Electoral scandals: ACORN vs. vote suppression

- CNN commentary on voting dangers by Donna Brazile - Oct. 27 2008

- CNN "voter purges" article by Abbie Boudreau and Scott Bronstein

- Market Watch RNC article ACORN and voter registration - Oct. 8 2008

- NY Times article by Bob Herbert - August 16, 2004

- Huffington Post vote suppression article by Michael Carmichael - Oct. 21 2008

- Democracy Now transcript on vote rigging by Greg Palast - Oct. 9 2008

- Factcheck on ACORN

   ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has been at the center of a fierce controversy in recent months over their voter registration scandal. This controversy, fueled primarily by rabid Republicans, has been dubbed by many experts to be of little overall consequence in relation to electoral subversion. The dispute centers on the fact that ACORN solicitors submitted numerous false voter registration forms in order to meet certain goals set by the organization. The frauds were not instigated by the organization itself, which helps explain why no charges have been filed against ACORN amidst the storm of political outrage spearheaded by McCain and Palin. In fact, ACORN is required by law to submit all of the forms they receive from their canvassers to local election officials, and leave it up to them to weed out the falsified forms, (see factcheck.org) although they flag suspicious candidates. This information alone practically nullifies the Republican outrage, since if ACORN discarded the forms themselves everyone would be screaming about how the organization broke the chain of bureaucracy. As stated by nearly every competent source, the real concern should be vote suppression, a much more worrisome and realistic possibility. According to Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist;

"A simple cost-benefit analysis tells us this [registration fraud] is not a reasonable or significant threat. The real threat here is the Republican Party using attacks on ACORN as a calculated strategy to justify massive challenges to the votes cast in Democratic-leaning voting precincts on Election Day. And this is what is truly outrageous, but where is John McCain's concern when it comes to people being harassed at the voting booth?"

Any person who values the system of democracy America enjoys and played such a central role in establishing should be at the very least concerned about this underhanded strategy. 

   Sadly, it seems as though there has always been a group of people unable to see past their prejudices, adamant that they alone are aware of the truth of events, and therefore have the right to determine the progress of millions. The process of vote suppression is a very subtle one, a stratagem adopted due to the obsolete, blatant quality of stealing votes or directly cheating the system to boost vote count. Instead of trying to increase a candidate's numbers, vote suppression calls for reducing the opponent's, or making it more difficult for people to vote in choice areas in order to tip the balance in battleground states. The forms this process can take are legion, from invalidating an individual's voter registration form due to trivial details, to reducing the number and accessibility of polls, even to discarding thousands of registrations because of "malfunctions", which, though sorted out later, prevent those people from voting. An excerpt from a CNN article paints a vivid picture of the sort of tactics officials can employ: 

"'This office has received notification from the state of Georgia indicating that you are not a citizen of the United States and therefore, not eligible to vote,' a letter from the Fulton County Department of Registration and Elections said. But Berry is a U.S. citizen, born in Boston, Massachusetts. She has a passport and a birth certificate to prove it. The letter, which was dated October 2, gave her a week from the time it was dated to prove her citizenship. There was a problem, though -- the letter was postmarked October 9."

Later in that same article the situation was elaborated on: 

"'What most people don't know is that every year, elections officials strike millions of names from the voter rolls using processes that are secret, prone to error and vulnerable to manipulation,' said Wendy Weiser, an elections expert with New York University's Brennan Center for Justice."

Obviously, records will need to be updated prior to elections, and modifications to the lists of eligible voters is not inherently suspicious, but the danger lies in using those same updates as an excuse to meddle with the "fabric of democracy", as McCain so eloquently puts it (albeit in the wrong context). 

   Personally, I cannot express in mere word the disgust I feel towards those who perpetrate vote suppression, as it is such a shameless manifestation of greed, perhaps one of human beings' most prevalent and base vices. The greed is not even material, (a type of compulsion which I believe to be more easily excusable and evolutionarily justified) but a sickening perceived superiority which manifests as a refusal to consider the opinions of others valuable. I believe that such an activity should be an imprisonable offense, (perhaps it already is, I am not quite sure) and that courts should give serious consideration to the death penalty during the judicial process.

A brief analysis of the 2008 presidential debates and their historical context

The recent presidential debates between John McCain and Barack Obama covered a wide range of pressing topics, from foreign energy policy to health care and financial programs. The upcoming election is sure to be a pivotal moment in the history of our country, if the tense atmosphere and momentous challenges facing our nation are anything to go by. Therefore, the debates were an excellent opportunity to allow the candidates a chance to speak directly to the American people in a Q&A format, a style that makes it far more straightforward to judge the character of a candidate, a feat made impossible by the prepared quality of almost every politician's public statements. Another useful aspect of the debate prompts is their focus on the important issues of the day, providing more in-depth and timely summaries of the candidate's plans, and allowing them to directly address the merits and shortcomings of each others proposals. 

The impacts of the Internet on Democracy in America

The Internet. Arguably one of mankind's most epic achievements, both in principle and effect. It has made possible countless advances of science, economics, education, philosophy, and almost any other facet of modern life one cares to name. With it, we have become a species united by our pursuit of efficiency, understanding, and order. It is a jewel of human creativity, born from the crushing weight of our collective intellects and the white heat of our insatiable curiosity. 

However, just as any natural gem, it serves to magnify our most crippling vices to the same degree as our most philanthropic aspirations. Whichever way your opinions lean, there is no doubt that the Internet has impacted numerous aspects of our society in the few years since its inception, and will likely continue to do so for many years of the foreseeable future. At this point I will implore the reader (most likely my teacher) to consider the staggering scale of the intellectual labyrinth posed by this prompt, the manifold paths one could explore in the process of answering it, the depth of research necessary to adequately pursue even one of those, and the amount of semi-educated guesswork I will be forced to employ in attempt to offset my lack of hard evidence. If the reader can bear all of this in mind while unraveling this blog entry, then hopefully you will understand why it demonstrates such a poverty of reason. One of the most profound of the internet's nearly infinite effects was the radical shift in cultural values that seemed to develop on par with its growth. It seems (to my admittedly shallow understanding of social history) that with the advent of the internet and its capability for near-instant communication, cultural values have diminished. I cannot say if this is a boon or tragedy, but it seems apparent how the personal interactions and experiences that ruled social behavior for centuries have diminished alongside the advance of technology. When America was in the midst of its struggle with England and the Constitution was conceived, the majority of people cultivated a rural lifestyle, in which information transfer was confined to the physical, such as writ or word of mouth. The effects brought on by the absence such a prevalent aspect of human social structure are unclear, but we can always postulate. Perhaps before the internet people's opinions were formed by their own conscience and familial influence, whereas afterwords they had access to  

Newspaper project reflection

- Transcript of fourth Lincoln-Douglas debate

This project (for any reading this besides by teacher) was one in which we were divvied into groups, assigned one of the Lincoln-Douglas senatorial debates, and commanded to collaborate and produce the front page of an imaginary newspaper that came out the day after our particular debate. My group got debate #4, which took place in beautiful Charleston, and decided that we each (it was a group of four) had to write at least one news-style article, which was a novel experience in principle. Before I embark on the irreversible voyage of reflective invective, I will furnish my unknown reader with a few choice excerpts from my compilation of day-to-day work logs.

Oct 6, 2008

"Today I read some of the debate and took notes on newspaper format. I also spoke with my group members and we started deciding on the nuances of our approach, a setback compounded by the absence of a group member."

That was written on the first day of the project, when we were still hashing out our plan. The rest of the in-progress logs are equally (and perhaps even more) boring and uninformative, so I will skip to the log of the last day when we were asked to reflect on our contributions.

Oct 14, 2008

"My article could have better conveyed the topic if I had read more of the debate transcript and used more quotes. I was unsatisfied with the final draft, and if I read [my article] in a real newspaper I would probably cancel my subscription."

As you can see, the article I wrote did not appease the demanding linguistic critic in me, though the same is true for every other article I read. This leads me to believe that writing dynamically about any topic that took place over a hundred years ago is an impossibility, and my dissatisfaction is not solely attributable to my own shortcomings. Despite it's outcome, the project involved useful and interesting writing strategies, namely writing in a newspaper format, which is radically different than any other style I can think of. Obviously this sort of knowledge will prove useful in future writing endeavors, for myself and all of my classmates. One project in particular that I foresee to have roots in the recent newspaper project is the upcoming water-quality project, in which we will analyze, among other things, the importance of our local oceanic ecosystem, how our activities affect it, and which aquatic zones are cleanest for swimmers and surfers. We are going to compile this data into some sort of informative publication which we will presumably issue to people due to the recent dearth of government funded water quality tests. Due to the public nature of this publication, it is essential that our writing, editing, photographical, and formatting skills be honed to their very highest levels in order to avoid the unremitting shame that would fall on our school as a result of lax work standards.

This is the article in question (please bear in mind that it is meant to be part of an 1858 newspaper):

Stephen Douglas focuses on defending against Lincoln and Trumbull at the Charlston senatorial debate yesterday due to the severity of their withering accusations. In the time remaining, Mr. Douglas used the Supreme Court’s decision in the Dred Scott case to reinforce his arguments that the black man is inferior to the white man and undeserving of equality.

“I will not even qualify my opinion to meet the declaration of one of the Judges of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case, ‘that a negro descended from African parents, who was imported into this country as a slave is not a citizen, and cannot be.’” said Douglas, to great applause.

“I say that this Government was established on the white basis. It was made by white men, for the benefit of white men and their posterity forever, and never should be administered by any except white men.”

With this statement, Mr. Douglas denounced Lincoln’s stance that the phrase “all men are created equal” implies the equality of blacks as well as whites. Douglas also makes quite clear his position on the topic of slavery, and opposes Lincoln’s opening statements in which he clarified his position on the equality of blacks to whites.

“I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing.” Proclaimed Lincoln at the beginning of his speech.

In this particular utterance, Lincoln expresses his belief that although a black man is inherently unequal to a white one, he still possesses the rights inherent to human beings, which are oppressed by the practice of slavery. However, Mr. Douglas chose to devote the majority of his time to refuting the accusations leveled against him by Lincoln (who drew copious evidence from the speech of Senator Trumbull), and only excoriated Lincoln’s statements on slavery in the closing minutes of his allotted hour and a half. This strategy could be seen as either a cunning political maneuver or a significant shortcoming, depending on the political orientation of the reader.

A review of various photos and their photographical elements

This photograph of a Tibetan yak clad in a colorful and utilitarian regalia demonstrates reasonable aptitude with a camera. You can see how the photographer utilized the dynamic background to full effect by employing the rule of thirds.

The rule of thirds

The picture is not focused merely on the yak - however vibrant it's saddle may be - but on an artistic amalgam of yak and environment (presumably some isolated Himalayan vista), the latter of which is certainly entrancing enough to equal or exceed the inherent splendor held by this yak and its distinctive trappings. There are a few constructive criticisms that come to mind when I contemplate this image, such as the position of the photographer. If this unnamed individual had moved a little closer and managed to fit the yak's face into the frame, while simultaneously capturing the spellbinding background and lively getup, the picture would be stupendously more aesthetically pleasing. I scavenged this remarkable photograph from the web site Tibetan Train Travel, which can be viewed using this simple link.

I was struck by this highly expressive photograph of a hippo while I perused the many pages of Wildlife-photo.org. Based on my impromptu understanding of photography, I would say that this is a spectacular example of a picture. Clearly visible is the photographer's talent for the use of the rule of thirds, depth of field, camera position, color, and doubtless many other obscure bits of photographical protocol which, taken together, dramatically enhance the appeal of the image. With but a passing glance, one can discern how the position of the gaping maw is roughly aligned with a part of the rule of thirds (as shown above), and that the eye is also along a line, but centered, indicating that the focal point of the image is intended to be the yawning abyss of pink flesh, fearsome tusks, and ghastly nubs of blackened molar that is the mouth of a grown hippopotamus, or Hippopotamus Amphibius (from Greek). Also apparent is the use of depth of field, where the opposite bank and farthest hippo head fade into indistinction, imparting a sense of realism to the picture, making it seem almost like a window.

Lincoln-Douglas debate #4

 

  

  The debate me and my group was assigned was the fourth, which took place in Charleston, Illinois. This particular debate was largely confined to the politicians hurling accusations at one another and defending against their opponents verbal attacks. Lincoln began with a statement clarifying his position on the equality of African Americans, followed by a long-winded accusation of conspiracy, drawing copious amounts of evidence from the speeches of one Senator Trumbull. Douglas then spent the majority of his hour and a half carefully and methodically refuting every scrap of the accusations leveled against him, time he studded with similar stabs at Lincoln's credibility.  I can scarcely comprehend what qualities a person could possess that would enable them to speak before an audience of over 10,000 eager listeners for over an hour uninterrupted. The mind boggles when one considers that in order to effectively answer their opponent's arguments (which is of course the whole point of a debate) the speaker could not read from a script or rehearse their performance very far past their opening statement. Most unfortunately, this massive and intricate tapestry of vocal performance had to be read and digested by my mind, a task that would undoubtedly give any human organ a cataclysmic case of indigestion. It may come as no surprise then as I assure the reader that the transcript of this debate was one of the most dreadfully boring pieces of literature ever to gain the dubious honor of being chopped up in my hippocampus and filed away among the metaphorical shelves of my short-term memory.

 However, upon completion of this near-superhuman feat, I was dropped head-first into a fathomless ocean of purest contemplation, from which I could clearly discern the profound distinctions between the debate format used in the time of Abraham Lincoln and that of our current presidential debates. In 1858, speakers were assigned great blocks of stage time, which they used to explain to the public their merits and those of their beliefs. In today's format, speakers are given questions and a time limit with which to explain how they view the issue in question and how their presidential regime would address each problem. It is not up to me to determine the format we should use, but I think that both have inherent strengths and weaknesses. On the one hand, an unregulated chunk of time poses the threat of evasion of the important issues, but it allows the candidates to go into greater detail on the nuances of their particular approach. The current format assumes the viewer to possess at least a rudimentary knowledge of current affairs, which may not always be the case, but the Q and A style allows a greater coverage of topics, both major and minor, in addition to keeping the speaker on topic.

Possible demographic ramifications of the upcoming election

Perhaps the most obvious controversy that could result from the elections is one of race. As is well known, if Barack Obama is elected for president he will be the first African American president in American history. For most, this merely adds to the gravity and historical significance of the election, but for others it may represent a more personal significance. As may or may not be widely known, racism is a fact of life in many regions of the country, as we as a class were shown in the assigned chapter "Dying for Dixie". How the discriminatory beliefs of some might manifest as a result of the possible election of an African American remains to be seen, though racism is almost never a polite and respectful conviction. On the other hand, there may be certain demographic groups that associate more strongly with a candidate, resulting in bias of varying degrees. An example of this could be Sarah Palin and her constant allusions to "hockey moms", or John McCains venerable age and combat experiences, or even, as mentioned above, Barack Obama's race. It is perhaps inevitable that presidential candidates will garner sympathy from different slices of the American demographic pie graph, but this election deserves special consideration due to the strength of people's emotions and the tense atmosphere surrounding this "fork in the road" of economic, local, and foreign policy.

Relevance of a landmark supreme court case: Brown vs. Board of Education

- USA Today current school segregation article by Annette Fuentes March 13, 2007

- Earl Warren biography

Brown vs. Board of Education (1954) was a huge step towards the dream of an unsegregated nation, and as such its repercussions can be felt to this day. Prior to the supreme court’s ruling, the education of black children was conducted in vastly inferior conditions to that of white children, if even allowed by law.

The case was a turning point for America, because it preceded and hastened the civil rights act of 1964, and overruled the previous case Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896), which made “separate but equal” the norm in American society. Of course the argument could be (and was) made that “separate but equal” is a contradiction in terms, especially in the case of education. The court used the process of Judicial Review to overturn the precedent set by Plessy vs. Ferguson (as mentioned above), and the case was combined with four others: Briggs vs. Elliott (filed in South Carolina), Davis vs. County School Board of Prince Edward County (filed in Virginia), Gebhart vs. Belton (filed in Delaware), and Bolling vs. Sharpe (filed in Washington D.C.). The supreme court’s decision ushered in an age of integrated school systems, which in turn contributed to the desegregation of the nation because from that point on protests against racial discrimination grew steadily more impassioned and effective, assisted in no small part by Martin Luther King Jr..

One need only consider the possible consequences for modern America had this case not passed to gain an understanding of its importance. Where would we be today if Brown vs. Board of Education had never seen the light of day? The rich tapestry of history always looks simple in hindsight, but it is impossible to accurately and effectively postulate the path events would have conspired to lead us down had a certain critical juncture of yore failed to manifest. Perhaps the relatively equal racial playing field we all (for the most part) know and love would never have materialized. Maybe it would have actually regressed to the state it was before the Civil war, or turned upside-down and subjected the historically “superior” white man to the harsh vagaries of unreasoning hatred he so often visited on his perceived inferiors.

Amid all the to-do about past injustices, it is easy to overlook the implications of the closest modern equivalent to slavery; sweatshops, and the role developed nations (like America) play in their perpetuation. It is true that the practice of outsourcing pays its laborers, and therefore is not technically slavery, but we must ask ourselves: does this slight difference truly makes it that much more morally acceptable? Acceptable enough for America; the land of the free and the home of the brave, to prop up and encourage sweatshop labor, essentially just a step down from the now-outlawed practices that are simultaneously the foundation of our nation and a terrible stain in our history books? Paying workers a miniscule fraction of what their work is worth while they labor in appalling conditions mass producing almost everything we need simply because no laws explicitly forbid it is a state of affairs nearly as alarming to me as studying our country’s checkered past. I see it as a mere extension of the mindset that promoted racial discrimination and slavery within our own borders, differing only by location. Certainly it has been curbed somewhat from the extremes of segregative passion that flourished in the 1800’s, but the concept of heaping all of a country’s difficult manual labor on the members of a foreign nation still smacks of prejudice.

Sadly, racial integration was not unanimously embraced by the white public, perhaps an inevitable by-product of centuries of deeply entrenched racism and the leisure afforded by free labor. In several cases it was taken to extremes, such as Senator Harry F. Byrd's Massive Resistance movement which called for, among other things, closing schools rather than integrating them, or Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus mobilizing his national guard to prevent African Americans from attending Little Rock High School. As we look back into the piebald annals of the past, we must strive to grow and learn from them, for truly our record of history is the only thing capable of shielding us from the darkest depths of savage barbarity, for we as a species possess the means for both appalling cruelty and uplifting benevolence.

(I know the sources are messed up but I can't fathom how to fix them)

"Brown v. Board of Education." Brownvboard. Brown Foundation. 2 Oct. 2008

.

"Brown v. Board of Education." Wikipedia. 1 Oct. 2008

.

"Findlaw/Cases and Codes." Findlaw. 2 Oct. 2008

<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=163&invol=537>.

"Briggs v. Elliott (1954)." Usca. 2 Oct. 2008

.

"Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, VA.." Brownvboard. Brown Foundation. 2 Oct. 2008

.