In a truly free society, what you have to say about Democracy is largely true. In our current society, where the government has almost limitless power over the lives, wealth, and property of its citizens, unrestrained democracy begins to show signs of being dangerous.

The entire purpose of the Constitution was to take democracy and wrap it in tight limits to prevent the kind of abuses we are seeing today.

We have a society where legalized looting, the forced transfer of wealth from producers to non-producers, occupies a majority of our government's function. This was not anticipated by the Founding Fathers. The fact that this rampant looting is considered not only "normal" but "benevolent" by most people shows how much our perceptions have changed over the years.

You and others are appalled by the idea that someone with money should have more say in how it is spent by the government (remember, I proposed a system based on taxes PAID, not just raw wealth or assets). Yet, when someone like Bill Gates has to fork over nearly half his income to the government, yet has no more say in its dispensation than the guy who pays no taxes at all, this is regarded as perfectly acceptable.

Gates largely ignored the government until it punished him by attempting to annihilate his company. It is worth noting that contributions from Microsoft to both parties have increased enormously in the past couple of years. The government may yet come to regret not leaving Gates alone.

What I'm getting at on the subject of the evils of restricting the vote is this: You, stereotypically as a conservative, dismiss people who disagree with you as stupid and uninformed. If you had the power to create a test for intelligence and knowledge, you would inevitably slant it to select people who agree with you. You'd define intelligence and knowledge in conservative terms.

Ah. The old "bourgeois knowledge" bit. I thought I'd heard the last of that one. So, tell me, what is "conservative" knowledge? Is math conservative? How about history, or science? Problem solving? What then is "liberal" knowledge? Any good examples?

You have a lot of nerve dropping the term "diversity" on me. Diversity, once thought to mean "diversity of ideas," now simply means diversity of color and ancestry--but all toeing the left wing line. Liberals don't like intellectual diversity, as witness their treatment of conservative minorities. Conservatives in this country are routinely abused, slandered, and, as you say, "dismissed as stupid and uninformed," particularly in the media and in the academic environment.