The takeaway:
It isn’t really disenfranchisement that bothers Van Hollen’s angriest critics. It is that taking the federal law seriously implies that cheating is a real possibility. This is a given in that humans cheat in every other competitive endeavor.
Several years ago at a social event I was in conversation with a (now retired) City of Milwaukee employee who had an upper management position. He was, of course, a Democrat Party member, although he did not agree with all the Party's positions. The man was amiable, enjoyable, every bit the gentleman, and always up for a brief political joust.
At the time, voter fraud was just emerging as an issue in the City, and (of course) I brought it up.
His response?
"What's a few extra votes here and there? They won't make a difference anyway."
I think he could tell from my reaction that he'd admitted more than he should have, and he very quickly steered the conversation in another direction.
Of course, my interlocutor did not view this as a serious moral evil. To him it was just a minor "end justifies the means" thing. Most likely his view is very common with Party loyalists.
But it's rarely admitted out loud.
Oh, there's more.
Van Hollen’s lawsuit has municipal clerks justifiably scared and has prompted synthetic outrage from critics, but all he really is asking is that the Government Accountability Board see to it that the anti-fraud checks it should have been running get run.
The clerks are spooked because this could impose impossible amounts of work mere weeks before a big turnout. But that’s the result of Wisconsin blowing past the federal deadline for checking registrations against other government records to find dead voters and fake names. The deadline was in January 2004. Wisconsin got two years of waiver and took 31 months beyond that.
P-Mac hints, but does not ask the underlying question:
Do you suppose that it is merely co-incidence that James Doyle, a viciously partisan Democrat hack, was Governor of the State while all this "delay" was occurring?
And that the delay just happened to climax only 60 days before a national election?
With the climax being that a James Doyle (vicious partisan Democrat hack)-appointed Board said "Ah, fooey. Screw it!"
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
The only thing I wonder about is if you and Paddy were getting into the church's wine.
You both got to be sotted to believe that this isn't partisan hackery on Van Hollen's part. I guess instead of terrorist cells behind every tree, you all are seeing fraudulent voters.
Capper, do me a favor. Put the shoe on the other foot for a minute. Imagine the parties were reversed. Then tell me, honestly, would you still be so dismissive? Would those on the other side be so flippant about this?
Bill,
If Van Hollen did this way back when, when the GAB supposedly came out of compliance, people would have complained, but wouldn't have much to go on. The fact that he waited this long makes it look more than suspicious.
Capper is known as the town crier. What he doesn't realize is that comments like the one above minimize everything else he says, even if it may be useful.
TerryN
Cap, you're full of crap.
The GAB made its "screw it!" decision only 2 weeks ago.
This might appear legit if the intent was to tackle all potential vote fraud. When absentee ballots are included in the mix, we'll know the reformers are serious.
Post a Comment