Tuesday, November 2

Up-to-the-minute reports

Earlier it was reported on CNN that a judge had greed with an Ohio woman that sued when she was denied a provisional ballot at the polls, because she had requested an absentee ballot. It was just reported on MSNBC that we are actually still waiting on that decision. Perhaps someone on the inside leaked the way the judge is leaning. More likely CNN just flubbed the reporting a bit. The big question now is whether federal law will supercede Ohio state law, so they say. I don't see any conflict. Ohio state law was written prior to the advent of provisional ballots so provisional ballots, not being addressed by the old state law, are clearly outside it's control and regulation. I assume the wording of the law will be relevant as the "doctors of the law" or "lawyers" as they are commonly called, bloodsucking vacumes of humanity as we like to call them, will be weighing in on the issue. I hope the wording specifically refers to casting normal ballots. This will make it easier to prove the old state law does not apply to provisional ballots. Also, the election reform laws passed as a result of the 2000 election apply to all states without exception. Period. I give this one to the Democrats by a length.


Post a Comment

<< Home