Excerpt from a press release from VoteVets.org a short while ago, opening a new front in the battle over mailing ballots to registered voters in Colorado marked “inactive” due to failure to vote in 2010–against a county clerk not involved in litigation, for withholding ballots from “inactive” military voters. As you know, that’s the status quo in most Colorado counties this year:
VETERANS SLAM EL PASO COUNTY CLERK’S DECISION ON BALLOT ACCESS FOR MILITARY MEMBERS
Colorado Springs, CO – A veterans group is today strongly condemning El Paso County Clerk Wayne Williams’ decision to not send nearly 1000 election ballots to military members, despite the fact that his county has one of the highest military populations in the country.
Williams has held steadfast in his decision. The Denver District court is hearing a case that could very well strike down a recent order from the Secretary of State to not send ballots to many registered voters. Yet, Williams has shown no willingness to change his mind on who receives ballots, no matter what the court decides. Recently, he told The Pueblo Chieftain that sending ballots wasn’t “cost effective,” because some ballots in the past have not been used by those who received them.
“It’s not Wayne Williams’ job to estimate which members of our military will or will not likely vote in the upcoming election,” said Richard Allen Smith, Vice Chairman of VoteVets.org, and an Afghanistan Veteran and Denver resident. “It’s his job to ensure our troops are given every opportunity to vote. His choice to not send ballots to hundreds of our troops, legally registered to vote in his county, is outrageous. Clerk Williams likes to site the cost of sending out ballots to our troops as a reason to not send them. Those of us who served in war would like to remind him that we’ve paid a much higher cost to protect that right to vote.”
El Paso Clerk Wayne Williams has been a reliable defender of Secretary of State Scott Gessler over more than this issue–you’ll recall that Gessler turned to Williams for backup after his push to “examine” the voter rolls for an unknown and dubious number of “illegal” voters met with pushback in the legislature. Williams told the Pueblo Chieftain recently that the rate of return for ballots in El Paso County mailed to “inactive” voters was very low, on the order of “1 in 1000”–a figure dismissed as absurdly, probably mendaciously low by just about everyone we’ve talked to.
So Williams can now share in Gessler’s soldier vote suppression glory! The shock value makes you famous, but we wouldn’t recommend this to politicians with, you know, career aspirations.
There seems to be some squeamishness about asking the next logical question here, folks. There are 64 counties in the state of Colorado, most of which are conducting all-mail elections this year, and only two of which are party (or seeking to be) to the litigation from Gessler. Who will be the next county clerk to defend denial of ballots to “inactive-failed to vote” voters?
How many soldiers in your county?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: joe_burly
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Wednesday Open Thread
BY: Thorntonite
IN: The Republican Field for Congress in CO-08
BY: bullshit!
IN: Speaker Johnson Frowns On Dave Williams’ Primary Chicanery
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
At least you’ve got me to set the record straight. VFW these jokers ain’t.
http://www.conservapedia.com/V…
Poor readers. Why doesn’t Pols tell you the truth about the people they cite?
Answer this question, please.
why don’t you find an UNBIASED source for your info regarding VoteVets?
God bless the internet. There’s always SOMEONE out there who agrees with you.
Whether that makes them a reliable source is a whole different matter.
that A-GOP has yet to join the discussion on the Gessler v. Denver thread? Interesting – he’s usually a part of every diary that’s been posted about it.
Pols didn’t make any new outrageous claims in that post so there was less to respond to. Like you, I am waiting to see how the hearing goes.
But further published speculation is akin to … bad behavior.
They are vets who have served their country and just because they aren’t as conservative as some other vets organizations doesn’t make them any less worthy of respect. They’ve simply noticed who really supports vets with legislation and funding for them and who doesn’t and offer support in return accordingly.
Jokers? My husband happens to be a progressive, a supporter of VoteVets and a combat vet, a swift boat vet to be precise, and you are a worthless little piece of crap in my book from now on. It would be fun to see you call one of our honored vets a “joker” to his or her face but you’d never have the stones. Don’t expect another reply from me to anything more you have to say, ever.
My point was simply that these are not impartial actors. If my usage of the word “jokers” is offensive, please accept my apology.
But these are partisan actors, and their partisanship clouds their accusation. I do stand behind that.
These are not “actors.” These are war veterans that served in Iraq and Afghanistan to protect this country. To protect me. To protect you. To protect your right to be an obnoxious asshole.
Everyone in this country is entitled to an opinion–even veterans. Everyone in this country is entitled to be partisan, to have a view that contradicts yours or mine.
Ain’t freedom of speech grand?
You are misreading my use of the word “actors.” I do not mean it in the thespian sense. Sorry about the chip perpetually on your shoulder, you must have a bitter life.
If I seem bitter to you, perhaps you are projecting your own misery, which seems to seep through virtually every comment you make on this site.
Your apology sucked and you aren’t even man enough to admit it. And that’s pathetic. Which is even sadder than being bitter, little buddy.
the term “Jokers” was not offensive.
We’d have to actually respect you to be offended by anything you write.
Better luck trolling elsewhere.
Williams and Gessler are partisan actors, and their partisanship clouds their approach to elections.
And they still deserve our best efforts, especially when it comes to their voting rights while they’re deployed and may have other things on their mind besides correcting our state’s over-eager categorization of them as “inactive”.
There is no achievement so honorable, no patriotic act so noble, that it can’t be invalidated by one’s liberalism. That’s the Republican message.
They are “jokers” because they aren’t conservatives.
Conservative vets advocating for conservative positions are the only “real” vets in some tiny minds. Calling men and women “jokers” who have put their lives on the line for their country in an all volunteer force, some of them surviving with severe wounds and permanent disabilities, can’t be apologised (if-anyone-finds-this-offensive) away. The thinking of it and saying of it can’t be unthought or unsaid. Period.
Instead of “jokers,” now they’re “actors.” Not honorable veterans, equal in standing and achievement as those who join more conservative groups.
As a vet, why don’t just speak for yourself and tell us how you felt when you were deployed and couldn’t vote on tax increases back home?
The bottom feeding little Borg brat doesn’t need to think. He just needs to know R or D, conservative or progressive to know what he thinks about any individual, group, organization, proposal, plan or piece of legislation. Good thing because he’s too stupid to think and too ignorant and misinformed to have anything solid around which to formulate thoughts.
If you got your legs blown off for your country and subsequently started supporting Dems because they try to vote you a better funded VA while Rs continually cry that we can’t afford you because that would mean cutting some benefits for the rich and benefits for them are a much higher priority than benefits for you, you are a “joker”. As long as you appear in support of a Tea Party R candidate, you are, instead, a hero. It’s so simple. And when you’re dumb as a bag of rocks, you need simple.
For instance today I learned . . .
http://www.conservapedia.com/E…
. . . about the undisputable and carefully proven inevitability of conservative thought, Gads.
I would have never known, for instance, that “hypothesis” is a “conservative word.”
Deep, deep intellectualism here. Thanks again brainiac, you’ve given me hope for our side . . . and the biggest gut laugh of this week.
I invite you to stand behind everything you find at, say, DailyKos. Do we have a deal? I’ll start searching right away.
whereas Conservapedia calls itself the ‘truthful encyclopedia’
So are dinosaurs still among us?
And apparently free of context. Right below what you quoted:
It’s not the way I would write either but as you can see, they do provide both sides. What’s your point?
under ‘History of the Dinosaurs’ is about two of each being on Noah’s Ark. Call me skeptical, but I don’t accept the source as credible.
Here’s their lead paragraph on global warming:
Yeah,that’s a balanced presentation. A ‘liberal concocted’ and ‘now discredited’ theory…
Meanwhile, over at evolution…
second paragraph:
Intelligent design, however is ‘verifiable:
It must be facty!
There are simply scientists.
Evolution isn’t an “ism.” It’s a fact.
On the other hand, there are Creationists, who deny the facts.
You might find a more receptive audience on some other blog where people who read and post have lower IQs.
You’re not going to sell that bullshit here.
LOL. This article is loaded with weasel words. “Evolutionists?” Who are they? Like Ralphie says, there are only biologists. “Speculated?” No, the term is “theorize.”
There was a time when I thought that maybe you were that all too rare specimen – a conservative with whom I can respectfully disagree. But citing conservapedia? Presenting it as unbiased – with a frigging BIASED entry as proof?
Your shilling for Gessler has already shown me your lack of personal integrity, but this is jumping the goddamn shark.
they all drowned in that great big flood along with all the other words not found in the King James Bible. Apparently you didn’t know until today that Noah only had room for about 8,000 words on the Arky Arky.
I guess he called those few dinosaurs that he did take onto his Ark, good old-time religion KJV names like “dove,” and “eagle” . . .
Live and learn — unless you’re Republican and have no need to learn anything.
I’ve never cited from DailyKos.
I don’t even read it. Not my style
But only when the content also points to further fact-y references to back it up. Or when I’m clearly noting an opinion. AGOP isn’t noting an opinion, he’s using Conservapedia as a fact source.
(Which gave out this year’s award for Mathematics to all those people who purport to have used math to calculate the exact date of the end of the world. Which, IIRC, is supposed to be coming up on Wednesday this week, since it didn’t happen earlier in the year)
this Wednesday’s not very good for me — I’ve already made some big plans for the following week.
They’ve rechecked it – it’s the 21st. You’ve got most of two weeks.
We get to celebrate our 30th anniversary on the 20th with no worries.
Soon-to-be-congratulations are in order, then!
And to quote Douglas Adams, “Drink up! The world’s about to end!”
Saying that Williams, or any other county clerk, is participating in “soldier vote suppression” by not mailing ballots to “inactive-failed to vote” service members is wrong.
When I was a 21 year old Marine in Yuma, AZ I didn’t care one bit about what was going on in Jefferson County. Why would you send me a ballot if I didn’t care enough to return the comment card?
Gessler is wrong in his complaint, however clerks shouldn’t be forced to send mail ballots to “inactive-failed to vote” electors either. If a county decides they can’t afford to send out ballots to “inactive-failed to vote” electors, and the residents of that county are OK with that, then I’m OK with that.
Look here! There are more reasonable people on this blog coming out of the woodwork every day. Too many more of these and we’ll actually be having a civil dialogue!
The problem seems to be that too many conservatives wilt when someone stands up to their ignorance (and most of the rest are so impervious to it that it devolves into ridiculing them…).
I actually disagree with ScottP here. If someone is registered to vote and their mailing address still seems to be valid, then they should be given the same opportunity to vote as their neighbor. Either everyone gets mail-in ballots, or no-one does unless they specifically request it for absentee purposes.
If you want to talk about equal votes, that is how it should work. And while I disagree with Gessler’s read of the statute – and his attempts to restrict the right to vote via his lawsuit – I agree with the statement that everyone should have the same opportunity to vote, and that it shouldn’t be different from county to county (or state to state, or…)
Does this mean I have to question your character and make fun of you now?
If it’s a mail-only election, then yeah every registered voter should be mailed a ballot.
But if I used to vote by mail and now I want to change my mind and go to a polling place then why send me a ballot?
I think it’s ok if it’s different county to county as long as everyone is given the same opportunity to vote. If Chaffee County gets a better turn out by mail-in ballots, but Jefferson County gets better turn out by polling places then they should be allowed to do things differently as long as voters have the same opportunity to cast their votes.
One of the generals will have a talk with someone (likely Lamborn) about whether it is wise on the military’s part to continue to move additional batallions into the Springs. El Paso govt will generate a proclamation about how much they love the military.