November 20, 2020

Conservatives cannot tolerate humans using laws to restrict corruptness. So they strip the purpose out of laws. In doing that, they harp law, law, law. They pretend to demand the most absolute and strict determination of law.

They concoct sanctimonious terminology of that sort. "Strict constructionism" was Nixon’s terminology. The mocker of laws was claiming to be a strict adherer to laws.

It's always the same argument by conservatives. No one is strict enough with laws. After the absolute strictness of laws, there are no laws left. The supposed strictness of conservatives is how they get rid of laws.

The reason why it happens that way is because strictness is a method of stripping purposes out of laws. There are no words perfect enough to define anything in an absolute manner. So the tactic is to use words so strict that no meaning remains.

Many courts have determined that laws are supposed to have purposes. Stripping the purposes out of laws is the purpose of the strictness conservatives apply to laws.

Now, or course, it's Trump claiming that a strict determination of law shows illegal voting, even after all authorities said otherwise. Trump assumes his sycophants can find technicalities which strip the meaning out of the laws which say he lost the election.

An example is the claim that signatures don't match well enough. There is no real significance to matching signatures. In fact, signatures are largely transformed in their meaning from identifying to indicating responsibility. In a court, the person who creates a signature must do the verifying, because there is nothing about ink on paper that will prove anything.

Signatures, now days, are used to create a proper sequence in a process. It says the persons involved are located where they are supposed to be, doing the things they are supposed to be doing and taking responsibility for what they signed. In other words, not somewhere else when they are supposed to be reading documents. Matching and proving with ink is not part of the process.

Since signatures cannot prove anything in themselves, Trump and the conservatives try to use signature matching for their version of Jim Crow laws. They can always find something wrong in signature matching.

In doing such things, the purpose of laws becomes nonexistent. The purpose is to get one vote per qualified person. Any old method would do. If someone tried to fake the result, it would be so obvious that everyone would appreciate the joke for entertainment that day. It would happen less than once every ten years.

If someone voted claiming to be Sam Jones from a certain address and Sam Jones from that address already voted, everyone could laugh about it and find the real Sam Jones from that address. It would never happen. Yet Trump and the conservatives pretend that they can overturn elections to prevent such an occurrence from happening.

Notice the problem conservatives are trying to create. They are trying to strip the purpose out of laws. The purpose is to produce an election bases upon one person getting one vote. Nothing is easier to achieve. Yet frauds claim technicalities are so impossible to meet than no voting is real voting unless they win the election.

Summary

The manner in which conservatives do laws is to create the most absolute laws which no one can adhere to and interpret them with the most absolute technicalities which no one can adhere to and then make exceptions for insiders. The election laws are used that way as modern Jim Crow laws. At this time, extreme technicalities are being used attempting to throw out votes in black areas such as Detroit while finding no problems in conservative areas.