Last night the great David Webb filled in for Sean Hannity on Fox News. Webb put on Allen West and Juan Williams to talk about urban malaise. The visuals at Fox must have been too much for Rachel Maddow because she put up an hour long show designed to scare people about voting rights. Her already small audience might have been even smaller otherwise.
The special was full of intellectually dishonest scare tactics, hyperbole, false statements, leading questions for reporters and outright fear mongering.
Of course nobody was invited on the show to name the dishonesty.
Naturally the show featured a parade of college democrats and academics out of central casting, including professor and Castro apologist Renee Scherlen. Notice the sign behind Scherlen deliberately placed on camera. Read all about the totalitarian history of “En Cada Barrio” in Cuba. Perhaps Scherlen hangs this sign because she collects relics of totalitarian murder, perhaps she is sympathetic. Given her scholarship tends to be pro-Castro, I’ll go with Door #2. Hanging a sign for En Cada Barrio is the equivalent of hanging a recruiting poster for the S.A. whatever the motive.
Democrat activist student Mollie Clawson also complained that her flip flops might fall off if she had to walk through the grass to her polling place. Such are the complaints of the grievance generation.
That’s standard operating procedure for Maddow. Her skill is preaching to the choir, not having vigorous intellectual debate about ideas. Dissent is forbidden, sort of like En Cada Barrio. That’s why if you want actual debate between both sides of an issue, you need to turn to Hannity, or last night, to David Webb.
Why doesn’t Maddow permit any dissent, any critical guests on her show when it comes to voting issues? It’s not like experts don’t exist who could handily rebut her. She doesn’t permit dissent on her show because her show is about Democrat activism – not voting rights, not airing both sides, not fairness. It’s about activism, period.
Her job is to stoke fears, preferably race based fears. Her job is to present the Orthodoxy of the vote fraud deniers and the racial left. It isn’t to be a journalist. Her job is to mobilize turnout for the 2014 election, nothing more. If that weren’t true, she would invite a guest on to rebut the factual and legal fallacies she airs.
We’ve learned a great deal from the election-focused left lately. They are perplexed that they no longer have a monopoly on the discourse about election issues. Often, this manifests as ridicule. Other times as flippant dismissal. Rarely does it manifest as engagement on the issues. They have a long pedigree in this regard – dissent is not to be tolerated. That’s why Maddow doesn’t have guests appear on her shows about election issues, and she does a disservice to her [small number of] viewers.
Flip flops??…seriously?…proving once again that some Democrats are too dumb to tie their own shoelaces
Requiring a minor to notify her parents that she’s exercise her Roe v Wade rights? Oppression!
Having to show an I.D. to exercise your 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendment rights? Racist!
Having to go to a 3rd party government-licensed dealer (which can take several hours for people in remote areas), show a photo I.D., pay a fee (“poll tax”), and wait for permission from the government (which can take minutes, hours, days, or weeks) to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights? Common sense!
There are two types of voting law changes in play: Election integrity and convenience.
First there are election integrity changes like requiring a photo ID to cast a regular ballot with the option to cast a provisional ballot and sort out ID problems later. The purpose of requiring a photo ID is to make it difficult and prohibitively expensive for a person to vote multiple times under different identities. Paying $10 “gas money” or a pack of cigarettes per vote requires finding an equal number of valid IDs per vote bought, assuming poll workers check ID.
Second, there are partisan changes to voting convenience. Democrats have an advantage when it’s super easy to vote. For example, the option of straight party voting helps Democrats. Poll hours shifted earlier in the day and fewer days of early voting tend to help Republicans.
I have no problem admitting that both parties make changes to election law to play to their relative strengths. What I object to is the left conflating ballot integrity laws with partisan changes to voting convenience.
That is one ugly man in that photo.
what fee? the id cards are free.
What was dishonest?
Also, she said she tried to get various Republicans to come on the show, and all they would give her was a brief statement which she read. It’s not her fault if they don’t stand up to defend themselves.
Rachel invited many of those directly involved, such as Pete Gilbert, the Pasquotank Republican Party chairman, to be on the program. He, as well as many others, simply chose not to appear on the program to defend their actions or positions. Kind of difficult to debate an issue when the other side doesn’t show up for the debate. But then, you knew that already.
My God, you’re a dull, fact-free writer.
There is a difference between inviting a local party operative who knows nothing about election administration or voting law, and inviting an expert on voter fraud, duplicate voting and the Voting Rights Act. She will invite the former, and never the latter.
I wonder if “the commitee”, on behalf of guy who privately bestowed full freight for her “higher education”, STILL approve of her “intellectual” approach?
Dishonest throughout.
“What the Maddow show didn’t have was any dissent.”
Ya’ want SPECIFIC dissent on this?
SEE:The Liberty Amendments
Mark Levin-Simon & Schuster
Maybe THAT’s what inspired her “special” presentation.
“I have no problem admitting that both parties make changes to election law to play to their relative strengths.”
That is a bit disingenuous. The changes to election law that would advantage Republicans all revolve around limiting the exercise of the franchise. The advantages for the Democrats lie in the direction of full participation.
The fundamental values of democracy rest on a commitment to full participation.
So this is an easy call for Democrats – what is right also happens to be in their interest. But it is a profound moral challenge to Republicans. Do you trash the principles of democracy to gain an electoral advantage?
Unfortunately, the activists in the modern GOP seem to be all in on the sleazy opportunism.
Take Colin Powell seriously – he is trying to save his party, and uphold basic principles.
Colin Powell did not tell the truth about voter fraud. Dishonesty does not advance the debate.
Concealed carry permits, gun permits … that’s the 2nd Amendment issue. No problem for the lefties.
“full participation”?
What about disenfranchising *my* vote by having duplicate votes, dead people voting — and MORE people voting than the resident population?
The fee is to transfer a firearm, not for the ID
Granted, I’m a conservative. But I have no ethical qualms about voting being something that you have to be paying attention to and take time out to engage in. If people don’t and just treat it like ordering a pizza, they’re not going to make an informed decision. It’s not real participation, it’s just going through the motions.
There’s no right to scribble something random on a ballot. You have a civic duty to learn about the issues, learn about the candidates, and make an informed decision. If you wisely decide you don’t have the time and resources to commit, you have the right to refrain from voting.
“what fee? the id cards are free”
The background check fee.
Because making Americans obtain government permission to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights isn’t enough of a deterrent, so in some states we charge them a fee to do so.
Apparently at this site, “dishonest” is defined as “making Republicans look bad.”
You guys should really have a lexicon for this kind of thing.
So that’s a picture of Ricky Maddow..
Come now, Rachel is merely stirring the pot. Facts seldom come into play with the extremes of either side of the aisle.
Thank you Mr. Adams.
I really appreciate all you’ve done to expose Obama’s and the Left’s voter intimidation and fraud.
God bless you.