“Your concerns might matter if Chancey becomes Supreme Leader or der Führer or was a SCOTUS nominee. It’s not pertinent to utility regulation.”

AND:
“You didn’t lie when you said you felt it was your “duty” to inform voters that Chancey’s wife has a blog. You’ve spammed every blog on the net that even casually referenced Chancey. On how many was this your first (and only) post?”
The term crusading (virtual) carpetbagger comes to mind.

Cynthia Gee Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

July 14th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
“Your concerns might matter if Chancey becomes Supreme Leader or der Führer or was a SCOTUS nominee. It’s not pertinent to utility regulation.”

LOl… no, it’s not, but everybody has to start somewhere, Rusty. And really, it’s not such a laughing matter. Chancey is what you call a dominionist,and for the last thirty years, dominionists have been preaching that people should have as many kids as possible and have been purposely homeschooling them to believe the dominionist take on Christianity, in the hopes that they will outbreed the mainstream opposition, seek political office in some cases, and gradually make their beliefs the majority views in America.
Check out this article, by Doug Phillips, Chancey’s mentor:
“National Home School Convention Casts Vision”
“In addition, the disproportionately high fertility rate of home educators, coupled with a philosophical and spiritual commitment of many to pass on the principles of multi-generational living to the their children, means that home educators are on the verge of an explosion of socio-political influence. Bottom line: We are out-populating our cultural opponents.”
………..from “Doug’s Blog”,Friday,October 8, 2004

Chancey is a first-generation product of the dominionist homeschooling system, and predictibly, Chancey’s fellow dominionionists are quite excited by his cantidacy and are plugging it online, even if they don’t live in Alabama.

As for “spamming”, for the most part, I usually post multiple comments to a blog only when someone wishes to debate, as we are doing now. Posting once in hopes of sparking a debate (or twice or more in cases of trying to fit a 2000 word comment into a 500 word comment limit, or for purposes adding pertinent information) isn’t considered spamming, no matter how many blogs you comment on — it’s called TROLLING.
So, yes, call me a crusading carpetbagger — I’ll wear the label with pride - but do get your terms right — it’s crusading TROLLING carpetbagger, not crusading SPAMMING carpetbagger.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~The Crusading Carpetbagger
(maybe I should go out and buy myself a cape….)

Your concerns might matter if Chancey becomes Supreme Leader or der Führer or was a SCOTUS nominee. It’s not pertinent to utility regulation.

Holding contrarian views against the law of the land and even most of the citizenry is precisely American. The concept goes right back to our founding. If the contrarian view is persuasive it’ll catch on. Voltaire may not have said it but he would agree.

You didn’t lie when you said you felt it was your “duty” to inform voters that Chancey’s wife has a blog. You’ve spammed every blog on the net that even casually referenced Chancey. On how many was this your first (and only) post?

The term crusading (virtual) carpetbagger comes to mind.

In Matt Chancey’s case, the voters have the right to know that the Chanceys have gone on record and publically claimed to hold what most folks would consider to be UNamerican, UNconservative views concerning suffrage, etc, and they deserve to know about those views BEFORE they vote Matt into office.
If it’s any comfort to you, I’d be doing this very same thing if I knew that a cantidate was a closet Communist or Islamic extreminst, or that he secretly advocated gay marriage but was telling the voters otherwise until after he got elected.

….and, begorra, laddie! …all the leprechauns I ever heard tell of were green, too.

1. Voting in federal elections is set forth by state legislatures. They could decide, for instance, that elections are too expensive and choose the electors themselves. The public would not be allowed to vote. Only when they allow voting can they not bar certain people from voting like you mentioned in the 15th and 19th amendment. As the Supreme Court ruled ‘there is no constitutional right to vote in federal elections’.

2. Why are you as a resident of PA or KY interested in a down ballot race such as the PSC in Alabama?

3. What does Matt or Jenny Chancey’s or that matter Phillip’s religous views matter to PSC policy?

Personally, I don’t care if he believes in blue leprechauns if his policies are what we need. I think they are.

Our Constitution DOES guarantee that no one, IN ANY STATE, can be denied the right to vote because of race (the 15th Amendment), gender (the 19th Amendment), or failure to pay a poll tax or any other tax (the 24th Amendment), and the Constitution requires that anyone who can vote for the “most numerous branch” of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members. In addition, the Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote.

Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications set forth by the states do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld, AS I POINTED OUT, BY DUE PROCESS — for example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote.

In all of this, however, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote for EVERYONE, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does not say that everyone must be allowed to vote, but it DOES delineate on what grounds a person cannot be barred from voting, and one of those grounds, gender flies directly in the face of some of the most cherished teachings of Doug Phillips and his protegee, Matt Chancey.

How can we trust your analysis when you make a demonstrably false claim like ‘Our Constitution guarantees…the right to vote”?

It most certainly does NOT. If you think it does please cite where.

I wrote,
“Alabama voters should be made aware that Matt Chancey opposes women’s suffrage on religious grounds.

Matt Chancey and his wife Jennie believe that it is a sin (or at the very least, is highly inadvisable) for women to vote, hold political office, attend college, or work outside the home. These views are expounded upon at great length on Jennie Chancey’s website,Ladies Against Feminism:
www DOT ladiesagainstfeminism DOT com/artman/publish/Hot_Button_Issues_21/Should_Women_Vote_12661001266 DOT shtml

Matt Chancey is also on very intimate terms with Doug Phillips, the president and founder of VisionForum Ministries, a major homeschooling curriculum company. Phillips also teaches that God doesn’t allow women to vote or hold office:
www DOT visionforumministries DOT org/issues/family/biblical_patriarchy_and_the_do DOT aspx

Doug Phillips is described by Matt Chancey as being his dear friend and mentor, while Phillips in turn praises as his own intellectual hero one of the most virulent racists of the 19th century, Robert L. Dabney, and has authored a book , Robert Louis Dabney: The Prophet Speaks.

…and Matt is not above a bit of internet sleight of hand, either, when it will aid his political ends, as shown by this article, from the Washington Post:
www DOT blogger DOT com/www DOT washingtonpost DOT com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/01/AR2005090100803 DOT html

Our Constitution guarantees that no American who has reached the age of 18 shall be denied the the right to vote without due process, regardless of race, sex, or creed, or income level, and while everyone, including Matt Chancey, has the right to their personal convictions, the voters of Alabama have the right to know that Matt Chancey’s convictions concerning suffrage and a good many other things are very much at odds with what is considered right and decent in America today.

Just as you wouldn’t want a man who holds a strong personal conviction that it is acceptable to embezzle money to serve as your banker or stockbroker, most Americans would not want a man who holds a personal conviction that voting should be restricted to male landowning heads of household to serve them in a position of governmental authority, and the voters of Alabama have a right to know about Matt Chancey’s unConstitutional, unAmerican convictions BEFORE they head to the polls.”