Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Welcome Back, Carter
Posted by: Jon Henke on Monday, September 27, 2004

Florida, due to discrepancies in data collected on various forms, produces a potential felon list with more blacks than hispanics. (there is no "hispanic" box on the felon list, while there is on the voting list) However, they also issued specific directions to the counties to to "verify the information" and "contact the voters" before taking any action to remove them from the voter rolls.

However, some people thought that was unfair--to the hispanics, who should also have a chance to be disenfranchised, I suppose--and "state officials have scrapped the entire list".

So, of course, Jimmy Carter speaks up....
"A fumbling attempt has been made recently to disqualify 22,000 African Americans (likely Democrats), but only 61 Hispanics (likely Republicans), as alleged felons."

Mr Carter said Florida Governor Jeb Bush - brother of the president - had "taken no steps to correct these departures from principles of fair and equal treatment or to prevent them in the future".
Jimmy Carter--who couldn't find voter fraud in Venezuela if he had a 36% exit poll discrepancy....and he did--has found "voter fraud" in Florida in the form of a felon list that was rejected two months ago. And, in response to Florida's rejection of that list, he claims "no steps" have been taken "to correct these departures"???

At any rate, Jimmy Carter has spoken out about this threat to Democrats democracy in Florida.

In Ohio? Not so much.
The state of Ohio is stepping in to investigate possible voter fraud in Summit County. ... More than 800 voter registration cards in Summit County are under investigation, NewsChannel5 reported.

The Board of Elections said the voter registration cards in question are for addresses that don't exist, spelling mistakes or have similar handwriting. Fifty of those questionable cards apparently came from the AFL-CIO central office in Cleveland, WEWS reported.
Hands up if you know which major party an AFL-CIO Union is likely to support.

For bonus point, try to find a story in which Jimmy Carter gives this 1/10th the attention he has given a Florida felon list that was old news two months ago.

UPDATE: Via Pejman, I note more on this topic at JaneGalt:
Mr Carter, if you are going to rhetorically lump the US in with tinpot dictatorships that stage elections, there are a few things you might want to consider, so that the effect redounds to the greater glory of yourself and your party, rather than alienating the unwashed masses who will be voting in this sham election.
She goes on, and it's worth reading.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Ok, I already vented on this one over at INDC, but as a Floridian I feel bound to state that we are NOT morally equivalent with Venez-frickin-uela in the voting department.

As I stated at INDC: If I see an international observer at my poll I will politely ask him or her to leave. If he/she does not leave, I will go vote and then get myself arrested for assault or inciting a riot.

Also, Carter and Arafat are good reasons that the Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded posthumously.
 
Written By: Brett
URL: http://law-b.blogspot.com/
John Fund notes in his book that the number of felons who were improperly allowed to vote in Florida in 2000 far exceeded the number of false positives, and they broke an estimated 68% for Gore.
 
Written By: Crank
URL: http://www.baseballcrank.com
I love his other main complaint...that they "let" Nader on the ballot even though they knew he would take votes away from Kerry.

Yeah, that's great Jimmah...you would keep someone off the ballot because he may hurt your party, nevermind this whole Democracy thingee.

Unqualified to observe the judging at a county fair, much less a national election
 
Written By: Shark
URL: http://
Brett, I'm a Floridian, too...a registered Palm Beach County voter. Why would you object to international observers at the polls? If you consider the State's rule to reign supreme, you must be incensed that Glenda Hood ignored a court order to remove Nader from our ballot, no?

It's really too bad the biased enforcement of our laws by .gov officials isn't deemed a felony.

Crank, could you please cite your source for Fund's statement. From what I've read, I've found him to be fairly non-partisan, and I'd appreciate reading more about these claims.

In Ohio, the situation reaches far beyond the AFL/CIO. (Note: This links to a pdf version of the Dayton Daily News article. Unfortunately, the DDN requires registration and I'm unable to provide a direct link to the article. Despite this link to a dem site, I encourage everyone to read the article. I think it's important. Afterwards, you can purge your browser cache and take a shower, if necessary. )

I don't think this is a partisan issue at all. This is a constitutional issue. It affects ALL of us equally...in spite of our politics.

Fair elections...who would've ever thought in a million years this would be an issue in the US?


 
Written By: Becky
URL: http://
Check your facts Becky, Hood printed two copies of the ballot because the appeal deadline and the early voting ballot mailout were less than 24 hours apart. The Florida Supreme Court upheld 6-1 that Nader met the rules and should be on the ballot. Though why the Democrats objected to him being on the ballot in the first place is an interesting debate.
link to Nader's ballot issues, Florida is halfway down the page.
Also, if you Google around on Florida felon vote 2000, you'll find that felons voting was a bigger problem than non-felons being turned away. I'm not going to do your research for you on that one. If you want to argue, get your own facts.

As to your aside about "fair elections" any and every study done about Florida 2000 found Bush the winner. Every study, even the NYT. Take your "fair elections" complaint elsewhere.

And I object to international observers because it delegitimizes OUR democracy. That is something that will be more important than who sits in the White House in 2005, but apparently Carter doesn't think so. Also, Carter, who hugs dictators and oversaw the dreadful Venezuelan election monitoring, has zero credibility on this issue.
 
Written By: Brett
URL: http://law-b.blogspot.com/
I checked my facts...and it appears the lawyers for the dems were sloppy -- principle surely did not have the upper hand in this case. Semantics did. Apparently, the definition of "national party" and "national convention" played a major part in the FSC's decision. Tsk. Who knew you could conduct a national convention by telephone? It seems the GOP attorneys (who represented Nader in Fla) are much better suited to this type of thing. I'm embarrassed.

This does make me wonder, however, why do you so strongly defend Nader's right to be on the Florida ballot, but prefer to to deny fellow voters the right to international observers in this next election?

Why is Ralph Nader's right to be on the ballot (running under a different party in each state) any less important or "legitimate" than my concern that my vote may or may not be counted? This seems a bit contradictory to me.

I did google around for "Florida felon vote 2000" and I'm sad to report the results did not provide me with the 68% statistic quoted by Crank. If you could provide me with a link, I'd me most appreciative.

Who sits in our White House in 2005 *is* of the UTMOST importance. International observers, who Jimmy Carter hugs, FSC rulings and GOP attorneys aside...we've got to do the right thing this November.

And I can't think of a better place than Q&O to discuss fair elections. Last time I checked, we are still allowed to do so.

 
Written By: Becky
URL: http://
Becky, what "right to international observers" are you talking about? I've never heard that refered to as a right before.

Doing the right thing in November is important. But at this point, it seems to be the Dems who're doing all the current lawsuits to block citizens from appearing on the ballot and laying the groundwork for legal challenges to the November elections.

If there are legitimate problems, then they'll be handled by the courts (as they were in 2000, and correctly as every recount showed), but this preparation for hair-triggered lawsuit bombardment that appears to be in place because one side might lose is unseemly. In fact, it's well into the realm of childish whining.
 
Written By: Ted
URL: http://rocketjones.mu.nu
Fair elections...who would've ever thought in a million years this would be an issue in the US?
I'm not sure when this has ever been a sure thing. Elections are *always* subject to fraud. Need I remind you of the City of Chicago? (and, historically, "fraud" is quite a bipartisan problem)

This does make me wonder, however, why do you so strongly defend Nader's right to be on the Florida ballot, but prefer to to deny fellow voters the right to international observers in this next election?
I can't speak for Brett--though, I suspect he'd agree--but it's a matter of sovereignty to me. International observers are a patronizing consequence of--not fraud--but partisan bickering.

However, it should be noted that I willingly signed a petition to allow the Libertarian candidate on the ticket in Virginia (some time back) despite the probability that he will take more votes from the GOP than from the Democrats.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net/blog
I am with John. As I said somewhere on this topic, this is about the legitimacy of the President. Just as Nixon was pasted for illegitimately using his office to engineer re-election, this international observer incident questions the legitimacy of the President and erodes the Presidency.

2 other quibbles. The candidate elected will not be a life or death thing for millions. I think it's far less important than not destroying the Office to gain it. Also, it won't be close enough for Florida to make a difference.

And yes, I support Nader being on the ballot. I think it was right for Perot to be on in 1992, even though he cost Bush Sr. re-election.
 
Written By: Brett
URL: http://law-b.blogspot.com/

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider