OBAMA CAMPAIGN SUES TO RESTRICT MILITARY VOTING

[The Annoyed Man]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ary-voting
OBAMA CAMPAIGN SUES TO RESTRICT MILITARY VOTING
by MIKE FLYNN 2 Aug 2012

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.

To democrats serving in the military: Are you still happy with your CIC?

To democrats not serving in the military: you complete frauds and hypocrites.

To republicans, military or not: VOTE!!! Get rid of those traitors and put a permanent dent in their ability to ever abuse your trust again.

[Purplehood]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ary-voting
OBAMA CAMPAIGN SUES TO RESTRICT MILITARY VOTING
by MIKE FLYNN 2 Aug 2012

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.

To democrats serving in the military: Are you still happy with your CIC?

To democrats not serving in the military: you complete frauds and hypocrites.

To republicans, military or not: VOTE!!! Get rid of those traitors and put a permanent dent in their ability to ever abuse your trust again.

TAM,

For once I actually disagree with you. There is no permanent fix short of the coming of the Four Horsemen.

[Heartland Patriot]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ary-voting
OBAMA CAMPAIGN SUES TO RESTRICT MILITARY VOTING
by MIKE FLYNN 2 Aug 2012

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.

To democrats serving in the military: Are you still happy with your CIC?

To democrats not serving in the military: you complete frauds and hypocrites.

To republicans, military or not: VOTE!!! Get rid of those traitors and put a permanent dent in their ability to ever abuse your trust again.

TAM,

For once I actually disagree with you. There is no permanent fix short of the coming of the Four Horsemen.

Maybe you are right in that it wouldn't be permanent...but I sure would love to see those dirty 'rats get sent packing this fall...

[AEA]

Are you surprised? I'm not.

Seems I recall he did something similar (not a suit, but some shenanigans to suppress Military votes) in the 2009 election.

What is amazing to me is that he is "all in". He is blatantly showing his true colors! He HAS TO GO!

[VMI77]

It may sound nefarious, but could just be that the Obama administration is concerned because the military requires members to have photo ID's, and that is just so patently unfair to illegal immigrants. Fairness means requiring that US citizens have photo IDs to exercise their God-given Constitutional Rights, but not requiring illegal immigrants to have ID to vote for the Marxist in Chief. Anything else would be racist.

[Oldgringo]

I can maybe understand why one would vote for this racist fraud once but; for the life of me, I can not understand any thinking American adult voting for him a second time.

[powerboatr]

It may sound nefarious, but could just be that the Obama administration is concerned because the military requires members to have photo ID's, and that is just so patently unfair to illegal immigrants. Fairness means requiring that US citizens have photo IDs to exercise their God-given Constitutional Rights, but not requiring illegal immigrants to have ID to vote for the Marxist in Chief. Anything else would be racist.

Agreed
even Gore tried to dis-allow military votes when he conceded then didn't then ....well we all know the rest


i was deployed on the USS Saratoga during the clinton/bush election cycle......we all voted on-board absentee. Then only to find out our votes were not going to make it back in time. Because a plane crashed........so roughly 4500 votes never made it

[RottenApple]

I can maybe understand why one would vote for this racist fraud once but; for the life of me, I can not understand any thinking American adult voting for him a second time.

This immediately disqualifies 99% of all liberals and 100% of all Democrats.

[anygunanywhere]

I can maybe understand why one would vote for this racist fraud once but; for the life of me, I can not understand any thinking American adult voting for him a second time.

The key word in your statemnt is "thinking", OG.

I doubt seriously if anyone voting for maobama is using any gray matter.

Anygunanywhere

[longtooth]

You can be sure they picked the softest, most socialist judge they could find. If this gets past the 1st court he will disenfranchize the entire Military before Nov.

[stealthfightrf17]

For someone who sayes he supports our military, he sure has an odd way of showing it. Sometimes I wonder if he is trying to turn America against itself.

[2firfun50]

"Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty."

The public has to appear in person to vote early, right? They get until the Friday before the election, right? To vote early, military personnel must be stationed in Ohio and appear in person, right? So why should they get 3 extra days? The local taxpayers will have to foot the bill for keeping the polling places open over the weekend and on the Monday before the Tuesday election.

When I was in the Army, our commanders went to great lengths to ensure everyone was provided every reasonable opportunity to vote. I just don't get it.

[JCole]

The plaintiffs don't appear to be attempting to restrict military voting, but rather, extend early voting to everyone else to match military early voting deadline.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/military.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

edit for more information:

First paragraph of the complaint:
"Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit to restore in-person early voting for all Ohioans during
the three days prior to Election Day – a right exercised by an estimated 93,000
Ohioans in the last presidential election. Ohio election law, as currently enacted by
the State of Ohio and administered by Defendant Ohio Secretary of State, arbitrarily
eliminates early voting during the three days prior to Election Day for most Ohio
voters, a right previously available to all Ohio voters."

[3dfxMM]

This really only affects about 7,700 voters. There are only about 51,000 military members in Ohio, and about 43,000 are not active duty. I see no reason to hold all polling places in Ohio open for an extra 3 days to accommodate 7,700 voters, many of whom may not need the extra time anyway. Heck, most of those 7,700 are USAF members. How hard can it be to get a few hours off from the USAF? :)

That last part was purely a joke from someone whose son was in the Army and frequently away from home for either training or deployments. He never missed a vote.

[The Annoyed Man]

Sometimes I wonder if he is trying to turn America against itself.

Of COURSE that's why he is doing it. He's the Race Baiter in Chief, the Class Warrior in Chief, the Redistributor in Chief, the Illegal Alien in Chief. He pretty much represents everybody who wants to be part of a grievance group, but the rest of us (who PAY for his insanity) can all go burn in hades, and he couldn't be happier.

Only thing is....when there's no more small business people left to pay his taxes, when there's no more middle class left to support his un-universal healthcare, when there's no big business and millionaires left to pay for the highways and the bridges and the Corps of Engineers......THEN he's going to have to figure which grievance group to blame for his problem, because he won't have any boogymen left to blame it all on. Bush has been out of office for how long?