I couldn't believe that there are some individuals/guardians who believe they should take the disabled individual to vote as they don't understand what they are doing. Well, understand it or not, there usually is a person there at the voting booths that can help answer questions. Depending upon the disabled individuals capabilities they could make accommodations and read to the person who they can vote for. If we start indicating that we no longer want those who are developmentally disabled, mentally challenged or the mentally ill that they cannot go vote alone or if they have a guardian they must go with them, then we have gone back in time to the thinking that the disabled are incapable of making decisions. Being mentally ill, challenged or developmentally disabled should not have anything to do with who takes the individual to vote. Did the guardian actually think she could make the disabled individual vote the way she wanted - I believe she did as the article indicated that she voted for McCain and the disabled person voted for Obama. How does another person find out who voted for who without the person telling them how they voted. As I'm mentally ill and if someone told me, as I have been under a court order indicating that I'm seriously mentally impaired that I can't vote without someone helping me, I would annunciate that I am just as capable as any. I may have a mental illness, but it won't change how I vote. In fact, my theory on voting is vote for the person who does the least amount of bickering. You might ask why? Because they are more likely to get along with people, which as in any political office the person should get along with people. Stop and think about it, if the elected individual constantly is bickering or arguing with others, what will they accomplish while in office? Probably not much if all they do is complain, argue and bicker. Sure, I suppose I should consider the issues as the major thing to vote for them, but in reality, no matter what office, generally the majority rules. The Governor and President have the power to veto. I don't strictly vote for the party to which I belong to as sometimes I just don't think they are right for the job. I like to think "out of the box" and vote for those who think of the people and may have some uniqueness to them. If they can't be different, but go along or do what other candidates do, what does that make them. As for the disabled, it is our right as US Citizens to vote and not just the disabled should take advantage of that, but every one who is old enough to vote. The disabled voters are overlooked a lot and if all those with disabilities formed their own group maybe candidates would think more strongly about the disabled and what can be done to help. However, the point of all this is the disabled of any kind (mentally, physically, developmentally, etc.) have the right to vote by themselves, even if there is a guardian involved. Why should the disabled person be subjected to the guardians point of view. We all have our own views and should be able to express them by how we vote, even if that means writing someone in.