By Mike Flynn
President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?
On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National
Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down
part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military.
Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible
rational basis."
Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until
the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to
do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no
discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the
demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their
sworn duty.
[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.
I think its unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as
easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have
more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and
sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.
If anyone proposes legislation to combat voter fraud, Democrats will
loudly scream that the proposal could "disenfranchise" some voter,
somewhere. We must ensure, they argue, that voting is easy and
accessible to every single voter. Every voter, that is, except the men
and women of our military.
Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise
some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with
prejudice.
No comments:
Post a Comment