Daily Show Unmasks GOP's Motives Behind Changing Voter Laws

Don't let the door hit ya, dude. Image from source, News Observer.

You wouldn't think it would be possible for The Daily Show with Jon Stewart's correspondents to take interview subjects off-guard. In the early days, a state politician could be forgiven for not knowing what the show is all about, or keying in on the interviewer's shtick. But they keep getting "gotcha-ed," and this time a guy ended up getting fired.

Aasif Mandvi interviewed both Congressman John Lewis (who seemed a little baffled, but held his own) and Don Yelton, a Republican Precinct Chair from North Carolina. Mandvi kept feeding Yelton rope, and he just kept stringing himself up with it. In the course of the interview, Yelton made very clear his own personal, overt racism. And he also laid out the real reason behind the state's tightened voting laws (and no doubt behind those spreading to states across the country). I wonder now, if we can finally drop the pretense that Voter ID laws (and their sibling voter restriction laws) have been enacted because of some rampant (phantom) voter fraud. Oh, and Yelton got fired the day after this aired. Poor guy.

Anyway, whatever your politics, this is worth a view, just so you know what's going on.

[Excerpt]

After 'The Daily Show' targets NC's voting law, precinct chair resigns

A five-minute segment of the Comedy Central show Wednesday night about the state’s new election law, focused a good bit on Yelton’s racial views. On Thursday, as the video went viral, Claude Pope, chairman of the N.C. Republican Party, called for Yelton’s resignation. . .

Read more at: News Observer

North Carolina Passes Laws Restricting Voting

Image from source, CBSNews

I'm getting to the point where I'm having trouble figuring out conservatives. Well, it's always been difficult, but I'm beginning to think that the elected officials and behind-the-scenes conservatives are working from a whole different playbook from the rabble. And their media lapdogs? I'd always assumed that they were in on the real story, while passing on talking points to the sheeple.

But how to parse this one? North Carolina has passed a whole bunch of restrictions on voting rights, from Voter ID to limiting early voting, to limiting what students can vote, and other measures. I watched All In With Chris Hayes, who had invited a Republican woman from North Carolina. Chris interviewed her, trying to pry out the reasoning behind the laws. All he got were the standard "protecting the sanctity of the vote" and anti-voter fraud answers. Was she feeding him what she wanted him to hear, or did she really have no other answers?

Steve Deace, an Iowa conservative (and how) talk show host posted on Facebook that he was truly baffled how anybody could be against Voter ID, since you need ID to rent a video at Blockbuster (how quaint). Is Deace really clueless as to the whole raft of other voting restrictions that came along with Voter ID? Has he really never heard why liberals are against these sorts of laws? Does he really believe that voter fraud is rampant in America?

Listen, folks, I know that the arguments for having ID to vote sound really, really good. You do need ID for all sorts of things less important than voting. But the fact remains--though it's hard to personally imagine--that tens and hundreds of thousands of voters don't have the ID. Some have been voting without it for their whole lives, going back to the fifties or earlier. In many cases, these people live in areas where the locations and times for acquiring legal ID is restrictive, sometimes purposefully so. You know how they pass tough restrictions on abortion clinics, like the width of hallways, or admitting rights at a hospital, and then they pass a law that hospitals can't grant admitting rights? It's often like that, a catch-22.

It is also true that voter fraud is vanishingly rare. The motives for passing Voter ID laws is not voter fraud. The proof is in the admissions of several conservatives saying things like "Voter ID is going to win for us in Pennsylvania," and in the fact that so many other restrictions are passed along with them.

If you honestly think that wiping out voter fraud is the primary reason for Republicans passing all of these laws, you have got to be hopelessly naïve.

[Excerpt]

N.C. sued soon after voter ID bill signed into law

North Carolina Gov. Patrick McCrory has signed a sweeping voting reform bill that imposes strict photo identification requirements on the state's 4.5 million voters, rolls back the early voting period and repeals one-stop registration during early voting.

Almost immediately following the signing, civil rights groups filed lawsuits in federal court challenging the law. . .

Read more at: CBS News

 

2 Hours After SCOTUS Decision, Texas Moves to Suppress Minority Voters

Texas shows how fast it can execute a dick move.
Image from source, Think Progress.

Emboldened by the Supreme Court decision to remove part of the Voter Rights Act of 1965, the State of Texas is moving forward with distracting maps that would previously have violated the act. The maps were already blocked last year for being discriminatory to minority voters, so I'd imagine they remain discriminatory. They're just legal now.

So, it took two hours for Texas to prove SCOTUS wrong. The law was still necessary, obviously. And my theory that Republicans are just trying to out-mean each other stands.

[Excerpt]

Two Hours After The Supreme Court Gutted The Voting Rights Act, Texas AG Suppresses Minority Voters

Just two hours after the Supreme Court reasoned that discrimination is not rampant enough in Southern states to warrant restrictions under the Voting Rights Act, Texas is already advancing a voter ID law and a redistricting map blocked last year for discriminating against black and Latino residents. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued a statement declaring that both measures may go into effect immediately, now that there is no law stopping them from discriminating against minorities. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

SCOTUS Kills Key Provision of Voting Rights Act

Wade Henderson, president and C.E.O. of the Leadership Conference
on Civil and Human Rights, criticized the decision on Tuesday;
from source, New York Times.

This one is a head-scratcher. I can't figure out why the Supreme Court found it necessary to carve out a cornerstone piece of the cornerstone piece of civil rights legislation ever passed. They basically said that since the Voting Rights Act has forced affected states to play by the rules, the act itself is no longer needed. What? Isn't that a bit like saying that stop signs have done a terrific job of getting cars to stop at intersections, so they are now no longer needed?

I just sit and shake my head, because I'm really not sure what to say. I mean, SCOTUS gave Congress the option of fixing the language, to modernize the act. . .but have they paid attention to this Congress lately? They're not doing shit. And already, states like Texas are pouncing, by ramming through voter ID bills and other things that--until Tuesday--were considered legally discriminatory against groups of voters. But no more! Sheesh.

And it really makes me queasy about the DOMA and Prop 8 marriage equality bills to be announced Wednesday. Ugh.

[Excerpt]

Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act

The Supreme Court on Tuesday effectively struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by a 5-to-4 vote, freeing nine states, mostly in the South, to change their election laws without advance federal approval. . .

Read more at: New York Times

Rick Scott Purging Elligible Voters in Florida

Image from Wonkette

Florida's Rick Scott (pricelessly pictured with his lookalike, Voldemort) is one of the odious GOP Governors class of 2010. Though he had a hideous past, and seemed thoroughly unlikeable, he benefited from 2010's dual political realities: disaffected, apathetic Democrats and Tea Party, Obama-hating Republicans. So, we got a whole boatload of arch-right, ideology-first Republican Governors. They all seem to think that being as nasty and mean as possible is the key to political fortunes.

Scott is second only in my book to Wisconsin Governor Scott Wanker Walker for douchiness. And he's proving it now by purging thousands of Florida voters from the rolls under the guise of preventing "voter fraud." Voter fraud is a vanishingly rare occurrence in the United States, but politicians like Scott have used very rational-sounding arguments to ram through many voter rights restricting laws in the short time since they gathered power. But now, Scott is going further. He's purging actual legitimate voters. And if they don't take the effort and time to prove that they are eligible, they just won't get to vote. If they didn't get the memo? Tough. They don't get to vote.

I can hardly think of anything more un-American. And he's getting away with it.

[Excerpt]


Rick Scott Bravely Purges 91-Year-Old War Hero Criminal From Voting Rolls

Oh look, there they go again! By “they” we mean the Democrats, always crying about voter suppression. Look, is it our fault that their supporters are all vicious thugs, pot smokers, illegal immigrants, white slavers, people whose names end in vowels or “z,” vicious illegal immigrant thugs, and liberals? . . .

Read more at: Wonkette

Conservative Ass, James O'Keefe, In Deep Trouble Over Voter Fraud

Voter fraud, oddly documented by the perpatrator. Image from TPM.

This James O'Keefe twerp has been running "sting" operations on many supposedly "liberal" people and groups for a while now. Unfortunately, since he's a protege of douchebag Andrew Breitbart, and because the right-wing spin machine is so much of a bubble, O'Keefe has had some success. But I have to qualify "success." Yes, his efforts got ACORN to disband. NO, he did not prove his case at all, having sleazily edited the video to show something as it didn't happen. Almost anything this creep does gets lauded by the right, but most of the time it is dishonest, skeevy and just plain wrong. He's gotten into trouble before, when his scams stepped a little to far astray from the law. But now? Voter fraud? Somebody is in big, big trouble. But will it be O'Keefe, or his lackeys?

On a side note, O'Keefe's sting this time was to show how easy it is to vote without ID. What he didn't prove (because it's almost non-existant) is how this even matters. Voter fraud of this sort is so rare as to be almost unmeasurable.


[Excerpt]


Election Law Experts Say James O’Keefe Allies Could Face Charges Over Voter Fraud Stunt

It was one of the few — if not the only — coordinated efforts to attempt in-person voter fraud, and it was pulled off by affiliates of conservative activist James O’Keefe at polling places in New Hampshire Tuesday night. All of it part of an attempt to prove the need for voter ID laws that voting rights experts say have a unfair impact on minority voters. . .

Read more at: Talking Points Memo

Maine Restores Same-Day Voter Registration

Image from source, Raw Story

Okay, so is the good news for Democrats in this off-year election just the pendulum swinging back after 2010, or is it a reaction to Republican overreach? Or does one follow from the other? Anyway, given all of the attempts to restrict various voting rights around the country, it's nice to see one that got undone.

Sidebar: I hope one of Herman Cain's accusers comes from Maine, just to set up the joke, "Bangor? I hardly knew her!"

[Excerpt]

Maine voters restore same-day voter registration


The citizens of Maine on Tuesday repealed a recently passed law requiring voters to enroll at least two days before an election.

With more than three-quarters of the state’s precincts reporting, 60 percent of voters had rejected the law, according to the Bangor Daily News. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

The Republican War on Voting

Image from source, Rolling Stone

I've said before in this space that Republicans are excellent at coming up with reasonable sounding reasons for extreme positions. In the case of voting rights, Republican-led states all over the country have introduced legislation to restrict them. The "good reason" they've used is that it prevents "voter fraud," an alleged crime that happens about as often as Dick Cheney's heartbeat. That is to say, it almost doesn't exist. So, what is the real purpose for all of these laws? In almost every case, the tightened restrictions will prevent mostly Democrats from voting. Because statistically, if voters turn out in very large numbers, Democrats tend to win. Cut down on the number of eligible Democrats, and you reduce that chance. It's pure math, it's purely evil, and it's dressed up to look legit by claiming that it reduces "voter fraud." Bullshit. I can't think of much that is more anti-American than trying to prevent eligible people from voting.

[Excerpt]


The GOP War on Voting

In a campaign supported by the Koch brothers, Republicans are working to prevent millions of Democrats from voting next year. . .

. . . "What has happened this year is the most significant setback to voting rights in this country in a century,". . .

Read more at: Rolling Stone

Greg Palast: Kerry Won in '04

Journalist Greg Palast first caught my interest when he was a guest on The Randi Rhodes Show. Impressed by that and other appearances, I read Armed Madhouse, his book dealing with election theft and general government corruption. I was alarmed by what I read, but didn't have a blog at the time to use as a forum.

In the past week, my interest was re-sparked by another appearance on the radio, very shortly followed by the Andrew Meyer tasering the other day (Meyer was quoting Armed Madhouse right before he got into trouble). So, I've been checking out his blog.

I've posted a couple of items on Palast over the last couple of months, in fact two in the last couple of days. But this story is important, so we're triple-dosing.

Palast has recently excerpted a chunk of his book, which really captures the gist of what really happened in 2004. This saves me a lot of time trying to recap it myself! So, please do go check it out. If this interests you, and you want to learn more, check out Armed Madhouse, all righty? OK then.

[Excerpt]

Cranks and Kooks: Kerry Won in ‘04

THE CON

Kerry Won. Now Get Over It . . .

. . .because they’re putting ‘08 in their pocket. Republicans just seem to have that winning spirit. They also have caging lists, felons of the future, rotting ballots, snuffed canaries, and a lock on the votes of Kissinger-Americans and the undead.

WARNING! There are cranks and kooks and crazies out there on the Internet who say that George Bush lost the 2004 election, like one titled, “Kerry Won” published on the TomPaine.com web site two days after the election. I wrote it.

On November 11, a week after TomPaine.com published it, I received an e-mail from The New York Times Washington Bureau. Hot on the investigation of the veracity of the vote, The Times reporter asked me pointed questions:

Question #1: Are you a “sore loser”? Question #2: Are you a “conspiracy nut”?

There was no third question. . .

Read the rest (it's good): GregPalast.com

Democracy is Hard Work. Vote Fascism!

I like my humor dark, and I like it to make a point. This fits the bill. Hat-tip to BradBlog.com for this video, about Australian politics. It is just as relevant here in the US. And hey, that strapping Aussie lad, and that accent. . .he almost had me convinced!

Monkeywrench in 2008 Election

Dirty pool or fair game? A GOP power-player in California may have found a way to ensure--or at least greatly boost the chances for--a GOP win in 2008. I'm not sure which way to feel about this one. Obviously, I think a GOP win next time is, to say the least, the wrong way to go. And I think this play smells a bit of desperation. Read on, and see what you think.

[Excerpt]

Votescam
by Hendrik Hertzberg
August 6, 2007

Two weeks ago, one of the most important Republican lawyers in Sacramento quietly filed a ballot initiative that would end the practice of granting all fifty-five of California’s electoral votes to the statewide winner. Instead, it would award two of them to the statewide winner and the rest, one by one, to the winner in each congressional district. Nineteen of the fifty-three districts are represented by Republicans, but Bush carried twenty-two districts in 2004. The bottom line is that the initiative, if passed, would spot the Republican ticket something in the neighborhood of twenty electoral votes—votes that it wouldn’t get under the rules prevailing in every other sizable state in the Union. [snip]

Nominally, the sponsor of No. 07-0032 is Californians for Equal Representation. But that’s just a letterhead—there’s no such organization. Its address is the office suite of Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk, the law firm for the California Republican Party, and its covering letter is signed by Thomas W. Hiltachk, the firm’s managing partner and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s personal lawyer for election matters. Hiltachk and his firm have been involved in many well-financed ballot initiatives before, including the recall that put Arnold in Sacramento. . . .

Read on at: NewYorker.com

Voter Fraud: 2004 Ohio Votes Tossed Out

Voter fraud. It's one of the more serious transgressions against a citizen's rights. Both Democrats and Republicans claim to be against it. But they don't both hold the same view of what "voter fraud" is.

Republicans tend to think that voter fraud is the registering of people (illegal aliens, felons, dead people) who shouldn't be allowed to vote. This may happen, but I don't think any wide-spread case has ever even been close to being proven in recent years. Certainly it shouldn't be allowed, but I'm not sure anybody could declaritively say that it has swayed an election.

Democrats tend to think that voter fraud constitutes a deliberate plan to disenfranchise voters, by way of caging lists, placement of inadequate or nonworking machines, phony phone calls, misleading pamphleting, and vote flipping. Some of these things have been proven. Don't believe me?

Start your homework here:

GregPalast.com

BradBlog.com

BlackBoxVoting.org

Often times, even when large-scale voter fraud is suspected, steps are taken (apply sinister motives or not) that prevent a definitive conclusion from ever being drawn. Read on. . .

[Excerpt]

In Violation of Federal Law, Ohio's 2004 Presidential Election Records Are Destroyed or Missing

In 56 of Ohio's 88 counties, ballots and election records from 2004 have been "accidentally" destroyed, despite a federal order to preserve them -- it was crucial evidence which would have revealed whether the election was stolen.

Two-thirds of Ohio counties have destroyed or lost their 2004 presidential ballots and related election records, according to letters from county election officials to the Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner.

The lost records violate Ohio law, which states federal election records must be kept for 22 months after Election Day, and a U.S. District Court order issued last September that the 2004 ballots be preserved while the court hears a civil rights lawsuit alleging voter suppression of African-American voters in Columbus. . .

Read more at: AlterNet.org