The Worldnutdaily specializes in two things: fake “adverticles” that are really just ads for books they’re selling wrapped around a flimsy “news” item, and articles that are little more than long, detailed examples of the argumentum ad labelum. This piece is a perfect example, a long article that does nothing more than apply the label of “liberal” to a voting rights group — along with a scary headline, of course.
WILL THIS DEVIOUS GROUP STEAL YOUR VOTE?
Find out who’s behind massive assault in key states before election
ZOMG! Someone is going to steal our votes! Who is it? The Advancement Project, a group that does really good work in defending voting rights around the country. But there’s nothing at all in the article that even suggests how they might steal anyone’s vote. Instead, the article is just a long series of attempts to paint the group as liberal, as if this alone proves the spooky conclusion in their headline. Here are their arguments:
1. The Advancement Project has filed lawsuits — successful ones, by the way — against voter ID laws.
2. They’ve fought to have voting rights reinstated for those convicted of a crime after they’ve served the penalty for those crimes.
3. One of their leaders criticized the Arizona immigration law that was largely struck down by the Supreme Court.
4. They filed a brief in a lawsuit brought by ACORN to help those displaced by Hurricane Katrina to still be able to vote.
5. Some of the group’s leaders have contributed to the Obama campaign.
6. They’ve been funded by George Soros (cue the Darth Vader theme music).
That’s it. Nothing at all to substantiate the accusation that they are “devious” or that they have done anything at all to steal anyone’s votes. In fact, the article lists lawsuits filed by the group to ensure the right to vote in many states. This isn’t news, it’s propaganda.
10 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
blf
September 13, 2012 at 10:13 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Sure they are planning on “stealing” votes. Trying to enable others to vote is theft of your own vote’s impact: “My vote is important, how dare your vote cancel it out.”
Chiroptera
September 13, 2012 at 10:17 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Do they realize that it currently looks as if they aren’t going to win the election and are now setting up the rationalization?
d cwilson
September 13, 2012 at 10:27 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’m starting to get the feeling that many on the right see democracy as a problem that needs to be worked around.
I’m kidding, of course. They’ve believed that for a long time now.
Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)
September 13, 2012 at 10:40 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
The horror… The horror…
kevinalexander
September 13, 2012 at 10:57 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Jesus Himself created democracy so that tha right people could vote for the right candidates and for the right reasons. That’s why it’s called the right wing. To do the right thing. Preserving the rights of the right people. Right?
D. C. Sessions
September 13, 2012 at 10:58 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
How is this different from their position on SS? “If they can vote (get married) it will devalue my vote (marriage).”
sunsangnim
September 13, 2012 at 11:17 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Somebody is helping people vote? Quick, send in O’Keefe with a camera to shut them down.
Area Man
September 13, 2012 at 12:19 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’m amazed by how much of right-wing propaganda is little more than a simple inversion of the victims and the perpetrators. In this case, people who have a hard time voting because of arbitrary barriers placed in their way are the bad guys, and those trying to stop them from voting are the aggrieved. With that narrative established, cue righteous indignation and outrage. Move on to the next issue, rinse and repeat.
Ben P
September 13, 2012 at 12:28 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Giving them fair credit, few of them think Democracy ought to be gotten rid of altogether. Many just believe, implicitly or much more rarely explicitly, that it ought to be limited to people like them.
The idea is old, the Founding fathers obviously limited democracy to certain types of stakeholders. Even the worst republican advocates rarely say they think women and minorities ought not have the right to vote, but its not uncommon to see suggestions that perhaps only land owners or people paying taxes ought to have the right to vote.
Freodin
September 14, 2012 at 2:00 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment