I welcome all thoughtful and respectful comment about life, the universe and everything.

06 June 2006

Felony and Irony

Oh the irony!
Many voters have been purged from voting rolls because of previous felony charges, or because their name was the same as someone with a previous felony charge.

Three of Diebold's computerized electronic-voting software designers are convicted felons.


At 8:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello Dr. G.

I think that's an outstanding report! I have never understood the reasoning of lifetime elimination of people convicted of a felony from voting. I think there is some pressure to change that. But that pressure is not because of the fundamental wrongness of the idea. It is because the law is (and always has been) the primary means of disenfranchising black males. It takes a big bite out of our vote every election. There is something wrong when the only argument that can be made against bad laws is when they are racially discrimatory. It seems bad laws that are applied equally across groups are just sort of...OK. Nobody cares.

I am not law expert, but I can't see how it could possibly be constitutional, other than the fact that we really have no constitutional right to vote to begin with. Only state officials have a real right to vote. That means state governments which have been corrupted through illegal campaign activities and corporate bribery (like Texas) actually hold the legal power to decide the outcome of any and all elections -- period. The actual vote counts are irrelevant legally. At least that is my understanding. Most people (especially us liberals) could not even name the person in their own state who has the power to "decide" the outcome of elections. The right to vote is an illusion, which puts RFK Jr.'s article in perspective. It's another situation where we progressives just don't get it. Then we wonder why we loose!

The moral: All politics is local.


At 5:31 AM, Blogger ydba said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 5:37 AM, Blogger ydba said...

It has come to my attention that this post is less than sensitive in some ways. I think I should publicly apologize. The problem with the net is that our comments, however poorly proofed or poorly thought out, are made up of information rather than things. Information is different from matter. It is not conserved. Once information is released, it can rarely (if ever) be "taken back", and it can almost be infinitely multiplied and copied.

I rarely make mistakes such as failing to capitalize terms like "Black" or "White", not to mention considering how those terms themselves might be received by others. To add insult to injury, my post might be interpreted to suggest that racial discrimination is not an important issue. Neither of those acts were intentional. None the less, we have a responsibility in public writing to go beyond our intentions and to consider the feelings of others. I know how I feel when I am categorized and referred to in ways which I find demeaning. I don't like it. It is painful. I also know exactly, on a daily basis, how it feels when issues of injustice which radically effect my life are marginalized or made to seem unimportant by others who are less effected by those issues.

For any who were offended by my post, please accept my apology and my sincere pledge to watch what I write.


At 6:34 PM, Anonymous Kim said...

I remember being taught in school that it is not "felons" who lose their right to vote, but "felons who are convicted of voter fraud". What happened to that?

As a completely irrelevant aside, one of my hobbies is surnames. One of the distinct disadvantages for African-Americans arises from the fact that they have a smaller assortment of surnames than many other ethnic groups (lots of Jacksons, Johnsons, and Washingtons.) I wonder what would happen if those people taking names similar to felons' names off of the voting roles started to remove everyone named, oh, Bush, or Wong, or Smith, or Lodge, or Cheney, or Chase, or O'Reilly, or Rockefeller, or Katz (some people say Katz is the oldest surname of all, but I would guess it's really Smith or some other version of Smith -- like Schmidt, Herrera, Ferrari, Kowalski....)


Post a Comment

<< Home