Unsurprising Story


Hattip to Matt Archbold at Creative Minority Report.  A nun is allegedly involved in vote fraud in Ohio:


A nun has been implicated by prosecutors in a troubling case of election fraud, according to local news reports.
It’s been alleged by Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters that Sister Marge Kloos of the Sisters of Charity mailed in an absentee ballot of Sister Rose Marie Hewitt who had reportedly passed away on October 4th of last year.
Deters sent a letter to the Board of Elections that said:

Re: Deceased Voter Rose Marie Hewitt.
Please be advised that sufficient information has been developed with respect to the above mentioned matter to determine that there is probable cause to believe that criminal activity has occurred.

Hewitt had reportedly lived with Sister Marge Kloos, the dean of arts at the College of Mount Saint Joseph. Prosecutor Joe Deters told WCPO that Kloos is being investigated as the person who sent in Hewitt’s ballot.
Sisters of Charity president Sister Joan Cook told reporters that they are cooperating with police.
Sister Marge Kloos has shown strong position on politics in the past. In fact in 2011, Sister Marge Kloos signed a letter reprimanding House Speaker John Boehner for siding with the “reckless” Tea Party. The letter read:

This is a stark choice between responsible leadership that serves the common good and narrow ideology that makes tax cuts for the wealthy our most sacred national priority. As Ohio Catholics, we urge you to reject the reckless path urged by many Tea Party leaders in Congress. Now is the time to seek a compromise that reflects the Catholic values of solidarity with the most vulnerable and prudential judgment.

Go here to Creative Minority Report to read the rest.  Radical nun, vote fraud?  Nope, I don’t find that very surprising especially when we read here that Sister Marge is from Chicago where voting the dead is a venerable Democrat tradition.



More to explorer


  1. I share the values of economic conservatives and attended Tea Party events in Pennsylvania. I find the letter quote above to be unremarkable.

    It contains fairly moderate language of disagreement. Sending a letter to government officials is even a laudable activity. We’d be a lot better off if more Americans did.

    In and of itself, the quote doesn’t further your argument.

    I’d stick to the voter fraud. That is a despicable behavior whereas disagreeing with us is not.

  2. She could sign a thousand letters for all I care G-Veg. I long ago ceased to care what nuns and sisters of heterodox orders do. The letter was cited in the story purely to indicate the political passion that might motivate her.

  3. It contains fairly moderate language of disagreement.

    Moderate it may be. It is also festooned with cliches. I would expect better from a college dean (and expect that women religious would not be all that concerned with the minutiae of legislative maneuvering – leave it to the bores on Washington Week in Review, sister).

  4. i’m sorry for being a grammar nazi but there’s really nothing wrong with using “Democratic” as an adjective as opposed to “Democrat”

  5. I am amused by the Democrat obsession with whether or not the word “Democratic” is used rather than “Democrat”. We routinely see Catholic Democrats get far more exercised over the fact that someone referenced their party as the “Democrat Party” than they do by the fact that their Democrat Party favors abortion on demand, same-sex “marriage”, and the overall secularization of our society.

  6. lol ok so it wasn’t the best example. (not a Dem BTW)

    Jay Anderson: no that’s fine, it’s just that “Democrat Party’s” used to disparage Democrats as if there isn’t continuity between the “good” old Dems and the new ones. but Democrats have believed in a lot of the stuff they’re criticized for today for a long time — universal healthcare, Keynesian stimulus — and the stuff you mentioned is a logical consequence of pure-form egalitarian liberalism, detached from any traditional moral constraints.

    plus i don’t get the point of it? best i can tell it’s also partially used to say Democratic=/=democratic. but of course that’s what the capitals are for.

  7. i know i’m pedantic on this point. but for instance people refer to the People’s Republic of China without endorsing it/pretending it’s an actual people’s republic. the Democratic Party as currently constituted is a logical endpoint of liberalism detached from any traditional morality so i got no prob referring to their name regularly

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: