I don't know if I'd agree with the briar patch analogy. I know more than a few dem/liberals that champion "the downtrodden" but would never in actuality physically associate with them. And when they do it has an unfortunate tendency to open their eyes to the reality of liberal social policy
As to felons being restored their rights, if its written into the law that they can (it varies state to state) then I personally have no problem with them exercising their rights.
I think you're right on with that statement. But somehow I doubt this little ACLU project will involve any actual interaction with ex-cons. I would guess the "community service" probably involves writing letters to politicians, doing legal research, etc. There's not much point in working with the felons themselves; they currently don't have any political power and I doubt any of them needs the ACLU to convince them they should get the right to vote.
As to felons being restored their rights, if its written into the law that they can (it varies state to state) then I personally have no problem with them exercising their rights.
Actually, I agree with you here too. I think if a felon is deemed ready to return to society, he or she should have all the rights of any other citizen, unless a judge orders specific conditions of parole related to the crime (e.g. if someone were convicted of vote fraud, paroling them on the condition they not vote is reasonable). But I don't really think the ACLU or this particular criminal have any such principled beliefs regarding the restoration of rights upon completion of punishment; I think they just want to create a new pool of voters who are overwhelmingly likely to vote Democratic.