Top Navigation  
U.S. Flag waving
Office Hours Momday - Friday  8 am - 5 pm Pacific 1-800-835-2418
Facebook   YouTube   Twitter
 Home Page
 Current Issue
 Article Index
 Author Index
 Previous Issues

 Kindle Subscriptions
 Kindle Publications
 Back Issues
 Discount Books
 All Specials
 Classified Ad

 Web Site Ads
 Magazine Ads

 BHM Forum
 Contact Us/
 Change of Address

Forum / Chat
 Forum/Chat Info
 Lost Password
 Write For BHM

Link to BHM

etc. - a little of this, a little of that - by Oliver Del Signore

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

Saturday, August 4th, 2012

You might think the Commander in Chief of a nation’s military would want to make it as easy as possible for the troops he commands to vote. You might think that, but in the case of Our Dear Leader, you’d be wrong.

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting
by Mike Flynn

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 it’s 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. 

If anyone proposes legislation to combat voter fraud, Democrats will loudly scream that the proposal could “disenfranchise” some voter, somewhere. We must ensure, they argue, that voting is easy and accessible to every single voter. Every voter, that is, except the men and women of our military. 

Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with prejudice.

How telling is it of the Obama and Democratic mindset that they would attempt something like this? Don’t they understand how bad this makes them look? Don’t they care? Or are they so desperate at this point that they will do absolutely anything to minimize the number of votes against The Smartest President Ever® when November rolls around?

I may not agree with some things the military is used for, but I absolutely agree that every service man and woman should be able to cast a vote for the person he or she wants to lead them.

Were I in charge, I’d make sure ballots were distributed to every service member at least two months in advance, collected soon after, and transported to everywhere they will be counted no later than a week before the election. I might even make it a serious felony to mess with such ballots, just to forestall anyone deciding to “forget” or lose” the ballots in states where they might well make a difference in the outcome of an election.

Obama, his campaign, the DNC, and the Ohio Democratic Party should be mightily ashamed of themselves. But then, shame is not something anyone ever associates with any of them.

What do you think?

Much ado about nothing or an open attempt to disenfranchise voters not likely to vote “the right way”?

16 Responses to “Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting”

  1. Robert Says:

    It’s very simple to answer this issue, military members won’t be voting for Obummer, you give the vote to those that will vote for you, the illegals that collect welfare!
    The main stream media never ceases to amaze me with how quickly they will turn a blind eye to an injustice like this but will latch onto the issues of illegal aliens, homosexuals, or OWS idiots but ignore those that risk their lives in far away lands to protect the home front.
    Obummer must be voted out!

  2. Cy Phorg Says:

    For a more honest view of the issue, data included, may I recommend reading the following?

  3. Vince Says:

    These actions are disgusting. This is the same crap they’ve been pulling with active duty military overseas for a while. Their goal is to disenfranchise our military and segregate them from the rest of society so they don’t know what’s going on here and have no input.

  4. mike Says:

    “I think it’s 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. ”

    No, military personnel don’t have ‘MORE’ right to vote than the rest of us.

    They have the same ‘right to vote’ as any other citizen of this country.

    I consider the implication that their service and sacrifice is ‘the’ reason that ensures the rest of us have the right to vote is incomplete and bordering on patronization of the military.

    Protection of constitutionally protected rights requires constant vigilance and actions from all citizens to maintain those rights. Not just the military.

    Unfortunately, it appears that many abdicate, ignore or expect others to shoulder that responsibilty.

    And I think that deployment considerations, active/inactive status and other factors unique to the situation should be resolved in a manner that would provide the necessary opportunity for military personnel to exercise their opportunity to vote.


  5. Chip Johnson+ Says:

    Four years of obamanation is quite enough. And the military vote could make the difference…therefore, the DNC’s clumsy disenfranchisement attempt.

  6. Jeffrey C. Anthony Says:

    Just read other articles about this as well… i cant see how opening voting up for more than one day to EVERYONE is blocking the military vote? Fact check please!

  7. whitehairedidiot Says:

    Man I’m tired of saying this:

    Obama and his devoted acolytes are insane. He really isn’t doing himself any favors by persisting in the same delusion about his omnipotence.

    Democrats are running away; like rats on a sinking ship.

  8. Oliver Says:

    i cant see how opening voting up for more than one day to EVERYONE is blocking the military vote?

    Military tend not to have hours to stand in lines. By opening those three days to everyone, which certainly sounds fair and reasonable, it could actually dissuade military members who have limited time to go vote.

    I can’t imagine the Obama camp would have gotten involved if they did not see some benefit and the only reasonable benefit I see is reducing the number of military votes, votes which tend to go against him.

  9. Leonard Barnes Says:

    If and when the SHTF it might behoove Mr Obama to have friends in the military. If he does not believe this he should have consulted with Gaddafi, Mubarak and/or Assad. Buy more of the four best precious metals, gold, silver, brass and lead!
    I don’t believe or want any situation in our Country to ever come to that but it might be the issue of last resort. Can we handle four more years?

  10. Tony Says:

    The right to vote is one of the rights that was to be regulated by the individual states. With the passage of a couple of amendments it is illegal to stop someone from voting based on religion race or gender. That I think is as it should be. However some folks still want to disenfranchise our military servicemen and women because they tend to vote republican.

    Maybe we should restrict voting to only be allowed to people who pay a net tax bill. Maybe then we could get spending under control. Maybe then we could get Congress back under control. Why should someone get to vote for a raise in their government benefits?

    There is nothing in the Contitution that would allow the governement to take your property just to give it to another man. The mental gymnastics of criminally derelict judges not withstanding, I would say that we are on the road to ruin and pressing the gas to the floor.

  11. kevin m Says:

    This disabled Marine vet agrees with….MIKE!

  12. mike Says:

    kevin m,

    Thank you.



  13. Hanza Says:

    I spent 20 years active duty in the Navy and absentee voted in Oregon during that time. It was so long ago that I don’t remember if I got every ballot in and returned in time to be counted.

    In the 2000 general election there were hordes of Dem lawyers in Florida with a 4 page list of ways to invalidate military votes.

    After that 2000 mess there was a federal voting office set up to ensure that all the states had procedures to get ballots to service personnel in time for them to vote and return the ballots. Not sure how that has worked out.

    I do remember reading that due to a number of states laws regarding absentee voting that were set up for people going to be on vacation, etc., but didn’t allow enough time for the military vote. That is why that military voting office was set up to try and make sure the military had adaquate time.

  14. alaskashane Says:

    this is an absolute lie, started by the republicans. all quotes from the obama side are taken out of context to further that lie. the fact that you reprinted it without checking into it is just as bad. what they are suing for is to block a law that would end the 3 day in person early voting in the civilian sector. the military is mentioned in this law as excempt from it. that is it. if the law is blocked, no military is affected. if the law is not blocked, no military is affected. sometimes i really cant believe the things you like to put forth as truth.

  15. Brian H. Says:

    You got this one wrong, way wrong. You know, if I posted something that was erroneous I’d say I was sorry and make a retraction. What say ye? Still propagating something you know that isn’t true? I don’t get it. Destroys your credibility.

  16. Oliver Says:

    Brian H., as I said in a reply to a previous comment, “I can’t imagine the Obama camp would have gotten involved if they did not see some benefit and the only reasonable benefit I see is reducing the number of military votes, votes which tend to go against him.”

    No politician does anything in an election year unless they believe it will help them get reelected. Especially Our Dear Leader and his regime. Opening the polls to everyone for those three days sounds quite noble. It may also dissuade busy soldiers and others from going, since they may well have to wait in line with non-military and may not have the time.

    Or maybe I’m seeing a boogeyman where none exists. But I don’t think so. Military groups oppose Obama campaign lawsuit.

    On the other side of the issue, I have no doubt the Republican majority who passed the election changes did so because they, too, saw a benefit for themselves. The difference is, they were not publicly “picking on” the military with a lawsuit.

    I stand by my contention that Obama and his people should be ashamed of themselves, if not for their intentions, then for not being smart enough to realize how it would play in the court of public opinion, which is about as good as was his bowing to some middle eastern king.

    American men bow to no one…except maybe their wives after really, really messing up.



Copyright © 1998 - Present by Backwoods Home Magazine. All Rights Reserved.