A Preemptive Strike By The Left
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Posted by J. J. Jackson @ 10:17 AM
The Washington Times is reporting that the Democratic Party in conjunction with other left leaning organizations such as the People for the American Way, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and the AFL-CIO are filing suit in Florida for because of attempts at "conspiring to disenfranchise minority voters".
Ok. So do they have a case?
The Washington Times reports that:
The suits say Republican officials refused to count provisional ballots, improperly disqualified incomplete voter registrations, established overly restrictive rules to disproportionately hurt minority voters and actively sought to disenfranchise blacks.and that
Matt Miller, a spokesman for the Kerry campaign, said Republicans are "trying to scare people away from the polls."Ok, so let's look at the credibility of this case shall we?
The first complaint?
challenges a ruling by Mrs. Hood to throw out forms on which new voters had failed to check a box indicating whether they were U.S. citizens, and another argued that although only 17 percent of the voters in Broward County and 20 percent in Miami-Dade County were black, more than a third of the voter-registration forms that were determined to be incomplete and invalid in both counties involved black voters.Question? Were the forms incomplete? If so, are they required to discard them? Answer - YES! What we have here is an attempt by the left wing to have two separate classes before the law. First, people that can follow the rules. Second, people that cannot follow the rules but that should be allowed to participate anyway.
So why even have the rules? Some liberal get back to me on that will you?
Not to turn away face time, DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe
accused Republicans of engaging in "systematic efforts" to disenfranchise voters, imposing unlawful identification requirements on voters, throwing eligible voters off the rolls and depriving voters of their right to cast a provisional ballot.Ok. So what old Terry is saying here is how dare you make sure that the person voting is who they say they are? Why would you want that Terry? Would that have something to do with bus loads of Democratic Partisans you want to bus around from precinct to precinct claiming to be anyone you tell them to be as names of people that did not vote yet are phoned in to you by your poll watchers?
Get back to me on that one too.
In 2001 the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights claimed that there was indisputable evidence of "injustice" and "ineptitude" and disenfranchisement of black voters. However it should be noted that Abigail Thernstrom and Russell G. Redenbaugh wrote an unchallenged 50 page dissent which correctly pointed out as the Washington Times Put it
at the time that a more rigorous statistical analysis showed that race was unrelated to the rate of ballot spoilage and that no evidence supported accusations of disfranchisement or discrimination of minorities. She said the Florida election was "hampered only by problems that were neither motivated by racial discrimination nor served to disfranchise minority voters."
These hearings included Democrats calling 3 black voters who were key to the "conspiracy" claims. But that
none of three could show that they had been denied their right to vote. No other witnesses were called.So there was disenfranchisement without evidence? Wait, I forgot! It's the "seriousness of the charge" that matters!
Three others also testified that they had "concerns" about voter intimidation and disenfranchisement but all admitted under oath that they voted in their precincts without problems. Again...there is that "seriousness of the charge" defense again!
Then, as the Washington Times reports:
Mrs. Tucker said she was detained at a routine police driver's license checkpoint that had been functioning for weeks before the election, but was waved on after producing her valid license.So,wait...the checkpoint had been up for "weeks" before the election and Ms. Tucker KNEW it was there and her complaint was that she was stopped and then allowed to pass after showing that she had a driver's license? So, there was no disenfranchisement there either...but they were "concerned" about it so that makes the charge "serious" I suppose.
Also, the Washington Times reports:
Mr. Whiting said his name had been purged by mistake from the voting rolls when he had inaccurately been identified as a felon, but was allowed to vote after a call to an election supervisorAgain, he wasn't disenfranchised. The problem was corrected and he voted. He was successfully RE-ENFRANCHISED by the system they claim was set up to disenfranchise.
This is confusing folks. And it is only going to get worse as hordes of DNC operatives hit the courts to over turn any election result not in John Kerry's favor. Will they ever produce hard evidence? Not likely. They will just keep accusing and hope that it sticks.
Leave a comment if you like! *Note if you are a left wing, tin hat wearing, pro-Marxist loon that likes to post "anonymously" you will be treated like the kook you are!