madp

All due respect, Hawk, the article you cite is written by Gregory Palast, a known and self-avowed liberal muckraker. It would be akin to me citing Sean Hannity to prove my point.

That being the case, Palast uses alot of innuendo, but never gets beyond the conclusion that:

<i>" the large number of errors uncovered in individual counties suggests that thousands of eligible voters may have been turned away at the polls. </i>

Key phrase: <i>"may have been"</i>

Even in the liberal Washington Post Op-Ed pages, they claim that 2,000 ex-felons and mistakenly identified law abiding-citizens were stricken from the voter rolls, yet there is no confirmation of how many actually tried to vote (voter turnout, obviously, is frequently less than 35% in certain communities).

Also, the article points out that the purge accurately found known felons who had illegally voted in previous Florida elections (was this a "disenfranchisement" of law-abiders?), but fails to state a number (perhaps too big of a number to meet the purposes of the Post's liberal agenda? )

<i>"The list did catch many felons who had voted illegally in previous elections. One was Jeffrey Key of Tampa, who served more than three years on a 1989 armed robbery charge and resumed voting in 1992 without applying to have his rights restored. In 2000, he was turned away from the polls.</i>

This, in a state where <i>"thirty-one percent of the state's black men are barred from voting because of prior felonies", </i> and in a state where <i>"9 out of every 10 African American voters"</i> vote Democratic, one can only conclude that non-Democrat voters have been screwed over by illegal voting by African-American felons for years.

The sword cuts both ways.

__________________
why are you wearing that stupid man suit?