We the People (with Disabilities): Why are Our Votes on These People’s Ballots?

Hello again, readers,


*WARNING*: This is a politically-driven post that is unfavorable toward the Democratic Party. If you cannot handle reading anything that is unfavorable toward this party, or the Republican Party, please cease reading now. You were warned. Any vitriolic, curse-ridden comments directed at the fact that the Democratic Party was taken to task in this post, will be deleted.

It’s your favorite Chick again, obviously making up for lost time.

Like many other people, I have my own set of little quirks. One of these is that when I get nervous, excited, or angry, I develop very red, itchy skin. Medically speaking, I guess it’s a form of rosacea. But we’re not dealing with scientific reasons today, so I’ll just call it what it is at the core: an emotional reaction. And I had it tonight. I think I’m allergic to something–or rather, someone. A lot of someones. I’m allergic to Democrats.

Yeah, you heard right. At this moment, I am ALLERGIC to DEMOCRATS.

Now, I know what you’re gonna say. “You claim to be a Christian; aren’t you supposed to love everyone?” Yes, I do claim this. Yes, I am supposed to. And yes, I do, as best I can. But as Jesus Himself would be the first to tell you, loving someone doesn’t mean you agree with everything they do or let them get away with doing wrong. And “wrong” is exactly what the people I’m going to talk about have done. Also, this is not a religiously-driven post, so actually, that argument is secondary to the point.

And you might also say, “Hold up; the election’s over. You’re just mad your candidate lost.” Well, yes it is, but no, I’m not. I was taught never to be a sore loser, and I live by that. The reason I’m writing about this now is because the story just hit the Internet. It’s a late story. And that tells me the media may be trying to cover up something we needed to know a long, long time ago. (Not really a shock, is it)?

So what is the story? Well, it makes me furious to even think about it, but here I go.

On newsmax.com, there appears this story, by David Horowitz. Mr. Horowitz is founder and president of Students for Academic Freedom, and the David Horowitz Freedom Center, Los Angeles, CA. He also has a brother-in-law named Henry. Henry is chronologically in his 40s. Mentally, he is six years old and has “lived most of his life in a home for the disabled.” Over Thanskgiving, David was shocked to hear Henry say,

“Obama saved me.”

Naturally, David asked what Henry meant, and was told the people at the home who “took care of” him filled out his papers, told him how Obama cared for him, “taught him the Obama chants,” and then took him to vote. “They did the same for [everyone else] in their care, approximately 60 in all.”

What. The. Flipping. HECK!!!!!????!!!!

There are so many things wrong with this scenario I scarcely know where to begin. But let’s break it down:

  1. I don’t care if you have an IQ of 20. Nobody, but nobody, has the right to tell another person how to vote. Americans came to this country to escape and avoid that kind of treatment. And nobody has the right to stand over your shoulder, fill out your papers for you, and make sure you vote the right way.
  2. To tell a person how to vote is to manipualte and extort them. Wait a minute–manipulation and extortion–isn’t that the same thing we accuse people with disabilities of doing all the time? While, out of the other sides of our mouths, claiming that they’re too stupid to know what’s best for them? Which reminds me…
  3. This entire scenario assumes that Henry was too stupid to know who he should vote for or what he wanted. Now, I understand that if a man has the mental age of 6, it can be difficult to explain what voting really means. And I hear my audience: “You wouldn’t let a six-year-old vote, would you?” No, I wouldn’t–if that were a chronological six-year-old. But as we have discussed on this blog, there is a major difference between chronological age–which should come first–and the “mental age” someone is given based on assessments that often don’t apply to the whole person. Chronologically, Henry is in his 40s, and that’s how he should be treated. Chronologically, he is plenty old enough to vote. So why hadn’t someone taken the time to explain the process and the meaning behind voting, in a way he could understand, instead of assuming, “He can’t understand because mentally, he’s 6?” If we stopped assuming “can’t,” I’d venture to say the lives of people with disabilities would be a lot better.
  4. These “keepers” (that’s the word Horowitz used, and I despise it. We call the people who take care of ANIMALS “keepers”), cast Henry’s vote for him. He was denied a voice. Instead, the “keepers” got to use him to project their own voice–and then do it again, at least 59 times over. You tell me that’s not pushing a manipulative agenda. People with disabilities need to, instead, be taught that they are “we the people” as much as any of us, and they should be allowed to say, “We the people WILL NOT SHUT UP!”
  5. Now we get to the nitty-gritty–the candidate Henry was in effect forced to vote for. Now, if Romney or any other candidate had been on the other end of that ballot, I’d be just as enraged–probably more so since that’s a representative of my party. (Which I chose, by the way, and thank God for the opportunity to choose). But Barack Obama is not the representative of minorities–including people with disabilities–that he would have us believe. He is guilty of blatantly lying to the American people in a number of cases (the real cause of the Benghazi attack, and the fact that it was “an act of terror,” for example). He and his fellow politicians push their own agenda out of a belief that America will blindly follow orders (“We have to pass the health care bill before you know what’s in it.”) He has sent America into a black spiral of debt, which my grandkids will have to pay through the nose for, and claims it’s all in the name of the common good. He has said, in effect, that Republicans want the elderly to die, for people with Down’s Syndrome and autism to “fend for themselves,” and for us all to suffer the ill effects of dirty water and air. And let’s not forget the infamous, “You didn’t build that” quote.

This man, and his party, are pro-death. The death of small businesses. The death of success. The death of people who have no voice (this is a pro-abortion party and a pro-euthanasia party). The death of existence as a person (it is my firm belief that this country’s current paradigm that “gender is a choice” is a subtle, relativist way to stamp out true masculinity and femininity, and make us ashamed to be defined as created men and women). The death of the “hope and change” that spilled from Barack Obama’s mouth in 2008. The more people on government assistance–including those with disabilities–the better HE looks. Handouts are good; hard work is bad. In fact, evil. And most of all, Barack Obama is the proponent of the deaths of INDEPENDENCE, DIGNITY, LIBERTY, EQUALITY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

How do you know Obama is killing dignity? Well, look at Henry and others like him. But–listen to me here–it is not only his fault. The people have choices, and we are misusing the power of choice, particularly if we allow stories like Henry’s to continue happening.

Am I saying we should hurt Obama and his Cabinet in any way? No–that would be against biblical principles. Am I saying he should be turned out of office? I’d like nothing better, but I don’t see it happening. What I am saying is, he and his fellow politicians are making exploitation and manipulation of the very people they claim to care most about, possible. I mean, the man uses CHANTS to get his point across, including the creepy song “Mom and Dad, We’re Blaming You” that ran in this year’s election ad campaign. I know of several other people who used chants and emotion-driven, anger-driven propaganda–and none of what they did was for the greater good. It was for no one’s good but their own.

So, what am I saying about people with disabilities and the voting process? Let me sum it up:

1. Stop assuming “can’t.” Chronological age trumps mental age. If your loved one or colleague or friend even shows a shred of competency in any form, explain the process to him or her in a way that can be understood–and let them cast a vote themselves.

2. If there is NO WAY UNDER THE SUN this person can vote? First, make sure you know 100% that this is true. But if it is? Then that person doesn’t vote. It does NOT give you a license to cast a vote for him or her. In this country, that’s called fraud.

3. People with disabilities need to know and understand the civic process early on, if at all possible. And then they should be allowed to use it.

It’s time for all people with disabilities to look at the ableist world and say:



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s