December 7, 2016
Updated September 2, 2021
ODP Staff
While vote fraud as Democrat strategy has become common knowledge to all but the most committed to personal ignorance, the usual suspects deflect incessantly about “voter suppression.” Their primary argument of “suppression” concerns Voter ID laws designed to protect vote integrity.
They’ll even cite examples of real conversation by conservatives that verify there might indeed be certain categories of voters they’d rather not see show up. And so establishing a “motive” becomes a sort of “proof of a crime” to the Democrat doctrinaires.
Additionally they’ll squeal about “minority rights” whenever the voter registration roles are cleaned as required as direct result of the Vote ID laws they themselves have smashed in whatever key battleground States where insufficiency of fraud proves harmful to Democrat candidates.
The basis of Vote ID “suppression” arguments are that “not all eligible voters” have qualifying ID’s. And rather than advocating for an easier time obtaining ID’s they simply conspire with the nearest available Federal Judge to eliminate the ID requirements.
Of course it’s all an act.
In order to tackle the question of “voter suppression” vs. “vote integrity” we must take on a bigger question concerning what voting is, and whether it’s better described as “a right” or whether participation in representative government as “a voter” might be better regarded as “a fiduciary responsibility” for those who have the means and inclination to achieve three important conditions, or essential ingredients that make a “qualified voter.”
Human rights and “voting” are largely sold as closely related concepts. And liberals banging the “vote suppression” drum offer constant reinforcement that voting is to be our most revered, if not only “right.” And by extension, voting must be made as easy as possible. With ballots offered in a myriad of different languages, extended polling hours, and in some cases keeping polling places open for days or weeks.
The slightest inconvenience to a voter is regarded as part of a plot to “suppress” and of course they’ll point out that it’s always the “minorities” and otherwise “oppressed” that are most effected.
Well so we’ll add that to the list of a few questions I’ve compiled that really deserve sober answers:
- Should voting be easy?
- Is voting a right?
- Is voting an expression of freedom?
Let’s tackle these now.
Should Voting Be Easy?
I’d start with a reminder that all the freedoms we enjoy did not come by any means easily. All of those freedoms many of us cherish were won by tears, sweat and even blood. All freedoms were secured for us by men who risked all in defiance of the usual oligarchs of their day. Here in America these include rights to free assembly and a broad definition of protected free speech. That right is in turn offered teeth by the individual’s right to keep and bear arms as acknowledged and protected in the 2nd Amendment. Whereas this is now deemed contentious, it boils down to a fundamental human right of self defense.
Now when voting is easy, it yields larger turnout. The larger the turnout the more it includes the least disciplined of voters that see it their “right” to leverage authority over their neighbors to simply take whatever fulfills their own sense of entitlement. This runs much like choosing items in a catalog shopper, a majority simply taking from whatever nameless faces they identify as deserving some punishment for “having too much” or for some hereditary link to crimes performed by long deceased dead people in a bygone era. All this to serve as rational to make the taking more comfortable for whatever vote block part of the gimme vote block that might otherwise have a twinge of conscience.
If we were faced with a choice between vote integrity and voter suppression, I’d argue that however much ease or difficulty is experience in their casting, insufficient attention to vote integrity makes the whole exercise rather meaningless.
Whether we ignore that freedoms come with sacrifice and not ease, and march “forward” with a firm resolve that “voting IS a right” then it becomes “a right” to vote away rights of others, and in the end a lonely and empty symbol of the legitimate freedoms lost.
Either way freedoms come hard, perhaps voting them away could afford to become a little less easy.
Is VOTING a “right?”
You’ll notice that there’s no mention of voting in the Bill of Rights. The extremely intelligent “old dead men” that set up our Constitutional Republic didn’t deem “voting a right” to all that can walk, roll or crawl to the polls. And their idea was that a class of citizens that, #1 Had built a life of their own to become a “property owner” and with presumed sufficiency of leisure time to have opportunity to #2 learn and discern the issues of the day, could be called upon for the #3 discipline of being up for the fiduciary responsibility as learned citizens to shape policy for the common good while preserving freedoms.
The contemporary replacement notion of “one man one vote” is really an expression not of any sort of meaningful “freedom” but of Marxism. So it should be no surprise that the old Soviet Block and other such “utopias” literally herded human cattle through polls forcibly. And the schemers that thrive on high turnout know that the broader the base of voters, the more they’ll see of the least disciplined and most dependent masses that lack discernment to do anything but amplify the will of whomever controls the media and schools where they receive their opinions, like cattle drinking from trough.
So for now I’ll assert an answer. The activity “voting” should not be generally conflated with “rights.” Legitimate rights are what we ALL obtain, preserve or forfeit together. Undisciplined voting is about what a majority get to force upon or take from others. Damn near the “opposite” of “a right.”
But that is given more clarity as we work through the next question…
Is Voting an expression of Freedom?
And I defy any to challenge my observation that the higher the turnout, the greater the loss of freedom to come once the ballots are counted.
So again, if voting were “a right…” it becomes becomes the “right” by which all legitimate rights are traded for real or less genuine promises of gains that are, at best, temporary.
Freedom is about individuals and natural rights to a bigger part of their own life plans than some authority established by others. Freedoms are rarely won by anything but a sweat, tears and blood. The very best thing that the most disciplined of voting achieves is the PRESERVATION of those rights, and much more often, ill informed and undisciplined masses, often those that haven’t demonstrated proficiency nor responsibility for any of their own lives, wield self serving social policy over the neighbors or a class of strangers that made them feel inferior, jealous or entitled to something that they cannot or don’t care to earn for themselves.
©2016 Occupy Democrats Parody
WarOnPress 
One thought on “Voter Integrity vs. Voter Suppression”