Obama suing to keep military votes FUBAR. FUBO you communist POFS!!!

[Soul Crusher]

http://www.dailypaul.com/247338/unbelievable-obama-campaign-sues-to-restrict-military-voting

 


Screw you every Obama ghetto thug. 

[Soul Crusher]

Skip to comments.

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting
Breitbart ^ | 8/2/12 | Mike Flynn
Posted on August 2, 2012 10:04:07 PM EDT by Nachum

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.

The National Defense Committee reports:

[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.

I think its unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

[Shockwave]

What the hell...... they have extra days in case they are going on deployment or otherwise cannot reach the voting booth... Why the hell are they even making a big deal out of this? Are they worried that those 3 days could spell defeat? I mean seriously, wtf?

[Soul Crusher]

http://times247.com/articles/obama-camp-sues-to-restrict-oh-military-voting





Good job obamabots.  

[Soul Crusher]

What the hell...... they have extra days in case they are going on deployment or otherwise cannot reach the voting booth... Why the hell are they even making a big deal out of this? Are they worried that those 3 days could spell defeat? I mean seriously, wtf?

Are you surprised? 

[Soul Crusher]

Bump.

[Hugo Chavez]

agree, this is a horrible lawsuit.  But don't think for a second I haven't watched crap from republicans go on with the intention of nixing as many votes as they can from dems.  That's an issue here.  Both sides are flinging shit trying to edge the other out.  So it's not exactly fair to say, oooh look what these guys are doing... This little war goes both ways and I for one and sick of it.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

This is just some local mumble jumble and the suit has nothing to do with soldier stationed overseas.....its little to do about nothing

[Straw Man]

if they need more time then let them start voting earlier
this law is not arbitrary - it's designed to give Repubs time AFTER THE RESULTS ARE IN to scramble and try to get more votes

You know old people have a hard time getting to vote too and so do blue collar people who work two and three jobs

maybe we should carve out some extra time after election day for them too

we should also give some extra time for anyone who is sick on election day ...with a valid note from a doctor of course

[Dos Equis]

Skip to comments.

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting
Breitbart ^ | 8/2/12 | Mike Flynn
Posted on August 2, 2012 10:04:07 PM EDT by Nachum

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.

The National Defense Committee reports:

[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.

I think its unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Not surprised. 

[Straw Man]

the law serves no purpose except to give Repubs a chance to rig an election after the fact

[Fury]

the law serves no purpose except to give Repubs a chance to rig an election after the fact

Funny response given the leftist reaction to voter ID laws.

[Straw Man]

Funny response given the leftist reaction to voter ID laws.

No comparison
The military is not being disenfranchised and no group should have the opportunity too change the results of an election by being able to vote for three days after the polls close
If they truly need more time then let them start three days sooner but they have no right to a unique ability to influence an election by being able to vote for three days longer than anyone else

[240 is Back]

Let people vote.  

Obama is wrong to cut their window of voting like this.

Just as repubs (see pennsylvania and FL) are wrong to try to restrict who can vote.  
and OH repubs slashing funding to overrun polling stations where ppl waited 10 hours to vote last time.

There is fraud, but repubs admit in Penn they have zero examples of any in relation to the law they want.

Both sides are trying to limit those who will vote against them - and its wrong on both.

[240 is Back]

yeah, this one is weird too.  They can vote for what, 2 months before the election using absentee balloting?  They're mad they cannot vote/mail it in AFTER we know the national results?

SHit, i'm all for giving them 6 months BEFORE the election to vote.  But that shit needs to be in the mail before polls close for everyone else.  Weak issue here - I dont want ANY americans being able to influence an election knowing the results already.  Opens WAY too many opportunities for shadieness - IE, Obama sending dem operatives to troops based in OH and FL and paying them to vote one way, after the election, once they know where they lost.


But he wouldn't do that, right fellahs?

[Straw Man]

Let people vote.  

Obama is wrong to cut their window of voting like this.

Just as repubs (see pennsylvania and FL) are wrong to try to restrict who can vote.  
and OH repubs slashing funding to overrun polling stations where ppl waited 10 hours to vote last time.

There is fraud, but repubs admit in Penn they have zero examples of any in relation to the law they want.

Both sides are trying to limit those who will vote against them - and its wrong on both.

The Dems are not trying to do anything to limit those who will vote against them

No single group in this country should have the right to continue voting for 3 days after the polls close

This gives a single group the unique ability to alter an election after the fact by continuing to vote when no one else can do so

[240 is Back]

The Dems are not trying to do anything to limit those who will vote against them

No single group in this country should have the right to continue voting for 3 days after the polls close

This gives a single group the unique ability to alter an election after the fact by continuing to vote when no one else can do so

youre right.  its crazy to think ANYONE could decide their vote after polls have closed - particularly when early voting is so easily available.

This sounds like far-right whining.  Nobody is saying they can't vote.  They're saying you can't vote after the election is over.  Common sense.

[Straw Man]

youre right.  its crazy to think ANYONE could decide their vote after polls have closed - particularly when early voting is so easily available.

This sounds like far-right whining.  Nobody is saying they can't vote.  They're saying you can't vote after the election is over.  Common sense.

total common sense and this law was a blatant attempt to give an unfair advantage for one group to influence the outcome of an election

[Soul Crusher]

Sometimes the overseas mail is not delivered in time you fools.   

[240 is Back]

Sometimes the overseas mail is not delivered in time you fools.   

Please tell us this is all about postmarking, and that no person would be able to choose a candidate after the results are announced from USA?  Please tell us that