Join 3,501 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


There there, little boys 'n girlz, Daddy Ashcroft knows best
October 30, 2004 10:30 AM   Subscribe

"There there, little voters, Papa Ashcroft and Daddy Bush will sort out those nasty little vote fraud disputes." - Bush Adm. sues to give Ashcroft authority over voting disputes under the HAVA Act. "...Bush administration lawyers argued....that only the Justice Department, and not voters themselves, may sue to enforce the voting rights set out in the Help America Vote Act.....would reverse decades of precedent..... Since the civil rights era of the 1960s, individuals have gone to federal court to enforce their right to vote.....in legal briefs filed in connection with cases in Ohio, Michigan and Florida, the administration's lawyers argue that the new law gives Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft the exclusive power to bring lawsuits to enforce its provisions." I'm reminded of Andrew Card's September 1, 2004 comment "that President Bush views America as a ''10-year-old child" in need of the sort of protection provided by a parent."
posted by troutfishing (29 comments total)

 
They don't believe in voting rights, or any rights for us citizens, at all, do they? We all know that Ashcroft would be completely and thoroughly partisan, and disregard established law entirely, if he was the sole authority. I guess that's their strategy for 2004? Not the Supreme Court again, but the AG?

It's just un-American, and sickening.
posted by amberglow at 10:34 AM on October 30, 2004


'm reminded of Andrew Card's September 1, 2004 comment "that President Bush views America as a ''10-year-old child" in need of the sort of protection provided by a parent."

I'm reminded of it as well, tf, but with all due respect, I think that's bullshit. Bush doesn't really think of Americans as ten year olds, rather he demonstrates the same failing that many some unintelligent people I know demonstrate: they, annoyingly or amusingly, depending on your tolerance for these sort of people, assume everybody else is stupider than they are. Bush is, I'm sure, constantly being told that he's smart and capable and committed by sycophants, handlers and opportunists around him; anyone with eyes, ears and a reasonable capacity for analysis will quickly determine that's not the case. To paraphrase the Ancient Chinese Wise One, he's the fool that doesn't know he's a fool - the most dangerous men of all.
posted by JollyWanker at 10:41 AM on October 30, 2004


What 10 year old is well off with a moron or an idiot as a parent.
posted by Trik at 10:56 AM on October 30, 2004


Jolly Wanker - you know, I was just quoting Andrew Card.

But in regards to "To paraphrase the Ancient Chinese Wise One, he's the fool that doesn't know he's a fool - the most dangerous men of all." : I think that's quite consistent with the possibility that Bush thinks of America (note : Card said "America", not "Americans") as a ten year old in need of guidance.

That seems possible to me. That's the way Bush behaves : arrogantly paternalistic.
posted by troutfishing at 10:58 AM on October 30, 2004


(I won't compare Bush to Hitler, I won't compare Bush to Hitler, I won't compare Bush to Hitler....)
posted by rafter at 11:01 AM on October 30, 2004


I guess our remaining option will be armed insurrection.
posted by 2sheets at 11:11 AM on October 30, 2004


2sheets - Well, I wouldn't go that far..... that's a court of last resort.

There are armies of lawyers mobilized by the Dems to slug things out. It may be a long battle.
posted by troutfishing at 11:31 AM on October 30, 2004


Troutfishing, I am praying that Bush loses the election in three days and fades from the international scene so that you can finally get a good night's sleep. It's hard work. . .

cheers.
posted by sic at 11:32 AM on October 30, 2004


Measures how a society ranks on a spectrum stretching from democracy to despotism. Explains how societies and nations can be measured by the degree that power is concentrated and respect for the individual is restricted. Where does your community, state and nation stand on these scales?
posted by four panels at 12:07 PM on October 30, 2004


Whatever man. After they lose they can enjoy a $1000 Sundae at Serendipity in New York.
posted by The God Complex at 1:45 PM on October 30, 2004


2sheets ... i'm afraid you're right ... if we can't sue the government for our voting rights, then what recourse do we have if we are deprived? ... and why should we regard that government as legitimate?

disenfranchise the people and you de-legitimize the government ... let's hope that some sanity prevails
posted by pyramid termite at 2:18 PM on October 30, 2004


At what point do we send in the UN to fix this so-called democracy?
posted by Hildegarde at 2:35 PM on October 30, 2004


Dear God,

I don't ask you for much, but please, please, please deliver us from George W. Bush.
posted by eustacescrubb at 2:38 PM on October 30, 2004


Ignoring the deep Democrat history of voter fraud is just sticking your head up your arse.
posted by HTuttle at 4:42 PM on October 30, 2004


.
posted by Blue Stone at 5:05 PM on October 30, 2004


Ignoring the deep Democrat history of voter fraud is just sticking your head up your arse.

We deplore it, actually, but (for this round at least) there is nothing I've read or heard about from the Democrat side that even remotely resembles the scale and scope we're seeing from the RNC. I welcome links proving otherwise.
posted by jalexei at 5:39 PM on October 30, 2004


I keep thinking, now they've gone too far-- the media, voters will have to take notice. But a large segment just don't care.

Can any Bush supporter explain to me how this is a good thing? Doesn't this concern you?
posted by gesamtkunstwerk at 7:15 PM on October 30, 2004


the media will take notice when it happens--after the election.
posted by amberglow at 7:55 PM on October 30, 2004


Man, Ashcroft having authority over anything is disturbing to me. He is one creepy mofo. So is Tom Ridge
posted by a3matrix at 8:21 PM on October 30, 2004


Democratic voter fraud typically seems to be stacking the deck with a few deceased voters so the effect is to water down peoples vote. The Republican approach to voter fraud is to keep certain people from voting. They correlate skin colour to income brackets and use the realization that the lower income brackets tend to vote Democratic and so suppress their vote. They do this through misinformation usually.

Both are illegal and immoral but I find using racial profiling to determine who's voting rights should be targeted more insidious.

I'd rather see a few people who shouldn't vote cast votes than a few people who should've been allowed to prevented from voting. It's sort of like the law. Yeah, sometimes due process sucks and the bad guys get away with murder but it's better than the alternative.
posted by substrate at 8:35 PM on October 30, 2004


Can any Bush supporter explain to me how this is a good thing?

Apparently "but .. but .. but .. the other guy's have done it too! It's our turn now!" is good enough for some.
posted by Space Coyote at 8:55 PM on October 30, 2004


"Ignoring the deep Democrat history of voter fraud is just sticking your head up your arse."
(posted by HTuttle at 4:42 PM PST on October 30) - HTuttle, who's ignoring history? - Nobody, but I'm talking about the present.....where we are now. Run the clock further back, and the Republican Party was the party of Lincoln, sure. But that's irrelevant to the issue at hand.
posted by troutfishing at 8:56 PM on October 30, 2004


Hard to imagine today that the rePublican party was once the defenders of civil rights. Right up until segregation and Jim Crow was outlawed. Then it got too close and personal and uncomfortable when the servants could use the front door and actually vote.
posted by nofundy at 4:51 AM on October 31, 2004


Yeah. I'd love to take a poll - even here on thoughtful, intellectual Metafilter :

"Do you know what the term 'Yellow Dog Democrat' refers to?"
posted by troutfishing at 5:19 AM on October 31, 2004


Does anyone else just want to go to bed for a week until the election has been decided again by the Supreme Court?
posted by mecran01 at 6:38 AM on October 31, 2004


"that President Bush views America as a ''10-year-old child"

This goes to the heart of what scares me most about GW Bush. I've lived under plenty of presidents I've disagreed strongly with (Reagan, Bush, Sr.) but I always considered them competent statesmen. I never feared that their sheer cluelessness could lead to disaster. With W, I worry about that a lot.
posted by jonmc at 8:15 AM on October 31, 2004


2sheets. . as valid as your first comment is. . well I would have a caution about uttering stuff like that. . .unless you are not worried about a knock on your door in the night and a free trip to gitmo. . .
posted by Danf at 8:24 AM on October 31, 2004


"Do you know what the term 'Yellow Dog Democrat' refers to?"

Well, I do, but I've grown up (mostly) in the American Deep South. It's a particularly regional usage that, it is my belief, dates back to Reconstruction, post Civil War. William Safire, in his book New Political Dictionary claims the origin as the 1928 Presidential election. But I'm fairly sure I've seen the phrase in pamphlets from the 1870s that were circulated around an election. But without access to a good political library, I'm not absolutely positive...it's possible I'm confusing the timelines between "brass collar Democrats" and "yellow dog Democrats".

As to this incredibly transparent grab for power by the Bush Regime, I'm no longer surprised by anything they do. Anxious, upset, bothered, but not surprised. Hopefully, some "activist" judge will slap them down for being the little theocratic fascist-wannabes that they are.
posted by dejah420 at 10:36 AM on October 31, 2004


asshole (flash, i think)
posted by amberglow at 3:15 PM on November 1, 2004


« Older All watched over by machines of loving grace...  |  NYC Critical Mass ride dampene... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments