Democracy, Acorn, Democrats and Republicans
“The McCain campaign has been criticizing voter registration efforts by the low-income advocacy group ACORN as an attempt to steal the election. The group registered 1.3 million voters in 2008, mostly young people, people of color and other working-class constituencies. State Republican parties, GOP prosecutors and sympathetic groups have been pursuing litigation and other legal tactics in key swing states — notably Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan — concerning the validity of voter rolls in order to create bureaucratic hurdles for election officials. This can only complicate the voting process on Election Day and create a climate to discourage new voters from casting ballots,” opined Alternet.org on Friday.
Strangely it seems that the organization does not find it necessary to mention the fact that Republicans consider these securities necessary because ACORN has committed voter fraud on an unprecendented scale. Instead, Alternet defends the organization of community organizers arguing it has ‘improved’ democracy by registering so many more voters.
The problem is: if many of those ‘voters’ are not living, breathing, walking and talking people, they do not in any way help democratize the country.
Of course it has to be pointed out that Republicans have indeed often purposefully made it difficult for certain groups to cast votes, especially for African Americans. Not out of racism, but simply because the majority of blacks vote Democratic. These attempts have often indeed been despicable.
But that does not excuse Acorn’s fraud, nor the clear attempt to ruin the Democratic process in order to get a Democrat elected.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
