Start A Petition

Obama Campaign Wages War on Troops

US Politics & Gov't  (tags: abuse, americans, corruption, cover-up, crime, democrats, dishonesty, elections, ethics, freedoms, government, lies, military, obama, news, propaganda, republicans, troops, usa )

- 2085 days ago -
Overseas troops often find it difficult to vote. For one thing, they can't just drop their rifle and mail in their ballot especially if they're stationed in a war zone, which is pretty much the entire Middle East.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Maggie S (40)
Monday August 6, 2012, 2:47 pm
BS - this is what the Regressionists are doing and spinning it back to Obama. A fact check is needed here!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 2:51 pm
Overseas troops often find it difficult to vote. For one thing, they can’t just drop their rifle and mail in their ballot especially if they’re stationed in a war zone, which is pretty much the entire Middle East. And not only that, since every state has a different law regarding absentee ballots, filling them out properly can be confusing. And if they don’t arrive in the States in time, they can’t be legally counted. During the last presidential election, only 20 percent of a 2.5 million-member military were able to vote successfully by absentee ballot. Just two years ago, it dropped to 5 percent. This is why some states have laws that accommodate members of the military. Ohio has a law that allows three extra days for them to mail in their early voting ballots. The Obama campaign, the DNC and the Ohio Democratic Party have filed suit against Ohio because they say this law “disenfranchises” other voters and that it’s not “fair.”
Yes, the Obama campaign is just trying to make sure everything is fair. After all, they are all for a “fair” redistribution of wealth, and everybody paying their “fair” share of taxes; why not make sure that everybody gets their “fair” share of voting rights? Surely, they’re going to make sure that no illegal aliens try to vote, right? Because that certainly wouldn’t be fair. But does it really have anything to do with “fairness?” I think they’re just afraid that they might lose Ohio because of how overseas troops will vote.
Ohio is important because it’s a key battleground state. No Republican has won the presidency without winning Ohio. And traditionally, the military by and large vote republican. Obama is at a tremendous disadvantage with the military. A recent Gallup poll among veterans shows Obama trailing Romney 58 to 34 percent. In the key battleground state of Ohio, the military’s vote might make all the difference in the world. So, to increase his chances of victory, he’s trying to restrict the voting rights of those in the military.
That law is in place out of respect for those in the military who are serving the interests of this country. You’d think that the man responsible for sending young men and women off to fight his wars would want to show at least some gratitude for their service to this country. Those troops deserve to be able to vote in who they want sending them out to battles around the world. But the Obama campaign certainly doesn’t want to give them any extra time at all, because they know that members of the military, especially those serving overseas, might not like fighting in his “overseas contingency operations” or his “humanitarian missions,” and they would vote against him.
This isn’t the first time the democrats have fought against the troops. In the 2000 election, during the Florida recount debacle, democrats were able to influence local operators to reject over 1,500 ballots from overseas military members. Although the ballots were eventually reinstated after a lawsuit, it cast the democrats in a very negative light with the military.
The troops are Obama’s pawns that he gets to shift around on the “grand chessboard” as he pleases, and he knows that the troops don’t like being treated like pawns. So he is rightfully afraid that they will help vote him out of office given the chance. But suing Ohio for accommodating the troops will only backfire on him.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 2:52 pm
Maggie...I only hope some day you can look in the mirror and say to yourself that you were WRONG! For your own peace of mind it would be well worth it!!

Maui Gal (68)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:00 pm
Of course he is against the troops, because they are voting for he has to silence their Eric Holder.....this falls under your line of work!!!

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:03 pm
Please read the following Obama, Dems Suing To Block Military Voting In Ohio? Update : NO. It might help you get your facts straight. Also, this is not just about Ohio, it is about Republicans trying to suppress Democrats votes. Also read The Republican Attack On Your Right To Vote. Dishonesty and false accusations have become trademark. of the GOP. Since they can't win by being honest, then by all means lie, cheat, buy, and steal what they want.

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:22 pm
Right now real is showing Obama leading in Ohio 48.3 to Romney's 43.5. In fact, Obama is leading in Virginia, Florida, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire - all key battleground states. States where it would be to the GOP's advantage to curtail early voting, and pass new obtuse voter ID laws.

Past Member (0)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:36 pm
I don't want to be rude but it seems as of late both Obama and Rodney sides seem to be telling more likes than truths.
And this whole thing about blocking military votes is BS. Believe me I know .. I spent more than fours years overseas with the Army as a medic. Our votes are not stalled and depending where we are they might be shipped out early. To think the militarys early votes hurts anything is just a spoon full of stupid...Please..please gather facts people. Don't believe evrything you see or hear, especially about the military..I swear we are the good guys.
Well said carrie

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:52 pm
Milkah.......Then you have to stop and think...this is a whole NEW and different election than we have EVER seen or HAD in the US!! This is not your typical election year and in past years the Military vote was NOT suppressed. So even though what you say about past elections may be true...this one is out to destroy America and if you can't see this then there is no hope for you! Obama has been destroying this country all under the name of "CONTROL" and if the Congress goes against what he says then he uses his "Executive" power to undermine their decisions. You HAVE TO admit that!! And again if you don't then you are deliberately blinding yourself! Obama does not want the Military to vote because he KNOWS they will vote against him and what better way to try and stop them than to pull this BS that the liberals and he are pulling now!?!? THAT is a FACT!!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:53 pm
Carrie...You have been blinded for as long as I have known you!! Intentionally I might add!! If you don't want to believe the truth that is on you!

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 3:59 pm
Carol, just exactly where do these "facts" and "truth" you speak of come from? Don't suppose you bothered to read anything I suggested in my earlier comments.

Maui Gal (68)
Monday August 6, 2012, 4:14 pm
Very interesting to hear Milkah and Carrie speak about dishonesty and false accusations....and Carrie says...."don't believe everything you hear".....I have the same impressions of the dems...especially pelosi and dirty harry for lying their arses off over harry's imaginary about calling the kettle black!!!!

Past Member (0)
Monday August 6, 2012, 4:45 pm
You are right Carol this is an election year like no other I have seen..To be honest both Obama and Romney lie so much that truth seems to have become like the wind..gone as quickly as it has come. I just want truth and forked tongues

Kit B (276)
Monday August 6, 2012, 5:01 pm

I decided to ask my own daughter-in-law about this as she served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, she also spent time in Bosnia. First, I read her this article, then I asked for her feelings about this, till this election Tiffany has voted republican, so I considered her a far more valid source of a non-biased opinion. Tiffany is a veteran of 3 wars.

She said that before any coming election, even off-year elections, from high command on down the through the chain of command, all troops were urged to mail in their ballots early. Should they be in the field during an election, mail carriers were sent to pick up ballots. No one that wanted to vote was denied the right to vote, their ballots were always cast early. To sure this was still true, she called a friend that has just returned from Afghanistan, who immediately gave validation what Tiffany had said.

The only people in this election messing around with voting rights are those in the states that are using the transparent excuse of voter fraud, where none does or has existed. This very slanted and light on FACTS article is just WRONG.

"During the last presidential election, only 20 percent of a 2.5 million-member military were able to vote successfully by absentee ballot." Well Carol I hope you too can look in the mirror and admit that is just not true.

Lynn Squance (235)
Monday August 6, 2012, 5:07 pm
Carol D --- " have to stop and think...this is a whole NEW and different election than we have EVER seen or HAD in the US ..."

New and different? What is so different about the election fraud perpetrated by the Republican/Teabaggers? It is as bold and rampant as ever. From compromised voting machines to the many faces of voter supression by various state governments, Republican/Teabagger state governments. Without saying there is a move a foot to repress the military vote which I firmly believe there is NOT, why is a military citizen's vote more important than that of any ordinary citizen? In Pennsylvania alone, there is the distinct possibility of over 700,000 votes that could go uncounted because of Republican/Teabagger regulations implemented all in the name of voter fraud which is virtually non existent (DOJ investigation at the request of Baby Bush showed .0001% nationally).

Carol, you were quick to remind Milkah that this is a new and different election from what she experienced overseas as a service member and said "...past years the Military vote was NOT suppressed...". Then why in your long comment did you bring up allegations of supression of the military vote in 2000 in Florida? In your own words "...past years the Military vote was NOT suppressed..." Which is it?

I find nothing in your argument that is compelling.

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 6:08 pm
Kit, I am pleased that you confirmed all of this with your daughter-in-law because I have also spoken to my son about it, but feared no one would take me seriously. Adam is in Kuwait now and he has the same information Tiffany has.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 6:11 pm
The Obama Justice Department ignored voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia but sued Texas and threatened other states who require photo I.D. to vote, alleging that such a requirement amounted to voter suppression.

In Florida, Governor Rick Scott ordered a review of state voting rolls which revealed over 80,000 dead people and hundreds of felons and non-citizens listed as voters. Since Bush won Florida with a handful of votes in 2000, the potential for fraud this year supported the need for I.D. to vote.

In the voter fraud versus voter suppression debate, the biggest suppression of the vote, and the most scandalous, has gone virtually unnoticed.

Deployed members of the American military have the most difficulty getting absentee ballots and casting their vote on time than any other group of Americans.

According to the Military Voters Protection Project (MVPP), only 20 percent of the 2.5 million military voters were able to request and return their absentee ballots on time in the 2008 election.

In response, in 2009, Congress passed the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE). MOVE requires states to mail absentee ballots at least 45 days before an election; use electronic delivery systems where possible; and require express mail delivery for returning absentee ballots.

The MOVE Act passed with just 75 days left before the 2010 election. The results were even worse. Just 5 percent of military voters returned their ballots on time to be counted.

According to testimony by Thomas Perez, assistant Attorney General for civil rights at the Justice Department, one third of overseas troops who wanted to vote in 2010 couldn’t.

To be sure, voting from a war zone may not be the easiest thing to do nor the highest priority. But for those warriors who want to vote, and who are putting their lives on the line to defend the right to vote, it is inexcusable that ballots are sent to the wrong addresses, lost in the mail, or sent too late to be sent back by election day.

This close to election 2012, implementation of the MOVE Act is still spotty among the states.

According to MVPP, 15 states, including Alaska, Florida, North Carolina, and Washington, have fully implemented MOVE.

Washington state, for example, allows 20 days leeway after an election and before the results are certified for military ballots to be received. This gives military ballots 65 days, not 45, to be returned.

MVPP identifies Alabama, California, Illinois, New York, and Wisconsin as doing the worst job in complying with the MOVE Act.

California law requires mail ballots to go out 60 days before an election. However, for the June 5 primary election, 11 of 58 California counties failed to comply with the law and the ballots were mailed late resulting in military absentee ballots which were cast but not counted because they were received too late.

Overall, 90 percent of absentee ballots sent to American civilians living abroad are returned and counted. For military personnel, the number is two thirds. Rep. Dan Lundgren (R-Calif.) chair of the House Administration Committee thinks the states and the Justice Department ought to do better.

The Army Times reports that part of the solution could be e-mail.

Florida allows overseas absentee ballots to be returned by fax, but not e-mail. Committee member Rep. Zoe Lofgren D-CA says e-mail is not secure, citing the successful hacking in a test of a proposed Washington D.C. online voting system.

In dozens of other states, election officials are proposing to extend the time when military absentee votes can be counted for some days beyond election day.

Obama’s DOJ has become involved since surveys showed that the traditional Republican advantage with military voters could be changing.

The New York Times reports that while military voters gave George Bush a 16 point advantage over John Kerry in 2004, and gave John McCain a ten point lead over Barack Obama in 2008, Obama has targeted military voters in 2012.

Obama talks up the end of the war in Iraq and the drawdown in Afghanistan, the killing of Bin Laden, and the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell, coupled with the growing diversity of the military to raise expectations for the 2012 vote.

The Romney campaign scoffs at such talk, pointing out the high unemployment numbers for ex-service members and huge defense cuts as reasons that the military vote will remain Republican.

Whatever the result of the military vote in November, efforts continue in each state to make sure that those troops who want to vote get their vote counted.

There is a Federal Voting Assistance Program with a website ( dedicated to helping military members and their families to vote.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 6:18 pm
This should answer all of your questions, accusations and or otherwise!!! :-) I won't argue with anyone who refuses to see facts!!! Believe what you want or believe the facts!

Kit B (276)
Monday August 6, 2012, 6:47 pm

These are the best you can do for FACTS? I have to admit that your a constant source of amusement, beyond that just as empty as these FALSE FACTS. You dare to question others with actual sources and, asked them to look into a mirror. Not you Carol, you posted this, now stop whining and step up. Black Panther voter intimidation, are you kidding? Or maybe you actually don't know what you are on about, perhaps it's possible that even in this world of vast access to information you really don't know any better. In wish case, I still find you amusing, but also feel pity for one that is so self deluded.

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 6:53 pm
Carole, just because you say something and want to believe it is true, it doesn't mean it is. I still have to see any facts here. The article you posted is incorrect and if you would bother to check the information providing you by others here, you would know it!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 7:07 pm
Time for a Military Suffrage Movement
By Keli Carender
Remember the last election and all the rhetoric from the Democrats about making sure every vote counted, and reaching out to "traditionally" disenfranchised voters and communities? Remember how they were constantly accusing Republicans of deliberately and maliciously alienating and suppressing minority voters? Remember all that? In fact, claims of specific instances of disenfranchised voters were alleged long before the One ran for office.

It turns out that the brave men and women of our military are the most disenfranchised group of voters today. Literally. The Heritage Foundation has published the results and analysis of research performed by Hans A. von Spakovsky, a legal scholar and a former Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, and by Eric Eversole, a former active duty officer in the Navy JAG Corps and former lawyer in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The authors assert that members of the military have traditionally been disenfranchised at both the state and federal levels due to the unique circumstances and situations in which soldiers find themselves (i.e. war). Spakovsky and Eversole also conclude that unless Congress does something about this injustice, "military personnel will continue to be the largest group of disenfranchised voters in the United States."

Key portions of the research:

Despite many states reporting record turnout in 2008, data from the election demonstrates a shockingly low level of participation among military voters.[8] Take, for example, the treatment of military voters in Minnesota. In a state that prides itself on the nation's highest voter participation rate--78.2 percent of the eligible population participated in the 2008 presidential election--only 15.8 percent of Minnesota's 23,346 military members and their voting age dependents were able to cast an absentee ballot in the same election.[9] To make matters worse, even if the military voter in Minnesota cast his or her absentee ballot, that ballot was nearly sixteen times more likely to be rejected by local election officials, as compared to other absentee voters statewide.[10] A vast majority of the rejected military ballots--nearly 70 percent--were rejected because the ballot was returned after the election deadline. Ultimately, only 14.4 percent of Minnesota's eligible military voters were able to cast a vote that counted in the 2008 presidential election.

(Minnesota? Wasn't that the state with the heavily contested election for US Senator, where Norm Coleman lost to Al Franken by roughly 312 votes? )

Ensuring that the men and women fighting for their lives - and ours - in 115 degree weather, dodging bullets, eating horrible food, and carrying gigantic loads of equipment are able to partake in their Constitutionally guaranteed civil right -voting - is apparently not as exciting or politically satisfying as ensuring homeless thug thizzles get to vote.

More from the study:

Florida had the highest number of requests [for absentee ballots] with 27.8 percent of nearly 324,000 military voters requesting an absentee ballot. Texas was second with 22.9 percent and California was third with 17.8 percent. All told, of the estimated 943,879 military voters in these three states, only 23.4 percent or 220,595 requested an absentee ballot to vote in the 2008 presidential election. The rate of return of those same absentee ballots was even lower. Only 11.3 percent of the eligible military voters in California actually returned their ballots compared to 20.6 percent in Florida and 13.1 percent in Texas.

If there were a minority group that had this low of a return rate and voter turnout, and said group was completely dependent on the government for the disbursement and transportation of their ballots, the cries of racism would never cease.

The Heritage Foundation report also finds:

According to a recent study by the Overseas Vote Foundation (OVF), many of these overseas military ballots may have been lost or significantly delayed by the postal service. The OVF found that nearly 22 percent of respondents to a survey, which included military and overseas voters, never received their requested absentee ballot for the 2008 presidential election.[12] In addition, 10 percent received their absentee ballots less than seven days before the election and 1 percent received their ballots after November 4, 2008. In other words, the 2008 OVF Report found that nearly one third of its respondents either did not receive their absentee ballot or received it with insufficient time to return it to election officials.

It comes as no surprise that this data does not solely reflect the 2008 elections. Apparently there was almost identical disenfranchisement of military personnel in 2006 as well. Research has determined that 45 days prior to the deadline is the minimum amount of time that the ballots need to be sent to military personnel, particularly those serving abroad and in combat zones. However, one-third of all states refuse to follow the 45 day guideline!

According to the authors, some government officials say that 60 days is necessary to ensure that personnel receive the ballots with enough time to return them before any deadlines. Think about it, not only do the ballots move through the US postal system both ways (and the Department of Defense won't even spring for expedited service), but they must also move through the achingly slow military postal system.

The report goes on to list the main reasons behind the military voter disenfranchisement and then suggests some very simple solutions to alleviate this travesty and injustice. The four main reasons a high percentage of military personal unable to vote: (1) inability to participate, (2) lost and undeliverable ballots, (3) not enough time to vote, and (4) votes rejected for other state law reasons.

Soldiers tend to move around a lot and the government has not figured out a way to help soldiers make necessary changes to their voter registration information, or even just make the information readily available for the soldiers to do it themselves.

The 2008 election data makes it clear that a vast majority of military voters (an estimated 75 to 80 percent)[18] were disenfranchised by their inability to request an absentee ballot. This failure rests squarely on the DOD and FVAP.

In short, military voters do not have access to the same level of voting assistance as other Americans and that lack of assistance directly affects their ability to participate in elections.

How hard is it to understand that some of our military personnel are in WAR ZONES? Why is no one sympathetic to their plight and lack of participation in our most sacred right? Why did Nancy Pelosi allow a bill, introduced by Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) that addressed these issues, to expire in the 110th Congress? Why was this not an important enough civil rights issue for her to allow it to the floor for debate and a vote? Why is the fact below not plastered everywhere?

This low participation rate is as severe as any in the nation's recent history, including that which resulted in the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to strike down the barriers to registration and turnout that kept black Americans out of the polls.[11]

I think we all know the answer to those questions and it isn't pretty. Bigotry and voter disenfranchisement in the USA is as disgusting now as it was in 1965.

Past Member (0)
Monday August 6, 2012, 7:10 pm
Carrie and Kit...Thank You so much for what you said. Not only are two ladies speaking the facts, but you did so with alot of respect and dignity.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 7:20 pm
With all of the problems facing the Military people for voting and Obama wants to cut down and not allow more time for them to get their vote in and counted!?!? Anyone with any common sense would have to ask themselves WHY would he do this if it was not out of fear that he will lose their votes!!! If he is so sure of himself that he has their vote then there should be no problem with him enforcing the option for them to have more time!

Registering Military and Overseas Citizens to Vote


Members of the United States armed forces and their families face unique challenges to participating in our elections. If their votes are to count and their voices are to be heard, these citizens must overcome hurdles not faced by most Americans. They deserve better: the nation should make it a priority to remove barriers to political participation for those who dedicate themselves to defending our democracy.

Two aspects of the election system create problems for military voters and their families. First, many of these citizens have difficulty with voter registration: earlier this year, the recently appointed Director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program in the Department of Defense, Bob Carey, testified before the United States Senate that the registration rate for military voters is almost 20 percentage points lower than that for all Americans. Carey explained that "[t]he military voter registration process is exceptionally complex, varies in its deadlines from State to State, is tied in with the absentee ballot application process, and is subject to exceptional opportunities for errors."

Additional problems spring from absentee ballots and the often logistically tricky questions of how to get these to - and collect them from - military personnel and overseas voters who are away from their permanent voting addresses on Election Day. In the 2006 election, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission ("EAC") reported that of almost 1 million absentee ballots requested by military and overseas voters, only about a third were ever counted; two thirds of the uncounted ballots were returned by the postal service without reaching the voters who requested them; another 10 percent arrived too late to be counted. Many of the problems with absentee ballots themselves trace back to problems with registration records, because when registration information contains out-of-date or inaccurate mailing address data, delivering absentee ballots is difficult or impossible.

The results are predictable - and disheartening: military voters are much less likely than other Americans to cast ballots and to have their ballots counted. According to the 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey, servicemen and women who live in the United States vote at a rate 10 percent lower than the general population - and military personnel stationed overseas face additional hurdles to voting. The Pew Center on the States found that overall, in the 2006 federal elections, "voter turnout was only 20.4% for the military population, compared to 39.8% of the general population which voted . . . [because of] a fractured system of voting for our military." The EAC found that in 2006, less than 16.5% of approximately 6 million eligible military and overseas voters even requested absentee ballots.

Fortunately, there is a way to modernize the voter registration system that will solve these problems. Moreover, the problems facing military voters - and civilian voters living overseas - have been the focus of significant attention since the 2008 election. Federal and state lawmakers introduced a wide range of reforms directed at remedying the absentee balloting problems plaguing these populations. One federal bill in particular - the Military and Overseas Voters Empowerment ("MOVE") Act - promises to make it easier for military and overseas voters to obtain voter registration applications, ballots and other election materials in a timely manner. This and other legislative efforts would certainly improve electoral access for military and overseas voters, but they would not materially affect the challenges these voters face in ensuring that they are properly registered with up-to-date mailing information. Unless these challenges are addressed, military and overseas voters will continue to face significant hurdles to participating in elections.

This policy paper focuses on the voter registration problems facing military voters - and on solutions to these problems. In particular, it explains how modernization of the voter registration process would significantly decrease the registration problems military voters face - while simultaneously reducing some of the problems associated with absentee balloting. Voter registration modernization would increase the rate and accuracy of registration for military voters and their families. It would also ameliorate problems experienced by veterans and other U.S. citizens.

American citizens have the right to vote no matter where they are stationed or choose to live, and the election system should be reformed to make their right to vote meaningful. Voter registration modernization is a crucial step toward ensuring that all Americans - including those who risk their lives to protect our democracy - can participate meaningfully in that democracy.

Problems Registering to Vote

According to EAC data, the military has a registration rate of 64.86% of voting age citizens, as compared to 83.8% for the general population. While the EAC concedes that its data overstates registration rates, the relative figures do demonstrate that Americans serving in the military are registered at far lower rates than those not serving in the military. Moreover, military personnel reported having almost twice as many registration problems in 2008 as non-military voters, according to a widely respected national survey.

An absent military or overseas voter must ensure not only that his or her registration application is received before the home state's registration deadline, but also that it is received far enough in advance of the next election that there is sufficient time for an absentee ballot to be mailed to the voter, completed, and returned before the deadline for counting such ballots. If the voter registers using the FPCA, that form can be used to simultaneously request an absentee ballot; if registering using a state or federal mail-in form, a separate absentee ballot request may be required. Whatever form is used, however, the voter will need to provide a mailing address that will be valid at the time absentee ballots will be issued. This may be the most challenging aspect of filling out voter registration materials for highly mobile citizens, and it is a serious challenge for military personnel who may be relocated with little notice. In some states, this problem can be lessened in part by providing election officials with a valid e-mail address; election officials in 32 states can electronically transmit ballots to distant voters (generally by fax or e-mail). But, in 18 states, ballots must be sent to absentee voters by mail, so military voters must provide election officials with a new mailing address every time they relocate if they are to receive their ballots in time to be able to vote.

Other groups of American citizens face registration problems similar to those experienced by members of the military. Civilian Americans living overseas, for example, encounter many of the difficulties involved in registering from afar, and these problems often hinder or prevent them from casting valid ballots. The Overseas Vote Foundation confirmed these registration problems in a report on the 2008 election, finding that, in 2008, nearly a quarter - 23.7% - of experienced overseas voters had problems or questions with registering. Registration problems occur even more frequently with voters attempting to cast a ballot from overseas for the first time.

The logistical difficulties related to registration result in millions of overseas and military voters not being registered to vote, and therefore not being able to participate in elections. As noted above, the voter participation rate for military and overseas voters is shockingly low - about 20% lower than the already-low turnout rates for all Americans.

Modernizing Voter Registration

Modernizing the voter registration system would significantly decrease the problems these voters face and would make it much easier for them to participate in our democracy. Under a system of voter registration modernization, state governments would automatically register all voting-eligible citizens captured in other government lists, including active duty military personnel and their families, veterans, and some voters living overseas. Election officials would track voters' address changes, and update their registration records regularly, based on accurate address change information provided to other government agencies. Election officials would also collect e-mail addresses, which can be used to confirm and update registration information and speed the delivery of ballots and other election materials to military and overseas voters. Overall, a more modernized registration system would leverage existing lists and technology to ensure that all Americans - including those who must travel to defend our democracy - are registered to vote, accurately, and with up-to-date information.


Most of the problems that impede military and overseas citizens from voting stem from the voter registration system and, in particular, the inability of the current system to handle a highly mobile population located far from home. The flaws in our current registration system mean that these voters are registered at significantly lower levels than other Americans - and that their ballots count much less frequently. This is simply unacceptable. Fortunately, despite the logistical challenges facing military and overseas voters, a solution is close at hand. Modernizing the voter registration system by automatically registering voters based on the data maintained by the Department of Defense's Defense Manpower Data Center will guarantee that American citizens fighting to defend our democracy will not be disenfranchised because of bureaucratic inefficiencies. This can be done securely, without compromising private or sensitive information; indeed, this data is already shared with other government agencies for the purpose of administering benefits and entitlements. Technical solutions to the problems that keep military voters from participating in our political system are readily accessible and should be adopted quickly. We must reform the voter registration system so that our men and women in uniform are guaranteed the right to participate in our elections. We owe them no less.

About the Voting Rights & Elections Project

The Voting Rights and Elections Project works to expand the franchise, to ensure that every eligible American can vote, and that every vote cast is accurately recorded and counted. The Center's staff provides top-flight legal and policy assistance on a broad range of election administration issues including voter registration systems, voting technology, voter identification, statewide voter registration list maintenance, and provisional ballots.

This is one in a series of white papers on Voter Registration Modernization. The first, Voter Registration Modernization, sets forth more detailed policy arguments in favor of modernizing America's voter registration system. Others include Expanding Democracy: Voter Registration Around the World, which examines international methods of voter registration; Permanent Voter Registration, which analyzes systems of statewide permanent registration; and When Voters Move, which examines how states handle voters who move.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 7:58 pm
These are the best you can do for FACTS? I have to admit that your a constant source of amusement, beyond that just as empty as these FALSE FACTS. You dare to question others with actual sources and, asked them to look into a mirror. Not you Carol, you posted this, now stop whining and step up. Black Panther voter intimidation, are you kidding? Or maybe you actually don't know what you are on about, perhaps it's possible that even in this world of vast access to information you really don't know any better. In wish case, I still find you amusing, but also feel pity for one that is so self deluded.

Kit..I would believe these comments coming from you! And you don't know about Black Panther voter intimidation!? Were you asleep during the last election and since!?

The New Black Panther Party Evidence on Voter Intimidation

New Black Panther Party Voter Intimidation AGAIN in 2010

Federal Court finds Obama appointees interfered with New Black Panther prosecution

Now....if you can honestly say there was no voter intimidation here then I have to say IMO you are intentionally blinding yourself

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:00 pm
Also Kit..Just because your daughter-in-law said that there were no problems with her in voting in the Military does not make it so all around!!

Kit B (276)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:01 pm

Carol, do you realize that you embarrass yourself? You're a part of the Teabaggery, I get that. You have no real ideas and must rely on the ideas of the foundation of Teabaggery, I get that too. To still come back with same worn lines, that have been PROVEN as false, that's really personal embarrassment for you in a very public way. Try...reading. Facts are available, you don't even have to go beyond this thread and read. No, I don't expect you to admit your wrong, just read and stop embarrassing yourself.

You also might consider, checking all of your facts before submitting yourself to this public humiliation.

One more time Carol, those in the military have the right to vote, no one and nothing, other then you and a very poor source, is attempting to take that away. No only do they have the right to vote, they are given time to do so in manner far beyond what is allowed in this country. As it should be. This could be confirmed by checking REAL source material, that is if you know what real source material is, which I doubt.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:01 pm
And Dotty...My name is spelled CAROL...Thanks!!

Kit B (276)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:04 pm

***Not rather than No ***

Tiffany is but one of millions of soldiers in the US military. Your source for this article has been soundly put down as fully unreliable. I'll take the word of a veteran of 3 wars.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:13 pm
Kit...Has anyone ever told you that you are very insulting!? And I will add..WHO said anything about the Military NOT being able to vote!? THAT is NOT the topic in question here in case you missed it!! The topic in question here is the fact that Obama will NOT give the Military any more time in order to make sure their votes get counted!!! So WHAT is his problem!? Possibly the fact he knows he will lose to them so he is not going to give them the chance to let their vote count!? Wake up!!

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:15 pm
Carol, this story has been proven to be incorrect by many different sources, yet you will not accept that once again you have been hoodwinked by the extremists whose every word you hang. I seem to recall you were a hard core democrat until Obama ran in 2008. Hmm, I have to wonder about that.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:18 pm

Many decry any attempt to suppress legal voters from voting legally. John Fund and Hans Von Spakovsky in their book “Who’s Counting: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote At Risk” found one group that is being supressed – active duty military voters. The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA), requires the Federal Voting Assistance Program (a Department of Defense Program) to administer UOCAVA, and requires the Justice Department to enforce it.

According to Fund and Spakovsky there are two primary reasons for military voter disenfranchisement. The first is the “transitory life of a member of the military and delays associated with delivering absentee ballots to remote locations”. The second is “[T]he Pentagon’s failure to provide military voters with timely registration and voting assistance, and the Justice Department’s failure to properly enforce the 1986 federal law guaranteeing the right of overseas civilians and members of the military to vote by absentee ballot”. [My emphasis]

Fund and Spakovsky report:

The estimated military voter turn out in 2008 was approximately 30 percent while the overall voting-eligible population turn out was almost 62 percent.
In 2006, only 22 percent of nearly 2.6 million military voters cast ballots, compared to 41 percent of the general voting-age population.
The Election Assistance Commission found that only 16.5 percent of an estimated six million eligible military and overseas civilian voters requested an absentee ballot, and only 5.5 percent of the ballots were returned and counted.
Data from 24 states on the 2010 election shows that only 4.6 percent of eligible military voters cast an absentee ballot that was actually counted.
According to Sarasota County Florida Supervisor Kathy Dent, “States transmitted nearly 1 million ballots to UOCAVA-covered voters (48.6% to military and 37.9% to civilian overseas). Of the ballots transmitted 69% (682,341) were returned and submitted for counting. States reported counting 637,216 UOCAVA ballots or 93.6% of the total submitted for counting. Supervisor Dent notes, “We won’t have information on 2012 General election until January/February 2013.”

Getting absentee ballots to the military and returning them to the states is critical to having them counted. Fund and Spakovsky state, “One of the most significant problems with UOCAVA is that it does not specify when states are required to mail absentee ballots”.

The Election Assistance Commission and others have found that overseas military and civilians absentee ballots must be sent out “at least 45 days before a state’s deadline.” Fund and Spakovsky report, “The Pentagon is required to use expedited mail service to ensure overseas military ballots are returned by Election Day.” However, “due to pressure from its unions, the U.S. Postal Service was made the exclusive carrier for this expedited mail service, rather than allowing competitive bids from private carriers such as Federal Express or DHL . . . Yet nearly one-third of states refuse to follow the 45-day standard, and at least 10 states gave military voters less than 35 days to receive, cast, and return their ballots,” state Fund and Spakovsky.

Florida Statue Section 101.62 requires all UOCAVA absentee ballots to be mailed not later than 45 days prior to an election. If the mailing date falls on a holiday or weekend then the absentee ballots are mailed the prior business day.

An inquiry was sent to Kathy Dent, Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections. Suzanne MacFarlane, Absentee Ballot Coordinator for the Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections, reports that in Florida during the 2008 General election:

Total UOCAVA absentee ballots transmitted was 121,395 (Military Stateside & Overseas & Citizens Overseas)

Total UOCAVA absentee ballots transmitted to Uniformed Services only was 86,926.

Total UOCAVA absentee ballots returned and counted for Uniformed Services was 66,007 (54%).

The high rates of return and counted ballots may be attributed to the Florida statue requiring mailing not later than 45 days prior to the election.

In 2009 Congress amended UOCAVA requiring states to send absentee ballots to military voters at least 45 days before elections. The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE) also required the Pentagon to create installation voting assistance offices on every military base. Florida is home to 21 military bases. The Military Voter Protection Project (MVPP) found in the 2010 election, “[A]t least 14 states and the District of Columbia failed to comply with the 45-day mailing requirement.” Fund and Spakovsky notes one “troubling provision” of the MOVE Act, which allows states to obtain a one time waiver. Ten states and the District of Columbia applied for the waiver in 2010. One of the states applying was New York. “Many of New York City’s military and overseas ballots, more than 40,000 of them, were sent 25 or fewer days before the election,” note Fund and Spakovsky.

Many of the problems with military absentee votes would have been avoided had the Justice Department enforced UOCAVA and MOVE. MVPP found that the overall military participation rate during the 2010 elections was 11.6 percent. Military personnel were 3.5 times less likely to vote than other voting-age citizens. According to Eric Eversole, Executive Director of MVPP, stated “Justice delayed is justice denied” when it comes to the military absentee vote.


Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:19 pm

Under current Ohio law, the period during which voters can cast their ballot early ends three days before the election. However, the law has an exception for members of the military. They are allowed to vote early right up until election day.

The Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee have filed a lawsuit to overturn this law. They argue that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to afford special consideration, flexibility, and accommodations to military voters to make it easier for them to vote in person. In court papers, Team Obama repeatedly asserts that there is no good reason to give special flexibility to military voters.

Fifteen Ohio military groups have intervened in the lawsuit to defend the Ohio legislature’s decision to give special consideration to military members. They argue that there are valid reasons for the consideration, such as special logistical challenges faced by military personnel. And they call Obama’s position that military members should not have extra flexibility “offensive.”

Team Romney is attempting to gain political mileage from the Obama campaign’s legal position. However, Obama’s spokesmen, including David Axelrod, defend that position on the grounds that they are not attempting to deny military members the extra three days. Rather, they want to restore prior Ohio law, under which all voters could vote on those days, not just military members. And they complain that the Romney campaign is misrepresenting the Democrats’ position.

But, as noted, Team Obama’s legal position is clear from its court papers — it doesn’t believe that there is anything that justifies giving military members extra fleixibility when it comes to voting. Indeed, it finds the contrary, pro-military view so weak as to render unconstitutional the special consideration granted to military members.

Not surprisingly, it is not just Team Romney that takes exception to this position. As noted, 15 Ohio military groups are offended.

Moreover, there was a valid reason for the Ohio legislature to amend the old law that gave everyone the extra days. According to Ohio’s Secretary of State Jon Husted, the old law did not create consistent early voting rights across the state because most local jurisdictions decided to close for the weekend. Husted notes that the Dems did not sue when 6 counties had weekend voting and extended hours while 82 counties did not.

Clearly, then, the Democrats’ concern is not equal access to voting for all Ohio voters. It was only when military members became the beneficiary of extra access that the Democrats found the system arbitrary.

If this opportunistic position ends up injuring Obama’s standing with pro-military voters, he has no valid complaint.

UPDATE: On Fox News Sunday, David Axelrod disavowed the Obama campaign’s legal position in this matter:

WALLACE: “Lightning round, that means quick. Your campaign is suing the state of Ohio for giving members of the military extra time to vote early, to the Monday before the election while other voters are going to have only until Friday. You don’t think that members of the military who are serving this country deserve special consideration to vote?”

AXELROD: “I absolutely do.”

But that’s not what his campaign is saying in court.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:20 pm
This link is to the story above the last one....

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:20 pm
Carrie..You will forever be under Obama's spell!! Good Luck to you!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:22 pm
I seem to recall you were a hard core democrat until Obama ran in 2008. Hmm, I have to wonder about that.

Carrie...I WOKE UP!!!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:24 pm
And was when Clinton was in where I was awaken to where the morals of this country were going and the leader in the White House! None of them good!!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:29 pm
Come one Carol. you are accusing Kit of being rude and not being on topic, yet here you are with the lawsuit right here which disputes your claim and have the audacity to tell someone to "Wake up".

Oh really Dotty!? Was I correct in correcting her what she falsely claimed as the topic or not!? Are we not talking about the fact that Obama is trying to limit or take away extra days for the Military to vote so their vote counts or are we talking about the fact that no one in the Military can vote!? You tell me! And there are no law suits that dispute my calim..if you truly think I am going to believe a law suit by the Democrats as a legal and correct one that proves anything then you are sorely mistaken! I wouldn't trust the Democrats to watch my dog if i had one! So I am sorry but your claim don't hold water IMO!

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:33 pm

There is something terribly wrong in America when our soldiers' voting rights are systematically destroyed under this administration.

These men and women are putting their lives on the line every day and dying in record numbers under Obama's crippling rules of engagement. And how does Obama thank them? By making sure their vote doesn't count. This is no accident.

J. Christian Adams was the heroic election lawyer who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice. He blew the lid off the Black Panther case of voter intimidation that Holder refused to prosecute.

The sabotage of the military vote is a high crime. I previously reported on Lema Bashir, the Palestinian stealth jihadist at Obama's Department of Justice. Lema Bashir was at the center of Virginia's failing to mail military ballots in time in 2008. The same mistakes were made again in 2010, and United States military voters were heavily disenfranchised because of in-actions by Bashir and DOJ throughout that year.

Disenfranchising the military vote is policy. You could make a case that bad mistakes were made in 2008, but that when those same mistakes are made and made worse in 2010 by a devout Muslim who calls Israel "northern Palestine," I submit that it is no accident but deliberate policy.

Obama's bumblers damage military voting rights By: J. Christian Adams | Washington Examiner | 07/13/11

Members of the armed services can visit a Pizza Hut on base in Iraq, but the Pentagon has failed to comply with a 2009 law requiring voter registration offices on every military installation.
A new report on military voting shows declining participation rates in the 2010 election despite an attempted congressional fix. Obama administration incompetence implementing the law is to blame.

Because service members have voted at historically low rates, Congress passed the MOVE Act in 2009. MOVE was supposed to cure impediments to voting by mandating absentee ballots mail overseas at least 45 days before election day. MOVE also required every military installation to have a voter registration office.

Sadly, a new report shows the problem has only grown worse, no thanks to a lackadaisical Justice Department and a Pentagon with misplaced priorities.

The report by the Military Voter Protection Project and Chapman University's AMVET's clinic concludes that participation rates by uniformed service members actually declined in the 2010 election, despite the MOVE Act.

Data collected by congressional mandate reveal that only 4.6 percent of eligible military voters cast an absentee ballot that counted. In 2006, it was 5.5 percent. These numbers came despite the MOVE mandate of a voter registration office on every military installation before the November 2010 election.

Yet Defense Department political appointees waited until three weeks after the 2010 election to issue the order to establish the offices. Now six months before the start of presidential primaries, a quarter of military installations remain noncompliant with the legal obligation to have functioning voter registration offices.

Contrast the Pentagon slow-walk on military voting with the blitz to integrate gays into the armed services. No resource limitation interfered with forcing every member of the armed services to sit through hours of sensitivity training.

Perhaps too busy acclimating warriors to the new gay policy, the Pentagon bureaucracy continues to resist voter registration offices, particularly for Marine installations.

Helping service members vote isn't a priority of the Obama administration, especially before 2012. Even the Pentagon unit tasked with helping service members to vote (FVAP) is targeted for a 30 percent budget slash.

Tomorrow, Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., will hold a hearing to determine what went wrong at DOD in 2010. The inept enforcement efforts at Attorney General Eric Holder's Justice Department also merit scrutiny.

Helping felons restore their right to vote is a priority at the DOJ Civil Rights Division. Unfortunately, the infamous division also enforces the MOVE Act. It took DOJ an embarrassing nine months after MOVE passed to update its webpage with the new standards.

Until July 2010, DOJ actually publicized the weaker protections of the pre-MOVE law. The responsible bureaucrat allowed a memo seeking approval for website changes to gather dust for months.

At DOJ, encouraging felons to vote is more important than helping a Marine understand her new rights. DOJ ineptitude didn't end with a stale webpage. In February 2010, the same unhurried official told a convention of state election officials that litigation to enforce MOVE wasn't a priority of the Justice Department.

Roseann d (178)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:49 pm
Well Carol's just blown her credibility by posting this false story. Please learn to post from reputable news sources and check the references. The fact that Romney and his camp are running this crap just goes to show how dishonest and without shame they really are. Carol, I guess you just love to be lied to.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:52 pm
Military absentee ballots not counted in Virginia - (2008 election)

A grassroots military service organization is urging the Department of Justice to intervene immediately of behalf of 3,200 Virginia and overseas voters from whose votes were not counted in this year's election.

Bob Carey is a senior fellow at the National Defense Committee, which was founded to protect the inherent legal and constitutional rights of military personnel and their dependents. He says the Department of Justice has regularly required states to send military absentee ballots out at least 30 days prior to an election.

However, he notes in this election cycle, nearly 12,500 military and overseas ballots requested from the state of Virginia were not sent out by that deadline. As a result, Carey adds 3,285 ballots were not returned in time for Election Day.

"We think it's imperative that their votes be received, cast, and counted," he suggests. "And if the Virginia local election officials fail to get the absentee ballot out in time, then they should be making accommodations in order to be able to receive those ballots in a timely fashion."

It is completely irrelevant, according to Carey, that the 3,285 ballots would not have affected the outcome of the presidential election. "If we say that they don't matter unless they can change the election, then we've established a precedent that military votes don't matter -- and I think that's wrong," he contends.

Carey believes it is quite possible that some of the ballots might have an impact on races for other offices, including a couple of very tight congressional races in the state. He is urging the Justice Department to force the Commonwealth of Virginia to accept military ballots received at least 30 days after they were sent out.

Just another example to show this is a real problem so again I have to ask...WHY is Obama trying to stop them from the fact of having their votes count by giving them extra days...would you not want your son or daughter's or Grand son's or Grand daughter's vote to count!?!? This is not a Democrat/Republican issue...this is an American Military voter issue!! We should be concerned about why the military men and women can't count on the fact of having their votes count instead or trying to defend Obama in a right or wrong scenario!! I believe in our Military and I believe they have every right to make sure their vote counts even more so than we do!! After all it is because of THEM that we have the great honor and duty to vote!!

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:53 pm
Carol, if your change in values, moral ethics, and truth is due to the fact that you "woke up", perhaps you should take a nice long nap and refocus. Being accepting of a certain amount of ethical decency does not mean I am under Obama's spell. It means that I am able to see two sides of a coin and tell the difference between heads and tails. It means that I can read and watch different news reports and make my own decision. It means I don't rely on FOX news and hate websites for my information. The world is full of information - all available at the end of our little fingertips. Try looking at more than what the teabaggers tell you is acceptable.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:54 pm
Dotty and go right ahead and keep your head in the sand with your information!! LOL..

Roseann d (178)
Monday August 6, 2012, 8:55 pm
The GOP is the ACORN of 2012 except ACORN was absolved of any wrongdoing, unlike the blatant criminality of the GOP. They should be in jail, not holding office.

Susanne R (234)
Monday August 6, 2012, 9:32 pm
Carol D: The proof you offer relies heavily on someone named "Hans von Spakovsky," a name with which I was not familiar, so I did a little research on this individual, and this is what I learned:

According to Wikipedia:

Hans Anatol von Spakovsky (born March 11, 1959) is an American attorney and a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He was nominated to the FEC by President George W. Bush on December 15, 2005 and was appointed by recess appointment on January 4, 2006.[1]

However, von Spakovsky's nomination was opposed by Senate Democrats, who argued that his oversight of voter laws was unacceptably partisan and that he had consistently acted to disenfranchise poor and minority voters.[2][3] Opposition to the nomination was bolstered by objections from career Justice Department staff, who accused von Spakovsky of politicizing his nominally non-partisan office to an unprecedented degree.[4]

While von Spakovsky and the Bush Administration denied the accusations of partisanship, the nomination was withdrawn on May 15, 2008.[5] Von Spakovsky subsequently joined the staff of the Heritage Foundation, a politically conservative think tank."

Early career

Von Spakovsky, originally from Huntsville, Alabama, is a first-generation American whose parents immigrated to the United States in 1951 after meeting in a refugee camp as displaced persons after the end of World War II. He received a B.S. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1981 and a J.D. from the Vanderbilt University Law School in 1984. Von Spakovsky is a member of the Georgia and Tennessee bars. Before entering politics, he worked as a government affairs consultant, in a corporate legal department, and in private practice.

Von Spakovsky served as Republican Party chairman in Fulton County, Georgia and as a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Registration and Election Board, where he championed strict voter-identification laws.[6][7] While in Georgia, von Spakovsky was a member of the politically conservative Federalist Society. He worked as a lawyer for George W. Bush's team during the 2000 Florida Presidential election recount.[6] After Bush's election victory, von Spakovsky was appointed to the Civil Rights division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Justice Department tenure

Von Spakovsky's tenure at the Justice Department was marked by a focus on voter eligibility and voter fraud. In 2005, he led the Department's approval of a controversial Georgia law requiring voters to produce photo ID,[8] despite strong objections from Justice Department staff that the law would disproportionately harm and disenfranchise African-American voters.[7] Von Spakovksy subsequently acknowledged that he had written a law review article supporting such photo ID laws under the pseudonym "Publius", prompting concerns that he should have recused himself from the Justice Department decision.[9] The Georgia law was subsequently overturned by a federal judge, who compared it to a "Jim-Crow era poll tax".[9] During von Spakovsky's tenure, more than half of the career Justice Department staff left the voting section in protest.[10]

Von Spakovsky also served on the Board of Advisors of the Election Assistance Commission, a government commission created by the Help America Vote Act of 2002. He clashed with the Commission head, Paul DeGregorio. Several individuals with knowledge of the situation, speaking anonymously to McClatchy Newspapers, alleged that DeGregorio had resisted an overtly partisan agenda and his removal was therefore engineered by von Spakovsky.[9]

Federal Election Commission

Von Spakovsky received his recess appointment by President Bush to the FEC in January 2006. His confirmation hearings were contentious, as Democratic Senators criticized von Spakovsky's Justice Department tenure and accused him of partisanship.[11] A group of career Justice Department staff wrote a letter to the Senate arguing against von Spakovsky's appointment, saying that he "played a major role in the implementation of practices which injected partisan political factors into decision-making on enforcement matters and into the hiring process, and included repeated efforts to intimidate career staff."[12][13][14] In response to questioning from the Senate, von Spakovsky repeatedly asserted that he could not remember or recall his involvement in various controversial Justice Department decisions, drawing comparisons to the testimony of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.[15]

Faced with mounting opposition, von Spakovsky ultimately withdrew from the FEC confirmation process.[5] He subsequently assumed a position with the Heritage Foundation, a politically conservative think tank."

Please read about this man's background very carefully, Carol. It isn't pretty. The fact that "During von Spakovsky's tenure, more than half of the career Justice Department staff left the voting section in protest" is very telling.

Most of the information you offer is from the Heritage Foundation and "The Foundry," a conservative policy news blog blog associated with the Heritage Foundation. Again, according to Wikipedia, "Heritage is primarily funded through donations from private individuals and charitable foundations. Businessman Joseph Coors contributed the first $250,000 to start The Heritage Foundation in 1973[citation needed]. Other significant contributors have included the conservative Olin, Scaife, DeVos and Bradley foundations.

In 2007, Heritage reported an operating revenue of $75.0 million dollars. As of February 2011, Heritage reported 710,000 supporters.[39] Heritage Foundation is also a part of the Koch Foundation Associate Program.[40]"

As Dotty pointed out in one of her comments, The Heritage Foundation is also a part of the Koch Foundation Associate Program. If that doesn't sound a warning bell, I don't know what will...

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 9:39 pm
Susanne, your diligence is commendable. Let us hope others take note and heed all of those red flags.

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 9:46 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Susanne because you have done so within the last week.

Susanne R (234)
Monday August 6, 2012, 9:48 pm
As is yours, Carrie! If we don't check our sources, we might believe anything --and that is NOT good for our country! Many green stars sent. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to send one to Kit because I've used up her weekly allotment...

Past Member (0)
Monday August 6, 2012, 10:18 pm
Thank you.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 6, 2012, 10:33 pm
Do you liberals realize that any other proof then what you come up with is all hogwash to you!? Imagine that!! ROTFL!!!

Carrie B (306)
Monday August 6, 2012, 10:41 pm
Well since we liberals are the only ones who offered any proof here, I guess the joke and the hogwash are on you.

P A (117)
Monday August 6, 2012, 11:16 pm
Drat! Can't sent green stars to Carrie or Kit or Lynn or Susanne yet as the computer won't let me - sorry! Thanks Carrie - you at least, alone, quoted the actual document (see the link WAY back at the top where Carrie has her first post on this subject) where it says the Democrats want to extend the voting to others not restrict it.

Past Member (0)
Monday August 6, 2012, 11:32 pm
This is a silly post. Don't waste my time.

Suruna WTF (38)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:07 am
Hey Rog, ya I'm impressed, anyone else impressed? Anyone, anyone?

Carol, you've done a masterful job presenting your case, but your sources have been found wanting and weak. As badly as you want to convince us to see and understand what you believe to be the demise of law and liberty, it is the liberals that maintain true communion with these things. The GOP and the Tea Party sell rapacious rhetoric and have moral and ethical values that harken back to the Medieval Fiefdoms.

I'm friends with nearly all comment contributors here, including Carol. I'd just like to say that we are going to see real and severe conflict, and increasing, in our debates. Let us agree to pursue the truth above all else, and to have the courage to re-regard those things for which overwhelmingly convincing and incontrovertible argument is presented.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:30 am
Suruna..Sorry but I just have to disagree with you on this one. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that this is the mob mentality that is always with liberals...always..they feel if they can all gang up on one person then they win I guess. Not the case though! I have heard ever since 08 that none of the sources that we Conservatives come up with are correct or right or whatever and it's always the liberals sites that have the truth...again..not quite the case but I won't waste my time on trying to convince any of you what is right or correct because you have all made up your mind that you are right and that's fine with me....I know better! :-) Actually I pity the whole lot for being so blinded...but the kool aid is good I guess so keep on a drink'n!!

Dotty...IF you read any of the articles that I added on you would see just exactly what the lawsuit is intended to do but seeing as how you refuse to read all the info you REALLY think I am going to waste my time on reading an Obama lawsuit!? I have to say anything makes more sense than listening to you guys!

Alexandra Rodda (180)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 4:08 am
Carol Dreeszen, of course you should have read all the info before going into your diatribe.

I'll quote you: ....but seeing as how you refuse to read all the info you REALLY think I am going to waste my time on reading an Obama lawsuit!? I have to say anything makes more sense than listening to you guys!

We get some idea of the facts by reading the source materials. Otherwise you'll just believe what Fox News tells you.

One has to be open minded and willing to change one's mind when irrefutable evidence presents itself to one.
Weak minded people on the other hand, go into a cognitive dissonance spin and always deny facts and cling to the delusion.

Do you actually know what a fact is?

Past Member (0)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 8:48 am
I must be honest and say I was surprised to still see this misinforill eing posted. This post bothered me so much that I had to take this post to the base Im stationed in Californai..Fort Irwin..I gave this post to my Sgt. 1st. Class Flitz who put it simply.
And I quote : "This post is not just misleading but filled with ALOT of false information. We must remeber that in the time election we must gather facts on both sides. The United States Military has always been a staple in elections. Posts like this are nothing more than misinformation."
I beleive Sgt. 1 Class Flitz summorized this post well.

Lyta V (36)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 9:27 am
I was of two minds whether to note this or not. One by noting it I feel it might be spreading more disinformation, however given the great debate showing real information as opposed to regurgitated talking points via Carol, some might just become fully informed on what the Rightwingers are trying to do, aka I'm rubber you're cement or as those of us informed, psychological projection. If you have no valid attacks you lower your side to name calling, "foreign, not American" and spread disinformation as far an wide as dollars will allow. That includes getting people like Carol to spread as much misinformation as far and wide using zero dollars. I have learned this about this particular election, people like Carol will never change their belief system that got them to where there is blatent cognitive dissidence so why bother. In this case the correct side, pro our President and his defense of a fundamental right to vote, has done such a perfect textbook job of debunking everything posted anti President Obama, it's a good use and spectacular read on factually debunking lies and propaganda. Thanks everyone though you have to know Carol will never ever see the light of truth. IMHO better if no one ever noted her submissions, she'd end up talking to herself.

DORIS L (61)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 10:00 am
Allof the above and probably all of the below is just one reason why I hate politics.

Cynthia Davis (340)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 11:06 am
There are none so blind as those who will not see. I fear carol is as blind as a bat. Dotty has spelled it out as clear as glass and still she cannot or will not see. It's beyond me.

Roger Skinner (14)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 11:16 am
Typical Obamaphobia BS that is basically an outright lie. The article talks almost entirely about absentee voting which has NOTHING to do with the Ohio lawsuit. Ohioans, military or civilian, can vote absentee as long as their ballot is postmarked by the day before the election and arrive within 10 days after the election. That hasn't changed. The lawsuit is about IN-PERSON voting. The Ohio Republican-controlled legislature and Republican Governor, decided to reduce the number of days that Ohio civilians could have for early IN-PERSON voting. The lawsuit isn't about the military voting, but about the restriction to civilian voting.

Kit B (276)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:05 pm

When will you see Carol? So many here have fully debunked this inflammatory, defective and fallacious article. Still Carol you insist on defending this totally inaccurate information.

This issue is not one of right or left politics, were even a word of this article
authentic, it would be incumbent on every American to investigate. Then proceed to make a judicious effort to support the voting rights of every American solider. In fact, every American is endowed from birth with a right to vote and any infringement on that right should be fully investigated and even considered treasonous.

You have before you the truthful facts of the Ohio lawsuit, and still you are making an effort to condemn those who would offer you the facts. Try to understand, this is not about liberal verses conservative, democrat or republican. This is about the inherent right to vote. Your source is so flawed that if you would just read what been presented and not rely on fully fictitious and misleading, disinformation, your actions would be applauded.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:06 pm
One has to be open minded and willing to change one's mind when irrefutable evidence presents itself to one.
Weak minded people on the other hand, go into a cognitive dissonance spin and always deny facts and cling to the delusion.

Alexandra...Being the Psychiatrist that you are I would think you would know that but quite obviously the way you are hog swindled into believing Obama you prove yourself otherwise!! So sad!!

Do you actually know what a fact is?

I have to ask you this myself because what you go on by facts and what you believe are facts are so totally opposite of REAL facts it makes one wonder about you! You refuse to open your eyes to what ia going on in this country today and what Obama has done to destroy your freedom and yet you stick up for him!?!? Urrgghhhhhh...

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:28 pm
Obviously, you will buy anything that discredits Obama and even when you are wrong, refuse to cede to the point. Thus, me thinks, there may be a little bit of a racial component to your dislike. I certainly am not a big Obama fan of late, but the alternative will lead to the complete downfall of the American Republic.

Dotty....Obviously I buy anything that Obama does to this country to destroy it which as of the day he took office is EVERYTHING he has touched!! Those are facts!They are not read out of an article..those are daily events that the man has done while in office and he is getting worse, more controlling, more arrogant, more disrespectful and more Muslim every day!! Any man who hates this country as much as Obama does has no business being a President and a bad one at that!! And you believe all of his BS!! So pathetically sad!!

As far as staying on liberals are fine ones to make any kind of a comment on staying on will switch whatever it is that is being talked about to whatever it is you want to make the topic about! That is why it makes more sense talking to a brick get get a better response!

And as far as a racial overtone to what I am saying...THAT is a perfect example of what I just try and make a topic about what YOU want it to say...sorry though I am not a racist..I always believe the ones who are racist it has to be on THEIR mind to even mention it so THOSE who do ARE the racists!! Did I happen to mention anything about racism!? And by the wya I LOVE Allen West..not there is a real true blue BLACK candidate for President! He would do this country good and protect it to the best of his ability..contrary to the way Obama is protecting us which is Zilch! And if Obama is not on your favorites list right now but you think Romney is worse than Obama...well then you really haven't seen the light after all!

Gene J (290)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:36 pm
Kit? "The only people in this election messing around with voting rights are those in the states that are using the transparent excuse of voter fraud, where none does or has existed. This very slanted and light on FACTS article is just WRONG." You're right

Carrie, you're right.

Dottie you have it right on the nose. The President is trying to ensure ALL Ohioans have the same right to vote, the suit has nothing whatsoever to do with preventing military votes and the Romney campaign knows it. They are outright lying about this. Which should surprise no one since they do that a lot. And it is standard practice for Mittens going all the way back to his silly campaign against Ted Kennedy. Sigh.

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:38 pm
Carol D. says "Dotty....Obviously I buy anything that Obama does to this country to destroy it which as of the day he took office is EVERYTHING he has touched!! Those are facts!They are not read out of an article..those are daily events that the man has done while in office and he is getting worse, more controlling, more arrogant, more disrespectful and more Muslim every day!! Any man who hates this country as much as Obama does has no business being a President and a bad one at that!! And you believe all of his BS!! So pathetically sad!!"

Wow, if that isn't a hateful and bigoted remark I don't know what is. That statement shows your true feelings and motivation for your refusal to accept truth and proven facts. It is not something to be proud of.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:43 pm
I have learned this about this particular election, people like Carol will never change their belief system that got them to where there is blatent cognitive dissidence so why bother. In this case the correct side, pro our President and his defense of a fundamental right to vote, has done such a perfect textbook job of debunking everything posted anti President Obama, it's a good use and spectacular read on factually debunking lies and propaganda. Thanks everyone though you have to know Carol will never ever see the light of truth. IMHO better if no one ever noted her submissions, she'd end up talking to herself.

And Christy..How do you feel about dead people voting and illegals...these are same of the people who voted in the last election and we didn't hear any of you complaining because dead people voted! And illegals!! Do you call that fair too!? Is there no pride in the Democrat party that they would stoop so low as to have DEAD people and ILLEGALS voting and Obama wants this to happen because it's more votes for him this way! Those are not lies..those are facts that have been proven over and over again. So saying that you actually believe Obama is not trying to stop the Military vote because this is a good share of the votes against him!? If so I have some great property out behind out place here that I am sure you would love!! And if you think I will never see the light of the truth..that's fine with me..I would rather SEE the light of the truth and have you think I don't than to have you think I do and I don't! :-) GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!

Terrie Williams (798)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:51 pm
Goebbels would be so proud of the Uber Spawn he has created through the likes of Kockroach Brothers, Boar Limbaugh and Faux Noise.....

I feel sorry for this nation in the coming years because, in the vein that the Teabaggers, the Ayn Rand worshipping Extreme Reichwing Libertarians and the ill educated, propagandized, non-critical thinking, biased, misogynist, race hating, white-supremacist, backwoods, Redneck lemmings they have created and call their 'base' will become their Brownshirts, their SS, their Gestapo.

And once they have attained what their (obscenely rich and powerful corporate body) overlords desire -- complete and total control AKA Fascism, and they have effectively fomented a civil war where we will all fight it out in the streets and hope we survive....only then will their 'base' come to realize that they too will have become nothing more than serfs and slaves with the rest of what's left of the American people.

It will dawn on them when they too begin to 'disappear' or are taken to 're-education' camps or just merely shot in the street for not being 'patriotic' or 'God-fearing' enough. The sadness is, when they realize they have been duped, taken-in, lied to and deceived beyond measure, it is then that maybe, just maybe, they will find what is left of their humanity or their 'morals'. But it will come too late. They will realize with a very deep and unending horror that they were, indeed, a part of it that let it happen, that voted in the end of Democracy, the end of common sense, the end of freedom as we knew it. That freedom was never perfect or just or all-encompassing, but it was something that worked...for a while. And, maybe saddest of all, there once was a time that Democrats and Republicans could actually talk to one another with civility, mutual respect and even friendship. Not anymore, not ever again, I think.

If you think that what I have described will not happen, cannot happen or is an absolute improbability in this have not been paying attention and you are not awake.

Kit B (276)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:53 pm

Carol, after your most recent bombastic and poorly written rant, I could say that you are opprobrious, alas you make the choice to go far beyond that simple definition. That you chose to bring race into this discussion of your own volition, is also extremely questionable, to say the least.

There is no reasoning, no discussion, most certainly no debate. You have no skills beyond name calling and misappropriation of factual information, you lack the ability to share in a free exchange of thought and ideas. Perhaps, everyone here is "out to get you" just another indication of your lack of skills and knowledge on a topic that you have chosen to bring to Care2. For me your ramblings are contemptuous, even malignant, you may continue to carry on no one really cares about your drooling attempts at slander.

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 12:56 pm
Carol you talk about dead people and "illegals" voting like it is something new and Obama created it. Have you ever read a history or civics book? Do you know how many times in the history of this country and the world there has been some type of questionable ethics going on in an election? That is what Obama wants to STOP or at least minimize. Voting scandals are not new nor are they limited to a particular generation or political party. This has been going on forever and most of us don't like it, but promoting those who want to not only continue the practice, but make it worse and use it to their advantage is not in your best interest. Why can't you see that?

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 1:02 pm
Wow, if that isn't a hateful and bigoted remark I don't know what is. That statement shows your true feelings and motivation for your refusal to accept truth and proven facts. It is not something to be proud of

Carrie...Anything I say you find hateful and bigoted...and you are so perfect correct!? So what's new!?

Kit..seeing as how whatever you write to me is always a negative where you tell me how dumb I am and how uninformed I am and how perfect you are shows exactly who you are...that is one thing I have found ever since being here on Care2 is how liberals gravitate to personal insults to try and make themselves look better than!!. That must get SO boring trying to make yourselves look better all the time!! And as far as mentioning racist..I was not the one who mentioned racist first IF you check back and see the facts!

Jae A (316)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 1:21 pm
Same ol teabaggers B.S. of posting misinformation and or out right lies with nothing to back them up other than FoxFactlessNews...aka...Teabagger and or Racist Entertainment programing for the hatefull at heart and evil of my opinion.

Yes, the Fact/Facts are that this article is misleading at best ...False...a Lie. .to stir the mindless teabaggers into another hyped mindset for the sake of ...insaniTea...period. This article has been shown to be False on other threads about it but still they carry on with their 'insaniTea' , not taking time to read anything other than their post and own comments while caring not for facts/truth....with nothing more than hopes that some will believe this/them...all the while the facts point in the opposite direction of that they are trying to point others.

They aren't known for doing anything that actually helps the country.. nor will they ever help solve any of it's problems...the proof of that has been shown by their Republican members in Congress time and time again over the last four years. They just love to hate and blame the black guy in the White House for their own hate/ignorance/stupidy/etc...

Carol is proving to us, it appears to me, that she doesn't not need no stink'n facts to show that she is right..only her stubbornness and willness to keep denying that she is totally / 100% wrong... as is this article. Reminds me of the GOPer..Mitt Romney...who thinks that just by saying 'Trust Me' that everyone will. Just how arrogant/ignorant does one have to be to believe that's enough for the 'commener's and all they need from/about him...

Using our troops like this,to promote rightcrazywinger/teabagger misinformation/lies for their own political agenda, well that's the shameful/disgraceful part of their action/mindsets in posting/supporting articles like this one in my opinion.

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 1:25 pm
No Carol I'm not perfect nor am I always correct, but I am able to tell the difference between fear mongering propaganda and fact. Especially when I have numerous reliable publications and documents to prove it.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 1:31 pm
Oh Come on know you always insist you know what facts and truth are!! But I won't argue with you on that so go ahead and say what you want!

JAE!!!!!!!!!!! Looks like the gang's all here ya been!? It's always good to see you share your opinion of me too!! :-) And you can believe what you want too! :-)

Suruna WTF (38)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 1:46 pm
Well, Ladies and Gents, the "I LOVE Allen West" comment set off my gag response. I try to find a place of agree to disagree, but this is my country, and I've had it with the brainwashed fanatics that insist that 'their' facts are the real and true facts. All we get is avoidance, denial, spin and lies. Romney wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit him on the ass! To those who continue to support the delusional notion that Obama is responsible for the condition We find ourselves in need to get off the blogs and watch freaking CSPAN, congress at work, HA! So don't even attempt to suggest that our situation is Obama's fault when McTurtle walks into the Senate on the very first day of Obama's Presidency and declares that Nothing will get done but to get rid of him, "our agenda is to make him a one term President." He didn't have a chance to do anything, blocked at every turn, yet what he Has accomplished under these circumstances is amazing. You really need to read and watch sources that report on the forward progress accomplished in spite of the opposition. But that would require a more expansive exposure to Real news, facts and figures.

If you want to get angry about what is being done to our system, how about all the taxpayer money wasted on this Do Nothing Congress? IMO they've accepted payment, to do our business, under false pretense, I think that's fraud. I'm pissed.

Jae A (316)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:01 pm
I do and will and good to see you and your assorted hire for lies crew here also. Guess you didn't expect anyone but the teabagger choir to show up and comment in support of this factless fear mongering article that uses our troops to send out rightwing propaganda/misinformation...

That being said: I have one last thought/question for those who support this factless article...'Are you that F'n Stupid or just Evil ?'

. (0)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:06 pm
This is one of the most tiresome entries I have read in a long time. To the military- vote as early as you can....
For God's sake Kit has had to defend herself with such nonsense.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:14 pm
Flashback: Democrats Worked Hard to Disqualify Overseas Military Ballots in 2000 Recount

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.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:31 pm

Jae..On the contrary...Truth and facts tend to bring out either the worst or the best in people and I certainly not blind to the fact that when it is added only the supporters of it will come out! If only the frustration and the anger and the hatred that I see here would be put to good use this country could be saved easier than what it's going to take! There is the power of ONE in numbers!

Jae A (316)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:32 pm
How about no more using our Troops for Corporate and Righwing propaganda. I think the right has done enough harm to them by sending them into Corporate Wars for profits to begin with...and that is absolutely believeable when you look at what the Republicans have done in just the last twelve years.

Facts one is trying to suppress the votes of our men and women in the military...instead they are trying to make sure everyone has a way to vote early / absentee...even those in the military.

If the Dem.'s wanted to stop Republicans from voting they'd do as the Republicans did in the 2004 election...use voting machines that will change the votes to their choice as was done to make sure Dubya won that one...the one after the one where the rightwing Supreme Court Judges took away all votes except theirs when they appointed Dubya to be the president in 2000. I think that 'fact' alone shows that the Repubicans are the masters at suppressing votes of their opposition.

Again I about no more using our Troops for speical interest righwing propanda/political agendas. They'd done enough,given enough, by being used for Corporate profits..for a few as it is..and that should be more than enough....even for the greediest and or evil of the Rightwing in my opinion.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:37 pm

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:39 pm
Facts one is trying to suppress the votes of our men and women in the military...instead they are trying to make sure everyone has a way to vote early / absentee...even those in the military.

Sure Jae...Sure!

Again I about no more using our Troops for speical interest righwing propanda/political agendas. They'd done enough,given enough, by being used for Corporate profits..for a few as it is..and that should be more than enough....even for the greediest and or evil of the Rightwing in my opinion.

You are right...they have done enough and given enough and that is why this is so important that THEIR VOTE COUNTS!!

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 2:43 pm
Carol, please read Military Veterans Blast Romney

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 3:57 pm
Carol, both Kit B. and Dotty are more educated and more well read than I. My ego is not so fragile that I can't admit that. There are times when I disagree with both and don't support their opinion, but I do respect what they say and at least research their sources. How about you? That being said, I know that more often than not Kit B, Dotty and I agree on most issues. Sorry, but that's the way it is. That doesn't mean anyone is ganging up on you - it means we are trying to show you something you have not seen or really thought about before.

Paula M (39)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 4:20 pm
Thank you, Carol, for this article. Those who argue that the litigation seeks to extend late voting rights to all citizens miss the point of the charge.Regardless of the immediate result of the litigation, the Complaint of Obama for America and the DNC challenging Ohio’s law denies any place for special accommodations that would allow serving soldiers to vote. In the view of the President and the DNC any such accommodations are inherently illegitimate.

This is a problem for a soldier who wants to vote. Due to the logistics of military correspondence it is often difficult for soldiers to vote in a timely manner, and as Carol has noted military votes are frequently declared ineligible for no fault of the soldiers who cast them. The National Defense Committee reports that the primary reason for military voter disenfranchisement is that soldiers do not have sufficient time to cast a vote. Democrats have a sad history of opposing any effort to help serving soldiers cast legal ballots, and the legal position asserted by the President and the DNC is consistent with that history.

Whether the early voting window should be extended for all Ohioans is debatable - it appears that the reason the window was pulled back was because some counties closed their election offices over the weekend, resulting in a situation where early voting was not uniformly available around the state. In either case it is outrageous for the President and the DNC to categorically reject all laws designed to assist military servicemen when it is clear that our servicemen and women often need special assistance as a result of their unique situation.

Jae A (316)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 4:25 pm
Carol said..."their votes count' in the 2000 election ? Ya know, the one where no votes other than the rightwing majority of the Supreme Court counted. Give it up Carol...using the troops as some sort of rightwing shield for promoting lies/hate/wars and just pure evil is nothing short of shameful/disgusting. You aren't defending their right to vote by making up lies or promoting them for reasons of nothing other than your polical opinion/views...and that is my set in stone opinion of any who use our troops in such a shameful/disgusting manor.

Again, I ask the question of those rightwingers/teabaggers on this thread..."Are you F'n stupid or just evil people ?" Of course you don't have to offer up an answer,few if anyone on this thread expects any of you to do so... but that's the question that on many of our minds when it comes to rightwing extremist/teabaggers in general.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS BY Continuing to ask those on the right to stop using them as political scape goats for the sake of their parties propaganda machine ! Have they no respect....personally I don't think so , not when it comes to the ways they've used our troops for almost 12 years to advance their political and corporate greed.

Antonia Windham (6)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 5:47 pm
The facts show this article's untruthful. The lawsuit's not about taking extra days away from military voters. It's about preventing the state from disallowing others to vote in-person for the 3 days just prior to election day. About wanting to give more time to vote, not less.

From some, a great agitation over nothing.

Harebrained to insist upon a fact once the fact's disproven. Red-facedness isn't an excuse for pretending something's what it isn't.

Michael T (82)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 6:19 pm
Carole I have to tell you that it is a lot of fun watching someone, despite evidence, defending a sinking ship. You and I have tangled before and I found your evidence lacking in totality.
Is this your first article on Care2? Well, if it is you have demonstrated perhaps the highest level of incompetence in presenting an issue and one intended simply to poke folks in the eye with a hateful verbal sharp stick.

Below are abc news, veterans news now, salon, media matters, talking points, business insider, WAPO gave him 3 pinnochios and fact check

sux to be you darlin

Vicky P (476)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 6:31 pm an article against Obama and everyone comes out and attacks the person..sad really. Both sides are liars and any non-biased person can look at it and see, politicians are all the same, don't kid yourself people

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 6:46 pm
Michael G and all the rest who seem to refuse to believe this is a viable story and refuse to take it seriously..Well check this out then and let's hear your wise words then...this is FROM the TOP Military people IN OHIO....they are the one who are saying what has been happening and going go ahead and call THEM liars!! I will believe them over any of those here who claim they know what this law suit really means...whether they have someone in the Military or not I do believe these people know what the HE*L they are talking about!!

Obama campaign sues to restrict military voting in Ohio

Ohio Veterans United, along with a number of military groups, including the National Guard Association have voiced opposition to a lawsuit filed by President Obama’s campaign, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party challenging the fairness of Ohio’s early voting rules claiming that the state’s use of a two-tiered early voting process violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.

“Military voters deserve to have every opportunity possible to cast their ballot, and in Ohio, we have worked with Ohio military organizations to ensure they do,” says Jon Husted, Ohio Secretary of State. “This premise of the Obama campaign’s lawsuit is that because of the high level of support we offer to members of the military and their families, the rest of Ohioans are somehow being treated unfairly. I fundamentally disagree and will make no apologies for the additional flexibility we have afforded our service members to participate in Ohio elections. The truth is there is plenty of opportunity for all voters to participate in the election this November whether they choose to vote early, by mail or on Election Day.”

In Ohio, state law allows families of armed forces members and civilians overseas to vote through the Monday before an election while early voting for all other Ohioans ends the preceding Friday. The Obama campaign wants a court order to invalidate the Ohio statutes.

“The men and women serving in the U.S. military, who risk their lives for us, have often been denied the basic right to vote,” says Harry Prestanski, executive director and founding member of Ohio Veterans United. “Our mission is to ensure that military voters have the ability to cast their votes and to have them counted. This lawsuit is an intentional attack on those serving in the military and purposely disenfranchises those serving their country.”
Ohio was recently recognized by The Military Voter Protection (MVP) Project for their leadership in promoting and protecting the voting rights of America’s military service members and their families.

Ohio House Bill Number 194, House Bill Number 224 and Senate Bill Number 295 were enacted by the 129th Ohio General Assembly. These laws allows voters using the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voter Act (“UOCAVA”) to vote early in-person at a board of elections office up through the Monday before Election Day, while non-UOCAVA voters can vote early in-person at a board of elections office (or designated alternate site) only up until 6 p.m. on the Friday before Election Day. Basically, the Ohio Legislature recognized the undue hardship imposed on those military men and women serving and provided an additional three days for them to vote.The lawsuit by the Obama campaign would eliminate the extra three days allowed the military.

“I find this move by the Obama campaign and the Democratic Party to be offensive,” said Prestanski. “In 2000, the Democratic party disenfranchised military voters using absentee ballots when key Democratic Party officials led a campaign to have numerous military ballots be disqualified .It was disgusting then and it is disgusting now.”

When Governor Romney was asked about the Obama campaign filing suit in Ohio to try to reduce early voting by a few days for the military Romney replied, “You know, I haven’t seen that report and so I can’t comment on the specific filing that you described. I can tell you that I believe our military and the men and women in uniform have an absolute right to speak in this election. Their lives are affected by what happens in policies here in the country and the direction of America. And in my view, every effort should be taken by the government of the United States of America to assure that every member of the military has the right to vote and their vote is counted. Any effort to impede the right of our military members overseas or here domestically in voting would be an extraordinary violation of the trust that we should have for those who serve so valiantly.”

The Ohio case is Obama for America v. Husted, 12-cv-636, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio (Columbus). Ohio Attorney General Michael DeWine and Secretary Husted have both filed papers opposing the Obama campaign’s complaint.

Fifteen military organizations have joined the Obama v. Husted case to fight to preserve military voting rights!

They include:

National Guard Association

Association of the U.S. Army

Association of the U.S. Navy

Marine Corps League

Military Officers Association of America

Reserve Officers Association

National Association for Uniformed Services

Non Commissioned Officers Association of the USA

Army Reserve Association

Fleet Reserve Association

Special Forces Association

U.S. Army Ranger Association, INC.


National Defense Committee

Military Order of the World Wars

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 6:57 pm
Thanks Vicky! I agree with's pathetic!!!

Michael..Don't you worry little head off about me...I do just fine on my own and none of it sucks!! :-) I do like a challenge and trust me people like you ARE a challenge....not that one can necessarily get any points across to you but it can be fun pointing out the hypocrisy sometimes!! LOL

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 6:58 pm
Thanks so much Paula!!! it's always a blessing to see someone who actually knows what's going on! :-)

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 7:00 pm
And Michael...lamestream media and all of the liberal sites you came up thank you! You can believe it if you'd like but I will pass on their rhetoric!

Carrie B (306)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 7:33 pm
Care2 Petition for all to sign Romney Don't Restrict Veterans' Voting Rights

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 7:46 pm
That's good Carrie....LOL

Oh think you know me so well..and I picked up on the "intentional" misspelling of my name quaint! And nervous!? ROTFL You certainly do show the liberal insults well too!! :-) You sound quite agitated and unhappy! take a deep'll be alright!

Michael T (82)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 7:55 pm
@Dottie writes Carolle - You posted an article which is completely false. Now you cannot find anything to justify your poor vetting of posting this piece of crap article Obviously, you will buy anything that discredits Obama and even when you are wrong, refuse to cede to the point. Thus, me thinks, there may be a little bit of a racial component to your dislike. I certainly am not a big Obama fan of late, but the alternative will lead to the complete downfall of the American Republic.

I totally agree Dottie. Whether or not Carolle is engaging in an outright bigoted attempt at racism is debatable. But there is an odor drifting toward us from the direction of Denmark that begs the question.

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that she just hates the President on principle. That hatred becomes an ideology, and that ideology becomes a dogma. When ideology is dragged in and slides to dogma all intellectual activity ceases and truth is the first casualty. Unable to admit to this, as it would give away the agenda, Carolle must insist on adhering to it even though truth has been sacrificed.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 8:04 pm

Geynell Eskite (68)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 8:28 pm
Wow. The author of this crap must get her info from Fox News. President Obama is trying to EXPAND voting rights in that state, including veterans. Romney is the one trying to curtail them. Check your facts.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 8:32 pm
Wrong again!!!

. (0)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 9:26 pm
I can't believe Carol was allowed to print this steaming pile of right wing do-do. You can't prove any of this, and you can't link to any actual facts. And now you have been reduced to pigeon chess.

Did you expect only other right wing parrots to post here?

Past Member (0)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 9:30 pm
Pure Propaganda
Republicans are very busy painting themselves as 'the victims'.
Seems they secretly admire the Democrats as they have published accounts in which they have revealed 'secret plots' of their own but placed Democrats in the role of instigators.
This is their big plan now, obfuscate the facts and paint themselves s 'victims'.
Truth is, BOTH parties are puppets of the real regime - Fascist Corporate Bullies.
Americans have not educated themselves well enough to realize what is happening.
If America does not awake soon, their end is near.
The whole system is rigged, the people are victims of BOTH parties.
I used to think the Republicans were the biggest liars.
Now Democrats are 'trying to be more like Republicans', they are succeeding.
Democrat promises to stop the lying and cheating of Republicans are becoming their own great lie, they are not changing anything - they are just continuing the same Fascist policies.
This story is just more lies, troop always vote in favor of war.
"ROTFL" must mean Republicans Only Tell Facist Lies - because that is the truth.
Sadly, this is also becoming true for Demorats.
America needs "the greater of two goods", NOT "the lesser of two evils" as their national leader.
Democracy has been Hijacked, so 'who votes' does not matter anymore - thanks to Diebold, the Fascists are in complete control.

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 10:12 pm
John Actually no you are totally wrong on the ROTFL and you know it! BUT...if you want to make it something else go ahead! And I don't know where all of this the Republicans are making themselves the victims here comes from...the fact of the matter is it has been proven that the Democrats have tried to stop the Military vote from being counted in the past and this is what is happening again. Can a Zebra change it's stripes!? So here we are again with the same scenario and anyone who thinks Obama is doing anything for the good or the better for the people or the Military they are totally asleep!! The only time Obama does anything that "appears" to be for the people he has an alterior motive and it's a selfish one!! He is a manipulator, a controller and a Socilist!! And if you want to talk about Fascist..look to the Democrats and Obama! It's funny how you can totally disregard what the article is about and the organizations that are mentioned in it that are against this lawsuit and make it all about Republicans.....the article is about the MILITARY...not Republicans..the Republicans are just trying to stop more totally unfair actions from being done by Obama against the Military! And please don't compare Republicans to Democrats....there are some very nice Democrats that actually think for themselves and can see through Obama and what he is about but for the most part I have not seen a whole lot of those! And there is no Democrat who I secretly admire for their Democratic actions, words and etc; and I could be wrong but I don't think you will find too many if any Republicans that can fit your claim! There are some Republicans too that are nothing but pure RINOS..they are not Republicans IMO!! And as far as I am concerned no matter what party anyone is in when it comes to doing something purely for the benefit of themselves or something they promote then none of them deserve to be in Congress!! The Government is our problem..there is too much of it!! They need to get the hell out of our lives and let people live their lives! Obama does not want to do that...he wants people to depend on the Government so he can control them that way!! He has got to go!!!!!!!

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 10:22 pm
John F..Well if you have seen it before that's funny seeing as how it just came out and i am sure you will be seeing a lot more stories and you probably won't like them either! But this was a smart move by the Obama administration to bring up this lawsuit..take up time waste more money try and put a negative claim on Romney and make him look like the bad guy and LOOK it worked with all of you guys!!...and it's a distraction...Obama does well with situations like this! Kind of like wanting to see Romney's tax records...throws the scent off his own personal records...let's see his College records..his Birth Certificate records...his school records...his foreign student records and all the other records..and then MAYBE it would work for Romney to share the rest of his tax records..until then I would tell him to blow off!!

Carol D (346)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 10:24 pm
Dotty..Don't believe the polls! They say what you want them to say because that is what they do when they want to make somebody believe their candidate is on top! On second thought that might be a good idea!

Suruna WTF (38)
Tuesday August 7, 2012, 11:45 pm
Hay-sus, Carol! Socialist And Fascist?

" The only time Obama does anything that "appears" to be for the people he has an alterior motive and it's a selfish one!! He is a manipulator, a controller and a Socilist!! And if you want to talk about Fascist..look to the Democrats and Obama! "

Socialist: A political advocate of socialism
Socialism: An economic system based on state ownership of capital

Fascist: An adherent of fascism or other right-wing authoritarian views
Fascism: A political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)

I find it hugely irritating when these two terms are leveled at the same person, it makes no freaking sense!

Nikolas K (94)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:53 am
How sad that Americans still believe their vote actually counts as it does not because if nobody voted for those the masters chose then they will just manipulate the outcome by use of the media just like they did with the 9/11 con job of planes hitting the twin towers. Tell a lie often enough and its soon accepted as truth.

JL A (281)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 1:53 am
Nikolas--such cynicism but it seems that many hope it proves true

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 2:31 am
Dotty..It's simple....STAY AWAY...problem are bringing on all of this whatever pain it is you are talking about.. all by yourself by coming into the topic!

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 2:33 am
Suruna...Here is some info...

A Whiff of Fascism from Obama's White House

Socialist or Fascist

Obama and Facism

Now this guy says he is not Fascist but has some VERY good information on Fascism..if you get the chance get the book Liberal Fascism by this Jonah Goldberg...I have the book and still am not done with it but it is very informative and I think everyone could learn so much about the relationship between Fascism and Socialism today compared to years ago and how the affects of today and back in the 20's are still the same with both!!
The Second Coming of American Liberal Fascism?

There is a little of each in this article that describes each one Fascism/Socialism and etc;
Obama, Hitler, And Exploding The Biggest Lie In History

Is It Within Bounds To Ask: Is Obama A Socialist?

Is Obama a Socialist? An Answer to Milos Forman

What Kind of Socialist Is Barack Obama?

Past Member (0)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 5:12 am
Silly Carol ~ you know how this isn't true? Because between non-stop campaigning with the elite, rich of Hollywood (ok for him to do, but not for Romney,) at $30,000 a head, constant rounds of golf, and parties at the White House, Obama has no time to create any additional trouble! Just when would he find the time?

I would rather die than vote for animal abuser Romney, but you people's comments are hysterical. Obama is the biggest saint to you, and as always, can do no wrong. It's the same copy and paste comments every time.

This is the biggest problem in American politics ~ people complain, and yet do nothing. The two-party system controls the country, and yet you continue to be part of it!

Antonia Windham (6)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 5:20 am
Magyar Girl, some who'll insist upon the facts being straight don't necessarily approve of Obama. One can both disapprove of a person's actions, position on the issues, and suchness and still insist that person be judged fairly. And you're very right - here in the U.S. it's a great unlikelihood that a candidate from any but the two major parties can get elected. I've no liking for either Obama or Romney and'll vote for neither of them. My own candidate'll not get elected (Hell not having frozen over as yet) - but at least he'll get my vote.

Abdessalam Diab (145)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 6:07 am
Noted.A very interesting discussion.Thanks Carrie

Arielle S (313)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 8:17 am
Reading all these comments makes it pretty clear who has the facts - and sorry, Carol, but it's not you.

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 11:57 am
Thanks so much John for your service!! God Bless You!! And also thank you for your very important input into this conversation! I have to disagree with you though on voting 3rd party because a third party vote is a vote for Obama...we can't afford to look at it any other way in this election! A third party candidate in this election is the wrong time to send a message to the establishment and i truly hope that you sincerely think about this long and hard. Once we get rid of Obama then the next election can be the one to try a different strategy but this election we HAVE TO get our country back first!! Obama is destroying this country and 4 more years is all he will need to totally submerge us forever!! So many can't see it and are totally blind to his agenda either on purpose or they are totally misinformed and can't see it. Just by what you have experienced here and voiced your opinion about shows to those who insist that the Democrats and Obama are hunky dory with the what this law suit says is in fact not the case at all. The claim they make against Romney as being the reason he is trying to stop voters is totally insane!! Romney has not and will not and has never tried to stop anyone from voting...Obama on the other hand....the list is long as to what he has done in this country to destroy the fabric of it and trying to disrupt the Military from getting 3 more days to vote is just another of his attacks on this country!!

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:11 pm
Silly Carol ~ you know how this isn't true? Because between non-stop campaigning with the elite, rich of Hollywood (ok for him to do, but not for Romney,) at $30,000 a head, constant rounds of golf, and parties at the White House, Obama has no time to create any additional trouble! Just when would he find the time?

Magyar..LOL...One would think that wouldn't they!! Somehow though when it comes to Hollyweed and his golf and his stars he makes time to work on more destruction as we speak!!

As far as Romney being an animal abuser..I don't agree with that at's funny how the lamestream media puts something out like them putting a dog carrier on top of the family car to go on vacations and somebody claims animal cruelty to the press and of course them being the spreader (like a maure spreader) of hatred makes sure it gets plastered all over Americas news stands, TV's, Media outlets and the people just scarf it up!! The dog was in a carrier, protected from the wind..loved being outside in the carrier..the carrier was locked for protection..the dog loved looking at the countryside and when they would get the carrier out to take him on vacation the dog would get all excited. How many people have seen their dog jump and run around with excitement when they see the owner with a dog leash which tells the dog they are going for a walk!? If the dog then is smart enough to know what's happening my guess is that Romney dog knew also when they were going on a vacation and he was excited! But..alas it's that terrible dog abuser that makes his dog happy to take him on a vacation that needs to be constantly attacked for treating his dog badly just because some egg head made the claim to the media and everyone else and it stick like spaghetti to a wall! It's too hard to think for some I guess!

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:17 pm
Thanks so much to all of you for replying and noting!! It's so very much appreciated! We may not all agree but isn't it wiser to raise questions and be able to disagree and yet see a different view point of another WITH RESPECT!?!? Differences can be very healthy but on the other hand when there are differences with no respect that's not so healthy...Thanks so much again and God Bless You All!!

Nancy L (141)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:25 pm
Thanks John. Some will never hear the truth.

Excellent job Carol.

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:33 pm
Thanks so much Nan and I LOVE your new avatar!!!

Suruna WTF (38)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:45 pm
John the R-cannots haven't been supporting the military, that's smoke and mirrors, they've been supporting Their Profits via the Industrial Military Complex. Haven't you noticed the privatizing of services that used to be provided by our forces? And don't forget to include the private combat forces. The disparity in pay alone should piss you off royally. Who is footing this bill? We are. Obama has been fighting to reestablish Veteran Benefits, not destroy them further. Cutting the Military Budget isn't about hurting our men and women serving, but to reel in the waste and abuse of our tax dollars. When the Pentagon says they don't want or need that damn plane, but our congressional corporatists insist, doesn't that send up a flag for you? The SOBs in DC are managing the budget appropriations to line their pockets, not to provide for those serving, returning, and facing continuing care.

Sorry John, this wasn't all directed at you, just had to speak to a couple of things.

The system we're (Fed / State) forcing our military personnel to depend on when attempting to cast their votes makes no sense. The Military could function as something such as an election clearing house. Rather than each GI having to receive a ballot and mail it back to the state of residence, on time, the overseas voting should be done on base and all results sent to the state of residence. It could be so simple.

I think we should ALL be able to vote as soon as both parties conclude their conventions and announce their candidates. Why not? What is the point of such tight and voter unfriendly regulation unless it is to discourage our votes?

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 12:50 pm
I think we should ALL be able to vote as soon as both parties conclude their conventions and announce their candidates. Why not? What is the point of such tight and voter unfriendly regulation unless it is to discourage our votes?

I think probably this is done to prevent fraud..the more time there is to vote gives anyone wanting to commit fraud more time to do so and it makes perfect sense to me. I mean it's bad enough the way it is with the limited amount of time we have to vote with all of the fraud...can you imagine if it was free reign on time limits to vote how much more it would increase!?

Maui Gal (68)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 1:59 pm
Wow Carol....KUDOS to you girl.....YOU posted more than enough information to back up this story.....thank you. John, thank you for your service....the Republicans at least recognize the military and veterans.....more than the other party has ever done....especially obama....he is only a user when he needs a photo op with the transparent of him. Go ahead and vote for him.....just remember....if he "should win".....becareful what you wished for.

Again Carol......many, many green stars coming your way!!!! I wish C2 wouldn't limit us because you deserve a truck load for sure.

Sandra S (38)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 2:27 pm
Being the wife of a retired military, I can empathize with soldiers & their families who are overseas. Most military are conservative and, of course, Democrats aren't interested in having their votes count. Thank you for the article, Carol.

Antonia Windham (6)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 3:47 pm
It wouldn't make sense to vote too early (right after the candidates are nominated by their parties) since a candidate can always pull out for various reasons before the election. Far less likely to happen right before the election when we currently vote. And if early voting like that happened and the returns were made public on an ongoing basis it'd likely tend to skew the votes of later voters (since seeing someone ahead or behind for a lengthy period of time before your own vote's cast may well cause you to change how you plan to vote based solely on who seems to be winning already or not.)

Past Member (0)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 6:15 pm
How do you feel about Bush (mabus) lying us into unpaid wars where our brothers and Sisters had their lives shattered and commit suicide at a rate of 18 a day?

How is it, petty trumps importance?

How can people be consumed by the little things that reinforce their hate and ignore the unthinkable?

It's like a CULT.

Past Member (0)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 6:22 pm
Give me a second and I can PROVE your lies are the opposite of the TRUTH.

The Truth-O-Meter Says:
President Obama’s lawsuit claims it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period.

Mitt Romney on Saturday, August 4th, 2012 in a press statement
Mitt Romney says a lawsuit filed by President Obama's campaign challenges voting privileges for the military


After some Ohio voters faced hours-long lines at polling places during the 2004 presidential election, the state adopted reforms designed to prevent similar problems in the future. Those reforms included allowing voters to cast ballots at county boards of elections for an extended period before elections. In 2008, Barack Obama’s presidential campaign used those new laws to its advantage. The campaign made particular use of voting the Sunday before elections in Ohio and other states as African-American churches organized "Souls to the Polls" events that took congregants to vote after religious services.

Republicans who control Ohio’s state government passed a law last year that would have reduced the time frame for early voting from five weeks to three, eliminated most weekend voting hours and dropped a requirement that poll workers redirect voters to the correct precinct if they show up at the wrong one in a location that hosts multiple precincts. Ohio legislators repealed that law when it became clear it would face a referendum this year, though its ban on early voting on the weekend before elections remained in place because it was part of a separate law. Democrats including U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown say Republicans wanted to eliminate that weekend’s early voting to cut turnout among African-Americans who vote after church, a demographic likely to vote for Obama. Brown said that in 2008, up to 19 percent of Ohio voters cast their ballots during the weekend before the election.

Last month, President Obama’s re-election campaign filed a lawsuit against Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to demand that in-person voting be allowed during the three-day weekend before elections. It noted that approximately 93,000 Ohioans voted in the three days before the 2008 presidential election. The lawsuit argues that all Ohio voters should be permitted to cast ballots that weekend, as members of the U.S. military are permitted to do. The complaint alleged that Ohio’s legislature failed to justify the disparate treatment between military and nonmilitary voters, and contended the "unequal burden on the fundamental right to vote violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution."

That assertion by the Obama campaign riled more than a dozen military groups - including AmVets and the Military Officers Association of America. On Aug. 1, they filed a motion to intervene in the Obama campaign’s lawsuit. It said they want to "defend the fundamental constitutional right to vote of members of the U.S. Armed Forces, which includes the right to receive special accommodations, flexibility and extra time to facilitate their voting, whether absentee or in-person." Their legal filing said the means the Obama campaign was using to request an overall extension of Ohio’s early voting period - "a ruling that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to grant extra time for early voting solely to military voters and overseas citizens - is both legally inappropriate and squarely contrary to the legal interests and constitutional rights" of members of the U.S. Armed Forces.

On the same day as the military groups filed their briefs, attorneys for the state of Ohio filed their own response to the Obama campaign’s complaint. It said that special laws were enacted to help uniformed and overseas citizens cast absentee ballots because they are often not present in the areas where they vote, and that the state of Ohio doesn’t have to treat other voters the way it treats those uniformed and overseas citizens.

"From the beginning of our Republic, military voters have had special problems in obtaining ballots and casting them," the state of Ohio’s legal filing says. "Ohio’s laws, allowing UOCAVA (Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voter Act) voters the ability to cast an absentee ballot after the time during which non-military and domestic voters may do so has closed, rationally recognizes the unique circumstances that military voters may face."

The state of Ohio filed a brief that backed intervention by the military groups. So did the Obama campaign.

"Plaintiffs seek to restore for all voters access to early voting through the Monday before Election Day," the Obama campaign’s brief said. "Neither the substance of its Equal Protection claim, nor the relief requested, challenges the legislature’s authority to make appropriate accommodation, including early voting during the period in question, for military voters, their spouses or dependents. The question before the Court is whether, in the circumstances of this case, the State of Ohio may arbitrarily and without justification withdraw from all other Ohio eligible voters the same right they previously had to vote the weekend and Monday before election day."

It didn’t take long for these dry legal exchanges to erupt into a political bonfire. Toward the end of last week, websites began to make the misleading claim that the Obama campaign was suing the state of Ohio to restrict military voting, when the lawsuit actually sought to permit all Ohio voters to vote the weekend before elections, as military voters can do. On Saturday, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney issued a statement that accused Obama of trying to undermine the rights of military voters.

"President Obama’s lawsuit claiming it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period is an outrage," Romney’s statement said.

In an appearance on Fox News Sunday, Obama campaign advisor David Axelrod disputed the way that Romney and others were characterizing the lawsuit.

"What that lawsuit calls for is not to deprive the military of the right to vote on the final weekend ," Axelrod told host Chris Wallace. "Of course, they should have that right. That suit is about whether the rest of Ohio should have the same right. And I think it’s shameful that Governor Romney would hide behind our servicemen and women to try and win a lawsuit to deprive other Ohioans. . . of the right to vote."

Democrats lined up their own military members to protest how some were describing the lawsuit.

Former Democratic congressman John Boccieri of Alliance, a Lt. Col. in the U.S. Air Force Reserves, issued a statement that accused Republicans of distortion.

"This is about restoring equal and fair access to early voting and in no way asks for restrictions to voting," Boccieri said. "Anything said otherwise is completely false. Period. And as a member of the American Legion and a lifetime member of the AMVETS, I find these claims outrageous."

Indeed, Obama’s lawsuit clearly states that it seeks to permit all Ohioans - not just members of the U.S. military - to vote during the three days before the election, as was the case in 2008. The suit in no way suggests restricting early voting by members of the military.

It is simply dishonest for Romney and his backers to claim that Obama’s effort to extend early voting privileges to everyone in Ohio constitutes an attack on military voters’ ability to cast ballots on the weekend before elections.

We rate the claim False.

Carrie B (306)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 7:55 pm
Carol, besides being stupid and completely unwilling to learn, you are a coward of the worst kind. Your behavior is despicable and completely unwarranted. Not sure how you are able to sleep at night except that you quite obviously have no conscience. When you and your so called heroes go down in flames, I will be one of the many laughing at your idiocy.

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 8, 2012, 10:50 pm
Well Carrie....why don't you tell me how you REALLY feel about me!!! ROTFLMAO!!!! You sound like you are so filled with love, understanding and respect!! Take a deep breath and BREATHHHHHHHHHHH,,,you will feel better!!

Michael T (82)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 8:20 am
ROF-LMAO Carolled.

Too funny, we all note the very nervous, and edgy response by you.

Jason R provides a most damning well-documented post to the empty and false claims of your article and you choose only to respond to Carrie B?

It must be really uncomfortable to be in your shoes.

Your behavior is clear evidence you are having a very difficult time dealing with the fact that your false position has placed you on the hot seat. ROF-LMAO. Better take your own advice about taking a deep BREATHHHHHHHHHHH, but I doubt that even if you take several of them you will ever feel better.

Should have thought about that before you went off half-cocked posting such a flawed assertion.LOL Carolled. LOL.

Past Member (0)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 9:55 am
Carol: The new pink mindy. Doesn't miss a beat when it comes to spreading the fascists lies.

Breitbart lives! The presumptive Republican nominee for President of the United States shamelessly lies about the military and turns the truth on its head to challenge Obama's voting rights lawsuit in Ohio...

Sandra S (38)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 11:51 am
Wow, that's really "funny" that you don't feel the military's votes should count. Do you include the few who vote Democrat or are you just concerned about what effect the majority who vote Republican whould have on the election. No doubt if the reverse was true, your attitude would be different.

Michael T (82)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 9:34 pm
Sandra, that you could twist all that has been said here by those of us who are calling out Carolled on this gross misrepresentation says a lot about you. None of us, not a single one of us who are disputing this tawdry representation by here want anyone blocked from voting no matter what their party affiliation.

Past Member (0)
Thursday August 9, 2012, 10:13 pm
Carol...I want to talk about the lies you find at sites you think are honorable. About how you don't seem to care.

Lynn Squance (235)
Friday August 10, 2012, 4:49 am
Interesting. I copied a post of the legal action from this story and it is now gone. There are numerous references to 'Dotty' and 'Dottie'. I wonder where they went. Carol, do you know?

Sandra S (38)
Friday August 10, 2012, 7:40 am
Michael, I am not bothered in the least by your opinion of me. Have you served in the military and voted in a Presidential election while a soldier overseas? If you have, I have no idea why you would disagree.

Lynn Squance (235)
Friday August 10, 2012, 7:45 am
Carol, it quite apparent to me that you have jumped on a Teabuggery bandwagon and created a real FUBAR with your distortions and untruths.

The following is only part of the suit by Obama for America. There are an additional roughly 30 pages which can be viewed at

Also, if you want some additional information and reporting go to
which includes some Rachel Maddow segments and a piece from The Nation.

Case: 2:12-cv-00636-PCE-NMK Doc #: 2 Filed: 07/17/12 Page: 1 of 32 PAGEID #: 22


OBAMA FOR AMERICA; : Case No. 2:12cv00636
COMMITTEE; and : Judge Peter C. Economus
: Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King
Plaintiffs, :
v. :
JON HUSTED, in his official capacity :
as Ohio Secretary of State and : PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
MIKE DEWINE, in his official capacity : PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
as Ohio Attorney General : MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN
Defendants. :


Plaintiffs Obama for America, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party hereby move this Court for a preliminary injunction to prevent the State Defendants from arbitrarily denying tens of thousands of Ohio voters the right to cast their votes in the three days prior to Election Day – a critical right that was granted to all qualified Ohio
voters in 2005, used by an estimated 93,000 Ohio voters in the 2008 presidential election, and inequitably taken away from most, but not all, Ohio voters without justification in the last year.

As demonstrated below, and in the supporting Memorandum of Law, Plaintiffs are very likely to succeed on their claims that recent legislative changes to Ohio election law violate the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution; Plaintiffs’ members and supporters – Democratic voters who may not be able to vote if the right to vote early in person in the three days prior to Election Day is taken away – will be irreparably harmed if an injunction does not issue; the balance of hardships tips in Plaintiffs’ favor; and a preliminary injunction restoring early voting in the three days prior to Election Day for all eligible Ohio citizens would be in the public interest.

As a result of a confused series of statutory maneuvers and “technical corrections” in the last year, Ohio election law now treats similarly situated Ohio voters differently with respect to the deadline for in-person early voting. Following the passage of Amended Substitute House
Bill 224 (“HB 224”) and Substitute Senate Bill 295 (“SB 295”), voters using the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voter Act (“UOCAVA”) are entitled to vote early up until the close of the polls on Election Day, pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code § 3511.10; non-UOCAVA voters,however, face a more restrictive deadline: 6 p.m. on the Friday before an election, pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code § 3509.03. This disparate treatment, which results in a significant burden on the fundamental right to vote for non-UOCAVA voters, is entirely arbitrary. The Ohio General Assembly failed to articulate any justification for this disparate treatment in the legislative record – an extraordinary omission given that the disparity was brought to the Assembly’s attention through testimony. Moreover, no legitimate justification can be discerned. The three-day difference for in-person early voting is unrelated to voter qualifications. Furthermore, even if there were an asserted justification, the relevant provisions must fall: They burden the fundamental right to vote but are not necessary to any sufficiently weighty state interest. Finally,to the extent the disparity was motivated by a bare desire to obtain partisan advantage in the
election contest, that motivation cannot justify the disparate treatment. Nor can a simple drafting error. In sum, Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that amendments made to Ohio Rev. Code § 3509.03 by HB 224 and SB 295, which eliminate the last three days of early voting prior
to Election Day for non-UOCAVA voters only, violate 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Moreover, thousands of Ohio voters, including many of Plaintiffs’ members and supporters, will be irreparably harmed if a preliminary injunction does not issue. It is well settled that an abridgement or dilution of the right to vote constitutes irreparable harm. Here, the withdrawal from most, but not all, Ohio voters of the right to cast a ballot in the three days prior
to Election Day places a significant burden on the right to vote. This burden, once imposed, can never be undone. Indeed, early voting – particularly in the three days prior to Election Day when early voting turnout is heavy – is critical to ensuring that voters are not disenfranchised by the long delays that plagued the 2004 presidential election. In contrast, the State cannot demonstrate any hardship at all. Any administrative issues would be minimal; Ohio has successfully administered early in-person voting in the three days prior to Election Day for five years. Indeed, the absence of early voting in the three days prior to Election Day for most Ohio voters is likely to increase the administrative burden on the Ohio election system given the overcrowding that occurred in the 2004 presidential election before the early voting system was put in place. To the extent there is any administrative inconvenience from the relief requested herein, it is far outweighed by the infringement of voters’ constitutional rights. Finally, it is well settled that protecting constitutional rights, as a preliminary injunction here would do, is always in the public interest.

In light of the foregoing and as set forth in the Proposed Order submitted herewith, Plaintiffs seek a preliminary injunction that would prohibit the Defendants from implementing or enforcing the HB 224 amendments to Ohio Rev. Code § 3509.03, specifically lines 863 and 864 of § 3509.03 (I) in HB 224, as well as the enactment of Ohio Rev. Code § 3509.03 with the HB
224 amendments by SB 295, thereby restoring in-person early voting on the three days immediately preceding Election Day for all eligible Ohio voters.

Respectfully submitted,
Donald J. McTigue (0022849)
Trial Counsel
Mark A. McGinnis (0076275)
J. Corey Colombo (0072398)
McTigue & McGinnis LLC
545 East Town Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Tel: (614) 263-7000
Fax: (614) 263-7078
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Robert F. Bauer*
Perkins Coie
700 Thirteenth Street, Suite 600
Washington DC 20005
Tele: 202-434-1602
Fax: 202-654-9104
General Counsel for Plaintiffs Obama for
America and the Democratic National
Jennifer Katzman*
Obama for America
130 East Randolph
Chicago, IL 60601
Tele: 312-985-1645
National Voter Protection Counsel
for Plaintiff Obama for America

John T (7)
Friday August 10, 2012, 5:23 pm

Fact Check beats 'Carol Check' any day of the week.
At least we know Carol is easily flummoxed - wonder if she gets that RETROACTIVELY?

John T (7)
Friday August 10, 2012, 5:27 pm
Before you start ranting on another one Carol;

Another Romney Claim rated 'Pants on Fire'.

Fred Jackson (85)
Saturday August 11, 2012, 7:40 am
The "Election 2012 - Smoke, Mirrors and Hot Air" will examine the acrimonious rhetoric surrouding the Presidential election.  This race is not like any other and it certainly "ain't" pretty. The campaign is being fought through distortion, manipulation and outright lies.

Jed will be interviewing TomCat of Politics Plus with Tom to discuss the nature of the ad campaigns of both candidates.

Please join us in the chatroom or call in with your comments at (347) 677-1814. Please join Jed, Fred and Marg on Lies My Country Told Me at 2:00 pm Eastern Standard Time (1:00 pm Central, 12:00 pm Mountain, 11:00 am Pacific and 3:00 pm Atlantic) either on the chatroom or call in with your comments at (347) 677-1814.

We will be discussing this thread!

Johnice R (11)
Saturday August 11, 2012, 11:47 am
Anyone who believes this LIE is dumber than dirt! I guess if a lie is in print that makes it ...a LIE in print!

Carol D (346)
Saturday August 11, 2012, 3:11 pm
Michael and Jason....Your comments are truly pathetic..but keep on going if it makes you feel more intelligent or doesn't bother me in the least though..but if you think it does then go for it...LOL..the only thing it proves to me is you are liberals of the worst kind....those who think they are totally right about anything and be it..have fun!! And I don't read Jason's proof because it's just more liberal propaganda....Michael..yours is just plain liberal trash talk!

Lynn..I have no idea where your post would i!?

And John T...Factcheck!? Are you serious!? No thank you!!

Johnice...So you are saying I am dumber than dirt!? Ahhh..yes....this is what I have been saying about the liberal comments..and the Conservatives are the ones who are the problem!? Look up the word respect...that would be a good place to start but you will still have a long haul ahead of you after that! Good Luck!


Carol D (346)
Saturday August 11, 2012, 3:12 pm
Thanks Sandra..The voice of intelligence!!

Michael T (82)
Saturday August 11, 2012, 4:26 pm
Carule D....Your article is truly pathetic..but keep on going if it makes you feel more intelligent or doesn't bother me in the least though.. but if you think it does then go for it...ROFLMAO..the only thing it proves to me is self-righteous neocons are of the worst kind....those who think they are totally right about anything and be it. Please post another unvetted article taking a position like this!! It is really entertaining. Caroul D.. yours is just plain inhuman trash talk!

Johnice...should get a green star to telling you that you are I dumber than dirt!. Ahhh.. yes....this is what we’ve have been saying about the hateful comments the likes of which you are capable of..and the Conservatives are the ones who are the problem! Look up the word respect...that would be a good place Carnal D for you to start but you will still have a long haul ahead of you after that as can be judged by your choice of posting such a foolish article and then looking like a one armed paper hanger trying to make it stick! LOL, LOL, ROFLMAO.

Lois Jordan (63)
Sunday August 12, 2012, 2:48 pm
Excellent comments Kit, Carrie B & Jae. I agree the article is incorrect. I scrolled down to the comments below it and....lo and behold...teabaggers everywhere! Many of their comments were disgusting, disparaging & without facts. Typical. The article is a complete waste of time.
Anybody remember how the Bush Regime pushed during the 2000 election in FL for the votes to be counted immediately and not wait for the military votes to come in? Go ahead & argue that with more lies and wasted time.

Carol D (346)
Sunday August 12, 2012, 7:36 pm
Touch touchy continue showing your hatred and immaturity with your words of anger and disrespect.....don't worry though..I consider the source!! :-)

Lois...Stick your head back in the sand again!! :-)

Michael T (82)
Sunday August 12, 2012, 8:27 pm
LOL Sneezen Dreezen, I bet if we took a vote you'd win hands down as the touchy person in the room. Guess your karma ran over your dogma girl. Your behavior showed you weren't worthy of anyone's respect. Nothing touchy about my comments at all. I am LMAO at you. I'm not the one who made a fool of herself in a real big way. You keep bating me, I'll keep coming back to laugh at you. .

Past Member (0)
Sunday August 12, 2012, 8:42 pm
Michael - I love this "Sneezen Dreezen". I actually believe that T-bagging is a result of the typical 60s bored housewife syndrome which allows them to feel radical without making them actually do some legwork (GOP doctrine is easily absorbed into empty heads). It was stupid for the GOP to pay any attention to these people, they should have ignored them. The Baggers are susceptible to the shiny object syndrome and if not given any attention would have moved onto the next "shiny" object like who is going to win Dancing with the Stars.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 13, 2012, 1:10 am
Michael..You are the kind of typical liberal that has to go on blabbing about nothing but making nasty comments and name as a result I am going to let you continue your asinine comments so you can prove to everyone who is the one who shows a behavior problem. Plus the fact that you would even mention behavior is telling of yourself! And you say baiting!? I never asked you to come in with your sick and nasty remarks but you show no restraint from the fact that you have to get in the last word so you are bringing it all on yourself! Isn't that what we've seen from the Obama administration..the blame follow the pattern well!! So I will leave you to your pathetically sick comments because I won't read them anymore!! Have fun!! :-)

Michael T (82)
Monday August 13, 2012, 7:33 am
Ummm Caroll lets take a good long lok at who has done more blabbing shall we? Hmmmm, I note a huge amount of blabbing in your posts that go on ad nauseum as you continue to try to prop up an unsupportable claim.

As I recall Cerroul I posted a comment that was civil and you began the onslaught of nasty comments and name calling. You did this with anyone who pointed out your flawed claims.
As for behavioral problems I can see that you are confronted with this problem every day you go to the bathroom and look in the mirror. ROFLMAO.

Maybe we are even then as I don’t remember asking you to post articles on Care2 claiming outright lies and distortions.

As I stated before we aren’t the ones who began making nasty comments. ROFLMAO.

Is there a class you can take at Care2 that shows you how to post an article that is properly vetted? You might also want to take one on anger management and on how to respond to people who come to make comments to your article.

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 12:59 am

We’re all daily witnesses to Barack Obama’s two-pronged, slash-and-burn re-election strategy:

1) Tell astonishingly bold lies about your opponent;
2) Bribe the heck out of all your constituencies in hopes of cobbling together a winning voting coalition in November.

Thus, voters daily hear that Mitt Romney is a felon, has neglected to pay taxes for 10 years and gives people cancer.

Simultaneously, Obama bribes every group he can, wooing female voters by ridiculously conjuring up a Republican “war on women,” endearing himself to homosexuals by embracing same-sex marriage, making an audacious play for Hispanic votes with his surprise amnesty edict – an executive action he himself previously claimed would be illegal, alluring college students with promises of student-loan rate extensions, homeowners with mortgage aid programs, union member exemptions from Obamacare requirements, and on and on.

But to put himself over the top – to capture that last few percent of votes necessary to win a close election – Obama needs one more voting bloc on his side. That would be the shadow group comprised of non-citizens, illegal aliens, repeat-voters, multiple-state-voters, dead people, felons and others ineligible to vote but who will vote anyway – for Obama.

To help this last “constituency,” Obama’s administration is currently engaged in what can reasonably be called a massive nationwide campaign to enable voter fraud. The current issue of Whistleblower magazine, which I serve as editor, tells the whole insane story – but don’t read it if you have a heart condition.

However, what I want to focus on here is without doubt the most despicable tactic the Obama camp has yet pursued in its efforts to stay in power through tampering with America’s hallowed election system. I’m talking about something even more outrageous than the Holder “Justice Department” attempting to block states from enforcing Voter ID requirements or purging dead people from their voter rolls – and even more corrupt than the left’s ACORN-style “swamping” of election officials with thousands of new (and often bogus) voter registrations at the very last minute and their national campaigns soliciting foreigners to vote.

As you may know, last month the Obama re-election campaign sued Ohio state officials in an attempt to suppress, in that pivotal swing state, the votes of America’s military men and women – people who traditionally lean conservative and vote Republican. (CNN exit polling data from 2008 show voters favored Republican John McCain over Obama by a 10-point margin, 54 to 44 percent.)

Now, the Obama camp vehemently denies any and all suggestions it is suppressing the military vote, claiming it simply wants an even playing field for all.

Let’s look at it: Current Ohio law – being challenged in the lawsuit brought by Obama for America, the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party against Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted and the state’s Attorney General Mike DeWine – includes a special provision to allow military voters to cast their ballots during the last three days (Saturday, Sunday, Monday) immediately prior to Election Day. However, according to the Obama lawsuit, Ohio’s special concession to military voters – an acknowledgment of the difficulty soldiers deployed overseas often encounter in trying to get their vote in on time – is “arbitrary” and has “no discernible rational basis.” Remember those words, for as we’ll soon see they are the key to understanding this grand deception.

Because the Ohio situation is somewhat complex and involves several different bills and a bit of recent legislative history, I will only touch on the highlights, but will commend to you a good RedState blog posting if you’re up for an in-depth, play-by-play review of the relevant Ohio voting laws.

However, beyond a few right-thinking bloggers, reporters and talk-show hosts, the vast, perpetually mesmerized pro-Obama media – and even the establishment’s arbiters of All Truth On The Internet, Snopes, Politifact and FactCheck – side with Obama and characterize as “shameful” the comments made by the Romney campaign and the few analysts who see the Obama lawsuit for what it is – an attempt to restrict military voting.

Indeed, the elite press currently overflows with articles accusing those claiming the Ohio lawsuit is bad for the military of being both wrong and dishonest.


Is that why no fewer than 15 military organizations have joined together to fight this particular Obama-machine lawsuit in court? I’m talking about:

The National Guard Association of the United States
The Association of the U.S. Army
The Association of the U.S. Navy
The Marine Corps League
The Military Officers Association of America
The Reserve Officers Association
The National Association of the Uniformed Services
The Non Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S.A.
The Army Reserve Association
The Fleet Reserve Association
The Special Forces Association
The U.S. Army Ranger Association, Inc.
The National Defense Committee
The Military Order of the World Wars

Are America’s armed forces wrong and dishonest? Do the Army, Navy and Marine organizations listed above not understand the issues of military voting as thoroughly as the experts at Snopes and Media Matters? Are the Special Forces and Army Ranger groups just plain dumb?

Or – is it just possible our military knows something about military voting that Obama and his sleazy lawyers don’t know? Yes, “sleazy.” The lead counsel on this case is none other than Robert Bauer, who author/analyst Matthew Vadum reminds us, “asked the Department of Justice to prosecute Obama critics and fine television stations for daring to carry an ad about Obama’s close personal friendship with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. Bauer, Obama’s former White House Counsel, is married to Anita Dunn, the Mao-loving former director of communications in the Obama White House. Bauer has been instrumental in whitewashing Obama’s radical roots by filing lawsuits keeping a bewildering array of the president’s personal papers hidden away.”

Should Team Obama prevail in the Ohio lawsuit, there are several possible outcomes: The judge could overrule Ohio’s Legislature and governor and resolve the issue by eliminating the three extra voting days for everyone, including military voters – something even the plaintiffs concede could be the result. That would hurt our soldiers. Or the judge could overrule the Ohio government, but impose the opposite remedy, forcing all voting precincts in the state to stay open all three days prior to Election Day for all voters in the state, not just military voters. That would also hurt our soldiers.

What?, you may ask. How could everybody, including the military, having three more days to vote hurt our soldiers? Indeed, “what’s the matter with everybody having three extra days to vote?” is the current establishment refrain, its purveyors claiming incorrectly that all Ohio voters used to have those same three days for early voting. They didn’t: Although state law allowed it, local election authorities could decide if they wanted to implement early voting or not. Only “six counties had weekend voting and extended hours and 82 of them didn’t,” lead defendant and Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted told the Associated Press.

And why was that? Husted explained, in a Bloomberg Businessweek interview, that setting limits on early voting for most Ohioans – other than the relatively few in the armed forces – is necessary so Ohio’s election boards can synchronize the early balloting records with those at 9,800 polling places to prevent voter fraud, i.e., people voting more than once. And as Ohio’s state GOP chairman, Bob Bennett, said in a written statement: “Nobody is being disenfranchised here, as Ohio’s voters who choose to vote early can do so by mail 24 hours a day, seven days a week or at early voting polls.”

The REAL issue at stake here, the one virtually no one is talking about, and the reason it hurts the military if the judge forces Ohio to open all its polling places for all voters for the final three days, is the legal precedent that will be set – namely, that our soldiers cannot constitutionally be given a break, a few extra days, to get their votes in.

Friends, you can’t obtain “reasonable results” through abominable means and then call it good. (That would be like me robbing a bank and then going home and saying, “Dear, I made a lot of money today.”) The price America will pay to obtain in Ohio a totally unnecessary “three extra days for everybody to vote” (if the judge rules the way Obama for America is asking it to rule) is the creation of a new legal precedent that it is unconstitutional to give any special consideration to military voters. After all, that is precisely the plaintiffs’ legal argument.

But as the Ohio defendants’ legal response points out so eloquently, America has always made special concessions for its soldiers to assure their opportunity to vote, going back to the Revolutionary War.

“Unfortunately,” argue lawyers for the Ohio defendants, “throughout history military personnel have been prevented from … [exercising their right to the franchise] due to both procedural and logistic hurdles, resulting in their franchise being effectively ‘hollow.’” They explain:

The problem of how to allow those serving in the United States Military to cast a ballot has been with us since the time of our nation’s war for independence.

Dating as far back as the Civil War, President Lincoln issued an executive order declaring a cessation of military operations in order to allow military personnel to travel home so that they could cast their ballots.

In order to make sure that those serving in the Civil War had access to the franchise, many states authorized elections officials to travel to units in the field to set up polling locations and to collect ballots from soldiers.

Military voters – the shocking truth

Putting aside arguments pro and con, is there or is there not a serious problem in today’s America with active-duty members of the armed forces having enough time to vote?

Here’s a one-question quiz: During the 2010 election, what percentage of America’s military and overseas voters do you think were able to cast a vote that actually counted in the election results?

If you guessed “5 percent,” you’re too high.

“Tens of thousands of service members’ votes not counted” was the headline of a June 27, 2012, McClatchy newspaper article detailing just how seriously flawed the current system is for enabling the millions of men and woman in the U.S. military to vote.

The story includes the following shocking statistics:

In 2010, of the approximately 2 million military and overseas voters accounted for in data reported by the states to the Election Assistance Commission, only 4.6 percent of those voters were able to cast an absentee ballot that counted, according to the Military Voter Protection Project’s analysis of that data from the federal Election Assistance Commission, which tracks participation in voting. That compared with 5.5 percent in 2006, which was also a midterm election, the organization concluded.

The overall national voter participation rate for the 2010 election was 41.6 percent, authorities said.

According to that report, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted – yes, the same Jon Husted being sued by Obama for America – was so disgusted he told county election boards “it would be considered grounds for removal of board members if their agencies should fail to electronically send out absentee ballots 45 days prior to an election” to all military voters who requested one.

Maybe Team Obama didn’t like Ohio’s zeal to make sure our brave soldiers get to vote along with all the illegal aliens, dead people and others the left is so eager to have vote “early and often” this November.

It’s the same thing every election

This problem is not new. Ever since the Bush-Gore Florida recount in 2000, every election cycle has brought with it controversy over the counting of overseas military votes – which traditionally lean Republican.

Two weeks after Election Day 2000, Mark Herron, a Democrat lawyer in Florida, circulated a memo to members of his party throughout the state instructing them on how to disqualify overseas military ballots. The entire five-page memo, obtained and published by the Drudge Report, included tips on how to lodge protests against military ballots which were thought to heavily favor Republican George W. Bush.

Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who commanded the Coalition Forces in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, led widespread condemnation of the Democrat memo, saying: “It is a very sad day in our country when the men and women of the armed forces are serving abroad and facing danger of a daily basis … and are denied the right to vote for the president of the United States who will be their commander in chief.”

Thousands of overseas military members registered to vote in Florida complained that they either never received requested absentee ballots, the ballots arrived too late or their votes were rejected. In an election won by Bush by just 537 votes, Florida officials had disqualified 1,527 military votes for lack of a postmark.

In 2004, the same sorts of complaints arose. And in 2008, legal complaints, news stories and studies showed dozens of states failing to allow soldiers enough time to vote.

Then in 2010, ex-DOJ attorney M. Eric Eversole spoke out against the Obama Justice Department for its failure to safeguard the military vote.

Although Congress had passed in 2009 a law mandating that military personnel overseas be given sufficient time to participate in U.S. elections, the DOJ’s Voting Section was ignoring the new laws, potentially allowing thousands of uncounted ballots to fall through the cracks, said Eversole, a former litigation attorney for the DOJ Voting Section.

And according to a 2009 Pew Center report, more than one-third of states did not provide military voters stationed abroad enough time to vote or were at high risk of not providing enough time. The study found six states provided time to vote only if their military personnel overseas return completed absentee ballots by fax or email – a practice with privacy and security vulnerabilities.

Although current law requires that absentee ballots be shipped to military voters overseas a minimum of 45 days prior to Election Day, Eversole said in a Washington Times column that tens of thousands of soldiers received their ballots too late to ensure their votes could be counted in 2010. After the 2010 midterm elections, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission released data showing less than half of the 119,000 overseas military votes cast were counted.

Leftists are masters of projection; they reflexively accuse others of the evil they themselves commit. So when Occupy protesters display widespread anti-Semitism, rape women and defecate on police cars, the leftist media ignore it and accuse tea partiers of similar misbehavior, utterly without evidence.

In the same way, while leftist-engineered vote fraud is a genuine problem in today’s America, the left denies it and instead projects its guilt onto Republicans with indignant cries of “voter suppression” in response to the most mild and reasonable attempts on the part of state officials to identify who people are before they vote.

Yet there is one form of voter suppression that is real and vexing. It is being perpetrated by the left. And its target is the one group that deserves, more than you or me or anyone else in America, to be able to vote for our next commander in chief. And that’s our fighting men and women.

Past Member (0)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 1:21 am
Pasting & cutting from the World Net Daily does not prove any argument. In order to make a point that is actually valid, you have to use a CREDIBLE source, not shlock from such a piece of crap blogl

Michael T (82)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 8:29 am
Crolle you outdo yourself and all the while your credibility sinks even lower. ROFLMAO.
You are really bent on trashing your own name and it is humorous to watch it. One foot, already bloody with a bullet hole in it and as you aim your gun at your other foot, that foot, more intelligent than you is moving rapidly to escape the fate its partner has already suffered.

Sandra S (38)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 10:38 am
Apparently, only Democrat sources are credible to some here. Michael, you avoided answering my question so I guess I have your answer. It's so easy to attack and name call Carol when one has nothing of substance and worth to add to the discussion.

Michael T (82)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 11:16 am
How sweet, the ever protective pet comes forward to defend its mistress in distress. What question could you have possibly asked that was of any relevance?

Sandra S (38)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 11:27 am

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 12:36 pm
Isn't that so typical and true Sandra!!!! If only people like him knew what fools they made of themselves!! But alas...there is no common sense there so any type of reality is impossible to comprehend!! He is one sad excuse of a human being!!!

Michael T (82)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 12:47 pm
You both make the most interesting chin music together. Off key, and the tempo leaves something to be desired. Mmmm mmmmm what a duet. ROFLMAO

Past Member (0)
Wednesday August 15, 2012, 8:06 pm
It has nothing to do with Democratic sources. It as to do with being so incredibly lazy to even read the lawsuit to make sure what one is posting is actually factual (which is UNTRUE)

Carol D (346)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 12:15 am
So because Obama came up with the lawsuit and he had lawyers...who are more than likely crooked by the way...that makes it believable!? If you believe anything that Obama writes up then there is a good share of the problem we have in this country! He has done nothing but told LIES ever since before he even got in..they have only intensified since he's been President. He has used and abused his power to destrpy us and you can't see this!?

Michael T (82)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 12:29 am
You really hate intelligent black people and nothing will stand in your way of painting them as evil

Paula M (39)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 4:28 pm
Michael G., I wish that you would not casually make ugly charges of racism against people merely because their politics differ from yours. Every misuse of the charge of racism diminishes its power against actual racists.

John T (7)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 4:30 pm
The simple fact is the lawsuit is saying that the citizens should ALSO have the extra days, not deny the days to the troops.
Of course, checking the facts takes all the fun out of the hostility.

John T (7)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 4:40 pm
All this bologna over illegal voting - and that's what it is - bologna!
Since the year 2000, 37 million votes have been cast in the State of Florida. Out of that, 178 votes MAY have been cast fraudulently. 0.00005%
In the year 2000, Kathryn Harris failed to put 36,000 legally registered voters in to the State's computer system, thus denying those legal voters their place at the ballot box.
In the year 2000 almost 4000 voters who showed up to vote were denied that right because they were, incorrectly, identified as Felons.
In the year 2000, under state orders, polling places were closed in violation of state law, too early. Many had long lines of voters, just home from work, waiting their turn to vote. That right was denied them.
In the year 2000, under the explicit orders of Governor Jeb Bush, Florida Highway Patrol Troopers set up check points on roads leading to polling places in heavily Democratic Precincts, causing traffic jams and searching cars in their lines, some for as long as an hour with no probable cause. Many voters, held up while these 'searches' were being conducted, turned around and drove home – losing their Right to Vote.
CLEARLY, the biggest danger to voter's Rights and accurate voting in Florida comes FROM the STATE, not from 'illegal voters'

Michael T (82)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 5:27 pm
Paula as you well know they are not causally made, nor are they made simply because someone disagrees. .
Your preference for denying the elephant in the room is your prerogative.

Carol D (346)
Thursday August 16, 2012, 11:19 pm
Hundreds of Felons Cast Illegal Votes in Florida

Miami Herald: Thousands of Foreigners May be Illegally Voting in Florida

Florida investigation reveals 180,000 non-citizens may be registered to vote

Why the Feds Are Suing Florida for Allegedly Purging Voters

Anyone who can't see why this is being done is deliberately blind and dumb!!

The reason for checking the voter registration of people to vote is to keep the integrity of being honest and not having people voting illegally with the influx of illegals that Obama refuses to send back to where they came from! Why is it that some people have a problem with honesty!?!?!? If there is nothing to hide NO ONE should have a problem with bringing up a Birth Certificate or any kind of registration proving ones self! This is what we Americans do every day and HAVE TO DO....does anyone see Americans throwing a fit because we have to prove ourselves!?!? And yet some are willing to let illegals and those who we do not know for sure if they are legal or not go by without a flinch of doubt!?!? People in this country have a right to know who is and who isn't legal and if anyone don't like that option I say move the hell out of the US and go where you think you can get by with anything! 10 to 1 you will be in prison for the rest of your life!!! But for the rest of us who want to feel safe we will fight you tooth and nail like it or leave it! Bitch about it or do something about it...the end result is we are not taking this lying BS anymore! Not all of us are asleep at the wheel!!

Paula M (39)
Friday August 17, 2012, 10:15 am
Very well, Michael G. You said to Carol:

“You really hate intelligent black people and nothing will stand in your way of painting them as evil”

If this is a carefully considered accusation that is based on something more than Carol’s political opinions you will have already found evidence to support your charge. Produce it now.

Past Member (0)
Saturday August 18, 2012, 10:56 pm
The republican party is mainly racist. if you don't like to be lumped in with them. Quit! If not, take what you have coming and stfu.

Sandra S (38)
Sunday August 19, 2012, 6:41 am
"The republican party is mainly racist." LOL Thank you for starting out my day with a laugh!

Michael T (82)
Sunday August 19, 2012, 9:04 am
Sandra, your denial of ethnocentricity is a marvel to behold.

Carol D (346)
Monday August 20, 2012, 11:28 pm
Sandra...It's truly uplifting to see these asinine remarks by some people who are totally out on a limb that don't know squat!! Sad..but one has to laugh or it could drive them loony!!! Some people there is no hope for!! Jason..You are so far out of it there is no hope. You refuse to look at where the racism started and where it continues today...I pity you!! And are on big joke! Refusing to study history is ignorance!

. (0)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 3:17 pm
Never seen so much blatant, venom spewing bigotry as i've seen from Carol D., and certain others, on several posts/forums!
(i'm new to Silent Majority...)
Sounds like these people would make perfect facist dictators....scary! - or perhaps just laughable....(giggle)

. (0)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 3:37 pm
What an incredible amount of blablablablabla!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Michael T (82)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 4:09 pm
wchi I can't determine if it is a form of stamping one's foot and insisting on have the last word after posting a false flag article, or if the continued desire to have negative responses since there are huge absences of any positive responses.

Kit B (276)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 4:20 pm

Obama Not Trying to Curb Military Early Voting

Mitt Romney wrongly suggests the Obama campaign is trying to “undermine” the voting rights of military members through a lawsuit filed in Ohio. The suit seeks to block state legislation that limited early voting times for nonmilitary members; it doesn’t seek to impose restrictions on service members.

In an Aug. 4 Facebook posting, Romney called the lawsuit an “outrage,” and said that “if I’m entrusted to be the commander-in-chief, I’ll work to protect the voting rights of our military, not undermine them.” He painted the court filing as an attack on the ability of service men and women to vote: “The brave men and women of our military make tremendous sacrifices to protect and defend our freedoms, and we should do everything we can to protect their fundamental right to vote.”

Conservative blogs and opinion pieces have also misrepresented the case, claiming in headlines that President Obama was suing to “restrict military voting.” A fundraising email appeal from a group called Special Operations Speaks — which wants to “remove Barack Obama from the White House” — wrongly says that Obama “deploys army of lawyers to suppress military’s voting rights,” claiming that “Obama needs the American military to not vote, so he has set out to make it as difficult as possible for them to do so.” But that’s not what the Obama lawsuit aims to do at all.

The lawsuit, filed by the Obama campaign, Democratic National Committee and Ohio Democratic Party in July against Ohio’s secretary of state and attorney general, asks for an injunction to block implementation of state laws that modified in-person early voting regulations. In the last presidential election, all Ohio residents — military and otherwise — could cast their votes in-person early up through the Monday before Election Day. But contentious legislation passed by Ohio’s GOP-controlled Legislature in 2011 limited early voting for nonmilitary residents, giving them a deadline of 6 p.m. Friday before the election. Military members and overseas civilians could still vote through Monday. Both parties have squabbled, with Democrats saying the law is a suppression of nonmilitary votes and Republicans arguing that they are just easing a burden on polling places and guarding against fraud. (Mail-in absentee ballots are not affected; the new regulations affect in-person early voting.)

Contrary to conservative claims, the Democratic lawsuit seeks to restore early voting “for all Ohio voters.”

Obama for America v. Husted: … Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment, preliminary injunction, and permanent injunction prohibiting Defendants from implementing or enforcing the HB 224 and SB 295 changes to Ohio Rev. Code § 3509.03, thereby restoring in-person absentee voting on the three days immediately preceding Election Day for all Ohio voters.

David Axelrod, a senior adviser to the Obama campaign, also argued with Fox News host Chris Wallace over the lawsuit on Aug. 5:

Wallace: Your campaign is suing the state of Ohio for giving members of the military extra time to vote early, to the Monday before the election while other voters are going to have only until Friday. You don’t think that members of the military who are serving this country deserve special consideration to vote?

Axelrod: I absolutely do, and the way you stated and the way frankly Governor Romney has stated it is completely false and misleading. What that lawsuit calls for is not to deprive the military of the right to vote on the final weekend on the campaign. Of course, they should have that right. What that suit is about whether the rest of Ohio should have the same right.

Axelrod’s characterization is right.

More Voting, Not Less

The lawsuit challenges last year’s legislation in Ohio on the grounds that the unequal treatment of different citizens violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Fifteen groups representing members of the military — including the National Guard Association, Marine Corps League and the Military Officers Association of America — filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to participate in the case on the side of the state of Ohio.

Their beef isn’t with the Obama camp’s intent, however, but with the equal protection argument and how a judge may react to it. The motion to intervene acknowledges that “the relief Plaintiffs seek is an overall extension of Ohio’s early voting period,” but objects to “the means through which Plaintiffs are attempting to attain it — a ruling that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to grant extra time for early voting solely to military voters and overseas citizens.” The motion calls the equal protection argument “not only offensive, but flatly wrong as a matter of law.”

The motion to intervene, quoting court cases, says a court could decide to pull back the early voting deadline for military members, rather than extend it for nonmilitary residents, in order to establish equal treatment.

Motion to Intervene, filed Aug. 1: A court facing an Equal Protection claim has “‘two remedial alternatives: [it] may either declare [the statute] a nullity and order that its benefits not extend to the class that the legislature intended to benefit, or it may extend the coverage of the statute to include those who are aggrieved by the exclusion.” … Thus, a plaintiff’s success in an Equal Protection case reasonably may lead to “withdrawing the statute’s benefits from both the favored and the excluded class.”

The Obama camp, DNC and Ohio Democratic Party filed a memo supporting the military groups’ motion to participate in the case. That memo reiterated that the Democratic groups didn’t want to change the way military members could vote.

Plaintiffs’ memorandum in support of motion to intervene, Aug. 3: Plaintiffs seek to restore for all voters access to early voting through the Monday before Election Day. Neither the substance of its Equal Protection claim, nor the relief requested, challenges the legislature’s authority to make appropriate accommodation, including early voting during the period in question, for military voters, their spouse or dependents. The question before the Court is whether, in the circumstances of this case, the State of Ohio may arbitrarily and without justification withdraw from all other Ohio eligible voters the same right they previously had to vote the weekend and Monday before Election Day.

But Romney blatantly misrepresents the lawsuit’s clearly stated goal to restore early voting for “all” voters. On Aug. 5, the Romney campaign’s legal counsel, Katie Biber, issued a statement that continued to wrongly cast the lawsuit as an attempt to curb military voting rights. She wrote that “the Obama campaign and the DNC argue it is ‘arbitrary’ and unconstitutional to provide three extra days of early, in-person voting to military voters and their families.” The lawsuit, however, argues for restoring the rights of nonmilitary residents, saying the state election law “arbitrarily eliminates early voting during the three days prior to Election Day for most Ohio voters, a right previously available to all Ohio voters.”

Biber goes on to say it is “commendable that the Ohio legislature granted military voters and their families this accommodation.” But that distorts the facts. Military voters and their families previously had this accommodation. What the legislature did last year was restrict early voting for civilian residents.

We received an equally misleading interpretation of the lawsuit from the attorney who filed the motion on behalf of the military groups. Kevin T. Shook of Frost Brown Todd LLC told us in an email: “We are unaware of any other case in which a political candidate, much less the Commander-in-Chief, has sued a state for trying to make it easier for members of the military to vote.” But the suit isn’t about making it easier for military voters, it’s about making it harder for others.

What Shook argues in the motion is that the suit “reasonably may lead” a judge to make it harder for the military — something the lawyers on Obama’s side haven’t asked for, and have told the judge they don’t want to happen. When we followed up with Shook about that, he said he was still concerned about a ruling that could set “a dangerous precedent that could jeopardize other laws making it easier for a military voter to vote.” But that’s no excuse for misrepresenting what the other side has said.

Some voters may well appreciate a discussion of the merits and ramifications of an equal protection legal argument. But what they got from the Romney campaign is a falsehood.

– Lori Robertson

If by some chance one does not who Walter Annenberg was - then you are not really a republican. Fact does care where the final facts fall, left-right or some where between they have one mission, to find the truth.
Our Mission

We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding. is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels.

Financial Disclosure:

Fiscal Year 2012
(12 months ending June 30, 2012)

Annenberg Foundation: $849,802

Individual donors: $107,644

During this 12-month period, we received a total of 2,183 gifts from individual donors, the largest of which was $2,500. The average individual donation was $49.31, and half of our individual donations during this period were $25 or less.

The individual donors included these who gave $1,000 or more:

Howard and Penny Burt Family Fund: $2,500
Michael A. Ramey, Seattle, Wash.: $1,000
Allen Stenger, Alamogordo, N.M.: $1,000
Thomas Ferguson, Nolanville, Texas: $1,000
David Joerg, New York, N.Y.: $1,000
Leighton Moss, Houston, Texas: $1,000

Fiscal Year 2012, Fourth Quarter
(3 months ending June 30, 2012)

Annenberg Foundation: $197,699

Individual donors: $5,149

During this three-month period, we received a total of 70 gifts from individual donors, the largest of which was $1,000. The average individual donation was $73.55, and half of our individual donations during this period were $25 or less.

The individual donors included these who gave $1,000 or more:

Michael A. Ramey, Seattle, Wash.: $1,000
Allen Stenger, Alamogordo, N.M.: $1,000

⬐ Click to expand/collapse the full text ⬏

Fiscal Year 2011
(12 months ending June 30, 2011)
Annenberg Foundation: $612,125
Carnegie Corporation of New York: $100,000
Rajkumar Anketell, Hackensack, N.J.: $5,000
Allen Stenger, Alamogordo, N.M.: $1,000
Individual donations of less than $1,000 each: $49,018.59
Non-corporate employer matching (Pew Charitable Trusts): $1,000
During this 12-month period, we received a total of 942 gifts from individual donors, the largest of which was $5,000. The average individual donation was $59.40. Half of our individual donations were $25 or less.
Fiscal Year 2010
(12 months ending June 30, 2010)
Annenberg Foundation: $806,542
Flora Family Foundation: $99,093
Individual donors: $11,498
During this period, we received a total of 281 gifts from individual donors, the largest of which was $500. The average individual donation was $40.92.


Kit B (276)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 4:24 pm

It's okay Carol I don't really expect you to read the above comment. Just know that like it or not, admit the truth or not...Fack Check has no political sides.

If by some chance one does not who Walter Annenberg was - then you are not really a republican. Fact does care where the final facts fall, left-right or some where between they have one mission, to find the truth.

Michael T (82)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 4:39 pm
Thanks Kit for finally putting the stamp of credibility on this issue and the final stamp that concludes factually this fallacious article. A Green Star to you!

Paula M (39)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 4:46 pm
So you had nothing, Michael G.? That's what I thought.

Michael T (82)
Tuesday August 21, 2012, 6:12 pm
Are you experiencing a difficulty of some kind Paula?

Carol D (346)
Wednesday August 22, 2012, 1:23 am
Of course Kit..Fact Check is totally perfect and honest..just like Obama!! And you believe him!! Good Luck!!

Wchi..what a name!! LOL It's really good to see what you are all about....another loser!! Hope you enjoy FSM!! :-)

Past Member (0)
Friday August 24, 2012, 8:22 pm
The lies exposed. From the front against fascism...

Past Member (0)
Sunday October 7, 2012, 10:19 am

Carol D (346)
Sunday October 7, 2012, 11:03 pm
More BS Jason....Sorry can't watch the propaganda! I am allergic to it...LOL

Nancy L (141)
Monday October 8, 2012, 11:43 am
***Fack Check has no political sides***

Not true, go look at the "About Us" section on their web site.


John T (7)
Friday October 19, 2012, 7:18 pm
What a CROCK of it.
The Administration sued and WON equal protection for ALL of Ohio's voters. They ALL get the 3 days which Kasich and his goon squad tried to strip from them.

Carol D (346)
Saturday October 20, 2012, 3:05 am
It's okay Carol I don't really expect you to read the above comment. Just know that like it or not, admit the truth or not...***Fack Check has no political sides***

ROTFLMAO...You are kidding correct Kit!?

Well John..I guess that solves it then huh!? LOL

John T (7)
Monday November 12, 2012, 10:06 pm
This is the same state that TRIED to open polls in Republican Districts for extra hours while trying to keep polls closed in Democrat districts.
The bottom line turns out to be, when you threaten people's rights they will react. And react they did. From standing in lines up to 8 hours in Florida to overwhelming the allocated voting stations in almost every state. It turned out the whole strategy of disenfranchisement back fired big time.

Carol D (346)
Monday November 12, 2012, 11:24 pm
John..If you have been following the news since the elctions you will notice that the fraud in Florida is overwheling as it is in Ohio and many other states on top of the fact MANY Military votes have not been counted...but don't believe it because this is what liberals do!!

On Tuesday only one precinct had less than 113% turnout. “The Unofficial vote count is 175,554 registered voters 247,713 vote cards cast (141.10% ). The National SEAL Museum, a St. Lucie county polling place, had 158.85% voter turn out, the highest in the county.”
The Supervisor of Elections, Gertrude Walker, had this to say concerning the 141% voter turnout: “They may have had something like that in Palm Beach County, but we’ve never seen that here.”
So maybe Allen West wasn’t crazy to ask for a lock-down on the ballot boxes and machines in this county. According to the report given the day after elections, Allen B. West garnered 52,625 votes in St.Lucie county and Patrick Murphy 65,896 votes.
This is a problem that must be addressed right away. There is no reason that there should ever be more than 100% turnout. This county alone could have cost Allen West his election. Voter fraud is real, and it is time that this be solved.

Now tell me there isn't major fraud in this country and the reason why Obama won....he never won!!! He stole an election so IMO he is not going to be the President! EVER AGAIN!!

John T (7)
Thursday November 22, 2012, 4:13 pm
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.