Behold how vote fraud enablers carry out their task. This week Greta van Susteren aired a piece about unpunished Ohio vote fraudster Melowese Richardson. Richardson, you will recall, admitted on camera to voting at least six times for President Obama. So far, the United States Attorney for Ohio, Carter Stewart, has done nothing about admissions that she violated 42 USC 1973i(e) multiple times, a federal felony. This is an inconvenient set of facts for vote fraud deniers in academia and elsewhere.
So what do the vote fraud deniers do? They do what they always do.
The template works like this:
1. Avert attention from the crimes by assuring everyone they are rare – even though they have conducted no social science research into the prevalence of fraud – and even though fraud, by its very nature is impossible to quantify.
2. Attack the messenger. Make racial accusations if at all possible. Refer to reports on voter fraud as a “hit piece.”
3. Pretend the voter fraud is old news, even if just a few weeks old. The attention challenged among us immediately disengage.
4. Ascribe motives to the criminal that echo the narrative of civil rights groups. For example, harp about “efforts to restrict the vote.”
5. No matter what else you do – make sure to mention Voter ID. Remind everyone at every possible opportunity “Voter ID would have done nothing to stop ______________.” That way the good old whipping on voter ID, the primary way to ensure that only those eligible to vote are voting, keeps apace.
6. Cite a democrat activist posing as an academic to support any one of the previous five tactics.
You can see these tactics at work defending Richardson and attacking van Susteren at “Newshounds.” Behold:
“Van Susteren Overlooks Key Evidence In Her Ohio Voter Fraud Hit Piece”
“A photo of the African American offender was positioned next to a head shot of Obama for the still on the video. Van Susteren was so aghast at the selective facts put forth by Fox’s “objective reporter” Eric Shawn, that she forgot to point out how exceedingly rare voter fraud is and that the system seemingly worked to catch what irregularities there are.”
[Note: accusations of racism need not be overt. Mere mention of the race of people on screen is enough to trip the switch.]
“Shawn duly noted that the Obama-supporting poll worker, Melowese Richardson, admitted to voting twice because, having voted absentee, “she was afraid her vote would not count.” “
[Ahh ha! the law should now absolve criminal idiots!]
Another bit of evidence left out? How Richardson may have been motivated by Ohio’s efforts to restrict voting. Even though Shawn specifically noted Richardson’s statement that she voted multiple times because she was worried her vote would not count, he never bothered to find out why she might have thought so. Not that that excuses her behavior in any way but it certainly puts a different light on the situation and adds a new dimension to it.
[And what “new dimension” would that be? The upside down dimension where the paranoid or the subscribers to the narrative of the civil rights groups are permitted to commit felonies – or – perhaps not permitted, but given leeway that only fellow travelers are given?]
What Richardson did was inexcusable but voting problems were highlighted in President Obama’s recent State of the Union address where he announced the formation of a non-partisan commission to address them.
[Look squirrel! President Obama wants us to worry more about long lines than crimes.]
It will be interesting to see if the U.S. Attorney in Ohio cares more about the rule of law, or excuses felonies that helped keep his boss in power. The answer will reveal a great deal about what sort of country we have in 2013.
