Relevance of Truth in Government

From blogger, "A Red Mind in a Blue State", a quote from the great Theodore Roosevelt:
"A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."

Character of the user is the point of my blog today. New York junior Senator Hillary Clinton is pushing for a national holiday to get the vote out. On top of that she wants to extend the privalidge to vote to convicted Felons. Maybe, just maybe Senator Clinton wants to make sure that she and Bill won’t ever loose their voting status some day when it all catches up with them.

I was reading, Rewriting History, by Dick Morris. In the first chapter he explained about two known lies that Hillary fabricated over items that would seem irrelavant. She made up a preposterous lie about how she happened to have the name Hillary, an out right lie that was easily uncovered. She lied about concerns for her daughter Chelsea on 9/11, again a lie about the where abouts of her daughter in order to attach the Clinton family with the misery of those families who actually did have losses. Character is not something you can put away for a while and take it back up when the mood suits you.

So, the question begs for an answer, why would Senator Hillary Clinton want to extend voting privaliges to convicted felons? Could it be that she believes that most of the roughly 4 million felons would tend to vote for a Democratic Presidential candidate? Think for a moment, which of the 2 biggest national parties aligns itself as “tough on crime” and along that same vein of thought; then who would a convicted felon favor? The last presidential election was decided by about 3 million votes in favor of George W. Bush. I think the Democrats would relish the opportunity to add 4 million allies to the voter pool, just enough to swing the pendulum in their direction. This all assumes that these felony voters would even bother to vote.

I have another question, something that by its ommission stands even more brightly. How come Senator Hillary Clinton never mentioned the disenfranchised voters who are in the active military? It would seem that those who wanted to vote, or did vote and their ballots were denied have a greater voice to be heard than some dirt ball convict. Maybe its just my “take” on the issue; but didn’t the active military, those whose votes were actually allowed, didn’t they vote close to 75% Republican? Maybe its not so much the idea that some folks are disenfranchised as to which ones would benefit her particular motivation.

Last but not least in my thoughts regarding felons and voting; why was it that felons were denied the privalidge to vote to begin with? Didn’t it have something to do with their character not matching up to the level of citizenship necessary to properly administer that right? It’s a lot like a liar trying to pass herself off as an Honorable Senator.

It would seem true that, "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user." There is little or no room for folks lacking character in the Senate, much less someone with her sights set on the presidency.