If requiring a citizen to show a picture ID to vote is "suppressing the vote," what does it mean when the Obama campaign really makes an effort to prevent our soldiers from voting?

Breitbart:

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty. 

The National Defense Committee reports:

[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense's Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote. 

I think it's unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

I would disagree that the military has "more right" to vote than anyone. Everyone has an equal right to vote as long as they're registered and a citizen, and by saying that some have a greater right to vote, it means that others have a lesser right to vote -- and that's unacceptable.

Not really important, except it appears the Obama administration is buying that argument. With the suit, they are saying that our soldiers have a lesser right to vote than others. The law is designed to give military personnel an equal opportunity to cast their ballot. and by fighting that notion, the Obama campaign is seeking to suppress the military vote, knowing that it usually goes 2-1 Republican.

Update:

American Thinker is withdrawing this story, although the blog post will remain up.

Further research shows that the suit brought by the Democrats does not target the military. The suit seeks to restore 3 extra days of early voting for all Ohioans. Currently, due to some legislative confusion, only active duty military are able to vote during those three days. The suit seeks a permanent injunction against the law that prevented all but military voters from voting 3 days before the election:

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.

American Thinker regrets the error.