>Oh please. If you can't
>tell that an ARROW means
>PUNCH HERE, then you don't
>need to be voting.
>Voting is more than simply
>registering and getting in line
>to hide behind a box
>and push buttons, it's about
>having the intelligence to make
>accurate decisions about the people
>you are voting for, or
>in some cases against.
>I'll cut the double punchers
>some slack, but the ones
>that voted Buchanan while intended
>for Gore are a bunch
>of morons. Once again,
>typical that leftists would fugg
>up something so simple.

More smug statements from a guy that simply is turning out to seem like a real asshole. There is NO, I repeat, NO, requirement for "intelligence" in the right of enfranchisement in the Constitution! Adults of marginal mental capacity are given the right to vote (I have personally registered people with serious learning defects, and others who were slightly mentally retarded, and illiterate individuals), and that's a GREAT thing, because they can protect their interests. If we start making comments that citizens with diminished mental abilities should not be enfranchised, then we put ourselves in a horrible presumptuous position of having to decide who is "fit" or "unfit" to have a basic Constitutional right, and that ish is eerily reminiscent of some slavery, "3/5 of a man" shit.

And for you to call a whole group of interested voting citizens(possibly as high as 19,000) "morons" because they may have ended up voting in a way they did not intend is just SAD on your part. Intent is the cornerstone of almost every law on the books, and Intent in voting MUST be of the UTMOST concern if we are going to preserve the integrity and faith in the system of enfranchisement, or else we open the door to tricanery in balloting and fraud.

I have read some of your claims before, some are on point, most are outlandish (the naming of yourself as "Expertise", I hope for your sake, was tongue-in-cheek), but I notice you must always resort to some "Democrats/Gore = Bad" generalized statement. Where is the "expertise" or intelligent thought in taunting those whom you don't share their political views by making dismissive comments about their integrity or intelligence?

On a personal note, I recall horror stories that my family in Louisiana (swamp cajun creoles) would tell me about how my only somewhat literate great-grandfather, once given the right to vote as a Black man, was turned away from the polls, then not given privacy when he cast his vote, then given a ballot that was not easy for him to decipher so he never was quite sure he voted the way he intended, all over several elections well into the 70s. Those were tricks of the trade back in the day to keep Black people from swinging the votes in Southern counties. I think the methods of prevention of enfranchisement, nowadays, although far more covert than the examples I gave about my great-granddaddy, are still present.

Those voters in Palm County are NOT gonna take this shit lying down.... if you've seen the ethnic composition of the voters there, they are overwhelmingly White, and you know how White folks are when they feel like THEIR rights have been trampled on! They are going to HAVE to be addressed.