Reply #52: Yes, a few are not on the side of real reform [View All]

[Land Shark]

as I've often said with $4 billion in voting machines plus control of the world's richest country and sole military superpower at stake plus dozens of life and death political issues, it would be almost absurdly unlikely that the activist debate would NOT be manipulated by God knows who? What greater motive could there be???

At the same time, we can't know for sure who is what. Getting into the issues of motives, which is what Mrs. Curling is talking about above, treads uniquely inside mrs. Curling's brain and heart, where the argument can be made that pretty much only she can know the truth.

But we can look at outward things. For example, a brief look at post history for DMAC will show many (mostly short) comments that are consistent with her stated beliefs in favor of election reform.

But then, I'd find more salient those posts that arguably start to move into Choicepoint territory, like issues of voter Identification being required at the polls, which many here consider a method of voter suppression (though not unanimously) while Republicans tend to hammer on this as an election security issue.

Mrs. Curling's DU post on voter identification is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=327751&mesg_id=327968

One, I have always puzzled over why people get up at arms about having to show ID. Since most everyone of voting age drives in our country, I do not understand why this is a problem. Secondly, if it is about minorities not having ID that can easily be remedied by having photo ID opportunities available with registration to vote - just as photo ID's are required for passports.

Secondly, the comment "There is an element of guilty of fraud until proven innocent in requiring voter IDs." Let's be careful here - the same could be true of our insistence to have verifiable voter paper ballots - the fact that we want this as a requirement is because we fear cheating and fraud. I personally believe the same can be said of requiring ID - because without it, cheating and fraud are made easier.

{snip}

Edited to add: further, any SoS's who stand in the way of recounts, or opposing legislation to demand them, should understand their motives immediately make them suspect. This is very true of Richardson, Blackwell, as well as Cathy Cox of GA - and probably quite a few others. 2/3 of those listed above are Dems and if Republicans cannot see that we are equally disturbed by their actions, they are not looking. Something needs to be done to highlight the bipartisan nature of this kind of legislation. It seems both sides want to believe the legislation targets one party over another - when in reality it only targets ANYone who even considers standing in the way of the intent of the people.

If Mrs. Curling can understand that "any SoS's who stand in the way of recounts, or opposing legislation to demand them, should understand their motives immediately make them suspect" as she does in the above post, then she can surely understand that her position in favor of voter ID, in light of her position as First Lady of Choicepoint, raises questions as well. She's arguably "standing in the way of free suffrage" and we have criminal laws, signature match requirements, and other mechanisms to prevent illegal repeat voting.