Posted on June 30,
2021
Soupy "Suppression"
Dems redefine yet another word
by
Daniel
Clark
To hear the Democrats and therefore the news media
tell it, there is no such thing as voter fraud.
Republicans only maintain the illusion of its existence as a pretext for
their own voter suppression efforts.
The conservative Heritage Foundation maintains a
database of voter fraud cases from around the country. As of this writing, it has catalogued 1,328
documented cases of fraud, 1,143 of which have resulted in convictions, over
roughly two decades. That's not a very
large number, but consider that these are only the cases that have been seen
through to their conclusion. One thing
we don't know is how many times more are never prosecuted, but here's a
hint. In 2018, the last year that
Republican Bruce Rauner served as governor of
Illinois, there were 12 voter fraud convictions in that state. Ever since Democrat J.B. Pritzker replaced Rauner in January 2019, there have been zero. Just because Democrats choose not to
prosecute for voter fraud does not mean they've rendered it nonexistent.
What
really doesn't exist in 21st Century America is voter suppression. If 1,328 doesn't sound like many, try asking
the Justice Department's Office of Civil Rights to produce 1,328 people who
were eligible and registered to vote but denied the right to do so. It couldn't even produce a single one. To "suppress" is to "put down by authority or
force." It does not mean making
something slightly less convenient than it otherwise might have been. Nobody in this country is putting down
people's ability to vote by authority or force.
In the parlance of our times, voter suppression is not a thing.
Try looking up the list of "forms of voter
suppression" published by the Voting Rights Alliance, an affiliation of
left-wing activist groups including the National Organization for Women, the
Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, and the Hip Hop Caucus (no, really!). The examples include voter ID laws,
elimination or reduction of early voting, elimination of same-day registration,
the purging of inactive voters from voting rolls, proof of citizenship laws,
"lack of language-accessible materials" (meaning not in English), laws that
prevent ex-cons from voting, signature verification, and the absence of a
straight-party voting option from the ballot.
None
of these things prevents eligible, registered voters from voting. If you are unwilling to identify yourself, can't
be bothered to vote in person on Election Day, neglect to register before
Election Day, or allow your registration to lapse due to inactivity, you have
not had your vote suppressed. Voting
simply is not that difficult a thing to do.
It's not hard to vote. It's not
hard to register to vote. It's not hard
to acquire a photo ID. It's not hard to
obtain an absentee ballot. Everybody
who's eligible to vote, and wants to vote, can vote.
According to the Democratic Party linguists (and yes,
they do have those), "suppression" no longer means to put down by authority or
force. "Voter suppression" now means
anything that requires a modicum of effort or forethought on the part of the
voter. If a state requires that people
either vote on Election Day or else by absentee ballot, that is now defined as
a deprivation of voting rights, even though it does not prevent anybody from
voting who is eligible.
Knowing that ignorant, apathetic people vote overwhelmingly
for their party, the Democrats have done everything they can think of to reduce
this civic obligation to an involuntary muscular action akin to belching. Don't want to wait until Election Day? They'll fix it so you can vote at your convenience
for months beforehand. Don't want to go
to the polls? Just mail your vote
in. There's no need to even go to the
mailbox, because a helpful Democrat will come to your door and deliver your
vote to one of the many drop-boxes that have been made available. If you need him to help you fill out your
ballot while he's at it, who's to know?
The Democrats and their friends from Silicon Valley
would ultimately like to make voting as mindless as liking a post on social
media. If you like a disapproved
candidate, they might give you a popup asking, "Are you sure?" If you obediently vote straight-party for
their side, they could set your vote to auto-renew. Even with those technological advances, they'd
still maintain their tried and true methods, of course. They wouldn't have much choice. The way they've redefined things, ending the
practice of bribing bums with cigarettes just might be a form of voter
suppression.
The Shinbone: The
Frontier of the Free Press