Would such growls from voting machines satisfy liberals that an undervote need not represent either a remediable flaw in the voter or in the technology? Can liberals accept that an undervote usually reflects either voter carelessness, for which the voter suffers the condign punishment of an unrecorded preference, or reflects the voter's choice not to express a preference? No, otherwise they would not be liberals: obsessive about rights, blind to responsibilities.My take on the voting problems with punchcards and butterfly ballots are a little less nuanced than Will's. If you don't have the intellectual capacity to figure out a ballot, then you certainly don't have the capacity to figure out the complex issues of the campaign and make a reasonable decision and therefore shouldn't be allowed to vote.
On Monday a Colorado judge upheld a new requirement that voters are responsible for producing identification before being allowed to vote. And Florida's Supreme Court rejected the argument that voters are disenfranchised when provisional ballots they cast in the wrong precincts are not counted.
Imagine that: Voters are responsible for proving who they are and knowing where they are supposed to vote. There will be charges that both rulings permit "intimidation," which in today's liberal lexicon is a synonym for linking rights to responsibilities.
Thursday, October 21, 2004
The Right to Vote
In the last few weeks, the Democratic cries of voter intimidation by the Republicans have grown to a crescendo. John Kerry has even accused Republicans of disenfranchising a million black voters, all this while evidence of Democratic voter fraud grows. George Will takes on these accusations and other voting irregularities in today's excellent column.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment