I have been following the course in the media set by Montgomery Jensen, and those who seem to be in cooperation with his message. That media course seems to me to be all about Monty Jensen and promoting the notion of voter fraud, and not really about the supposed merits of his bogus complaint.
I believe that message to be as contrived and false as the version of events concocted by Jame's O'Keefe, the now-discredited right wing's media darling of the last election cycle. I believe that Montgomery Jensen is being positioned to be the right wing media's darling of this election cycle; the only question remaining in my mind is, will this be just Minnesota state-wide, or is it intended to be part of a larger attempt to shrink the number of people who may vote, and to make it more difficult. I do not believe from my research into this so far that Montgomery Jensen just happened to be voting, and that he saw something that upset him. My research suggests he was looking for something to happen, and when it did not, he created a false accusation to fit his agenda - his pre-existing political agenda.
Look to see claims that those who have limited mental disabilities, be it developmental, illness or injury in nature, will be identified as different than other disabled people. Look for the right to be claiming, in the name of stopping some people from voting, that they are the true guardians of the rights of the disabled, seeking to prevent manipulation and abuse of the disabled by their care givers, especially the elderly who need care givers in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
But what they will really be saying is that not only the individuals that Jensen wrongly - so very wrongly - described in the most demeaning way should not be permitted to vote, they will in fact be trying to make a more stringent standard for voting that will also have an adverse impact on the elderly very active voting population. I hope that the right will not be allowed to put that spin on it - but watch for them to try, just as they tried to promote the death panel lies to that segment of the population (and with some success).
I believe I can make a very good argument that the right wishes to disenfranchise anyone who is a minority, anyone who is an immigrant - even legal ones- or born here of immigrant parents, anyone who does not fit the profile of the typical tea partier. In short, I am persuaded that the work of Chris Uggen, U of MN sociology chair on voter disenfranchisement - the work misrepresented earlier this year as demonstrating felons voted democratically 'stealing' elections, and the work of the Brennan Law Center study on alleged voter fraud and disenfranchisement support viewing this as an attempt to silence voters who are not on the right, or ......perceived to be voting for conservative candidates. This fits in, like a puzzle piece.
This is nothing less than an assault on universal suffrage, an attempt to control elections by limiting who may vote, even disenfranchising LEGAL voters under the U.S. Constitution and the state constitutions.
There seem to be quite a willing segment of the right who want to believe Monty Jensen, who want to believe that the only reason they have lost past close elections was because of fraud, not fewer votes for their candidate. There seems to be quite a willing segment of the right who want to restrict voting more, and some - but by no means all of them -- may even believe in the bogeyman of voter fraud, despite the absence of proven instances. Those who desperately want to believe in voter fraud ignore the very nature of the crime - it's signatures, the cross checking, the nature of the penalty, and the lack of plausible motive or gratification compared to the risks involved. This is the same segment of the population that is willing to believe all manner of conspiracy theories, not the least of which is the birther conspiracy, without a practical regard for how easily conspiracies become known the more people there are involved in them. Very few actual conspiracies work very well.
But facts are not a problem for the right wing conspiracy theorists who swallow the manure put out by Glenn Beck, or who listen to Rush Limbaugh, or even those who participate in the local right wing media and blogosphere. Those who want to believe are fact-free, even fact-aversive to any facts which are not convenient to what they have chosen to believe.
In my communication with Clark Lake Group Home administrator Lynn Nelson, a man with decades invested in advocating for the disabled, the subject came up of this incident being intended as an attack on the rights of the disabled. In the same hour, the subject of having to address the 'terribly flawed' law that permits them to vote was mentioned on the right in another private email.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and predict that Monty Jensen and the clients and staff of the Clark Lake group home are going to be the centerpiece of an attempt to disenfranchise disabled voters, just as soon as the new class of candidates-elect are sworn into office in the Minnesota House and Senate.
I don't think it is going to stop there; I believe that it will be part of a coordinated attempt to do the same thing in other states. I believe that Monty Jensen intended this, long before he went to the Crow Wing County Courthouse on October 29th.
Sadly, I believe that in the end, Monty Jensen will find himself just like James O'Keefe - no one, no where, discredited, and discarded; except by a very few die-hards who don't like to fact check.
But I also believe - I hope - that pointing out the direction this story will go will change how people view it unfolding according to script. This isn't a conspiracy per se, this is a Rove-like marketing strategy. When you know what to look for, when the unfolding becomes predictable, it also becomes less persuasive.
Except for those few who will always believe what they want to hear; they'll find this gold, and not see the heaping shovel of steaming poop they're being handed for what it really is.
Grab some popcorn, the circus will be along momentarily; only this time the men marching behind the elephants with the poop-scooping shovels will be leading the parade.
Often DG and I debate about whether the nature of the issue is that people are guilible/ignorant and so easily swayed (her view), or that they are looking for what they want to see and thus find it (my view).
ReplyDeleteThis story is a bit of both. First, people (some) are untrustworthy and don't chose to look any more deeply, so they are more likely to buy into this crap - but what's worse, is that their sense of cynicism, questioning this type of absurdity, seems totally lacking. They readily believe that the "others" would willingly act to undermine our cherished freedom (democratic selection). They believe that others would victimize the infirmed and elderly, and not just a couple of rare and isolated cases, but apparently thousands, so many that it actually affects elections.
On the empirical level, of course there is NO evidence to support such claims quite bluntly because it isn't true. But on the logical level, I have to wonder what kind of people are so fearful, untrusting and elitist that they truly think "others" (in this case Democrats) are totally without ethical principles, are totally willing to sacrifice such principles for victory, that they (the Republicans in this case) would believe that Democrats would do ugly, mendacious (as in death panels) things or ALLOW such things to happen. My question for them is, "Are you SERIOUS? You truly think I'd kill old people? You offend me to my core and I no longer have any use for you, you're thinking is at best ugly and paranoid and suggests a person who hates the rest of the world."
Perhaps the reason so many on the right think this kind of thing goes on is that they would do the same given the chance so they cannot grasp that others, in fact have moral backbones and would NEVER, NOT ONCE engage in such things - certainly not enough to matter.
Either way, it is important to remember, as this story points out, the chief reason (among many), this kind of thing DOESN'T go on is that it is too easily investigated and keeping a secret among hundreds, thousands (or dozens) is virtually impossible. The other reasons are; the risk (of 10 years in prison) isn't worth the reward, and probably as important, the huge preponderance of people, especially and including election judges BELIEVE in our system and would never, EVER want to comprimise it for the transient benefit of winning one election.
Your symbolism was excellent, and you are right, we have to pillory this for what it is.
These are people looking to take the right of the elderly to vote away from them and or to impugn, insult and sully the reputation of the hard-working, underpaid staff which try their best to provide decent care.
Shame on them in both counts - it's disgusting.