Wanker of the Year, Blogosphere Division winner John Bambenek has topped his crowning achievement.
Adam B already gave you what you need to know about how wrong Bambo is on the law. But I just couldn't resist a point-by-point look at the various and ridiculous wrong turns Bambenek made along the way to his audaciously stupid conclusion.
So yes, the yo-yo who filed the FEC complaint against Daily Kos that was so wholly without merit that the Commission actually disposed of it (wearing clothespins on their noses, no doubt) in record time is back again with another publicly-financed Morons-a-PoppinTM boondoggle: a criminal complaint to the Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox (control yourself, Beavis) alleging that urging Democrats to vote for Romney in the Michigan Republican presidential primary constitutes voter fraud.
Oh. My. God.
Will these right-wing "bootstrappers" never tire of making the public pay for their inevitable smackdowns? Is this some kind of a weird fetish I just don't understand? Surely there are privately-financed ways Bambenek can come to grips (if such were his wont, let's say) with his hard-on for Markos, no?
But Bambenek wants none of that. He wants to do this on your dime. Make the FEC waste the time and resources to restate the rules it had already promulgated a year before. Make the Michigan Attorney General explain that an open primary is... well, open. All on the taxpayer dime. What a prince, eh?
Here's the thing: It's. Not. Voter. Fraud.
When people entitled by Michigan law to participate in elections held at public cost do so under their own names, in their assigned polling places, and cast just one ballot, there's no fraud. None.
Special Note #1 for the media: This case should tell you in no uncertain terms that when wingnuts cry to you about voter fraud -- and let's be honest, they're constantly crying about it -- they have not a clue in the world what they're talking about, and they should be given no more attention than if they'd told you they've got video of Elvis descending from a UFO to cast a stretchy, sequined ballot.
Do not forget this. There's nothing the Republicans whine about more annoyingly or more frequently these days than "voter fraud." And here they are, once again, demonstrating embarrassingly for all to see, that all they can really hope for is for the media not to ask any questions when they slap that oh-so-scary-sounding label on... well, whatever the hell they happen to have at hand.
Do not believe Republican crocodile tears about voter fraud. They don't know what it is.
So Bambenek is just stupid, right? Wrong. Bambenek is spectacularly stupid. Why? Here's a point-by-point rundown of the idiocy (and a second Special Note for the Media), after the break.
Dumb part number one:
I allege that this violates 168.932a(c) of Michigan state law by "aiding or counseling a person who is not a qualified and registered elector to vote or offer to vote at the place where the vote is given during an election."
What does 168.932a(c) say?
(c) A person who is not a qualified and registered elector shall not willfully offer to vote or attempt to vote at an election held in this state. A person shall not aid or counsel a person who is not a qualified and registered elector to vote or offer to vote at the place where the vote is given during an election.
Bambenek's allegation is that people who cross party lines are not "qualified and registered electors," so for Markos to "aid or counsel" such people to vote, he claims, is a felony.
But what is a "qualified and registered elector?" Bambenek says...
Michigan state law 168.534 specifies who qualified electors for primary elections are, and not surprisingly, qualified electors may only vote in primaries for the party in which they are members of.
Only... no, it doesn't. 168.534 says:
168.534 General primary; time; party candidates to be voted for; condition to nomination.
Sec. 534.
A general primary of all political parties except as provided in sections 532 and 685 shall be held in every election precinct in this state on the Tuesday after the first Monday in August before every general November election, at which time the qualified and registered voters of each political party may vote for party candidates for the office of governor, United States senator, representative in congress, state senator, representative in the legislature, county executive, prosecuting attorney, sheriff, county clerk, county treasurer, register of deeds, county auditor, drain commissioner, public works commissioner, county road commissioner, county mine inspector, surveyor, and candidates for office in townships. A nomination for an office shall be made only if the official is to be elected at the next succeeding general November election.
This is sheer idiocy. The first thing you may notice (especially if you have Adam B. looking over your shoulder) is that this section describes primary election procedures for every elective office under the sun except one... President of the United States. Oopsies!
Bambenek wishes that the part that says, "qualified and registered voters of each political party may vote for party candidates," meant that qualified voters registered in each political party may vote only for that party's candidates. But it doesn't mean that. It'd be easy enough to say that if it meant that. But it doesn't. Hell, it doesn't even mention the presidential primaries at all. But even if it did, it would mean only that qualified and registered voters of each party holding a primary may vote for party candidates. Which party candidates? That's the key. It doesn't say. Why do they say "party candidates" at all? Because this is a primary. That's what the people on the ballot are: candidates of a particular party for the nomination to be general election candidates. Bambenek has taken us down a meaningless detour with this section. It has nothing whatsoever to do with who's qualified, how they qualify, or for what they qualify.
Get it?
Who cares? It doesn't matter! Because 168.534 doesn't deal with presidential primaries at all. Why not? Because that's in 168.615c.
Sec. 615c.
(1) In order to vote at a presidential primary, an elector shall indicate in writing, on a form prescribed by the secretary of state, which participating political party ballot he or she wishes to vote when appearing to vote at a presidential primary. In fulfilling the requirements of this subsection, the secretary of state shall prescribe procedures intended to protect or safeguard the confidentiality of the participating political party ballot selected by an elector consistent with this section.
(2) An elector shall not be challenged at a presidential primary based upon the participating political party ballot selected by the elector. An elector may be challenged only to the extent authorized under section 727.
Ahem.
An elector shall not be challenged at a presidential primary based upon the participating political party ballot selected by the elector.
So, if Bambo has totally screwed up in identifying the wrong section of Michigan law here, then what does define a "qualified elector?" Why, it's section 168.10, of course. See if you can decipher the complicated legal mumbo-jumbo in the title that caused Bambenek to miss it:
168.10 Qualified elector; definition.
Sec. 10.
The term "qualified elector", as used in this act, shall be construed to mean any person who possesses the qualifications of an elector as prescribed in section 1 of article 2 of the state constitution and who has resided in the city or township 30 days.
And what does section 1 of article 2 of the Michigan constitution say?
Sec. 1 Every citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 21 years, who has resided in this state six months, and who meets the requirements of local residence provided by law, shall be an elector and qualified to vote in any election except as otherwise provided in this constitution. The legislature shall define residence for voting purposes.
Bambenek next stuffs his head further up:
Further, I allege that such voters who do participate in "crossing party lines" potentially violate 168.933 of Michigan state law.
Sigh. Section 168.933?
168.933 Perjury; definition.
Sec. 933.
A person who makes a false affidavit or swears falsely while under oath under section 848 or for the purpose of securing registration, for the purpose of voting at an election, or for the purpose of qualifying as a candidate for elective office under section 558 is guilty of perjury.
There is no party registration in Michigan. You can't commit perjury for the purpose of securing registration as a Republican for the primary, because you can't actually secure "registration" with a party. The registration this section is talking about is registration as a qualified elector, not with a political party.
But there's still more lower bowel to be explored, and Bambenek dutifully (shut up, Beavis!) pushes on:
Lastly, I allege that using a high-profile blog with many editors and contributors, such an attempt also violates 750.157a of Michigan state law.
That's the Michigan conspiracy statute. Bambenek says that because there are a lot of us here at Daily Kos, this is a conspiracy. Specifically, a "Conspiracy to commit offense or legal act in illegal manner," as the cited section's title reads. The problem? You guessed it: there's no offense here, and no "illegal manner" about what's being done. That's probably kinda important, don't you think?
So how does Bambenek's get to his contention that Democrats who vote in the Republican primary are somehow "unqualified?" By misreading the federal Constitution, of course. In a high-flying bit of rhetoric Adam B. compares to Doug Niedermeyer's Animal House courtroom buffoonery (but which I find more closely reminiscent of Eric "Otter" Stratton's) Bambenek waxes moronically poetic:
The right to vote is clearly enshrined in the great history of our nation. I am certainly not naïve [ed. note: Heavens, no!] and know that party-line crossing happens on Election Day and certainly do not expect the attorney general's office to take on the massive burden of investigating each voter who shows up. However, such a public attempt to call for vote fraud must not go unanswered. On January 15th, voters will show up to the polls of their particular party to express their desire in who their party's leadership should be. An attempt to dilute that vote by having those who not only are clearly not a part of that party – but are actively opposed to that party - is clearly a direct attack at the very core of our Republic.
On January 15th, though, voters will not show up to the polls of their particular party. They will show up to the same polls everyone uses, regardless of party, and will cast the ballot of their choosing in the open primary. What Bambenek is hoping to do by grafting a tiny American flag onto his argument is convince people that there's a First Amendment freedom of association problem here. (Problem one for "strict constructionists": there's no mention of this freedom in the Constitution. But hey, we're liberal about that.) Bambenek maintains that the political parties ought to have the right to freely associate with whom they want, and only those with whom they want. But the freedom he's describing is one that private organizations have as against the government -- that is, that private organizations have a (limited) right to include or exclude whom they want from their private functions.
This primary, however, is a public function, paid for by public dollars. The private options (conventions, caucuses) were available to the Michigan Republicans, but they rejected them in favor of a primary, paid for by public funds. Word is, the GOP brass was afraid that the Huckster's shock troops would outmaneuver them at a convention or caucus, so they figured thought a primary was their best chance of diluting his forces (by opening the process to the public, which -- shockingly -- contains Democrats) and thus avoiding all possibilities leading to a pathetic, national embarrassment. Save one, that is.
Special Note #2 for the Media: So it's the Republican leadership's inability to control their own party that threw the cost of their contest on the Michigan public at large. Wastrels! Taxers-and-spenders!
But even if the primary were private, the Republicans' right to free association is only a right they can assert as against the government. Which, at last check, wasn't Daily Kos, though some might argue we'd be better off that way.
No, telling someone to shut up is not a violation of their freedom of speech. And in the same way, telling someone to try to join the Republican party -- even if only for a minute -- is not a violation of their freedom of association. Bambenek is headed for another publicly-funded legal wedgie. It's a shame and a horrible waste of taxpayer dollars, but at least we all get to watch.