The joke that went around college campuses back in the sixties was to "made friends with a cop. They get the best dope!"
Evidently the chair of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children Caucus, by a similar principle, figgered he would meet the cutest boys.
Holy Foley!
Couldn't happen to a more well-deserving "family values" politician.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Poster Child of an Endangered Species
Former Senator John C. Danforth (R-Mo.) has just published a book about our current crisis: the American Southern Baptist jihad to take over the U.S. government. His book's title sums up his thesis: "Faith and Politics: How the 'Moral Values' Debate Divides America and How to Move Forward Together." (Referencing here an article in the WashPost.)
Danforth goes after the so-called "Christian Right," accusing it and its hyper-conservative Republican allies of creating "a sectarian party" bent on domination. Danforth "holds that social conservatives cannot prevail because a majority of Americans do not share their views or appreciate their style."
Well, now (putting ourselves in the shoes of Southern Baptist Mullah Richard Land, father of iPootValues), let's consider the messenger here:
1. Former Senator Danforth is Episcopalian (gay!)
2. He's in fact an ordained Episcopal priest (big gay!)
3. Danforth was once upon a time an ambassador to the United Nations (commie gay!)
4. Danforth writes, "The problem with many conservative Christians is that they claim that God's truth is knowable, that they know it, and that they are able to reduce it to legislative form" (ignurt sombitch!)
5. Danforth favors government recognition of "committed same-sex partnerships." He believes the proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw same-sex marriage amounts to gay-bashing (well, what did we tell ya!)
Danforth goes after the so-called "Christian Right," accusing it and its hyper-conservative Republican allies of creating "a sectarian party" bent on domination. Danforth "holds that social conservatives cannot prevail because a majority of Americans do not share their views or appreciate their style."
Well, now (putting ourselves in the shoes of Southern Baptist Mullah Richard Land, father of iPootValues), let's consider the messenger here:
1. Former Senator Danforth is Episcopalian (gay!)
2. He's in fact an ordained Episcopal priest (big gay!)
3. Danforth was once upon a time an ambassador to the United Nations (commie gay!)
4. Danforth writes, "The problem with many conservative Christians is that they claim that God's truth is knowable, that they know it, and that they are able to reduce it to legislative form" (ignurt sombitch!)
5. Danforth favors government recognition of "committed same-sex partnerships." He believes the proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw same-sex marriage amounts to gay-bashing (well, what did we tell ya!)
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Poster Child of the Bush Judiciary
A 15-member panel of the American Bar Association, including three big Bush donors, have unanimously -- UNANIMOUSLY -- rated a Bush nominee to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals as "not qualified." This is the first "not qualified" rating by the ABA of an appellate appointment since 1982.
The ABA report on Wallace is here, though it does not get into the specifics of what 69 separate interviews turned up, interviews with other lawyers and judges before whom Wallace has appeared.
Bottomline: the ABA investigators determined that Wallace lacks "judicial temperament," which means in simple terms the man is not free of bias. From the ABA report:
This is the sort of man El Presidente wants judging us.
Naturally, we expect the Christian Right to take up the cause of championing this man for the court, since he is so clearly a disciple of Christ's message to the poor of the earth.
The ABA report on Wallace is here, though it does not get into the specifics of what 69 separate interviews turned up, interviews with other lawyers and judges before whom Wallace has appeared.
Bottomline: the ABA investigators determined that Wallace lacks "judicial temperament," which means in simple terms the man is not free of bias. From the ABA report:
One of the negative comments expressed over and over, and often with great emotion and concern for the system, was that Mr. Wallace had not shown a commitment to equal justice under the law. Lawyers and judges stated that Mr. Wallace did not understand or care about issues central to the lives of the poor, minorities, the marginalized, the have-nots, and those who do not share his view of the world. These concerns were most often discussed in the context of Voting Rights Act cases and other issues involving constitutional rights.
This is the sort of man El Presidente wants judging us.
Naturally, we expect the Christian Right to take up the cause of championing this man for the court, since he is so clearly a disciple of Christ's message to the poor of the earth.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Red-Letter Christians and Red-Meat Fundamentalists
You can read about the formation of the "Red-Letter Christians," a group of New Testament believers uncomfortable with American Christianity's becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of Karl Rove's Republican Party, here. And here.
We had barely finished catching up with this new wave of Christianity when an e-mail from the Rev. Lou Shelton, of the Traditional Values Coalition, landed with a leaden thud in our in-box. Since there's no way to paraphrase the Rev. Shelton, we'll quote him at generous length:
Take a breath, Lou! He's working himself up for this (our favorite!) paragraph:
Is the good Reverend not the very model of a modern Major Christian? Without any visible contortion of his trunk, he gets from the Bible condemning the taking of innocent life to a justification for preemptive war "when there are threats to national sovereignty." We'd LOVE to see that passage of scripture!
The Reverend runs on:
One might suggest, based on the evidence here presented, that it takes a shill to recognize a shill. We just adore the conflation of "the Republican Party" with "a truly Biblical worldview."
We suggest the Reverend Shelton avoid the "red letters" of what Jesus said altogether, since that message is obviously lost on him. Re-read the book of Amos, why don't you, Mr. Shelton. Amos is our favorite prophet (if only a minor one), since he was an actual shepherd who condemned his nation for relying on military might and for the grave injustice of social inequalities and for the shallow, meaningless piety of loud-voiced Pharisees.
As you say ... every word, every sentence is the Word of God.
We had barely finished catching up with this new wave of Christianity when an e-mail from the Rev. Lou Shelton, of the Traditional Values Coalition, landed with a leaden thud in our in-box. Since there's no way to paraphrase the Rev. Shelton, we'll quote him at generous length:
September 26, 2006 -- Democrats have an anti-religion problem. In fact, they have such a serious anti-religion problem that in 2004 they had to bring a leftist pastor named Jim Wallis to try to teach Democrat congressmen how to use "God talk" in their campaign speeches. This pathetic effort failed as will a new disinformation campaign called "Red Letter Christians."
Wallis, founder of the left-wing Sojourners group, and self-described "progressive evangelical" Tony Campolo, have just founded a liberal front organization called the "Red Letter Christians." Wallis, Campolo, Father Richard Rohr, "Emergent Church" pioneer Brian McLaren, Dr. Cheryl J. Sanders, Rev. Noel Castellanos, and others met recently to form this new pseudo-evangelical group.
These "Red Letter Christians" are supposedly trying to alert American Evangelicals to the importance of living the words of Jesus as highlighted in red in many Bibles. Their idea of living the words of Jesus, however, is somehow reinterpreted to mean support for every liberal political agenda on the horizon.
These pseudo-evangelicals would have you believe that the Bible only contains the Word of God. True Evangelicals believe that the Bible -- each word, each sentence -- is the Word of God. This is how you can tell the difference between these pseudo-evangelicals and true Evangelicals.
Wallis and Campolo both have lifelong careers as left-of-center social activists. Wallis was a radical anti-Vietnam War activist in the 1960s and an apologist for the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and other leftist guerrilla forces in Latin America in the 1980s. I wonder if Jesus would have supported Marxist terrorism. Frankly, I doubt it.
Campolo's political views are as a skewed as Wallis's. In a speech at Wheaton College not long after 9/11, Campolo claimed that then-Attorney General John Ashcroft was more dangerous than Osama Bin Laden! (Campolo was also a "spiritual" counselor to finger-wagging President Clinton after the "blue dress" incident at the White House that eventually resulted in Clinton's impeachment in the House.)
These pastors are the leaders of the "Red Letter Christian" movement.
In every election cycle, we see the same tired old left-wing "religious" activists trotted out by the Democrats as proof that the Democrat Party has a spiritual base.
Take a breath, Lou! He's working himself up for this (our favorite!) paragraph:
Yet, these "religious" leftists and Democrats routinely support policies that are diametrically opposed to the teachings of the Bible. The Bible condemns the taking of innocent life -- yet liberals support abortion on demand. The Bible condemns the behavior of homosexuality -- yet liberals support homosexual marriage and adoption. The Bible calls for the punishment of evildoers and justifies war when there are threats to national sovereignty -- yet liberals are routinely weak on punishment of criminals and weak on national security.
Is the good Reverend not the very model of a modern Major Christian? Without any visible contortion of his trunk, he gets from the Bible condemning the taking of innocent life to a justification for preemptive war "when there are threats to national sovereignty." We'd LOVE to see that passage of scripture!
The Reverend runs on:
Americans need to understand that these pseudo-evangelicals are nothing more than shills for the Democrat Party and trying to use whatever credibility they think they have to draw Christians away from the Republican Party and a truly Biblical worldview.
One might suggest, based on the evidence here presented, that it takes a shill to recognize a shill. We just adore the conflation of "the Republican Party" with "a truly Biblical worldview."
We suggest the Reverend Shelton avoid the "red letters" of what Jesus said altogether, since that message is obviously lost on him. Re-read the book of Amos, why don't you, Mr. Shelton. Amos is our favorite prophet (if only a minor one), since he was an actual shepherd who condemned his nation for relying on military might and for the grave injustice of social inequalities and for the shallow, meaningless piety of loud-voiced Pharisees.
As you say ... every word, every sentence is the Word of God.
On Being in Opposition
A commenter in a thread down-column scolds us for being overly partisan. The words "childish" and "sarcastic" rolled out in the same sentence. Along with an invocation of the Promised Land of cooperative democracy, which clearly we are personally thwarting by using monikers on this blog like "El Presidente" (translation: the president) and "Madam" (Def.: "a title of courtesy").
Gosh.
It's interesting to us that the prospect of losing a national election in six weeks brings out the school marm in some of our readers, those who drink from a wholly different fountain of wisdom, and we are sent to our beds without supper for not trying harder to just get along.
Let's see here. In the last two years, we've been called godless. We've been told that we cannot possibly be Christian. We've been accused of caring more for the terrorists than for our own country (but thank GAWD we've got "a deal on torture" now). We are "socialists" who were "communists" until the dissolution of the Soviet Union rendered that insult inoperable.
Now we're just inpolite little jackasses who won't stay quiet and accept it that Jehovah is running this country through His agents George W. Bush, Virginia Foxx, David Blust, Keith Honeycutt, and the rest of the Heavenly Host. We're supposed to accept it that not only are Republicans in control of the executive and both legislative branches of government. Not merely in charge, they have developed in Congress at least an iron system that routinely shuts out Democratic voices in the conference committees which work out differences between Senate and House bills. That's how we get "a deal on torture"! And a "Medicare reform" that gives billions to Big Pharma. And an energy bill that gives billions to Big Oil. And a continuing system of "ear-marked" pork. And a failure to reform lobbying. And a thousand other blessings that floweth from On High, not least of which is a new doctrine of preemptive war based on remixing, kneading, adulterating, and then cooking the truth to justify.
Gosh, we say. If there were only a cliff we could plunge over, in a great big herd of godless socialist lemmings, or a funeral pyre we could throw ourselves on, sending the smoke of our repentance up as a sacrifice in the nostrils of God!
Instead, we're in opposition. And we must admit, we're damn poor at it, not at all talented like Republicans. We're trying to learn. We're sitting at the feet of the masters: Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity, Ann Coulter, Tom DeLay, Jesse Helms, Robert Novak, Tucker Carlson, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Rev. Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanan, Mary Matalin, the Pope Foundation, John Hawke, Charles Hastings. And you're right. We haven't seen a bit of sarcasm or childishness -- let alone self-righteousness -- in ANY of these our models, so obviously we have a way to go.
But not to worry. If Democrats SHOULD take back any small portion of the federal government, they will have learned virtually nothing about governance from their Republican betters. So you'll see compromise piled on top of compromise. You'll see Republicans allowed into the legislative process. Hell, the leaders of a Democratic Senate or a Democratic House will probably even talk to El Presidente!
And we assume, should Republicans become a minority in any house of Congress starting in January 2007, they will respond positively to your call for pleasant cooperation. Right?
Gosh.
It's interesting to us that the prospect of losing a national election in six weeks brings out the school marm in some of our readers, those who drink from a wholly different fountain of wisdom, and we are sent to our beds without supper for not trying harder to just get along.
Let's see here. In the last two years, we've been called godless. We've been told that we cannot possibly be Christian. We've been accused of caring more for the terrorists than for our own country (but thank GAWD we've got "a deal on torture" now). We are "socialists" who were "communists" until the dissolution of the Soviet Union rendered that insult inoperable.
Now we're just inpolite little jackasses who won't stay quiet and accept it that Jehovah is running this country through His agents George W. Bush, Virginia Foxx, David Blust, Keith Honeycutt, and the rest of the Heavenly Host. We're supposed to accept it that not only are Republicans in control of the executive and both legislative branches of government. Not merely in charge, they have developed in Congress at least an iron system that routinely shuts out Democratic voices in the conference committees which work out differences between Senate and House bills. That's how we get "a deal on torture"! And a "Medicare reform" that gives billions to Big Pharma. And an energy bill that gives billions to Big Oil. And a continuing system of "ear-marked" pork. And a failure to reform lobbying. And a thousand other blessings that floweth from On High, not least of which is a new doctrine of preemptive war based on remixing, kneading, adulterating, and then cooking the truth to justify.
Gosh, we say. If there were only a cliff we could plunge over, in a great big herd of godless socialist lemmings, or a funeral pyre we could throw ourselves on, sending the smoke of our repentance up as a sacrifice in the nostrils of God!
Instead, we're in opposition. And we must admit, we're damn poor at it, not at all talented like Republicans. We're trying to learn. We're sitting at the feet of the masters: Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity, Ann Coulter, Tom DeLay, Jesse Helms, Robert Novak, Tucker Carlson, the Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Rev. Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanan, Mary Matalin, the Pope Foundation, John Hawke, Charles Hastings. And you're right. We haven't seen a bit of sarcasm or childishness -- let alone self-righteousness -- in ANY of these our models, so obviously we have a way to go.
But not to worry. If Democrats SHOULD take back any small portion of the federal government, they will have learned virtually nothing about governance from their Republican betters. So you'll see compromise piled on top of compromise. You'll see Republicans allowed into the legislative process. Hell, the leaders of a Democratic Senate or a Democratic House will probably even talk to El Presidente!
And we assume, should Republicans become a minority in any house of Congress starting in January 2007, they will respond positively to your call for pleasant cooperation. Right?
Waxhaw Road Rage Over Wal-Mart
Talk about a protest that makes a point!
Opponents of a proposed Union County Wal-Mart SuperCenter (176,000 sq. ft. of discounted toilet paper and cat food!) staged a traffic jam on Hwy 16 to demonstrate the sort of congestion a new big-box store will bring to Waxhaw.
Apparently, the Waxhaw Planning Commission got the message. The board voted NOT to make a decision last night on Wal-Mart's requested conditional use permit, bumping it to the Waxhaw Town Council. Ah, the American civic tradition of passing the buck! But eventually, SOMEBODY is going to have to stand up and be counted.
Opponents of a proposed Union County Wal-Mart SuperCenter (176,000 sq. ft. of discounted toilet paper and cat food!) staged a traffic jam on Hwy 16 to demonstrate the sort of congestion a new big-box store will bring to Waxhaw.
Apparently, the Waxhaw Planning Commission got the message. The board voted NOT to make a decision last night on Wal-Mart's requested conditional use permit, bumping it to the Waxhaw Town Council. Ah, the American civic tradition of passing the buck! But eventually, SOMEBODY is going to have to stand up and be counted.
Monday, September 25, 2006
The GOP Flogs a New Poster Child
But first, a recipe:
The Madam trotted out new talking points for an appreciative all-Republican audience in Forsyth:
She positively wakes up screaming. Luckily, up steps International Poopie-Head Hugo Chavez to give The Madam a cheap comparison. What? Osama not working for you any more?
And we were sooo hoping you'd talk about the immigrant workforce and your role in keeping it employed.
VIRGINIA FOXX MUFFINS
2 cups bleached (extra-white) flour
1 cup white sugar
1 stick butter
1 tsp baking powder
1 tsp salt
nuts (optional)
1 pound raw hamburger meat
The Madam trotted out new talking points for an appreciative all-Republican audience in Forsyth:
Foxx said that such comments as [Venezualan President Hugo] Chavez's are similar to those made by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, and Sen. Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, who have called Bush "a loser."
Democrats, she said, use rhetoric "just like Chavez and the president of Iran. The similarities to me are frightening."
She positively wakes up screaming. Luckily, up steps International Poopie-Head Hugo Chavez to give The Madam a cheap comparison. What? Osama not working for you any more?
And we were sooo hoping you'd talk about the immigrant workforce and your role in keeping it employed.
Pimpin' for Fox Gets Hazardous
Bill Clinton cleaned Chris Wallace's clock yesterday on "Fox News Sunday." Cleaned his clock good. You can see clips all over the place this a.m. Here's just one handy link.
Meanwhile, how is Fox News handling it? On the show's site, they're describing the smack down this way: "President Clinton Gets Defensive." They're so smart! "We report, and you decide." We've decided, all right! You guys can't handle the truth.
Bill was also on the first half of "Meet the Press" and said something about torture:
--Transcript, "Meet the Press," Sept. 24, 2006
It was a pure-dee pleasure seeing ole Bill yesterday. We had almost forgotten what it's like to have a leader who is so clearly THINKING before he speaks, thinking AS he speaks, and putting thoughts together in coherent sentences, and sentences together into coherent paragraphs.
FOOTNOTE: Posted on Talking Points Memo, this independent assessment:
UPDATE: According to the HuffPost here, the clips of the show that Fox is making available on its site are carefully edited to make Chris Wallace seem less a giant tool.
Meanwhile, how is Fox News handling it? On the show's site, they're describing the smack down this way: "President Clinton Gets Defensive." They're so smart! "We report, and you decide." We've decided, all right! You guys can't handle the truth.
Bill was also on the first half of "Meet the Press" and said something about torture:
If we get a reputation for torturing people, the following bad things are going to happen: We're as likely going to get bad information as good, just for people to just quit getting beat on; two, we're likely to create two or three or five enemies for every one we break; and three, we make our own soldiers much more vulnerable to conduct which violates the Geneva Convention. That is, we can't expect our friends, much less our enemies, to accept the fact that because we're the good guys, we get to have a different standard of conduct. And most people think the definition of a good guy is someone who voluntarily observes a different standard of conduct, not someone who claims the right to do things others can't do.
--Transcript, "Meet the Press," Sept. 24, 2006
It was a pure-dee pleasure seeing ole Bill yesterday. We had almost forgotten what it's like to have a leader who is so clearly THINKING before he speaks, thinking AS he speaks, and putting thoughts together in coherent sentences, and sentences together into coherent paragraphs.
FOOTNOTE: Posted on Talking Points Memo, this independent assessment:
I have my issues with Clinton, but I sometimes forget not just what a tremendously effective communicator he is but how much he just plain gets it. He understands politics at a level no one else does. He intuitively knows the subtext to questions and so not only answers the expressed question but in a very analytical way picks apart the subtext and answers the implied question, too. If you're a little younger and missed most of the Clinton years, it's something to watch.
UPDATE: According to the HuffPost here, the clips of the show that Fox is making available on its site are carefully edited to make Chris Wallace seem less a giant tool.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Suppress the Vote!
No surprise, Madam Virginia Foxx voted for H.R.4844, the "Federal Election Integrity Act," by which the Madam and the rest of the Republican Party says it wants to "fix" something that isn't broken. They now want us to present picture I.D.s at our polling places, proving that we're U.S. citizens.
I've been through my wallet. I currently have nothing that proves I'm a citizen of this country. Can you prove your citizenship with a picture I.D.? A driver's license won't do it. Madam Foxx and her rubberstampers are very fond of pointing out how easy it is for non-citizens to get an N.C. driver's license.
Anyway, this isn't about hoards of people showing up at polls, impersonating others, and voting illegally. This isn't about anything but suppressing the vote.
The NYTimes said it eloquently day before yesterday:
Locally, the Watauga GOP is all about suppressing the ASU student vote. To wit:
1. In 2004, the local Republican Party appointed Deborah Greene as an assistant precinct judge in Boone 2 precinct, a majority ASU student precinct. Apparently, Ms. Greene meant to challenge, discourage, and generally disrupt student voting, but on the morning of November 2nd, 2004, after she caused her first uproar in the voting enclosure, Ms. Greene was warned that she would be removed as a precinct judge and replaced. There were no more incidents that day.
2. After the results came in for the 2004 elections, and the Republican county commissioners were swept out of office, defeated commissioner Allen Trivette caused bumperstickers to be printed: "SHAME ON YOU, ASU." What did that mean, exactly? "Shame on you students for daring to exercise your constitutional rights to vote in The Land of the Free"? This year Mr. Trivette intends to share his understanding of voter rights with an even younger generation ... if he wins a seat on the Watauga County Board of Education.
3. In 2005, when the local Board of Elections proposed moving another majority ASU precinct, Boone 3, to Farthing Auditorium (from the Agricultural Conference Center), the Republican member of the Board of Elections fought the move with every argument his imagination could gin up ... including his voiced fear that elderly voters might be subjected to pictures of nekkid people in the Catherine Smith art gallery and that there was an increased hazard of forcible rape for female voters on the ASU campus.
We've battled this sort of nonsense for years. In 1990 we were confronted at our own polling place by a "requirement" that we fill out an "application" for a ballot, an extra step someone had evidently thought up to discourage new voters motivated by the candidacy of Harvey Gantt against Jesse Helms. We refused to fill out the "application" "Oh," the poll workers said, and let us vote anyway. How many other people didn't know they could refuse such illegal harassment?
In past elections, ASU students were illegally harassed when they were singled out to produce photo I.D.s. Some of them with driver's licenses from other states feared they wouldn't be allowed to vote, though they were properly and legally registered. It was illegal at that time to single out students and demand they provide photo I.D.s ... unless ALL voters were asked for the same identification.
There are those -- Mr. Trivette and others -- who don't want students voting on principal. "If they weren't born here, they got no business voting in our elections." Well gosh. Voter registration statistics in Watauga County now reveal that a majority of registered voters here were not born in this county. Shall we disenfranchise them all? Fortunately, the Supreme Court disagrees. In 1979 (Symm v. U.S.), the high court ruled that college students have every right to vote where they are in residence for school. To disenfranchise them because they intend to move elsewhere upon graduation, or because they don't own real estate in Watauga, or because they're not likely to vote for Mr. Trivette is just simply unconstitutional.
As is, likely, the proposed law that Madam Foxx and her self-righteous brethren voted for the other day ... to make us PROVE we're citizens in order to vote.
I've been through my wallet. I currently have nothing that proves I'm a citizen of this country. Can you prove your citizenship with a picture I.D.? A driver's license won't do it. Madam Foxx and her rubberstampers are very fond of pointing out how easy it is for non-citizens to get an N.C. driver's license.
Anyway, this isn't about hoards of people showing up at polls, impersonating others, and voting illegally. This isn't about anything but suppressing the vote.
The NYTimes said it eloquently day before yesterday:
One of the cornerstones of the Republican Party's strategy for winning elections these days is voter suppression, intentionally putting up barriers between eligible voters and the ballot box. The House of Representatives took a shameful step in this direction yesterday, voting largely along party lines for onerous new voter ID requirements. Laws of this kind are unconstitutional, as an array of courts have already held, and profoundly undemocratic .... The bill was sold as a means of deterring vote fraud, but that is a phony argument. There is no evidence that a significant number of people are showing up at the polls pretending to be other people, or that a significant number of noncitizens are voting .... America has a proud tradition of opening up the franchise to new groups, notably women and blacks, who were once denied it. It is disgraceful that, for partisan political reasons, some people are trying to reverse the tide, and standing in the way of people who have every right to vote.
Locally, the Watauga GOP is all about suppressing the ASU student vote. To wit:
1. In 2004, the local Republican Party appointed Deborah Greene as an assistant precinct judge in Boone 2 precinct, a majority ASU student precinct. Apparently, Ms. Greene meant to challenge, discourage, and generally disrupt student voting, but on the morning of November 2nd, 2004, after she caused her first uproar in the voting enclosure, Ms. Greene was warned that she would be removed as a precinct judge and replaced. There were no more incidents that day.
2. After the results came in for the 2004 elections, and the Republican county commissioners were swept out of office, defeated commissioner Allen Trivette caused bumperstickers to be printed: "SHAME ON YOU, ASU." What did that mean, exactly? "Shame on you students for daring to exercise your constitutional rights to vote in The Land of the Free"? This year Mr. Trivette intends to share his understanding of voter rights with an even younger generation ... if he wins a seat on the Watauga County Board of Education.
3. In 2005, when the local Board of Elections proposed moving another majority ASU precinct, Boone 3, to Farthing Auditorium (from the Agricultural Conference Center), the Republican member of the Board of Elections fought the move with every argument his imagination could gin up ... including his voiced fear that elderly voters might be subjected to pictures of nekkid people in the Catherine Smith art gallery and that there was an increased hazard of forcible rape for female voters on the ASU campus.
We've battled this sort of nonsense for years. In 1990 we were confronted at our own polling place by a "requirement" that we fill out an "application" for a ballot, an extra step someone had evidently thought up to discourage new voters motivated by the candidacy of Harvey Gantt against Jesse Helms. We refused to fill out the "application" "Oh," the poll workers said, and let us vote anyway. How many other people didn't know they could refuse such illegal harassment?
In past elections, ASU students were illegally harassed when they were singled out to produce photo I.D.s. Some of them with driver's licenses from other states feared they wouldn't be allowed to vote, though they were properly and legally registered. It was illegal at that time to single out students and demand they provide photo I.D.s ... unless ALL voters were asked for the same identification.
There are those -- Mr. Trivette and others -- who don't want students voting on principal. "If they weren't born here, they got no business voting in our elections." Well gosh. Voter registration statistics in Watauga County now reveal that a majority of registered voters here were not born in this county. Shall we disenfranchise them all? Fortunately, the Supreme Court disagrees. In 1979 (Symm v. U.S.), the high court ruled that college students have every right to vote where they are in residence for school. To disenfranchise them because they intend to move elsewhere upon graduation, or because they don't own real estate in Watauga, or because they're not likely to vote for Mr. Trivette is just simply unconstitutional.
As is, likely, the proposed law that Madam Foxx and her self-righteous brethren voted for the other day ... to make us PROVE we're citizens in order to vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)