Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Home RSS
 
 
 

Selective outrage

December 27, 2018
Pine Island Eagle

To the editor:

A recent article in the Eagle written on behalf of a local organization which has claimed to be "Non-Partisan" in their meeting announcements, bemoaned our Democracy and cited several examples of "unfairness" by their apparent nemesis, "The Republicans".

The source was "The Economist", a foreign magazine whose self-described views are economic liberalism, globalization, free immigration, cultural and drug liberalization among other socialist concepts.

While this was hardly a fair and balanced source for "statistics" used in the article, my issue is with the "fast and lose" use of bogus, implausible numbers to substantiate a flawed theorem and the half-truths on voter ID and voter rolls.

The article stated that because of "gerrymandering," a term applied to both Democrats and Republicans for their attempts at redrawing district voting lines to favor one party or the other depending on demographic data changes, that Republicans only needed to win "46.5% or less" "of all votes cast by the two major parties" but "Democrats needed to win at least 53.5%" "just to have a 50/50 chance." This claim is completely false. "Zero" is "46.5% or less" and no Republican has ever won a race with 0%. The math as well as the source are nothing more than sleight of hand as is the false implication that only one party employs the practice of "gerrymandering."

Think back on this last mid-term election and tell me the name of one Republican that won a general election against a Democrat with less than 50% of the vote and name one Democrat that lost a race with over 50% of the vote. It simply did not happen and is just one more example of pulling "statistics" out of thin air to support another illegitimate complaint.

The comments on cleaning up the voter rolls were transparently partisan and left out most of the facts. The article suggested that removing anyone from the voter rolls for any reason was tantamount to voter suppression. Most American citizens wish to preserve the integrity of the voter rolls by having a living person that casts one vote by a U.S. citizen or naturalized citizen that is legitimately eligible to cast a vote. Preserving the integrity of one of the most important freedoms we've fought for since the inception of our country is precisely what keeping the voter rolls "corruption free" is all about. Approximately 2.5 million people die annually in the United States. Add to that the 35 million of our citizens that relocate each year and a fair-minded person can quickly see the need for oversight of the voter rolls so that dead people, people that illegally vote more than once or non-citizens voting illegally may be prevented from doing so.

One more small point; the path and methodology for illegals voting in our elections is blatantly clear but as long as they vote for the party of "free stuff," it'll be "don't ask, don't tell." Rest assured, if these non-citizens ever decide to vote for freedom instead of handouts, you'll hear a huge uproar from the left.

Max Christian

St. James City

 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web