RevCarter: MmmmBacon: Lies, rumor and innuendo are all the GOP have left to fight Obama.

Innuendo? What's that, some kind of Italian suppository?

In-your-endo.

HighOnCraic: Seriously though, if Obama wins the lawsuit, soldiers get to vote early; if Obama loses the lawsuit, soldiers still get to vote early. How is this being spun as "Obama is screwing over the soldiers?"

Because some people don't give a shiat about facts. All they want to know is how to hate the person they already hate more. Lying to themselves and to others is easier than challenging their preconceived notions about the topic... so that's what they do.

JohnnyC: HighOnCraic: Seriously though, if Obama wins the lawsuit, soldiers get to vote early; if Obama loses the lawsuit, soldiers still get to vote early. How is this being spun as "Obama is screwing over the soldiers?"

Because some people don't give a shiat about facts. All they want to know is how to hate the person they already hate more. Lying to themselves and to others is easier than challenging their preconceived notions about the topic... so that's what they do.

Ya know, the sort of people who hear "The President is trying to curtail the voting rights of Military Members" during an election cycle and thing "Hmm, seems legit."

pants made out of guns: JohnnyC: HighOnCraic: Seriously though, if Obama wins the lawsuit, soldiers get to vote early; if Obama loses the lawsuit, soldiers still get to vote early. How is this being spun as "Obama is screwing over the soldiers?"

Because some people don't give a shiat about facts. All they want to know is how to hate the person they already hate more. Lying to themselves and to others is easier than challenging their preconceived notions about the topic... so that's what they do.

Ya know, the sort of people who hear "The President is trying to curtail the voting rights of Military Members" during an election cycle and thing "Hmm, seems legit."

Most likely they're among the common clay of the old West...

/What's that old line? "A lie travels around the world before the truth remembers it's log-in name and password." Or something...

Cataholic: cameroncrazy1984: Cataholic: They are. Mainly because none of them get ordered to leave the country on a day or two notice. They also don't go to jail if they fail to show up for work.

Your position is that a military member can go to jail if they go vote instead of showing up at their base of operations?

That's hilarious!

Go enlist.

Get orders.

Don't show up when you are supposed to.

Tell them it was because you were voting.

Please come back and tell us how that worked out for you after your Article 86 proceedings.

Question: why would you early vote without telling anyone? That has never happened in the history of ever AND that is why the early voting exists.

That's the funny part of this entire thing. The military will still be able to early-vote. Why would you want to take that away from civilians?

Flying Lasagna Monster: During a recent press conference, Romney was asked a question about this...if he was against "Obama trying to restrict voting in Ohio by members of the military". It seemed like a planted question when I was watching the press conference on CSPAN. Here's the link, it's 10:50 in - Click on the "Mitt Romney News Conference" link on the right under Video Playlist.

yeah who asked that question? Fox news?

JohnnyC: HighOnCraic: Seriously though, if Obama wins the lawsuit, soldiers get to vote early; if Obama loses the lawsuit, soldiers still get to vote early. How is this being spun as "Obama is screwing over the soldiers?"

Because some people don't give a shiat about facts. All they want to know is how to hate the person they already hate more. Lying to themselves and to others is easier than challenging their preconceived notions about the topic... so that's what they do.

It is just amazing. This lie popped up yesterday on another board I frequent and the Right Wingers were up in arms. And just like here, even though people kept posting the facts of what the lawsuit was about and what it was seeking to do and even explaining it to them, they just kept repeating the lie. It was like they were literally saying "I don't care about facts, I'm going to believe the lie."

FTA: The campaign, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party contend the law unfairly ends in-person voting for most Ohioans three days earlier than it does for military and overseas voters.

Attorneys for the Democrats argue such "disparate" treatment is unconstitutional, and all voters should be able to vote on those days.

For all you keyboard commandos who say the military deserves special rights, what about the oversea voters who, under the current law, are also allowed three extra days to vote?

What's so wrong with letting all voters have the ability to vote on those three extra days?

Also FTA: As noted above, the relief sought by the plaintiffs is not to "restrict military voting" in any way but to afford civilians the same voting opportunities as military personnel, opportunities which civilians were previously allowed prior to a recent change in state law.

The headline should be: "Ohio Legislature restricts early voting rights for civilians."

If Obama could prevent the military from voting (they overwhelmingly vote Republican), then he would be happy. This Prez is despicable.

I had a big long argument with a friend of mine that I had considered a somewhat intelligent conservative. He swore up and down that the whole crux of this was to take away early voting time for the military, even after I posted a link to the actual lawsuit document.

Right wingers, Breitbart pimped you again..you stupid farks.

tony41454: If Obama could prevent the military from voting (they overwhelmingly vote Republican), then he would be happy. This Prez is despicable.

trollingusedtomeansomething.jpg

Funny how early voting for civilians in Ohio wasn't a problem until..

A) The black guy won

B) Republicans took over the state legislature

C) Several Republican dominated states all decided to enact new voter laws all crafted by the same Conservative legislation writing agency (ALEC)

Hmm.....

zappaisfrank: Funny how early voting for civilians in Ohio wasn't a problem until..

A) The black guy won

B) Republicans took over the state legislature

C) Several Republican dominated states all decided to enact new voter laws all crafted by the same Conservative legislation writing agency (ALEC)

Hmm.....

i'm w/ ya, just next time say "half black" and the trolls won't go after ya....


cuz that's what "it" is....................

Eh ! Maybe not so untrue after all !

I did some further research. The suit is aimed at extending the period for everyone. So on the surface the report is not true, but it is probably not feasible for Ohio or other states to make special accommodations for everyone. Therefore, it does work against the military, and veterans groups are getting involved.
For at least one election it could work against the Military as well as other early voters !

zappaisfrank: Funny how early voting/voter ID for civilians or anyone else in Ohio wasn't a problem until..

A) The black guy won

B) Republicans took over the state legislature

C) Several Republican dominated states all decided to enact new voter laws all crafted by the same Conservative legislation writing agency (ALEC)

Hmm.....

The republicans:
- can't win with their ideas
- can't win with their platform
- can't win with their proposals
- no one likes them
- and their candidates suck ass

All they have left is to cheat.


/FIX'D

larry00: Eh ! Maybe not so untrue after all !

I did some further research. The suit is aimed at extending the period for everyone. So on the surface the report is not true, but it is probably not feasible for Ohio or other states to make special accommodations for everyone. Therefore, it does work against the military, and veterans groups are getting involved.
For at least one election it could work against the Military as well as other early voters !

WTF?

Early voting in Ohio is not a "special accommodation", it's the way things were until the republicans decided to f*ck with it. They specifically wanted to change the rules so that no one but military got to vote as early as they did last time.
Early voting is actually more beneficial to the process, because not only do more people get to vote, but the polling places aren't swamped with people standing in line for 9 or 10 hours just to perform their civic duty. Better to have a a dozen or two people come by per hour over 4 or 5 days than 1000 people all showing up at 3 pm on election day after work.

Of course the republicans want as few people voting as possible, especially minorities (who may come in organized groups like churches), the poor (who may have less time to vote owing to inflexible work schedules or difficulty with transportation) and the young - especially college students (whose schedules may preclude them from voting on that day - Nov 6th is around midterms), all of whom vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

IMO, voting should be open the first full week of November, including the weekend, and no results should be either counted or reported by ANYONE until the last polling place closes in Hawaii on the last day.

larry00: Eh ! Maybe not so untrue after all !

I did some further research. The suit is aimed at extending the period for everyone. So on the surface the report is not true, but it is probably not feasible for Ohio or other states to make special accommodations for everyone. Therefore, it does work against the military, and veterans groups are getting involved.
For at least one election it could work against the Military as well as other early voters !

It's so "unfeasible" for Ohio to make special accommodations for early voting that they actually had been making special accommodations for early voting since 2005. They only recently changed the law.

Since 2005, Ohio has had in person early-voting in the three days prior to the election. This year, however, the Republican legislature in Ohio eliminated early voting during this period, except for members of the military. The Obama lawsuit is attempting to restore voting rights for all Ohioans, not restrict them for the military or any other group.

Link

Fox News is now reporting this as Obama assaulting the military. And some of my idiot coworkers are throwing it on their Facebook feeds.

clkeagle: Fox News is now reporting this as Obama assaulting the military. And some of my idiot coworkers are throwing it on their Facebook feeds.

I keep asking people how this is attacking the military and the only answers I have gotten back are the same, he is disenfranchising the military or he is taking away military voting rights. When I point out the facts of what is going on and ask them to elaborate on their answer they either just repeated again that he is taking away military voting rights or they call me a liar. It is said when you can't even explain your argument.

ongbok: I keep asking people how this is attacking the military and the only answers I have gotten back are the same, he is disenfranchising the military or he is taking away military voting rights. When I point out the facts of what is going on and ask them to elaborate on their answer they either just repeated again that he is taking away military voting rights or they call me a liar. It is said when you can't even explain your argument.

The self imposed idiocy will only increase until it reaches a fever pitch on November 4th. And then we get to deal with their lamenting when they lose.

ongbok: clkeagle: Fox News is now reporting this as Obama assaulting the military. And some of my idiot coworkers are throwing it on their Facebook feeds.

I keep asking people how this is attacking the military and the only answers I have gotten back are the same, he is disenfranchising the military or he is taking away military voting rights. When I point out the facts of what is going on and ask them to elaborate on their answer they either just repeated again that he is taking away military voting rights or they call me a liar. It is said when you can't even explain your argument.

If the fact that Obama hasn't said anything about taking everyone's guns away is actually proof that he really IS taking everyone's guns away, then I guess the fact that he's not restricting the rights of military voters really is proof that he's restricting the rights of military voters. It's just the way that naive, useless without a teleprompter, empty-suit of a president learned how to do things back when he was playing hardball, cutthroat, in-your-face politics in Chicago. Or something.

HighOnCraic: If the fact that Obama hasn't said anything about taking everyone's guns away is actually proof that he really IS taking everyone's guns away, then I guess the fact that he's not restricting the rights of military voters really is proof that he's restricting the rights of military voters. It's just the way that naive, useless without a teleprompter, empty-suit of a president learned how to do things back when he was playing hardball, cutthroat, in-your-face politics in Chicago. Or something.

I think what we're seeing is these mouth-breathers just sitting on the edges of their seats, waiting for that moment where they can say "ah-GOTCHA" to Obama.

And they can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that their "gotcha" moment simply isn't going to happen from a center-right president. Regardless of his declared party, skin color, state of birth, or college grades.

/"Governor" Romney in 2003-2007 was probably more left of "President" Obama
//Wonder if he's related to "Candidate" Romney of 2012?

clkeagle: Fox News is now reporting this as Obama assaulting the military. And some of my idiot coworkers are throwing it on their Facebook feeds.

Respond back with this link..it goes to the actual lawsuit paperwork, wherein the very first sentence reads..

"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."

Link

Be prepared because Republican DERP will surely follow...they don't like it when facts get in the way of their lies.

JohnnyC: ongbok: I keep asking people how this is attacking the military and the only answers I have gotten back are the same, he is disenfranchising the military or he is taking away military voting rights. When I point out the facts of what is going on and ask them to elaborate on their answer they either just repeated again that he is taking away military voting rights or they call me a liar. It is said when you can't even explain your argument.

The self imposed idiocy will only increase until it reaches a fever pitch on November 4th. And then we get to deal with their lamenting when they lose.

It is even better. On another board that I frequent I am now being accused of hating the military by right wingers because I dared to ask how this lawsuit is disenfranchising the military or encroaching on their rights, which is what they are claiming it's going to do, when it is only asking for the early voting deadline for civilians living not living overseas to be returned to the Monday before the election like it has been since 2005. It is amazing how when these people are proven wrong or can't defend their argument they won't admit so, they will go straight to the you hate America card.

ongbok: JohnnyC: ongbok: I keep asking people how this is attacking the military and the only answers I have gotten back are the same, he is disenfranchising the military or he is taking away military voting rights. When I point out the facts of what is going on and ask them to elaborate on their answer they either just repeated again that he is taking away military voting rights or they call me a liar. It is said when you can't even explain your argument.

The self imposed idiocy will only increase until it reaches a fever pitch on November 4th. And then we get to deal with their lamenting when they lose.

It is even better. On another board that I frequent I am now being accused of hating the military by right wingers because I dared to ask how this lawsuit is disenfranchising the military or encroaching on their rights, which is what they are claiming it's going to do, when it is only asking for the early voting deadline for civilians living not living overseas to be returned to the Monday before the election like it has been since 2005. It is amazing how when these people are proven wrong or can't defend their argument they won't admit so, they will go straight to the you hate America card.

Republicans will never, ever admit to being wrong. Ever. They'll bob and weave, tap dance, obfuscate, name call, finger point, everything they have to do but will never admit they are wrong, nor will they ever admit anybody Republican ever did anything wrong, either. Talking to them is like trying to nail jello to the wall.

clkeagle: HighOnCraic: If the fact that Obama hasn't said anything about taking everyone's guns away is actually proof that he really IS taking everyone's guns away, then I guess the fact that he's not restricting the rights of military voters really is proof that he's restricting the rights of military voters. It's just the way that naive, useless without a teleprompter, empty-suit of a president learned how to do things back when he was playing hardball, cutthroat, in-your-face politics in Chicago. Or something.

I think what we're seeing is these mouth-breathers just sitting on the edges of their seats, waiting for that moment where they can say "ah-GOTCHA" to Obama.

And they can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that their "gotcha" moment simply isn't going to happen from a center-right president. Regardless of his declared party, skin color, state of birth, or college grades.

/"Governor" Romney in 2003-2007 was probably more left of "President" Obama
//Wonder if he's related to "Candidate" Romney of 2012?

"Candidate" Romney is "Governor" Romney's Mirror Universe counterpoint (he just shaved off his beard). I think he came over in the same transporter accident in which "Candidate McCain of 2000" was replaced by "Candidate McCain of 2008"

tony41454: If Obama could prevent the military from voting (they overwhelmingly vote Republican), then he would be happy. This Prez is despicable.



/from now on i'm reading all your posts in Daffy's voice

: HighOnCraic: - Seriously though, if Obama wins the lawsuit, soldiers get to vote early; if Obama loses the lawsuit, soldiers still get to vote early. How is this being spun as "Obama is screwing over the soldiers?"


This needs to be shouted from the rooftops, First thing I did this morning after hearing about this suit was to go to PACER and actually read the damned complaint for myself. It was exactly the opposite as the usual right-wing media and internet websites were portraying it (surprise, surprise). In no way is it asking the Court to LIMIT anyone's rights, it is actually asking the Court to EXPAND voting rights. It merely asks that all similarly situated citizens within the State of Ohio have the SAME rights and ask the courts to restore the status quo. (14th Amendment Right to Equal Protection) Besides, the law as written in Ohio does not just grant the military the right to use the early voting period, but many non-military types as well (non-residents, etc.)

Those pathetic pieces of shiat over at Fox Nation have disabled commends on this story so nobody can correct them!

Romney is actually spreading this rumor as the truth now. Amazing.

Captain_Sunshine: Mrbogey: Captain_Sunshine: Losing their job?

Nope. Not a good reason.

Early voting is not available in 18 states. If I am reading the reference below correctly, absentee voting/vote-by-mail is severely restricted in most of those states. Voting on election day is all they get. What other options, pray tell, would you offer to those who do have to make the choice between getting fired or voting, beyond your callous waveoff of their situation?

For your reference: Quick list of early voting regulations

Yeah, my state doesn't have early voting.

But you can request an absentee ballot if you're going to be out of the district during the entire time the polls are open. I work outside of the district and plan for a very long work day on election day. I get an absentee ballot.

It's my version of early voting.

Captain_Sunshine: There's more to the story. It gets worse.

In Ohio election law there is a provision allowing county-level control of early-access voting station hours. The county boards have two Democrats and two Republicans on each board, but any tie is broken by a vote from the Secretary of State in Ohio, who is currently a Republican. What's happening now is that the boards are meeting to vote on what hours the early-voting polling stations will be open. In several of the large cities, early voting stations will be open from 9AM to 5PM, when most people are working. In suburban counties the boards are voting to keep hours open later than normal business hours, weekends, and even Sundays.

So, not every citizen in Ohio is going to have equal access to early-voting opportunities, and the large cities in which there is a higher percentage of blue-collar, poor and/or minority voters, all of whom tend to vote more for Democratic candidates, are having their hours restricted, while the suburban counties with a history of voting for Republicans are extending their open hours for polling stations. The weekend before the national election sees a lot of early-voting efforts, including transportation for the elderly and transportation efforts centered around Sunday services; it's these last three days which Ohio Republicans are trying to hold open for military members, and close to everyone else. And recent history holds that military servicemembers tend to vote Republican.

It's voter selection in favor of one party. Anyone with a conscience should tell these Con jokers to piss up a rope. The Cons, of course, don't have a problem with it, seeing as how they're doing it in plain sight.

Link Here for a writeup of this. Same info as above, with a few counties called out for further research. I wrote it up from earlier reading; I didn't mean to re-write as much as I did.


Is it really that hard to vote?

jmr61

Have you conveniently forgotten that in 2004 and 2008 there were massive problems in Ohio with the polls being completely crowded with up to 6-8 hr waits to vote in the more populous areas (Cities), while those in the suburbs where in and out in no time. In fact, Judges had to issue orders on election day forcing the state to keep the polls open to at least allow everyone who was in line prior to the deadline to vote!

The whole notion of the early voting period is to prevent that type of gridlock on election day. The Republicans in the legislature want the gridlock, because it discourages those who live in the city (and more likely to vote "D") from even voting at all.

The problem is that they have created a two tiered system with different rules for similarly situated citizens, a big NO-NO when it comes to the 14th Amendment.

Is it an "e-rumor" if the Romney campaign itself is trumpeting the same out-and-out lie?

And of course, the alleged "liberal" media has headlines like "Romney: Obama lawsuit "undermines" military voters" or other absurd headlines that make it seem like Romney's claim might have even a shred of truth (hooray, false equivalence).

HMS_Blinkin: Romney is actually spreading this rumor as the truth now. Amazing.

It's almost like Republicans will believe anything negative about the president, regardless of truth.

by MIKE FLYNN 6 Aug 2012, 4:30 AM PDT 33 POST A COMMENT

On Thursday, I broke the news that the Obama campaign had sued the state of Ohio over a provision which gave members of the military three extra days for early voting. The media and the left predictably pushed back aggressively that the Obama lawsuit wasn't intended to target votes of the military. Rather than taking them at their word, my colleague, Joel Pollak documented the sad recent history of Democrats working to suppress the military vote. Today, we bring you evidence, from 2000, of Democrats actively succeeding in disqualifying military ballots.
In 2000, the nation's politics hung in the balance of a recount fight in Florida. George W. Bush had beaten Al Gore by a few hundred votes in the seminal swing state, and Democrats went all-in to reverse this result and hand the presidency to Gore. One of the lawyers hired by the Democrats during the recount fight was Mark Herron, how drafted a memo detailing how to disqualify military absentee ballots. (Memo is below.) His work had an immediate affect, as recalled by Bill Sammon in 2001:
The main battlegound was Duval County, home to more military families than any other county in Florida. Duval had more absentee ballots from overseas than any other county - 618 of 3,500 cast statewide. Five Gore lawyers showed up at the elections office at 9 a.m. Friday to disqualify as many of those ballots as possible.
Tom Bishop, one of the Republican lawyers, was incensed as he watched the Democrats, armed with the smoking-gun memo, blatantly go about disqualify large numbers of military ballots.
"They had their little cheat sheet they were using, and they objected on every single possible ground they could, no matter how spurious," Bishop told Sammon. "It was so bad that there was rolling of the eyes by even some of the Democrats there who were watching their lawyers work."
Before Nov. 17, the Duval supervisor of elections compared signatures on ballot envelopes against signature cards on file. He could find only two absentee ballots that could not be included because the signatures did not match.
"But now the Democrats insisted that they be allowed to compare all signatures, one by one. For seven tedious hours, they bitterly argued that signatures on more than 100 envelopes did not precisely match the signature cards - although some envelopes had been signed by sailors on rolling seas in hostile situations," Sammon wrote.
"You could clearly tell it was the same person´s signature, but they would object because it didn´t have a certain curlicue or didn´t have a certain twist or it was smaller," Bishop told him.
The Democrat lawyers sought to disqualify military ballots that had no overseas postmark on the grounds that some voters might have marked their ballots a day or two after the election and then mailed them in.
The Democrats' efforts to suppress the military vote weren't confined to one county. From an Associated Press account:
In some counties, half or nearly all the overseas ballots were rejected, many of them military ballots that apparently didn't have postmarks.
Orange County, for example, rejected 117 of its 147 overseas ballots. In Hillsborough County, 74 of the 135 ballots were rejected after Democrats raised concerns about postmark or signature problems. Alachua County rejected half of the 56 ballots it received. St. Lucie rejected 13 of 14 and Lake County, all five.
"The party of the man who wants to be the next commander in chief is trying to throw out the votes of the men and women he will be commanding," charged Jim Post, a Republican lawyer in Duval County, where 107 ballots were rejected.
Thomas Spencer, a Miami attorney for Bush, said the GOP legal team would weigh whether to sue this weekend. "One of the problems with those ballots is it is so difficult under Florida and federal law that you almost have to be a rocket scientist to comply," he said.
Earlier this week, Mark Herron, a Tallahassee lawyer helping shepherd Democratic presidential election lawsuits through the local courts, sent a five-page letter to Democratic attorneys throughout Florida giving them tips on how to lodge protests against overseas ballots.
Such protests had to be filed before the ballot was taken out of the envelope. The letter focused on protesting military ballots.
Herron said he was retained by the DNC on election night.

No matter how the Democrats and the media try to spin this, the party has actively sought to suppress the votes of the men and women in the military. The very fact that a memo was circulated, explaining, in detail, how to disqualify military ballots should be enough evidence of the party's checkered history with military voting.
Don't believe what the left and the media say. Believe what the Democrats have done.