IAVA aligned with Obama????

[Guest]

[RCJP2070]

I just received an e-mail from IAVA (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America) proudly proclaiming their victory against un-named entities in the Ohio Supreme Court to preserve the voting rights of veterans.

When I called IAVA, no one except their leader, Mr. Reikoff, was authorized to speak on the issue.

Well, here's some background folks.  The Ohio issue was in regard to the activities of ACORN, a highly partisan, pro-Obama organization which is seeking to register voters at the polls and have their votes count immediately. In otherwords, open the gates to voter fraud.

The un-named opposing entity was the McCain campaign and the GOP.

Does Mr. Reikoff really think most veterans support Obama? The man who would surrender what I fought for and my friends died for?  Does he really think we'll beleive that John McCain opposes voting rights for service members?  OF COURSE NOT!!!!!! That's why he didn't name any names, just sent some cryptic references to the issues and parties.

But, if you politics with more than a passing interest, you know exactly what the issues were and who was involved.

So, be aware: IAVA is not a non-partisan organization like the VFW.  IAVA does not have the true wishes of vets at heart.

I was shocked, and immediately withdrew from IAVA. 

[dmh1566]

I withdrew from the IAVA because I had a feeling there was some political bias within the organization.  Like you said, it tends to be rather cryptic but I've seen it pop onto the radar scope a couple of times now. Each time I've seen this happen the IAVA leaned in a direction I definitely didn't agree with.

http://www.arenaofideas.org/?p=226

http://www.vawatchdog.org/nfNOV06/nf112806-4.htm

www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/006928.html

[speisk]

Yikes!

After reading these two entries and the links as well as visiting their website, I'm OUT!  As a matter of fact I will make sure all of my GWOT buddies know their positions as well.  This is a BIG mistake for any veternas organization to make and it will come back to haunt them.

[RCJP2070]

Yeah, I had no clue.  I'm really disappointed and will be doing all I can to let the world know the truth.  IAVA does not represent any veteran that I know.

[dmh1566]

Any idea where I can go to see who IAVA has sent donations too in the past? They offer very general financial information in their page but I'd like to see specifics. I emailed them with this request, we'll see if they respond.

They do some good things for veterans but I think they allow their leadership's personal political views play into their agenda as well. I agree that most veterans I know don't subscribe to IAVA views on many issues.

If they want to deal in politics they need to have the guts to come right out and say so.

[speisk]

I would be interested in their donation history when and if you get it from them.

[marlinnotafish]

Here is a link to their last IRS Form 990.  Page 2 doesn't show any grants.

http://204.203.220.33/EINS/201664531/201664531_2006_0330BBCF.PDF

[dday76]

So, be aware: IAVA is not a non-partisan organization like the VFW.  IAVA does not have the true wishes of vets at heart.

Disclaimer: I am not an IAVA member.

I am however aware of the IAVA and have read Reickhoff's book, which, by the way, has a rather drawn-out story about how he was unceremoniously dumped by John Kerry.  That's hardly DNC love.

The IAVA is a 501c3 non-profit organization, which is to say it is non-partisan, just like the VFW.

For some background on this ballot initiative in particular, here is Reickhoff's article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-rieckhoff/voting-rights-of-ohio-vet_b_129642.html
The issue is that there was a suggested change to disallow registration and voting on the same day on absentee ballots.  Forgetting for a moment partisan concerns about which way those extra votes eliminated by more restrictive procedures might go (and maybe I'm wrong for assuming the military is a red demographic), I'm thinking these procedures benefit veterans, and IAVA was right to oppose the change regardless of the source.

For some more well-rounded information on the IAVA, here are a few links:
IAVA's report card rates congress members on their votes regarding IAVA issues, not their party.
Report Card story: http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/nowhearthis/archives/150802.asp
Report Card:  http://www.veteranreportcard.org/
Agenda: http://www.iava.org/2008-legislative-agenda

Since we're talking about the Presidential candidates, here is their agenda for the new President:
http://www.iava.org/component/option,com_/Itemid,235/option,content/task,view/id,2835/


The question is really about issues.  DMH's second article provided a great quote from DAV.  Accused of democratic bias, the DAV responded, "charges of bias are not possible.  We didn't cherry-pick votes, we picked the legislation that was important to us."   I think the same is true for the IAVA.  I checked out DMH's others links.  The first link is a blog entry from someone who seems to have entirely misunderstood the IAVA scorecard -- it's not an opinion survey.  The third link was another blog and didn't seem to have any relation to IAVA.

RCJP's comments about one ballot initiative in Ohio seem like knee-jerk partisanship a whole lot more than does that one IAVA ballot initiative.  The Ohio issue is not a main issue for IAVA by any stretch.  The ballot issue is just a side note with hardly even a reference on the IAVA site.  Again, I'm not a member of IAVA.  I would just hope that we can take a bit of a more in-depth look before writing off an organization that is by veterans for veterans.

Jason

[RCJP2070]

If IAVA is using the veterans status of its members to fight laws that prevent voter fraud - and casts it lot with a group such as ACORN that is obviously a voting fraud machine - then they have no support from me.

[Dnkldorf]

I'm glad I read this. We don't need IAVA as a comrade on our site at all then.