Do House and Senate Democrats In Washington D.C. Care About Republican Disenfranchisement?

1-10-2005

Election year 2000 was the year of the endless recounts in the state of Florida and during the fiasco, Democrats only wanted to recount 'selected' voting areas and even went so far as to try and 'disenfranchise' the military vote, because they knew there were no Democrat votes to be gleaned from that constituency.

Yet after several recounts, in which the conclusion of the many tallies that took place after the finalization of the election results confirmed that George W. Bush had in fact won the election, Democrats still promote the specious argument that the election of 2000 was a 'stolen' election.

During that same year, there was no Democrat outrage of election fraud, voter intimidation, or multiple vote recounts in any of the many other states in which voting day problems occurred, and there were several. There were no contentious debates about those states or the voters who were 'disenfranchised'.

Democrats only cared about Florida.

And not really the entire state as a whole, only selected counties. The most notable similarity between those counties was the fact that they all heavily favored Democrats. Democrats didn't seem to care about the voter disenfranchisement that had taken place in the 'panhandle' of the state where many voters didn't vote because mainstream media elitists announced prematurely... before the polls had closed in that part of the state... that Gore had won the election there.

Why didn't Democrats care about those voters, after all, registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans? The answer to that question is the same as for the other states who had voting irregularities and why they intentionally tried to disenfranchise the military vote, Republican candidates dominate in those areas.

Fast forward to the election of 2004 and suddenly Democrats notice that Republican candidates seem to do better in the panhandle counties of Florida. Why, how can that be? It must be voter fraud led by Republicans, because instead of the election being close the way it was in 2000, Bush won easily, without controversy.

But controversy was also brewing elsewhere in the United States and the voting conspiracy theorists were swimming from place to place like sharks circling their prey. Just as swiftly as Paul Krugman can turn a monumental economic expansion into Hoover's Great Depression, media elitists made voting in Ohio more chaotic and life threatening than elections in the Ukraine and Afghanistan!

Democrats complained that people actually had to wait in long lines, sometimes for hours and even in the rain, to vote. Of course, they and their elitist media conspirators always point out that these type things only happened in Democrat or African-American communities and never bother to mention that the same things happened in Republican communities as well.

They also harangued accusations that the long lines were exclusive to less affluent communities, which is liberal speak for 'voter disenfranchisement steeped in racism'. Yet, without ever setting foot in Ohio, anyone could surmise that... listen really closely here because we wouldn't want everybody to know this... more people probably live in the less affluent neighborhoods. And again, Republican dominant neighborhoods that had long lines didn't matter.

Another situation that doesn't matter to Democrats is the one in Washington State where a newly elected Democrat Governor, Christine Gregoire, was able to get as many recounts as was necessary to discover several thousand 'missing' votes. In an unexplained mystery, the Democrats simply kept suing Democrat controlled King County until the ballots suddenly appeared, giving her just enough votes to declare victory. Now the Democrats are happy, oppose a statewide election and can't seem to find one shred of evidence of 'voter disenfranchisement'.

What's worse is that as the national election was to be certified, Democrats on Capitol Hill decided to contest the election because of all the voting problems that took place on election day in, well no, not America, just Ohio. With close votes in other states, such as Pennsylvania, and stories of voting irregularities, Democrats didn't feel the need to raise awareness in those states, probably because the election outcome could not be affected there.

And as the crocodile tears fell from the eyes of Congressional Democrats, there was not even one mention of the most heinous election controversy in the country where the absolute disenfranchisement of voters has taken place and could get worse.

In the state of North Carolina, electronic voting machines malfunctioned in coastal Carteret County and 4,438 voters never had their ballots properly recorded by the voting machines. These were all votes cast in the early 'no excuses' voting process where a resident can vote before Election Day avoiding the 'long lines', and when someone votes, they are listed.

So it is known exactly who the disenfranchised voters are and allowing those same voters to recast their ballots can easily rectify the situation. There is just one little problem. The only contested race is for Agriculture Commissioner and the Republican, Steve Troxler, has a 2,287-vote lead. Democrats control the state election board and they know that Carteret County is a Republican County, so they are not about to let only those voters recast their votes.

First they ruled that the 4,438 Carteret County voters, plus any voters who didn't vote by Election Day would be allowed to vote. After a judge ruled against that scheme, the Democrats decided to disenfranchise every voter in the state by ordering a new $3 million dollar statewide election. Even liberal North Carolina newspapers like The Charlotte Observer see this as nothing but partisan politics. All this just to deny an Election Day Republican victory.

Where are Barbara Boxer's tears now? Shouldn't the outrage expressed by Democrats about voter disenfranchisement be non-partisan? Everyone would like to see a perfect election, but that only happens in Communist countries. Democracy is so powerful and strong exactly because imperfect elections can't destroy our society as mistakes can be rectified.

Florida is a perfect example where the 2000 election made that state a toss-up, but after addressing their election problems, it became a solid Republican state by the 2004 election. It also shows why Democrats are losing the South, and the North Carolina fiasco won't help them in the future, either.

Will Ohio and Washington State be the next in line?

Lee P Butler