America's angry "debaters"

This morning, a friend brought to my attention Newsweek's series of pictures ("of angry 'debaters'," as he said) from the recent town hall meetings ("Town Hall Face"). My friend commented, "The town halls are a true hallmark of today's American democracy: pure, direct, misinformed, and opinionated." And he asked, "Who subverted this direct form of democracy, after the indirect parliamentary form had long been chained by interest groups?"
    Well, I wonder whether part of the answer lies with the 1988 Willie Horton ad campaign against Michael Dukakis on behalf of George H. W. Bush for President. During that campaign, George W. Bush and Karl Rove received their most intense tutoring from Lee ("You gotta go negative") Atwater¹ (not that Rove hadn't already learned and practiced much of the art). (I read about this in two books: Molly Ivins's and Lou Dubose's Shrub: The Short [unfortunately not short enough] but Happy Political Life of George W. Bush, and Carl Cannon's Boy Genius: Karl Rove, The Architect of George W. Bush's Remarkable Political Triumphs.)
    Not to exempt Democrats, but no one among their ranks comes to mind who was or is even half as committed to going negative as Atwater and Rove were.
    And possibly Newt Gingrich's 1994 "Contract with America" might have been significantly involved. At any rate, that Congress seemed to shelter and feed hugely subversive figures like Tom DeLay. And (my friend mentioned interest groups) I don't believe that lobbyists had ever experienced anything like the golden age that began to flourish about then (despite Ike's January 17, 1961 speech about the "military-industrial complex").
    I think that the willful exploitation of certain "party bases," along with a policy that any means are okay so long as the end to be achieved is necessary surely influenced what has come to pass with respect to "America's angry 'debaters'." (For Rove and DeLay, the end was for the Republican Party to control all three branches of government, not to mention the media, to be led, of course, by Fox News [sic].)
    And when did Rush Limbaugh arise? Ah, 1988!
_______________

1. Whether Atwater's deathbed "I'm sorry" for the Willie Horton ad was sincere or a last-minute effort to try to win eternal bliss, I guess we'll never know, unless all things get revealed to the Elect someday in heaven.

Be prepared to fight for your right to vote

With so many Americans in the McCain/Palin camp showing themselves to be red-hot rednecks, we well-behaved, hopeful Americans need to be ready for what might unfold on Election Day. We haven't forgotten the debacle in Florida eight years ago, or the serious findings of vote theft and disenfranchisement in Ohio four years later (see Robert F. Kennedy, Jr's Rolling Stone article, "Was the 2004 election stolen?"). It is impossible to doubt that similar things will be tried this year. After tolerating an illegitimate "president" Bush for eight years, it would be heart-breaking (and nation-destroying) to endure four more years of such "leadership."

The New York Times reports, in today's editorial, "Sorry, I Can’t Find Your Name," that

Republicans have been pressing for sweeping voter purges in many states. They have also fought to make it harder to enroll new voters. Voting experts say there could be serious problems at the polls on Nov. 4.
    When voters die or move to a new address, or when duplicate registrations are found, a purge is necessary to uphold the integrity of the rolls. New registrations must also be properly screened so only eligible voters get added. The trouble is that these tasks generally occur in secret, with no chance for voters or their advocates to observe or protest when mistakes are made.
    A number of states — including the battleground state of Florida — have adopted no match, no vote rules. Voters can be removed from the rolls if their names do not match a second list, such as a Social Security or driver’s license database. But (like the U.S. mail) lists of this kind are notoriously mistake-filled, and one typo can cause a no match. In Ohio, Republicans recently sued the secretary of state, demanding that she provide local officials with a dubious match list. As many as 200,000 new voters could have been blocked from casting ballots. The Supreme Court rejected the suit, but Republicans are still looking for ways to use the list on Election Day.

The editorial warns us to be prepared to fight for our right to cast a ballot and recommends that voters vote early if their state permits it. "Any voter who finds that their [sic] name has disappeared from the rolls will then have time to challenge mistakes."

The editorial concludes [emphasis mine] that

If voters find on Election Day that their names are not on the rolls, they should contact a voters’ rights group like Election Protection, at 1-866-OUR-VOTE, or a political campaign, which can advocate for them. They should not, except as a last resort, cast a provisional ballot, since it is less likely to be counted.
    There is a desperate need for reform of the way voting rolls are kept. Until then, election officials, voting rights advocates and voters must do everything they can to ensure that all eligible voters are allowed to vote.

I plan to vote early myself, as many, many Americans are doing—they're that angry¹ and that concerned. I'm hearing that the lines for voting early are getting pretty long, but they're surely a good deal shorter than what we'd experience on November 4 if we haven't voted (or attempted to vote) before then.

By the way, the comments from Times readers on today's editorial are extremely moving.
______________

1. A friend tells me that some white people in her neck of the Pennsylvania woods who still use the n-word are so mad they're going to ignore Mr. Obama's skin color and vote Democratic...if they're not prevented by one or another dirty trick.