Yesterday afternoon, President Obama delivered an unsparing speech in Washington, rejecting Republicans' budget, their shift to the very far right, and their entire approach to governing. Fox News viewers got to some of the early portions of the remarks, but the network soon broke away to cover a breaking story ... which happened to be a four-year-old incident.
What had Fox so excited? Ed Kilgore explained that the right has taken a keen interest in an obscure Indiana indictment.
Mugshots of four Indiana Dems charged with fraud in a 2008 primary.
The Fox lede makes it sound pretty lurid: "Felony charges related to election fraud have touched the 2008 race for the highest office in the land." And the headline, below which are arranged mugshot-style photos of the malefactors, reads: "4 Indiana Dems charged with election fraud in 2008 presidential race."
Elsewhere are bloggy headlines and shouts about "voter fraud" and, inevitably, "voter ID" .... Republicans promoting franchise-shrinking Voter ID laws, you see, are hard-pressed to supply evidence of any actual voter fraud, so anything that sounds remotely like it will get a lot of attention.
That's true, though the details in this case help make a very different kind of point.
In Indiana, four county-level Democratic Party officials in South Bend are accused of falsifying some petition signatures to get all of the party's major presidential candidates on the primary ballot in 2008. It's unclear why they bothered -- Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton enjoyed ample support in the area at the time -- but whatever the reason, some local officials cut corners and got caught. Now they're facing charges as a result.
Who cares? Well, those orchestrating a "war on voting" care a great deal -- they're desperate to find real-world examples of actual fraud in order to justify sweeping new restrictions on Americans' ability to participate in elections. Fox has no qualms about breaking away from a major presidential speech to cover this Indiana story, because if the public can be convinced that election fraud is real, then voter-ID laws will appear more legitimate and less like efforts to rig elections.
But Fox may not have thought this one through enough.
For one thing, even if voter-ID laws existed everywhere, they wouldn't prevent troublemakers from screwing around with petition signatures. The solution doesn't address the problem. For another, there are already laws in place that do address the problem -- it's why these four are being prosecuted.
Moreover, when Republicans are so eager to justify a war on voting that they cling to a four-year-old incident about a county primary ballot, they're actually proving the opposite of the intended point -- the takeaway here is that real examples of fraud are incredibly rare. If they were more common, minor incidents like these would be easily overlooked as legal trivia, and Fox would shine a light on more compelling proof.
Indeed, Texas recently went looking for examples of voter fraud and found fewer than five incidents of "illegal voting" out of more than 13 million votes cast in the 2008 and 2010 elections. Five out of 13 million helps prove just how exceedingly uncommon this is, and helps underscore just how unnecessary new voting restrictions are.
And finally, if Fox is serious about reporting on election fraud, the network would have more of an interest in more meaningful examples of recent voter fraud -- most of which have come from Republicans.
Leave a Comment:
Humorous...
Probably the wrong state to get in an uproar about while confusing voter registration 'fraud' with voting fraud!
Naturally, Fox Noise will not mention the Repuknican Secretary of State in Indiana who was tossed from office after being convicted of multiple felonies including actual voting fraud.
Another example of disrespecting the President. It's like shouting, "you lie" and many of the other rotten things they have done.
More breaking news for FOX News. 'Jesus killed by conservatives using an unelected judge to decide the case." Follow up stories in 2000 years.
All's I gotta say is if you want to see 'election FRAUD' you need look no further than the Republican Primaries...yeah tell us boys what it LOOKS like.
And in other breaking news Thomas Tolbert (R) of New Mexico just got nabbed registering his dog to vote - it was a whim and he followed thru with it......
Ok, so we got :
War on Voting
War on Woman
War on the Middle Class
I'm sure I'm missing a few, but this is becoming the "Liberals who cried war".
It is real, you just stated cases in Texas were it was proven, I guess NBC with the recent GZ/TM tape is waging a "War on the Truth".
There probably are some cases of voter fraud, it just isn't enough to actually believe the "outcry" by the republicans. If we were overrun with more than a handful here and there it would be a bit more warranted than the republicans are claiming it is.
If you reread the part that states "...Democratic Party officials in South Bend are accused of falsifying some petition signatures to get all of the party's major presidential candidates on the primary..." - which appears to be so NOT voter fraud......
Republicans want to make it as difficult as possible to oppose them, but they need a reason to block inconvenient votes and "Democrats keep cheating" is a politically acceptable one. Sure it's 99% bullcrap, but Fox "News" viewers won't know that because they have been trained to avoid those "liberal" places where right wing lies are exposed. It's how Birtherism manages to stay alive.
Voter ID laws seem to be flawed in the same exact way that conservatives feel gun laws are flawed.
If you pass voter ID laws (gun laws), you'll end up in a situation where law-abiding citizens will not be able to vote (not be able to have guns), but criminals who don't abide by laws will still be able to commit voter fraud (to have guns).
Which do you think is more difficult for a criminal to obtain: a fake ID, or an illegal firearm?
There is no logical reason to suspect that voter ID laws would decrease the already miniscule rate of voter fraud, yet there is an abundance of evidence that those laws would disenfranchise law-abiding voters.
Of course there is abundant evidence that the intent of the so-called voter fraud laws is to disenfranchise law-abiding voting blocs who normally vote for democrats!
Republicans running solely on their policies have losing positions so eliminating portions of the voting population who will not reflectively vote repuke is needed.
Jordan you get a cookie for the smartest comment on the thread ;-)
There are more reported sightings of UFOs, (36 of 50 states in Jan 2012), than reports of citizen voter fraud. This does not include irregularities in the GOP primaries.
FOX News - Our advertisers demand the truth, we are a business in the truth and we are pretty good at delivering the truth, the hard part is making up truth where it does not exist.
This is the most important paragraph for this particular thread. I accept the premise that voter fraud can happen and therefore laws need to be made to prevent voter fraud. However Voter ID laws are not laws being passed in a vacuum. All 50 states already have a registration system and a process of investigating and prosecuting voter fraud. Voter ID is merely an amendment to these already existing laws. Since we are amending what is already in existence we have to ask ourselves A. what are the inadequacies of the current system that would prompt us to need to amend it? and then B. how will Voter ID laws address the problem(s) of A? I'm still waiting for someone to answer these two questions for me.
Who's behind this? GIRL SCOUTS that's who!
Again, Ms. Maddow failed to do her do diligence as a reporter or even as a commentator.
This is not old news. After years of investigating a conviction happened NOW. These are not isolated voters, they where running a ring. Convictions are hard to get, because voter fraud is by definition identity fraud. Go not by convictions, and instead by dead people and animals voting after going through the rolls, and you will find that most of them vote for a certain party.
>Due diligence
And there is alot more than five here or four there
Once more..proof that the fallacy of "american exceptionalism" is more fiction then fact..and that blatant racisim is alive and well..how sad....for a country with so much promise...
LOLOL!! Cutting away from ANYthing oBUMa says is fine...I would rather watch commercials than listen to more lies from that A-hole.
As far as fraud and dirty politricks- look at Harry Reid. He has probably 30 bills- already passed by the House, just SITTING on his desk. He refuses to allow them into the Senate as some of his fellow "Donkey's" would possibly have to vote and might upset the constituency back home (because they vote to return favors- they don't give a $HIT about their voters and the voters feelings, thoughts or needs). Those bills actually may HELP people- but Reid doesn't care. THAT is a perfect example of "POLITRICKS". Something that made it's way ALL the way up through the ranks and he flat out killed them. Why? Because he is worried his constituents will get mad if he votes the way he wants and they don't return him to Washington next election.
Gee- if he DOES get voted out, he could just have some of his cronies fake a bunch of votes and get him back in....he is already in the "left" party.
HOW long did it take the LAMEstream media to report on ACORN? Exactly.
First, the headline referred to "election fraud" not "voting fraud." Second, the reason Fox reported this event was because the charges were filed that Monday and therefore it was a current news event. Third, rather than report a piece of news that might upset the heavily liberal MSNBC audience and its benefactors, they chose to attack a competing news source for doing their job and as always, pointed their childish fingers in the opposite direction shouting "but they did it too!!!" Fourth, "who cares?" - really? I imagine that the people who trust these folks to do their job correctly care. Anyone who abhors political manipulation might care as well. And coming right down to it, anyone who values the law over their own party bias would probably care too.