Answer to Mr Bursey

Mr Bursey,

I am sorry for the delay in answering your e-mail and I also would like to apologize for not attending your Town Hall meeting in Sumter which I was looking forward to attending.  My grandmother use to say that excuses are only good for the one who makes them and based upon that I yield my attempt at an excuse for my failures on both issues.

Just for the record, I respect your organization, it's record of achievements and what it is doing and hope to do.  My critique (not criticism) was in reference to the content and clarity of your strategy, from a grassroots perspective.  It is my belief that we should always be as clear and open with the grassroots as possible, so that they can clearly be aware of the pitfalls as well as the benefits of our strategy.   By doing this you create partners in your endeavor instead of unsatisfied customers, who were sold something that turned out to be not what they ordered.  Trust and respect don't come quickly and/or easily at the grassroots level, if you lose either you will lose both and without them you cannot do business in the grassroots community.  

I was also addressing the lack of an alternate strategy and/or strategies that could be and/or is being deployed individually and/or simultaneously.  My e-mail was not meant to make you responsible for an alternate plan nor was I attempting to demean your efforts in the plan that you have constructed.  I must say again or, if I have not said it, for the first time your strategy is sound and it is something that has been very successfully worked in the past but the Republicans strategy is also good and it is based on what has worked for you in the past. So based upon this, I feel they have a better than average chance of winning if we limit ourselves to only use your strategy.  One thing that I have notice since becoming a part of the Democratic Party here in South Carolina, is that we tend to have a tunnel vision mentality which limits the number of ideas that can or will be used at the same time and thus makes it easier for our opponents to defend against us.  We must learn to actively seek and support others with valid ideas and strategies.  In doing so this makes it harder for our opponents to successfully defend against us.  In war, sports and in life, it is that who is the most diverse in ability is the one who has the overwhelming chance at success.  As an individual, intuitively we understand this but as an organization, we have forgot it or was never taught it.

My alternate strategy was and is based on what Governor Perdue touched on in vetoing the Voter ID Bill in North Carolina.  Governor Perdue eluded to the fact that she did not feel that the purpose of the Constitution was never intended to prohibit the vote of our citizens.  When Michael Bailey in his interview on television, told the interviewer that more whites under the Voter ID Law will be prohibited to vote than minorities, the interviewer was totally surprised.  In that moment of surprise lies our future talking points to the white community.  There is very few if any whites who would set still for having less rights than minorities and that includes Tea Party, Republican Party and/or Democratic Party.  Their are five Amendments dealing with Voting Rights in our Constitution: Amendment XIV, Sections 1 and 2; Amendment XV, Section 1 and 2; Amendment XIX; Amendment XXIV, Sections 1 and 2; and Amendment XXVI.  I believe that it is in the first Amendment on our Voting Rights; that is Amendment XIV, Section 1 and 2; that our best defense lies.  Amendment XIV, Section 1 states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.  No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.  Based upon the underlined sentence above, whether you consider your right to vote to be a privilege or not, I certainly do.  And because this law infringes on both whites and minorities it impacts on the purpose of this Amendment.  Amendment XIV, Section 2 states: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.  But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.  What this is saying is that if the right to vote is denied or prevented in anyway to a significant portion of the populace then the Representation in this state will also be reduced.  This mean that based on your percentages that have been calculated 8% for non-whites and 6% for whites, we will lose around 14% of our voting population because of this law.  This also would mean that we would also lose a noticeable amount of our Statewide elected officials, who happen to be mostly Republicans.

Now these are my views, it does not make them right and it does not make them wrong, just my point of view.

Lee Walter Jenkins