Clowns to the Left, Jokers to the Right…

Open request for Jay Sekulow…
Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, a respected {at least until now} right-wing watchdog, to quit willfully misrepresenting Obama and company’s Ohio lawsuit and fight it on its actual merit.

I absolutely oppose Obama’s Ohio lawsuit, but I also absolutely oppose watching you knowingly misrepresent the case. Your unscrupulous actions discredit those who oppose the case based on its true lack of merit. At one time you held my respect, but with all due consideration… you sir, are lying. Intentionally.

Basically I would like to unscrew the argument
about the Ohio lawsuit concerning military votes. There’s a lot of bluster about it on the net… and the positions taken, whether on the left or the right, have one thing in common. They are almost all based on advertisements and blog posts, and are in almost every case, WRONG.

What follows is, in simple terms, the Ohio lawsuit…
…WITH with source documents provided. Please aquaint yourself with the facts before making hair-on-fire pronouncements about either side. It isn’t that complex, it’s just been misrepresented by both sides.

-1-  The Argument on the Right
As championed by Jay Sekulow, who USED to have credibility… the argument is summed up in the following graphic used on his Facebook site.

-2- The Argument on the Left
The argument on the left is that the GOP is trying to disenfranchise Ohio voters, and that the lilitary does not by any means need more forgiving timing with regard to earlt voting that the average voter. They believe the GOP passed a law restricting absentee balloting for the three days prior to the actual election to disenfranchise all but military voters. To hear their supporters tell the tale, the GOP totally eliminated early voting in person for non-military personnel. [Not true.]

-3- What ACTUALLY Happened —  PART {A} The Ohio Law
The Ohio legislature responded to documented instances of voting irregularities in the 2008 and 2010 elections with a law that stopped early in-person absentee voting 3 days prior to the election. The object was to allow those handling the elsection process to update their records based on who had voted. The extra time makes it less likely people will vote twice and such. The military was exempted because a federal law recognizes that the military is subject to being called away on short notice, and the state law cannot strip the military of something guaranteed by federal law.

-4- What ACTUALLY Happened — PART {B} The Suit to STOP That Law
A suit was filed as follows:

OBAMA FOR AMERICA, : Case No. 2:12cv00636
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL :
COMMITTEE and :
OHIO DEMOCRATIC PARTY

v. :
:
JON HUSTED, in his official capacity :
as Ohio Secretary of State, and :
MIKE DEWINE, in his official capacity :
as Ohio Attorney General, :
:
Defendants.

The object of the suit was to stop implementation of the law limiting non-military voters from engaging in absentee in-person voting during the three days preceding the election.

What the DNC and the Obama campaign fail to mention… that still leaves non-military voters OVER ONE MONTH of early in-person absentee balloting time. It doesn’t eliminate it, just shortens it to provide a break before the election. See the info on early voting on the Ohio website: http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/Voters/absentee/regAbsenteeVoters.aspx

DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR THAT! READ IT:

Go see the regulations for voting on the Ohio website. Taking the word of some blogger is silly. Here’s the link to the source docs. See for yourself: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/ObamaForAmericaVHusted.php

C’mon. Doesn’t ANYONE read primary docs anymore?
The Obama suit suggests people will be disenfranchised, and seemingly forgets they still have over a month of absentee in-person ballot time. The Obama and company suit suggests that the average civilian is less subject to uncertainties than the military voter, which might be true if we deployed civilians to war zones on the other side of the globe on short notice, but we do not.

The object of the Ohio law Obama wishes to block is obvious
There were documented voting irregularities in 2008 and 2010. All too often the dead registered to vote, people from out of state registered, non-citizens registered, etc. Having a couple of days before the election to compare who has already voted to the rolls lessens confusion and helps ensure the 1-man / 1-vote rule our republic requires. The civilians in Ohio STILL have over a month of early in-person-balloting. They will not be disenfranchised.

Mr Obama and the DNC do NOT want the guys handling the election to have time to avoid confusion. His suit seeks to reinstate the confusion caused by allowing the general populace to keep doing absentee voting in person all the way up to the election. Given that many of the registrations of the dead, out-of-state, and others that are legally NOT allowed to vote was previously done by ACORN on his behalf, his motive seems self-evident.

What the suit does NOT do, Mr Sekulow
… is limit military votes. Don’t get me wrong, I think if there is any way the Obama campaign CAN oppose military votes from getting counted, they likely would, BUT this silly lawsuit they are pressing does no such thing.

Jay – You ONCE Had a Conscience
There are people that are depending on the past reputation of the ACLJ who are parroting this ridiculous argument you’ve been posting. The Romney campaign is also posting the same argument. Lead the way and reframe the contest to argue this case on the actual merits instead of this ridiculous contrivance about taking votes from the military. You know very well that is not what the case is about.

PRIMARY SOURCE DATA
The next dimwit that tells me I need to get the REAL story on some blog can go pound sand. Anyone that believes others when source docs are available is to stupid to be entrusted to vote and should be confined to your house until the election’s over. Whle there… please shut your sheepy yap and read the real source documents for the case and you may actually have a clue next time you discuss it.

Seriously guys, Obama’s suit lacks merit, but fighting it with a lie condemns your own credibility.