WSJ: Wasichu Slandering Jackasses

The Wall Street Journal is beginning to slither its way to the top of my shit list. Today, they’ve conclusively proven two things: they’re unafraid to present uninformed opinions, and they love bashing American Indians.

I can’t link to the damned article, because I’m not gonna subscribe to that rag even if I were to inherit the fucking paper from a long lost uncle. I will, however, summarize and provide a few select quotes.

In an editorial in today’s (11/14/02) Wall Street Journal entitled, “The Oglala Sioux’s Senator,” the WSJ asserts that something very fishy went down in the South Dakota race between Senator Tim Johnson and Rep. John Thune for the junior Senate slot. The last results to be reported in the election were from Shannon County, and they were almost exclusively in favor of Senator Johnson. Those results proved to be the deciding factor in the election.

Then they go on to interview a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard who did some Internet research and came to a stunning conclusion: “this trifecta of late results, high turnout and unusually strong support for the Democratic nominee should, if nothing else, arouse suspicion.”

Well, you’re here for the Straight Dope and I happen to have it. You want to know what sort of disingenuous scoundrels those editorialists at the WSJ are? Consider this quote again:

Pretty impressive, eh? But if you look at this article from the Washington Post, you will find that voter turnout at Pine Ridge generally hovered at or below thirty percent, while the rest of SoDak has one of the highest average turnouts in the nation–71% this past election. The dramatic 89% increase on the Rez can also be stated in slightly more mundane terms: 49% total voter turnout.

Shannon County reported its votes last for a pretty simple reason: it has the shittiest roads, the shittiest phone network, and some of the shittiest weather in the entire nation. Coupled with the comparatively large turnout, it was a difficult task, and took all night.

Is a 49% voter turnout incredible? Anywhere else it wouldn’t be, but let me tell you a little bit about how it was done. It was done with the work of hundreds of volunteers, who spent months encouraging people to register, and then going from door to door on election day begging people to vote, organizing car pools, and the like. Yes, one person was busted for forging absentee ballot applications, but South Dakota’s (Republican) Attorney General said, “I don’t see any evidence that anybody stole an election from anybody else.”

I myself volunteered to go to Pine Ridge–without pay, because I have no leave accrued in my new job, but was told to stay here. Everyone in Indian Affairs knew how important this election was, and how close South Dakota was. The election on Pine Ridge was observed by dozens of lawyers on each side.

So, why did nearly everyone in Pine Ridge go Democrat? I’ve got another answer for you, Wall Street Journal:

Because the Republicans fucked us, you assholes!

In the past two years, the Republicans have tried to extinguish rights to their own money which was stolen by the federal goverment. They yanked the land-into-trust regulations that allow Indian tribes to try to recover their lost and stolen land, in order to allow state and local governments to water the regulations down further. They’re exploiting sacred lands all over the country. They’ve cut health, law enforcement, and infrastructure funding.

And moreover, when John Thune’s Republican House of Representatives failed to pass an energy and water appropriations bill this year, it effectively stoped construction on a critical project to deliver potable water to the Pine Ridge Reservation. Bathing in cold, septic water hauled in on the back of a truck probably gave voters some reflective moments.

What have the Republicans done for American Indians lately? Fucked 'em without a kiss, that’s what. Think that might have had something to do with it, you miserable scum!

I’m glad I’m not the only person who’s pissed off at them about this. I just read that editorial less than an hour before I saw your post, and I have to tell you, this was pretty low, even for the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page. I read that paper regularly, but seldom have the stomach to bother with its editorial page.

As an election junkie, I read quite a bit about the midterm elections, and did catch on that the Lakota were pretty pissed off at the local (Republican) sheriff, in at least one part of Shannon County, and that they’d recently gotten far more organized, politically, than ever before. Combine that with South Dakota having one of the most closely watched Senate races in the country and all the out-of-state cash that that race drew, it’s hardly surprising that they turned out in such numbers. Plus, if you look at county-by-county maps of who voted how in the 2000 presidential race, you’ll see that Al Gore won that county by pretty solid numbers.

Okay, it’s true that Shannon County’s turnout is higher than normal. Sure, it’s safe to assume this is due to heightened registration among the Lakota and the Sioux, but I concede that it’s fair to request a recount. Frankly, if I were a Thune voter, I’d expect one. If I were a Johnson voter, I’d agree that a recount is fair. As a New Jerseyan, I couldn’t vote in South Dakota, and though I’m content with the turnout, I think it’s reasonable to have one. I mean, 500 votes out of what, 330,000 cast, or something like that? That’s not much of a margin. Let ‘em recount. It’s important to count all the votes.

However, the Republicans are in an awkward situation when it comes to asking for recounts, even when the request would be fair, particularly in light of their protestations of recounts in Florida in 2000 and in Alabama in 2002. Plus I don’t think they’d want the Lakota to get worked up into a froth, since the Republicans, hoping to do well in Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico in 2004, wouldn’t want to give the Indians in those states something to hate them for. This is probably part of the long-term strategy, which is fine by them, since they’ve already got a Senate majority, anyway, and one more seat wouldn’t make a hell of a big difference for them.

The Journal should be embarrassed for having suggested that there was anything underhanded in the South Dakota election, particularly since there’s nothing to back that claim up. Talk about your sore losers! Well, in 2004 there are Senate races in both Dakotas, plus a gubernatorial race in North Dakota, plus the presidential race, of course. I hope they get together and fuck the Republicans again, and I hope the Wall Street Journal continues to whinge about votes stolen by those poor, legitimate voters.

Oops. I hit “submit” instead of “preview.” I’m not done yet.

To continue:

The naked arrogance with which this editor makes his just-shy–of-libelous insinuation is exactly what got Tim Johnson reelected. The haughty, imperious attitude toward American Indians, implying that they can be exploited and ignored–and suspected and vilified when they cannot be ignored–is precisely why the Oglala spoke this year.

Oh, and one more thing. Rather than consult a web-surfing professor from Harvard, I asked one of the lawyers who was in Shannon County, a personal friend of mine. There were three Republican election observers per precinct in Shannon County. The Dems had one each.

The Oglala Sioux didn’t steal this election. Instead they won it back for the guy who did the best job of representing their interests. Had that election been contested long enough to be thrown into the lap of South Dakota’s Republican-controlled state legislature, that would have been an election theft. I doubt you would have seen a WSJ editorial on that.

And here’s a big, final “fuck you” to the Wall Street Journal for implying that such a thing could have and even should have been done.

Where’s the link to the december GD thread? You mean there isn’t one yet?

$12,000 paid to person in voter fraud probe

So… one in ten of the one thousand new registrations in Shannon County is somehow suspect? That’s only a hundred votes–if they all actually voted. If you recall, our President managed to have more than that air-mailed to Florida without postmarks.

Furthermore, if you ask the woefully ignorant Jim Boulet, Jr., he’d probably be forced to concede that the registration errors are most likely due to translation problems.

Heh, heh.

You seem to have ignored the second quote entirely. I would actually suggest that you read the entire article.

Real truth is that while it may be possible that the increased turnout is due to the factors you describe, given the apparently widespread voter fraud going on throughout the area, there is also reason to believe that the WSJ may be onto something. By brushing aside the scope of the voter fraud in your OP, you presented a misleading picture.

Given the size of the margin of victory, it is eminently reasonable to assume that the Democrats stole this election.

The editorial mentioned in the OP is here. I think it’s available for free. it mentions several grounds for suspicion.