Kevin's blog

Former Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell may have decided to get back into public life, but he does not seem to have learned much from his devastating loss in last year’s election. Blackwell ran for governor of Ohio last year with an education policy platform based solely on his support for school defunding, the “65% Deception,” and vouchers. Blackwell’s opponent – now Governor Ted Strickland - expressed his principled opposition to vouchers throughout the campaign.

Blackwell’s full-throated advocacy of publicly funded private school vouchers earned him praise from some of the nation’s most ardent advocates of school privatization.

For instance, voucher warrior and affirmative action foe Clint Bolick said the voucher movement “has no greater friend than Ken Blackwell.” And voucher pusher Patrick Byrne, also the impresario of the “65% Deception,” praised Blackwell’s “passion” for vouchers. Voucher backers made sure that the money kept rolling in.  Blackwell’s campaign received at least $100, 000 from voucher groups such as Bolick’s Advocates for School Choice

But on Election Day, Blackwell received just under 37% of the vote.

In spite of that dramatic evidence that vouchers and other privatization schemes do not enjoy wide-spread public support in Ohio, and research showing the same nationally, Blackwell soldiers on.  In his first published column since joining the staff of the Family Research Council, Blackwell attacks Governor Strickland’s groundbreaking plan to eliminate the EdChoice voucher program and redirect the money back to Ohio’s public schools:

Calling school vouchers "undemocratic" and charter schools a "dismal failure," Gov. Strickland, in his first major public policy address, slammed the door of educational opportunity on thousands of poor children and crushed the hopes of their parents.

By denying these children the equal access to a quality education that choice programs offer, he also denied that the bloated public education bureaucracy and its entrenched unions have failed our children.

Despite Blackwell’s assertion that voucher programs offer students “equal access,” private schools can choose who to accept – many deny admission to all students with special needs – and students who currently receive vouchers do not have the ‘choice’ to attend any school they wish.  Last year, Ohio voters had a choice, and elected a governor openly committed to funding and strengthening Ohio’s public schools – and focusing on proven reforms – as the best way to ensure that all children have access to a quality education.

Last week the Utah House of Representatives narrowly passed a bill that could become the nation’s first universal voucher program. If this voucher scheme is passed into law, Utah taxpayers will be forced to finance religious education in private Christian and other religious schools– and Utah public schools will be robbed of much needed resources. Even in one of the most conservative states, the voucher movement has faltered in previous attempts to privatize public education. This year, however, sketchy campaign contributions and dirty tricks may help the extreme right-wing pull one over on the people of Utah.

The voucher movement has bought and paid for undue influence in Utah’s legislature. Last year, a political action committee called “Parents for Choices in Education” spent over a half a million dollars with the exclusive goal of electing proponents of school privatization. The organization’s money came from the usual suspects of the voucher movement. Patrick Byrne, chief advocate of the recently defeated 65% Deception plan to defund public schools, gave at least $70,000 to the pro-voucher political action committee. All Children Matter, the political funding arm of the voucher movement founded by Dick and Betsy DeVos, gave the group $240, 000.

One of the politicians the pro-voucher group helped elect is Steve Urquhart, the sponsor of the universal voucher bill. Not only did Urquhart sponsor the legislation, it seems that he may have used his position as chairman of the power House Rules Committee to extort votes for it. Rep. Sheryl Allen, a supporter of public education, has recently claimed that Urquhart will not allow bills she sponsors to get past the Rules Committee. Fortunately, Allen has found a way to work around Urquhart’s obstruction. Unfortunately, however, Urguhart’s underhanded tactics may have forced two other lawmakers to vote his way. The Salt Lake Tribune reports:

When the controversial private school vouchers bill passed the House of Representatives by one vote last Friday, one of the surprise "yes" votes that put it over the hump was Rep. Brad Last, R-St. George, who had voted against the bill in the House Education Committee just a few days earlier…

Here's a possible reason why: Last, who manages assisted living centers in southern Utah, is sponsoring HB338, which would have made it more difficult to sue emergency room doctors for medical malpractice. The bill had been stuck in the House Rules Committee for two weeks and then, lo and behold, it was passed out of the committee three days after Last voted for the voucher bill.    

And who is the chairman of the Rules Committee? Rep. Steve Urquhart, R-St. George.    

And who is the sponsor of the voucher bill? Urquhart…

Another unknown vote prior to the final tally on the vouchers bill last Friday was Rep. Richard Wheeler, R-Ephraim, a vice president at Snow College.

When crunch time came, he voted yes.

And on Wednesday, when the Capital Facilities Appropriations Subcommittee submitted its priority list for capital facilities projects, a proposed library at Snow College made the cut.

The $14.5 million library was seventh on the list. If the top seven projects are selected, the total cost will be about $144 million. The Legislature has discussed spending $150 million on capital facilities projects this year.

Urguhart’s voucher bill passed by one vote.

In 2005, after the Kansas School Board took steps to promote creationist objections to science education, an outraged Oregon State University Physics student decided something had to be done. Rather than organize a letter writing campaign or protest in the streets, Bobby Henderson turned to an age-old tool of social commentary, satire. Henderson ‘founded’ a new religion called Pastafarianism whose followers worship a noodly deity called the “Flying Spaghetti Monster.” In a fun and playful way, Henderson’s Pastafarianism highlights both the religious motivation of advocates of so-called “intelligent design,” and the weaknesses in their arguments. Perhaps owing to the effectiviness of Henderson’s parody, the anti-evolution Discovery Institute has recently launched an attack on Pastafarianism.

In a post on Discovery’s blog last month, the loquacious Casey Luskin takes aim at the Flying Spaghetti Monster:

During the holiday season, many Americans take time to seriously and respectfully reflect on Judeo-Christian religious beliefs. Not so for one website, the “Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster" (FSM), a pro-evolution satire against intelligent design. They exhibit no interest in treating Christian holidays with respect.

Aside from the anti-Christian Christmas cards, the FSM website sells "The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster," which is a mockery of the Christian New Testament. Anyone who has ever studied the paraphernalia in a Christian bookstore will recognize that the FSM shirts with dead Christian fish symbols and the word "Truth" are mocking Christianity. They even sell an FSM car icon to mock the “Jesus fish” icon. I've seen a couple FSM car icons on the road here in Seattle. It's funny, but clearly the FSM concept aims to mock those who seriously believe in Judeo-Christian religious views.

Not content to limit the struggle against satire to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, yesterday Luskin focused his attention on a column posted on the aptly named web publication, “The Spoof.” The piece, clearly written in a jocular tone, includes a fictional scientist arguing against “intelligent design” by claiming that penguins are “the work of a total moron". Luskin was unimpressed:

Spoof.com should realize that they weren’t really spoofing anything, and that Darwinists make these fallacious arguments with a straight face all the time.

In response to Luskin’s screed, National Center for Science Education’s Glenn Brock asks “Why would mocking traditional religion be of concern to a purely scientific organization?" An interesting question indeed. For his part Luskin’s colleague, John West, attempts to answer Brock’s question, but perhaps Luskin and West are simply unwilling to accept that the target of these parodies is not religion or science, but the doctrine of intelligent design creationism that they peddle?

A school district in Washington State has prohibited teachers from showing Vice President Al Gore’s documentary on global warming. Last month, a national organization of science teachers turned down an offer of free copies of "An Inconvenient Truth" citing controversy surrounding the film, but Federal Way public schools may be the first school district to ban it outright. According to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, the Federal Way School Board enacted the ban after complaints from a local gadfly:

"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven who also said that he believes the Earth is 14,000 years old. "The information that's being presented is a very cockeyed view of what the truth is. ... The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD."
Hardison's e-mail to the School Board prompted board member David Larson to propose the moratorium Tuesday night.

Hardison, who vehemently opposed a plan to prohibit PowerPoint presentations at Federal Way City Council meetings last year, was incensed when he learned that one of his daughter’s teachers planned to show the documentary based largely on a PowerPoint presentation delivered by Gore. Hardison’s wife Gayla, who unsuccessfully ran for Federal Way’s City Council in 2005, also objects to what she sees as the anti-American message of the film:

"From what I've seen (of the movie) and what my husband has expressed to me, if (the movie) is going to take the approach of 'bad America, bad America,' I don't think it should be shown at all," Gayle Hardison said. "If you're going to come in and just say America is creating the rotten ruin of the world, I don't think the video should be shown."

Unfortunately, school board president Ed Barney agreed with the Hardisons, invoking the familiar rhetoric of right-wing opposition to teaching science:

Students should hear the perspective of global-warming skeptics and then make up their minds, he said. After they do, "if they think driving around in cars is going to kill us all, that's fine, that's their choice."

Asked whether an alternative explanation for evolution should be presented by teachers, Barney said it would be appropriate to tell students that other beliefs exist. "[Evolution]'s only a theory," he said.

The American Family Association of Pennsylvania is up in arms after a national group committed to ensuring safe schools for all children invited a school principal to diversity workshop. Convinced that the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network is secretly working to make Pennsylvania “similar to Massachusets,” the AFA of PA issued a press release vaguely threatening Ambridge Area Senior High School principal Alan Fritz:

“School boards and school administrators at Ambridge Area School District and beyond, need to be fully aware that it is in their best interest not to partner with homosexual organizations such as GLSEN. Pushing the acceptance of homosexuality ultimately will target the First Amendment rights of those with deeply held religious beliefs which believe that lifestyle is sinful,” Diane Gramley, president of the AFA of PA, noted.

In the press release, the AFA of PA also notes that they provided Fritz with a copy of an “anti-bullying curriculum” developed by the fervent advocate of so-called reparative therapy, Warren Throckmorton, apparently unconcerned that Throckmorton’s work to change gays and lesbians into “ex-gays” has been discredited by the likes of the American Psychological Association. Presumably, the AFA of PA hopes that Fritz will heed such sage advice as “avoid bullies and where they hang out” and “if you are in danger, RUN.”

Throckmorton’s curriculum repeatedly encourages students who are being bullied to talk to a teacher or school administrator. This, however, may be a problem for LGBT students in Ambridge Area Public Schools, some of whom are reporting a recent increase in anti-gay harassment. During a discussion of a Gay / Straight Alliance club at Ambridge Area High School in November, a school board member accused the club’s organizers of promoting a “sex club” and referred to LGBT students as “faggots.” Is it reasonable to expect LGBT students to readily report anti-gay bullying and harassment given such a vivid display of homophobia at the highest levels of school administration? Perhaps Throckmorton and the AFA of PA would prefer those students just run away.

NOTE – Dr. Throckmorton has contacted Right Wing Watch to say that he is not an advocate of "reparative” therapy. Rather, he prefers the term "reorientation" therapy. Regardless of the terminology used, no leading professional health, mental health or education organization views homosexuality as a disease and many have warned that ‘therapy’ intended to change or ‘re-orient’ a person’s sexual orientation is ineffective and potentially harmful.

After Keith Ellison was elected the first Muslim member of Congress last month, talk show host Dennis Prager, among others, attacked the Representative-elect for indicating that he would swear his oath of office with his hand placed on a copy of the Qur’an. Now, former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice and regular WorldNetDaily columnist Roy Moore has decided that regardless of how they are sworn in faithful Muslims are not fit to serve in Congress.

Our Constitution states, "Each House [of Congress] shall be the judge ... of the qualifications of its own members." Enough evidence exists for Congress to question Ellison's qualifications to be a member of Congress as well as his commitment to the Constitution in view of his apparent determination to embrace the Quran and an Islamic philosophy directly contrary to the principles of the Constitution.

Citing the recent actions of the rebel government of Somalia and the public statements of the founder of a “radical Islamic school,” Moore argues that the Islamic faith “rejects our God” and is “simply incompatible with our law.” To Moore, these two examples are enough to prove that none of the world’s more than one billion Muslims could fulfill an oath to uphold the US Constitution. Never one for subtlety, Moore goes on to invoke Godwin’s Law:

[C]ommon sense alone dictates that in the midst of a war with Islamic terrorists we should not place someone in a position of great power who shares their doctrine. In 1943, we would never have allowed a member of Congress to take their oath on "Mein Kampf," or someone in the 1950s to swear allegiance to the "Communist Manifesto."

Oddly, Moore seems to forget the sixth article of the US Constitution:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.[emphasis added]

Roy Moore has demonstrated a unique understanding and interpretation of the US Constitution in the past, though it may take a truly singular intellect to explain how preventing Muslims from serving in government would not constitute the application of a ‘religious test.’

Months ago, voucher warrior Clint Bolick announced he would leave his position as head of the Alliance for School Choice. It may have been more of a career change than we realized -- writing romance novels. Bolick has decided to release his first self-proclaimed work of fiction, Nicki’s Girl, just in time for the holiday shopping season: One on-line book seller offers the following description:

When talented young architect Kevin Gibbons meets Nicole Petri, he is quickly swept away. Nicki's otherworldly beauty, sweet disposition, and ardent lovemaking seem almost too good to be true. Even after she reveals alarming personality traits, Kevin marries her.

Eventually Nicki bears the daughter she desperately desires. But despite the fact that Alexandria is the spitting image of her mother, her arrival does little to purge Nicki's demons. Alex's behavior in turn veers between angelic and terrifying, forcing Kevin to struggle furiously to save both his little girl's life and his own sanity.

Along with this brief synopsis, one can find several stellar reviews. Alliance for School Choice communications director calls her boss’s book a “page turner.” Libertarian lawyer and Goldwater Institute staffer Jordan K. Rose says Bolick’s “foray into fiction” is a “must read.” And "Diane Bolick" objectively opines that she “can’t put it down.”

The voucher movement has suffered a number of setbacks recently, but it remains to be seen if the public will appreciate Bolick’s fiction any more than they support school vouchers.

Though outgoing Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romey’s recent long-shot attempt to end same-sex marriage in that state has received considerable attention, his recent attacks on programs serving LGBT youth have largely flown under the radar. Two weeks ago, Romney, a potential presidential candidate, submitted his final annual budget in which he eliminated all funding for the Department of Education’s Safe Schools Program and slashed funding for a Department of Public Health Program aimed at preventing LGBT youth suicide by nearly one-third.

In 1998, a study in the journal Pediatrics examined the experience of LGBT youth in Massachusetts high schools. Among the key findings were:

…GLB youth [were] more than three times as likely to have attempted suicide in the past 12 months, almost five times as likely to have missed school because of fear about safety, more than nine times as likely to have used injectable drugs in their lifetime, and more than four times as likely to have been threatened with a weapon on school property…

The researchers concluded “that educational efforts, prevention programs, and health services must be designed to address the unique needs of GLB youth.”

Given this and other research documenting the effects of bullying on LGBT youth, Romney’s decision to cut these life-saving programs is puzzling. Does Governor Romney disagree with the substantial and respected body of research linking bullying and harassment in schools to higher suicide rates among LGBT youth? Or, does he hope that showing disdain for the struggles of LGBT youth will increase his appeal among Republican voters in 2008?

In a telling display of the right wing’s contempt for affirmative action, College Republicans in Boston have decided to take a break from limiting the rights of gays, women and non-Christians to stand up for one of our society’s most down-trodden and ignored groups: white people.

Looking to draw attention to what they call the "worst form of bigotry confronting America today," Boston University's College Republicans are circulating an application for a "Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship" that requires applicants be at least 25 percent Caucasian.

Just in case any students of a non-pure blood attempt to swindle money from needy white Republicans, the scholarship application requires students to provide a written essay describing their lineage. Applicants are also required to write an essay describing “what is means to be Caucasian-American today.” Will applicants bemoan the lack of prominent white role models in government and business? Or, will they opine on the unequal treatment white people often receive from the criminal justice system? Perhaps, applicants will discuss their dream of a day when being white is not such a hardship.

The Boston University group is not the first to offer scholarships to white folks. Two years ago a group of College Republicans in Rhode Island offered a similar scholarship, though their application required a photograph to “confirm whiteness,” and asked applicants to write an essay extolling white pride. Former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie criticized those white only scholarships.

In Pennsylvania, a high school senior named Adam Smith recently founded a gay/straight alliance club to confront anti-gay behavior and promote diversity at his school. When the local school board undertook discussion of the club last week, the Vice President of the Ambridge Area School Board may have unwittingly demonstrated how much such a club is needed. During the public meeting, William Scherfel, a former township supervisor who was elected to the school board on a promise not to build any new schools, made repeated references to the gay/straight alliance as a “sex club,” employing a bit of common right-wing spin. After a couple of school board members pointed out that his characterization of the club was inaccurate, Scherfel replied, “Ok, the faggots.”

A recent study sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN), found that over 75% of self identified LGBT high school students regularly hear anti-gay hate speech at school. Even more alarming, well over one-third of these same students report having been physically harassed or assaulted in school because of their perceived sexual orientation. That same research shows that LGBT students in schools with Gay/ Straight Alliance clubs and/or supportive faculty and staff feel safer, perform better on their school work and are more likely to plan to attend college.

Scherfel now says that he does not remember calling students “faggots,” but admits the word is in his regular vocabulary because he “grew up in a different generation when certain terms were acceptable in referring to gays and other groups.” If only Scherfel’s high school had a gay/straight alliance, he may have known better. It’s not too late for Scherfel, though, Adam Smith has extended a standing invitation for him to attend his group’s meetings.

Writing on the Alliance for School Choice blog, right-wing activist Nancy Salvato uses a recent controversy over a Harry Potter book in Georgia to claim that public schools are being used to indoctrinate children into radical Islam. The Georgia controversy started when a parent complained that the book promotes the wicca religion and demanded it be removed from an elementary school library. Salvato, an aide to Illinois state senators Ray Soden and Carole Pankau. says that debating wicca is a waste of time. The real danger, she says, is Islam:

We are facing clear and immediate dangers to our way of life and shouldn’t waste time entertaining the paranoid delusions of any person(s) declaring that Wicca is being proselytized through the Harry Potter series, especially anyone who hasn’t bothered to read an entire book. Indeed, from everything I’ve ever read about Wicca, it is a very peaceful practice.

Yet, one can conclude that another religious practice is spreading evil amongst us; those who believe in the inalienable rights of every person to pursue life, liberty, and happiness; and respect and defend the U.S. Constitution which protects these rights…Radical Islamists, in the name of Allah, will commit indiscriminate, non-selective and suicidal acts of terror, as has been demonstrated on American soil.

Despite this, in our nation’s public schools, children are being taught about Ramadan…

This is what the mainstream media should be reporting, this is what parents should be worrying about. Harry Potter is a fantasy, and though no one is telling readers which characters are good and evil, it can be agreed that most kids fantasize about being Harry, the good guy, not Malfoy (the bad guy). Do the kids indoctrinated into radical Islam understand good and evil? They haven’t had enough experiences to recognize that they are being brainwashed. Let this be on what our energy is focused, not distractions like magic and witchcraft. Leave that to the imagination.

The Alliance for School Choice has made many outlandish accusations against public education, but the suggestion that our public schools are in danger of becoming virual madrassas is certainly…novel. Clearly the not-so-subtle difference between teaching about religion and indoctrination is lost on Salvato.

The voucher movement has been dealt some serious set-backs in recent months. In July, a study by the Department of Education found that public school students outperform their private school peers – undercutting the right-wing’s basic argument that private schools are better. In August, a similar study found that public school students also learn more than students in charter schools. Last month, a survey released by Gallup and the non-partisan education organization Phi Delta Kappa found that public support for vouchers is in a free-fall. A poll of Indiana residents by the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy came up with similar results. And recently major fractures have occurred between different factions of the Right over the proposed national voucher program and the Bush administration’s implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act.

All this may have proven to be too much for one of the privatization movement’s biggest stars. An Arizona paper announced yesterday that Clint Bolick, president and general counsel for the pro-voucher Alliance for School Choice has taken a position with a Scottsdale law firm. In recent years, Bolick has committed himself to fighting against public education, he first rose to prominence a crusader against affirmative action as a disciple of Clarence Thomas. He was co-founder of the right-wing legal group called the Institute for Justice and a prominent player in the conservative libertarian community.

This news may not indicate Bolick’s outright surrender in the Voucher Wars, but could it be the beginning of a strategic retreat and reorganization at the highest levels of the right-wing coalition against public education?

Last week, gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos sent his campaign strategists scrambling when he told reporters that he believes creationism, in the guise of “intelligent design,” should be taught as science in Michigan’s public schools. Almost immediately the DeVos campaign starting walking back his comments with this statement:

"I've always believed that our children should be provided with more knowledge, not less. Lots of intelligent people can disagree about the origins of life. In the end, I believe in our system of local control. Local school boards should have the opportunity to offer evolution and intelligent design in their curriculums."

Who doesn’t love a little ‘local control’? The leadership of the Gull Lake Community Schools in southwestern Michigan sure likes it. In 2005, Gull Lake schools decided to prohibit the use of intelligent design textbooks in science class. Of course, the Religious Right was not happy with that and soon after the decision by Gull Lake school, the Thomas More Law Center threatened a law suit on behalf of two Michigan science teachers who want to teach intelligent design in opposition to the local school board’s decisions.. In addition to working to outlaw abortion, prohibit gay marriage and adoption, etc., the More Center, based in Anne Arbor, unsuccessfully defended the Dover, PA school board’s decision to require intelligent design in science class.

According to the Detroit Free Press, Dick DeVos is one of the major funders of the Thomas More Law Center:

Dick DeVos says he believes in local control, but his actions tell a different story. When it comes to the far right’s pet issues, Dick DeVos won’t let anything stand in the way of pushing ideology into Michigan’s public schools.

Note: If you are interested in defending science in your community, check out this brand new resource from PFAW Foundation.

UPDATE: Within hours of this post, Cato removed the offending article from its website.

A few days ago Right Wing Watch noted that Cato’s Andrew Coulson was caught falsely casting aspersions on an academic research center in Indiana. The Center for Evaluation and Education Policy recently released a survey that found falling public support for vouchers. Unwilling to believe the results, Coulson launched an untruthful ad hominem attack on CEEP claiming that their study couldn’t be trusted. Now, Clint Bolick’s Alliance for School Choice has stepped up to defend Coulson.

The folks over at PFAW's blog must have at least pulled a muscle when they stretched to take a swipe at Cato's Andrew Coulson. Here's PFAW's account: Earlier this month, Andrew wrote a column in the Indianapolis Star critical of Indiana University's Center for Evaluation and Education Policy. CEEP periodically polls Indianans on school choice, and recent poll results have shown declining support for school choice among respondents. Andrew's principal complaints: CEEP's financial ties to IU's Department of Education make the group biased against school choice, and the question design was flawed.

CEEP's Jonathan Plucker fired back that CEEP is financially independent of IUDOE; that the costs of the poll are likewise paid by CEEP to prevent any hint of bias; and that CEEP works with outside polling experts to make sure the results are accurate and reliable.

Bolick’s group , does not dispute that “Andrew” was lying. Instead, they praise him for issuing a purported retraction, to which they provide a link.

However, PFAW oddly fails to mention that, five days after the column ran in the Indy Star, Coulson subsequently posted this on Cato's blog.

Sure enough, there is a post on Cato’s blog, dated 9/8, in which Coulson acknowledges his error:

In a recent op-ed for the Indianapolis Star, I wrote that Indiana University’s Center for Evaluation and Education Policy (CEEP) had a vested interest in finding school choice to be unpopular with voters — because it was a part of the University’s Department of Education, and that department could well be rendered obsolete under a large scale school choice program. As it turns out, the Center is largely financially independent of the Department, and so would not likely go down with the ship under a voucher or education tax credit program.

But on that same day, Coulson’s column, including the passage he admits is false, was posted on Cato’s website, where it still appeared without the correction nearly two weeks later.

Coulson himself may have apologized, but Cato and the Alliance for School Choice don’t seem to have a problem perpetuating his false allegations.

On his radio show yesterday, comedian Rush Limbaugh encouraged Republican efforts to deliberately disenfranchise voters.

I mean, you take a look at the average Democrat voter registration drive, you can take for every hundred thousand voters they register, the cumulative IQ would probably be less than a pencil eraser. So when it comes time for the election, half of them can be fooled in saying, "No, it's not Election Day. It's tomorrow, Wednesday." And they show up on Wednesday to vote when the polls are closed, and the Democrats claim a trick has been played on them. That's how stupid some of their voters are.

Limbaugh then pointed out a specific example of a ‘successful’ campaign to deny registered Democrats the right to vote:

You think I'm lying? That happened. Republicans did a dirty trick and sent a flier out a week early and said due to unfortunate circumstances, certain precincts, Election Day will be held on Wednesday, blah, blah, blah, blah. Democrats heard about it, this is such a dirty trick. They were worried because they knew it would work, because half their voters are stupid idiots! They have to be when you look at the way they vote.

Right-wing voter suppression campaigns are nothing new. People For the American Way Foundation’s latest report, The New Face of Jim Crow: Voter Suppression in America, highlights methods of intimidation and deception such as this, plus budding legislative proposals that would keep eligible voters, many of them African- American, from the polls. Supporters of these proposals claim they are to bringing “integrity” to the process, but can the Right really be trusted to bring “integrity” to election reform while Mr. Limbaugh brags about the ease with which his friends work to suppress the vote?

One would hope that Mr. Limbaugh would feel compelled to report such egregious violations of the law to the proper authorities. In the alternative, now that Mr. Limbaugh has indicated his knowledge of, or complicity in, voter fraud, perhaps the feds should pay him a visit.