Rob Curley, in his article about the First Amendment on Jan. 10 (“The First Amendment likely doesn’t mean what you think it means”), assured readers that if a letter is “relatively civil,” and follows word count and timeline guidelines, “we’re almost certainly running it.”
I’m going to test his assertion with this sensitive issue: With regard to the November election, let’s imagine a scenario where you are a vote counter who has heard or read accusations hundreds of times in the media of one of the candidates being Hitler-like. If you were convinced that one candidate was Hitler-like, wouldn’t you cheat on the vote count? It seems reasonable that you might, and that it would be the moral thing to do.
This scenario was presented by Dennis Prager from Prager University in one of his fireside chats. He didn’t assert that there was voter fraud in the last election because he said he didn’t have proof. But the paraphrased question above should make us all ponder.