New Mexico Political Journal
-------------
Volume I, No. 11
Sunday, September 12, 2004
Roswell
6,043
-------------
In this issue:
Albuquerque Tribune unmatched
--- in Bias and Inaccuracy
Appears to have used Democrat Talking Points on Voter ID but
labeled it as its own "editorial"
--------------
We have watched as the print media have struggled with accurate
reporting on the Voter ID case which has been in court for the past
couple of weeks. Whether it has been inexperienced reporters or
mischievous editors is hard to say, but for the most part the Albuquerque
Journal and Tribune have been unable to clearly understand
what has happened, much less convey it to their readers. (Though
we must say that the last couple of articles by Dan McKay of the
Journal were reasonably accurate.) The Santa Fe New Mexican
has played it pretty straight. So have other dailies--usually thanks
to the AP which has also been reasonably fair with its readers.
As far as editorials go, all newspapers, including the Journal,
have urged the courts to enforce the state's Voter ID law. None
of these newspapers is right of center, their editorials simply
reflect the fact that the law is so plain on its face that it can't
be disputed.
It's one thing to write --and report-- with a liberal bias, but
it is another thing entirely to deliberately misstate the facts.
Saturday however, the Albuquerque Tribune let fly
with a shocking editorial, almost undecipherable in its inaccuracy,
so bad it makes them look like nothing more than a tool of the state
Democrat Party. While all the other papers in the state can at least
agree we should enforce the law, the Tribune has once again fallen
off the left-side of the Earth.
Last week, New Mexico Democrat State Chairman John Wertheim had
extensive meetings with Tribune reporters and editorial staff.
He worked feverishly to plant an anti-Republican conspiracy story
on Voter ID. It worked. The staff of the Tribune snapped
to attention, saluted, and began spewing just the rhetoric Wertheim
needs for future mail pieces and television ads.
The degree to which the Albuquerque Tribune disregarded
the truth is nothing short of astonishing. Here is an example:
"Republicans snarl that widespread Democratic voter registration
efforts -- aimed at enhancing John Kerry’s chances here -– are
automatically suspicious or flat-out fraudulent. They say newly
registered voters should be required to present identification…"
By constructing their sentences this way, the Trib is trying
to leave everyone with the impression that it is Republicans who
are 1) singling out newly registered voters for scrutiny, and 2)
doing it because most were registered by Democrat-sponsored voter
registration drives. But this just isn't the case.
The simple fact of the matter is that Republicans did not select
the group of voters that is subject to new Voter ID law. The legislature
wrote that law, and passed it. And the governor signed it. In 2003,
the Democrat-dominated legislature passed a Voter ID law. It says:
“if the (registration) form is not submitted in person by
the applicant and the applicant is registering for the first time
in New Mexico, the applicant must submit with the form
a copy of a current and valid photo identification, utility bill,
bank statement, government check, paycheck or other government
document that shows the name and address of the applicant; and
if the applicant does not submit the required identification,
he will be required to do so when he votes in person or absentee.”
Keep in mind that the law says if the form is not submitted "in
person" and "by the applicant," the voter must show
ID. The law does NOT say that voters are exempted from the ID requirement
if the form is submitted "in person by ACORN, ACT, Moveon.org,
or any other Democrat front group."
Let's explain it one more time for editorial writers at the Albuquerque
Tribune: The law says in order to avoid the ID requirement the
voter registration form must be submitted to the clerk's office
"in person" and "by the applicant." The average
8th grader can easily understand the language of this law. But it
appears to be too complex for the average Tribune writer.
Any suggestion that Republicans are trying to single out
people for the law is absurd. The law was passed by the Democrat
legislature and signed by the Democrat governor.
But it gets worse.
The editorial goes on to blast those county clerks who are actually
willing to follow the law, and suggests that they should stop checking
IDs immediately. The Tribune actually put the following assertions
in print:
"Those clerks (checking IDs) need to abide by the letter and
spirit of the law. Last week's ruling by state District Judge Robert
Thompson in Albuquerque did exactly that, by properly limiting the
identification restriction to voters who had registered by mail..."
Problem is, the judge said no such thing.
First of all, here's what the judge said about the law after the
first court hearing:
"If you don't enforce the statute in its clear meaning,
I think the voter, any voter, could be disenfranchised."
and
"What I find is that the statute really is clear on its
face. My feeling is that it's not ambiguous."
– Judge Robert Thompson, August 28, 2004
While it is true that the Democrat judge later flip-flopped and
chose NOT to enforce the law, he NEVER SAID the law does not require
first-time registrants who don't register in the clerk's office
to show ID. On the contrary, he said at least twice in the court
record that it says precisely that. Instead, in his September 8th
"flip-flop" ruling he simply more or less mumbled that
it was, in effect, "too late to follow the law." Yet another
new kind of jurisprudence---again unique to New Mexico state courts.
(In doing so, he rather cavalierly decided to disenfranchise the
same voters he claimed to be so worried about just a few days before.
He also showed great contempt for the electoral process---not to
mention the law---something he had insinuated was important to him
just days earlier. What had happened to him in the intervening period?
That is a story for another time.)
In reaching his conclusion, the judge essentially ruled that the
Democrat Secretary of State had so screwed up the election by giving
clerks bogus directives and "rules" that it was impossible
to straighten it all out at this point in the process.
That's a far cry from what the Tribune editorial suggests---and
frankly it appears the Tribune editorial board did not in
fact read any of the court transcripts but merely relied
on John Wertheim's condensed oral version. The Tribune reads
exactly the way Wertheim sounded over KKOB Radio that week. Coincidence?
We don't think so.
The editorial then makes the mind-boggling statement that there
has been no evidence of fraudulent registrations making it onto
the voter rolls in Bernalillo County:
"The record is clear that deficient registration forms are
being rejected in Bernalillo and other counties."
Huh? There are at least 600 new registrations---on the rolls right
now in Bernalillo County---that list bogus, non-existent addresses.
These include vacant lots, parking garages, strip malls----all favorite
"addresses" used by Democrat front groups (apparently
taught in their seminars) to provide "homes" for "new
voters.
Earlier, a 13 year-old and 15 year-old were registered to vote by
a Democrat front group. Those registrations were NOT rejected---they
were accepted by the clerk and put on the rolls."
And the hits just keep on coming…
Last Thursday, the plaintiffs in the Bernalillo County lawsuit held
a press conference and released yet another example of voter registration
fraud making it onto the rolls. This case involved a man from Arizona.
He hasn't lived in New Mexico for nine years, but his parents somehow
received a voter registration card in the mail for him. When the
forged card was checked by the plaintiffs, guess which group submitted
it? The very same Democrat front-group who registered the teenage
boys and fictional voters at vacant lots and parking garages all
across Bernalillo County. And every single one of those registrations
made it on the rolls in the county. Who knows how many more are
on the rolls that haven’t been caught? But somehow, someway, the
Tribune makes the claim that every fake registration is being
“rejected” by the clerk. This is probably because the only "source"
for their "editorial," Wertheim himself, did not tell
them about these cases.
Unfortunately, the Tribune editorial board wasn’t without
like company among the paper's reporters.
The previous Saturday, the Tribune ran a pathetic front-page
story about how requiring identification would disenfranchise hundreds
of college students because the addresses on their IDs don’t match
their registration addresses.
This was another fictional story created by the Democrats. The Democrats
told the press that the plaintiffs wanted the addresses to match.
But that never happened. It was a claim simply invented by John
Wertheim and the Democrats. The reporter never bothered to check
the facts, read the transcripts, or ask the plaintiffs. Had she
done that---what some people refer to as "reporting"---she
would have been informed that the law the plaintiffs were seeking
to enforce had no such address matching requirement. If a college
student was registered at the dorms, as long as that student had
a valid photo ID (regardless of the address), he or she would be
allowed to vote. It was a non-issue. (Question is, does the Tribune
care? Answer: probably not. A consistent finding over the past decade
among liberals--whether in politics or ostensibly in journalism,
is that they see themselves as in a fight for what they consider
to be the very existence of the nation. Facts are good to have,
but are not essential in the greater goal of "saving the country"
from conservatives.)
In fact, a scientific survey, conducted by the plaintiffs, of 400
newly registered voters in New Mexico proved it – not a single person
in the survey aged 18-24 said they would not be able to provide
the ID required by the law (of the entire sample, only one person
out of the 400 claimed to be unable to show ID – an Anglo Republican).
Of course, the Tribune reporter did not bother to include any facts
in her story – just fear-mongering statements by liberal campus
activists. So this week, a Tribune columnist picks up where
the reporter left off and rambles endlessly about how Republicans
are trying to disenfranchise college students.
FACT: The only people who have intimidated college students from
voting are the Democrats and Tribune writers who have told them
that they’ll be turned away at the polls.
That’s the ultimate irony. With reporting and editorials this bad,
it’s no wonder the e-mail you just read has a distribution nearly
as wide as the Albuquerque Tribune itself.
---------------
Comments on this issue? Please send them to nmdr@dfn.com
(c) Copyright, 2004. All Rights Reserved by New Mexico Demographic
Research.
|