With less than two weeks to go before Election Day, Mitt Romney has eliminated the 16 point advantage Barack Obama once enjoyed among women.  Last month, women preferred Obama over Romney 56% to 40% on the economy. Now, the difference is 49% for Romney and 45% for Obama.  Where understanding people’s problems is concerned, Obama's lead among women has shrunk from 58%-36% to a 50%-43%.

The polls consistently show a real surge to Romney, away from Obama:

Rasmussen: Mitt Romney 50% nationwide, Obama 47%.

Gallup: Romney 50%, Obama 47%.

ABC News/Washington Post: 49% Romney, 48% Obama.

Reuters/Ipsos: Romney 47%, Obama 46%.

AP-GfK: Romney 47%, Obama 45%.

In the battleground state of Michigan, once considered a lock for Obama, not only is the race now tied Romney 47%, Obama 47%, the Detroit News endorsed Romney:

“As we said, this is more than a choice between two individuals. America is locked in a struggle over what it will be as a mature nation.

A country built on rugged individualism finds itself increasingly under the thumb of a federal government that is ever expanding its reach into the lives of its citizens.

Obama has proved himself a disciple of the doctrine that for every problem there's a government solution.

Romney, by contrast, embraces individual initiative and entrepreneurship. He would turn back the encroachment of the bureaucracy into the private sector.

Romney would replace the heavy hand of government with the invisible hand of a rational marketplace working to produce broad prosperity.

While both poverty and dependency have increased on Obama's watch, Romney promises to replace government checks with private sector jobs and reverse the decline in middle class incomes. It is heavy lifting, but we favor the candidate who is committed to it.

Romney's goal is to help all Americans live independent and productive lives, free to rise to the extent of their personal capabilities. He would not shield them from risk or the consequences of their decisions, but neither would he deny them their earned rewards.

Our hope is that Mitt Romney would restore faith in the core principles of free men and women, free minds and free markets that made America great, and will keep it so.”

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121025/OPINION01/210250332/1008/opinion01/Editorial-Mitt-Romney-President

In his never ending quest to elevate America’s political climate above hateful, petty partisan rhetoric, in a Rolling Stone interview Barack Obama called Mitt Romney a bullshi**er:

“We arrived at the Oval Office for our 45-minute interview … on the morning of October 11^th. … As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president. … [S]he said, ‘Tell him: You can do it.’ Obama grinned. … ‘You know, kids have good instincts,’ Obama offered. ‘They look at the other guy and say, “Well, that’s a bullshi**er, I can tell.”’”

http://lonelyconservative.com/2012/10/classy-obama-calls-romney-bullshitter/

Such class…such poise…such leadership…such inspiration…such an example for young Americans.  To have an Oval Office occupant who conveys to the world at every available opportunity that he bears no responsibility for the consequences of his policies, words or actions.

Romney’s surge is for real and for good reason.

America deserves better.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/25/romney-surges/

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama argued foreign policy in the final 2012 presidential debate in Boca Raton Fl.  Romney looked like a solid, strong American Commander in Chief, while Obama resembled an ageing hippie college professor wannabe enraged at having his beliefs successfully debunked in public.

Obama insulted Romney, speaking to him in patronizing fashion while mocking his stance on defense cuts: “I think Governor Romney maybe hasn't spent enough time looking at how our military works. You mentioned the navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military's changed.”

Then Obama became truly condescending when he said “There are these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.  The question is not a game of Battleship, where we’re counting ships, it’s what are our capabilities”.

So Obama apparently believes that Mitt Romney, someone who also graduated from Harvard, who also just happens to have earned both a business and a law degree, doesn’t know what aircraft carriers and submarines are.

In short, Obama’s performance was crude and un-presidential.

Not unusual for the narcissist in chief, the words “I”, “me” and “mine” seemed to come out of his mouth every four or five seconds.

Despite numerous assertions by the likes of MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and other card carrying members of the “progressive” Party Pravda, the night was won by Romney when Obama, instead of offering viable answers to serious questions posed by Moderator Bob Schieffer, angrily attacked Romney with red herring arguments.  To which Romney replied: “Attacking me is not an agenda”.

That moment laid waste to the entire Obama re-election strategy, which was to attack Romney with viscous smears and repeated false accusations in hopes the damage inflicted would set Romney so far back in the polls he could never recover.

Unfortunately for “the smartest man in the world” and his hatchet wielding political henchmen, the strategy has completely backfired.  Going into the last two weeks of the race their campaign is borrowing money, while Romney is financially poised to blanket swing states with political ads favorable to him.  Ads that reflect the calm, cool, thoughtful, caring individual American voters witnessed in the debates.  The man who stands in stark contrast to the phony Romney portrait the Obama campaign intentionally painted.

Naturally, because “progressives” are so tolerant and open minded, Obama supporters are still threatening to riot and assassinate Romney.

Not the least bit surprising, after the debate was over Chris Matthews claimed that support for Romney is fueled by race hatred.

Once one team starts taking cheap shots and committing flagrant fouls, it is a sure sign they have lost and the game is over.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/24/game-over/

Have you ever wondered where MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, The New York Times, Newsweek, Time Magazine et al get their talking points?

It is difficult to determine if Chris Matthews is America’s answer to Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey or Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey is Russia’s answer to Chris Matthews. 

 Pravda.ru, Russia’s online neo-KGB government controlled news site, sounds troublingly like what can be found online at Yahoo News, MoveOn.org the Daily Kos or Media Matters.

Or is it the other way around?

Consider some excerpts from Bancroft-Hinchey’s piece on the upcoming U.S. presidential election.  Quite presumably referring to writers for National Review, The Wall Street Journal etcetera or people who appear on FOX News, he ponders:

“There are those who somehow manage to get their articles printed in reputable international newspapers, claiming that a vote for Obama is a vote for "murder" or "destroying America" or "lack of freedom" but then again there are those who trick their way into the homes of the stupid and gullible selling dreams and promising the Earth in exchange for a pay-check or a pledge to clean the windows once a month.”

Then Bancroft-Hinchey makes a claim that is repeated ad nauseum by “progressive” pundits who actually appear multiple times a day on FOX News:

“They never turn up again, just like the "birther" tsunami which peaked a few months ago and has whittled down to nothing after being shouted down from all sides of the political spectrum. The "birthers" claimed that President Obama was not eligible to stand for office, despite the fact that he would have been vetted by everyone, by every newspaper and journalist, from the day they announced he was a candidate.”

Apparently propagating revisionist history is practiced by both the Russian Pravda and America’s “progressive” Party Pravda.

Of course, as America’s “progressive” Party Pravda does with vigor, Russia’s Pravda relishes bashing Romney with straw-man arguments.  Long a staple of radical fringe left extremists world-wide:

“These same people support Mitt Romney. Who? You know, the gaffe guy, the one who opens his mouth and insults people, or accuses them of things they never did. In short, a foul-mouthed oaf, a wannabe President with no credentials beyond the Governorship level.”

Never mind that Obama’s credentials going in to the 2008 race were being a community organizer, an invisible State Senator from Illinois and a first term junior U.S. Senator who began running for the presidency almost immediately after taking up residence in the Beltway.

Then, in true “progressive” form…wait, this is from Russia.  In true Communist form, Moscow’s Pravda throws up the classic red herring argument by comparing Romney to George W. Bush:

“Mitt Romney, without this competence, without Barack Obama's skills, wants to be there, and so do those ousted elements from the Bush regime dying to get back in. Rumour has it that Senator McCain is ear-marked for Secretary of State. Ask a Nam Veteran what they think of McCain and then decide whether this Bush regime remnant is the perfect external image of the US of A.

Governor Romney's position in the Peter Principle is...Governor Romney. Not President Romney. Everyone knows it, the Obama freeze in debate number one gave rise to some flights of fantasy (OK Barack Obama is better at being President than debating maybe, and so?)...and so we can conclude that he is better at handling the extremely difficult conditions bequeathed to him by the Republican Bush regime than at making an idiot of himself in televised debates getting everything wrong, as Mitt the Twit does.”

Mitt the twit? No doubt the likes of George Stephanopoulos or Brian Williams wish they could work for MSNBC or Current TV so they could use such language.  For these proud, card carrying members of the “progressive” Party Pravda, it must be discouraging having to conform to broadcast media standards.

Russia’s Pravda falls short of accusing Republicans of wanting dirty air, dirty water or seeking to leave old people and special needs kids to fend for themselves.  Instead, they choose to attack the GOP in their own unique style:

“Right, same old, same old Grand Old Party. The same Grand Old Party which just four years ago had the United States of America synonymous with sodomy, illegal detention, rape, urination in food, sleep deprivation, murder, torture, water-boarding, concentration camps...”

Then, there is one last swipe at Romney:

“And on a more serious note, would YOU trust a guy who has never had a glass of beer in his life? Or says he hasn't...”

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/21-10-2012/122517-usa_decision-0/

A review shows that when comparisons are drawn between American news media and Russia’s Pravda, such comparisons are not made in a vacuum.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/22/from-russia-with-love/

Pelosi, Reid, Obama and other “progressives” called the Tea Party “teabaggers”, “racists”, “astroturf”, “Nazis” ” and “extremists”. The Department of Homeland Security described the Tea Party as “right-wing extremists” and ”insurgents”, saying “Right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities.”

How long before members of Tea Parties are called “killers”?

Hasn’t that already happened? It was more than heavily inferred by the “progressive” Party Pravda after a nut job working solo shot “Gabby” Giffords.

How long before expressing dissent leads directly to arrest and torture?

Bill Ayers’ Weather Underground Central Committee meant to cause the collapse of the United States government. Ayers and his group would deal with resistant Americans by “establishing re-education centers in the south-west”. Those who refused to convert to Communism would be “eliminated”. As in: concentration camps would be used to kill 25 million Americans.

Consider this from Yahoo News, USA Today and ABC News:

“Congress could be least productive since 1947”

The story attacks the Republican House for a lack of legislative success.  This is typical of “progressives” who never miss an opportunity to parrot messages dictated by the George Soros funded Media Matters via Valerie Jarrett and the White House.

It might be statistically true that “Congress is on pace to make history with the least productive legislative year in the post-World War II era,” but to insinuate this is the fault of the House Republican majority is fiction.

The U.S. Senate, under the failed “leadership” of “progressive” Harry Reid, has refused to allow a majority of House passed bills to even come to a vote in the U.S. Senate.

The reason so many believe the House is to blame for this are the lies spread by “progressive” shills like Yahoo News, USA Today, ABC News and their ilk.

Should the 112th Congress come to be “defined by partisan divisions and legislative failures”, the blame will rest squarely on Reid and his “progressive” co-conspirator in the Oval Office.  The “progressive” Senate majority has not even passed a budget in over three years.  They even voted down the one from the White House 97-0.  This is a clear dereliction of duty.

Thanks to the utter failure of their “progressive” policies, the only card left for them to play is vintage Saul Alinsky, blaming the right for problems caused by the left.  This has been the M O of “progressives” since they seized control of the Democratic Party.

The most egregious of lies propagated by the institutionalized “progressive” left is the one spoken by Nancy Pelosi during the TARP debate.  On September 28, 2008 Pelosi laid the blame for the economic collapse entirely on George W. Bush and failed Republican policies.  Sound familiar?  Obama’s using it against Romney daily.

The 2008 financial collapse was a direct result of failed “progressive” social engineering in the U.S. housing market.  For decades the U.S. has had nothing remotely resembling a free market in residential real estate.  Instead, “progressive” big government created monstrosities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac controlled over half of all U.S. mortgages.  For twenty years, Conservatives warned about the systemic risk Fannie and Freddie posed to the financial system but they were constantly thwarted by the left.  To this very day, the institutionalized “progressive” left denies the essential part Fannie and Freddie played in creating the housing bubble and causing the financial crisis.

Whether in the area of journalism or politics, once the facts are in members of the institutionalized “progressive” left prove themselves to be nothing more than bold faced, willfully deceitful psychopaths unfit to serve the public.

Be it Fast and Furious, the Benghazi terrorists, fudging the poll numbers or lying about the rate of inflation and unemployment, the so-called mainstream media is lying through its teeth to protect Obama and help his re-election.  Enough!  It is time to rage against the media!

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/rage-against-the-media/

A teenager in Pakistan gets shot in the head by the Taliban.  She is flown to Britain for emergency medical attention and so she can be protected from the threatened follow up attacks.

All 14-year-old Malala Yousufzai wants is for girls in Pakistan to be able to attend school.

The Taliban has issued threats that state Malala will be a target in the future if she continues to promote what they describe as “Western thinking”.

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_PAKISTAN?SITE=VANOV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-15-16-17-56

Meanwhile, “progressives” in America continue to cling to the “Islam is a religion of peace” fallacy their tenured, grey pony-tailed “progressive” college professors brainwashed them into believing.

So much so that the Obama White House is conducting a foreign policy based on the unfounded fairy tale that if westerners are just nice enough to people who will kill young girls for wanting to go to school, then Islamofascists will like and forgive the west for not being Islamists and not attack the west.

These “progressives” are the same group who believe the vaporous illusion that Islamofascists as reasonable people with whom it is possible to negotiate peace.

They are also the same crowd that insists on fomenting the lie that Conservatives are waging a war on women because Conservatives believe a thirty year old Georgetown University law school graduate should buy her own contraceptives.

Naturally, “progressives” remain steadfastly incapable of understanding why Conservatives find them a bit lacking in the perception, common sense and moral center departments.

You cannot fix stupid, but you can vote it out of office.

Be sure to vote it out of every single office at every level of government on November 6, 2012.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/progressives-no-puzzle/

Obama lied about his response to the Libyan attack.  The day following the 9/11 anniversary terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, he did not state from the White House rose garden that it was a terrorist attack.

He blamed it on an unknown video.

As did White House press secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; which was followed by UN ambassador Susan Rice repeating the same lame excuse five times in one day on the Sunday morning television political talk show circuit.  This was done again by Obama in a speech he gave to the UN general assembly, where he blamed the video six times and never once called the incident a terrorist attack.

Everyone knows the Obama administration, in a desperate attempt to obscure its foreign policy failures and defray responsibility for the deaths of four Americans including America’s ambassador to Libya, spent weeks blaming a heretofore unknown anti-Islamist internet video trailer for the violence.

Candy Crowley exceeded the limitations placed on the moderator when she stuck her nose where it did not belong by openly siding with Obama’s claim.  Meanwhile Obama’s wife violated the rules by aggressively leading the studio audience in applause when Crowley interrupted on behalf of her flailing, visibly struggling husband.

Never mind that Crowley gave Obama nine percent more time than was given to Mitt Romney.  Forget that she interrupted Romney twenty eight times.

How can media bias in America be ignored when every moderator for the debates has been a member of the institutionalized “progressive” left’s Obama cheerleading machine?

Obama lied about oil, gas and coal production.  Permits for oil drilling on public land have been reduced by over fifty percent since Obama seized power in 2008.  Attempts to produce natural gas on public lands have been obstructed.  Coal production has been demonized and prevented.  Energy prices have increased notably, especially the doubling of gasoline prices at the pump.

Romney dismantled the idea that a second Obama term would lead to economic recovery by noting the failure left in the wake of Obama’s broken campaign promises.  Obama did not cut the deficit in half, he doubled it.  He has not reduced the national debt, he has added over $6 trillion to it.  Obama’s policies have not stimulated the economy.  After spending $878 billion on non-existent shovel ready projects that turned out to be financial bailouts for fiscally irresponsible blue states, in 2012 GDP is growing slower than in 2011, and in 2011 it grew slower than in 2010.  At this point in his presidency the tax rate reduction policies of Ronald Reagan, which inspire Romney’s financial plans, had created 7.2 percent economic growth.  GDP growth is over six percent slower today than it was under Reagan.

The Frank Luntz focus group showed a huge swing in Romney’s favor by a group that was comprised of undecided voters who largely voted for Obama in 2008.  A similar MSNBC panel had a similar response.

And in true “progressive” form, the debate resulted in a flurry of assassination threats against Romney on Twitter.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/17/debate-highlights-progressive-way/

For the pending second presidential debate, the format agreement says that after each question from the audience and a two-minute response by each candidate, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are expected to have an additional discussion facilitated by the moderator.  This year the Hofstra University town hall debate moderator will be Candy Crowley of CNN.   The language of the debate-format agreement means that Crowley’s participation is to be limited.

As the document states: “In managing the two-minute comment periods, the moderator will not rephrase the question or open a new topic … The moderator will not ask follow-up questions or comment on either the questions asked by the audience or the answers of the candidates during the debate or otherwise intervene in the debate except to acknowledge the questioners from the audience or enforce the time limits, and invite candidate comments during the two-minute response period.”

http://thepage.time.com/2012/10/14/moderator-role-under-scrutiny-before-the-debate/

Yet Crowley’s take on her role is: 'I'm not a fly on the wall'.  It has been suggested that debate questions must be pre-submitted in order to allow Crowley to choose the questions.

Of course, coming from members of today’s openly biased media this is nothing new.

In 2008 Tom Brokaw of NBC News moderated a town-hall debate between Obama and John McCain. Brokaw redirected the topics, changed questions from the audience and asked too many of his own questions.   Brokaw defended his performance by citing that a debate commission official praised that debate as “good television.”

Good television?  Has the bar for debates between two people vying to be President of the United States of America been arbitrarily reduced by news media pundits to being “good television”?

So, when are the hosts of Survivor, American Idol, or Snookie and Kate plus eight going to declare their candidacy?  Should the briefcase brigade from Deal or No Deal be considered among the front runners for 2016?

Members of  today’s news media are so openly biased they would keep protecting and defending Obama while actively working for his re-election even if there was verifiably authentic video showing Obama burying Caylee Anthony’s body in the Florida swamp.

Having people of this ilk unilaterally changing their role in debate proceedings because it is “good television” is most certainly not in America’s best interests.

It is a suicide pact.

America is at an existential decision making point.  The 2012 presidential election will be a watershed moment in history.

All the questions submitted by the Hofstra audience should be shuffled by twelve different people who are not actively involved in the debate proceedings, then read by Crowley in the order she receives them.  She should be a professional, stick to the role assigned her and keep her two cents out of the debate.

As NewsBusters reported immediately after Mitt Romney chose Paul Ryan as his running mate:

“…the goal of the Obama-loving media is to rip him to shreds.  Doing her part Saturday was CNN's Candy Crowley who claimed some Republicans (unnamed, of course) think this ‘looks a little bit like some sort of ticket death wish.’”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/08/11/cnns-candy-crowley-ryan-pick-looks-little-bit-some-sort-ticket-death-#ixzz29N2psx9D

The reason Romney won the first debate and is experiencing a major surge in popularity is it was the first time a large number of American voters were able to see Romney as he is, rather than the filtered version presented to the public by the “progressive” Party Pravda.

When watching the Hofstra debate proceedings, remember Crowley, like her fellow “progressives” in the media, is openly pulling for Obama.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/crowley-biased-bad-joke/

Who needs debates between candidates when you can have cartoon character distractions?

First there was Barack Obama, who did so poorly in his first debate with GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney that he and his campaign resorted to focusing on saving Big Bird and Sesame Street from spending cuts.

Next, there was Joe Biden auditioning to play the role of the Joker in a Batman show at Universal City Hollywood.

Biden showed he is a real natural.

His innate ability to bully, muster condescending goofy faces, to laugh, smirk, constantly interrupt, grimace, or chuckle while very serious topics were being discussed showed that when it comes to being a Court Jester, Biden is more than ready to play prime time.

Sorry SNL.

Some believe Biden’s performance in the October 11^th VP debate was a win for “progressive” Democrats, because it dominated the post-debate conversation.

That perspective is a clear sign of how panicked “progressives” and their parroting lapdogs within the institutionalized “progressive” left and the ultra-obedient “progressive” Party Pravda are.

If the best they can point to is a sitting Vice President making stupid, animated faces in reaction to nearly everything Congressman Paul Ryan said, they are desperately grasping at straws.

Talk about drawing inappropriate conclusions.

An “expert” named Jerry Shuster, a University of Pittsburgh professor, claimed that Biden’s painfully rude, childish behavior helped him control the agenda.

Would it have helped Biden control the agenda had he worn tights, ridden a unicycle and juggled chainsaws?

Shuster also said Biden’s inexplicably condescending body language was an important strategic move because it kept Ryan off stride.

Of course, having al Qaeda terrorists launch a sophisticated 9/11 terrorist attack complete with rocket propelled grenades and mortars, one that murders four people, would have kept Ryan off stride.  Especially if Biden stuck to the now fully discredited story that it sprang from a spontaneous protest to a video so obscure nobody had heard of it until the White House used it as an excuse to cover up its own incompetence.

Oh wait, Biden did stick to that story during the debate.

Of course, if in the eyes of “progressive” Democrats all it takes to win a debate is cutting off your opponent while speaking, a human clown is not even necessary.

An embarrassingly flatulent gorilla would suffice.

Certainly either launching a terrorist attack or introducing a large primate suffering major digestive discomfort would throw an opponent off stride during a debate.

Serious experts agreed that Ryan was successful in his first outing on the national debate stage.  His performance against a man 27 years his senior showed that his command of foreign and domestic policies will make him a credible, acceptable Vice President.

And if after he loses his job as Vice President Biden loses out in his bid to play the Joker, perhaps his ability to cackle will help him win a job playing the wicked witch of the west in a Wizard of Oz show.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/big-bird-and-the-joker/

According to Yevgeny Fyodorov, the head of the Committee on Economic Policy and Entrepreneurship of the Russian State Duma, the U.S. is slowly but surely losing unchallenged global economic and political power.

Fyodorov said that: "… but in reality it is the key event in today's global scenario. With the onset of the global economic crisis, with political and economic turbulence, the APEC is a key event in terms of the demonstration of new vectors of unity of the international community outside the United States.

It is clear that it is not a split - everyone still plays by American rules, but the countries already demonstrate their independence in economic policy. I was there and saw how angry Mrs. Hillary Clinton was when she came from China, where several Chinese leaders - especially those who are to become top officials of China next year - did not even want to meet her. In China, Clinton was told no when she wanted to take on mediator's functions in resolving China's territorial disputes with Asian countries.

She also heard no in response to her requirement to set the yuan rate. It is an annual requirement of the United States to China to set the yuan rate for political reasons to pump resources and opportunities from China to the U.S. It is an additional form of tribute from China, which China had to deal with every year for political motives. Nowadays, the U.S. was refused. The world is changing.”

Welcome to the world after is has been reset by Barack Obama and his foreign policy initiatives.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is seeking to replace the American dollar as the world’s reserve currency with regional currencies. Russia and China have already begun using this system and Putin is actively promoting the idea that other countries should follow along.

America’s enemies are seeking to reformat the world’s entire economic system.  They see the U.S. in the same light “progressive” politicians in America see the U.S.

America’s wealth comes at the expense of less successful countries. America did not build its success, somehow America stole it.

And if that is not enough, Russia sees the weakness of Obama’s America providing them the opportunity to form a world national liberation movement to “free the world from the U.S. occupation”.

http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/21-09-2012/122236-russia_apec-0/

Rest assured America, the Islamist world is not the only place where Obama’s foreign policy initiatives have resulted in disaster. What will happen if Obama is re-elected and is “more flexible” with Putin?

America needs an American President. The international/global/UN/brave new world approach is decidedly not working in America’s interests.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/10/obamas-reset-world/

The most recent Washington Times/Zogby poll shows voters now favor GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney over Barack Obama on two key issues: the economy and national security.

Obama had been leading prior to the October 3^rd debate.  The results of that debate changed a lot of minds.  On national security, Romney is now preferred 48 percent to 45 percent, while on jobs and the economy, Romney now enjoys a 50 percent to 44 percent advantage.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/8/obama-loses-lead-key-voter-issues/

This major swing in popular support is reinforced by the latest Rasmussen poll, which shows Romney now leads Obama in eleven key swing states.

Those eleven states were all won by Obama in 2008 and are considered competitive in the 2012 contest. The states include Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. In those states a total of 146 Electoral College votes are at stake.

According to Rasmussen: “In the 11 swing states, Mitt Romney earns 49 percent support to Obama’s 47 percent. One percent (1 percent) likes another candidate, and three percent (3 percent) are undecided.”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_swing_state_tracking_poll

Americans are beginning to recognize the choice offered to them in the November 6th election.

During the debate, Romney made it clear that he was a pro-American successful businessman who supports America’s free market economy over centrally planned big government control. He has also staked out a preference for peace through strength over neo pre-WWII style appeasement in foreign affairs.

While the Islamist world descends into flames and violence in response to Obama’s failed foreign policy initiatives, Europe is currently giving America a real time expose on why choosing to follow their economic model would be a grave mistake.

German Prime Minister Angela Merkel landed in Greece to streets filled with violent mass protests.  Cradle to grave nanny state dependency has conditioned too many Greeks into believing that a struggle-free life is owed them simply because they were born.

Since the global “progressive” socialist mindset not only shares the Marxist philosophy but also employ “the ends justify the means” “progressive” tactics wherever they appear, some of the Greek protestors dressed like Nazis.  They got so out of hand that police were forced to fire tear gas and use stun grenades.

The latest presidential polls indicate Americans perceive the importance of this election with greater clarity.

The choice is between restoring the formula that made America the world’s economic giant and sole military superpower or settling for descent into economic decline and military irrelevance through adoption of the anti-growth tax and spend nanny state big government policies practiced by European Union members.

Jobs, economic growth, smaller government that cost less, and peace through strength, or riots in the streets by government enabled bums who think the world owes them a living and believe apologizing for America will solve the world’s problems?

For Americans, picking between American success and European failure should be an easy choice.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/09/american-success-or-european-failure/

America needs to become energy independent. America’s dependence on foreign energy puts her at great risk in a world that grows increasingly unstable. Given the current political upheavals in the Middle East, this reality is more than slapping America in the face.

Those who claim to be “progressive” feel a compulsive obsession to force Americans into accepting the “green energy” fantasy. Three plus years of actions taken by the current administration and fellow “progressives” show a willingness to achieve this end at any and all costs. Stiffer standards on auto emissions and mileage, crushing EPA regulations on energy providers, opposing development of domestic energy reserves, copious deficit spending on inefficient and noncompetitive solar, wind, tide and bio-fuel technologies besmirch the White House’s energy policy.

While such “progressive” measures theoretically “promote” development of “green” energies, they dictate a highly impatient, frantic pace that is crippling the American economy. They force the issue during a stubborn, recovery-resistant recession that is teetering on the brink of a full-blown depression.

America’s public and industrial infrastructures use petroleum, natural gas and coal, as well as limited nuclear power. Nearly every vehicle that is driven on American roads burns gasoline or diesel fuel. Public transportation relies on fossil fuels as well. Natural gas, heating oil and coal are used in furnaces to heat homes and places of business. Coal and nuclear power generate electricity, which powers countless devices; the uses of which are taken for granted every day. Coal, natural gas and petroleum products power American’s industrial complex, the base of the economic engine. America’s economy depends heavily on existing energy. The methods of providing and consuming energy are deeply ingrained into American business, industry, home life and recreation.

Expecting to change the methods of powering a society of over 300 million people overnight is unrealistic. While whatever conversions that do make sense are taking place, what energy is going power manufacturing, delivering and installing windmills, solar panels, turbines, generators and the power grid needed to provide “green” energy to the public? Will it be the “green” energy that is still under development? No. The energy that’s going to be used will be traditional fuels.

Why does America continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on foreign energy while there is undeveloped energy in its own country? Why doesn’t America keep those billions of dollars at home, in its own cash starved economy?

At a time when millions of Americans are looking for work and its economy is starving for liquid capital, why doesn’t America take advantage of its own wealth of natural resources? Why aren’t Americans drilling for oil and natural gas or digging for coal? Why aren’t people working building refineries and power plants? Why aren’t people delivering gas, coal and natural gas to consumers? How many peripheral jobs will be created in the process? For every new oil well, power plant, refinery or mine there will be new roads built, followed by restaurants, stores and housing. All generated by the only force capable of powering America’s economic recovery: the private sector.

In the interest of national security and job creation, America should put Americans back to work delivering American energy to Americans. This is the best way to become energy independent. Forcing “green energy” on America overnight will only lead to economic destruction.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/energy-starts-american-recovery/

After having his hat handed to him and being shown the door by his opponent in a debate performance so poor for Barack Obama that his only recourse was to bully Mitt Romney on the campaign stump the next day, what is a candidate hoping for re-election supposed to do to change the momentum?

Have the Labor Department revise previous unemployment numbers to show that the economy created 86,000 more jobs during the summer than first reported, then conclude that as a result, the unemployment rate has actually fallen below 8.1 per cent in for the first time in almost four years.

What a coincidence.  Just like magic.

The Labor Department reported the economy had added 114,000 jobs in September.  That is not fast enough to keep pace with population growth, much less reduce the rate of unemployment.

If growth in the human population is creating new workers faster than economic growth is creating new jobs, how is it possible that the unemployment number went down?

And why did it unexpectedly happen in a report issued immediately after an Obama debate performance that left him on the ropes and displayed his weakness to a television audience of 67.2 million?

How about that?  A sudden, unexpected, unexplainable change in the jobs numbers making them more favorable to Obama’s re-election aspirations.  And it just so happens to occur at a crucial moment in the presidential race.

Mysterious.

The fact is so many people have had such little success finding work they have fallen out the unemployment data pool.  How does that mean jobs outlooks are improving?  They have been out of work for so long they have reached their 99 week unemployment insurance benefits limit and thus are no longer counted by the Labor Department.

This artificially lowers the unemployment statistics and creates a false impression that “progress” is being made in the single most important number to struggling unemployed Americans.

Can you say false “Hope”?

Of course, this does not deter the “re-elect Barack Obama at any and all costs” members of the “progressive” Party Pravda.

What was their reaction?

Yahoo News headline: “US jobless rate falls to 7.8 pct., 44-month low.”  The sub-headline: “US unemployment rate falls to 7.8 pct., lowest since 2009, giving Obama a potential boost.”

First paragraph: “The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years and giving President Barack Obama a potential boost with the election a month away.”

If this is not intended solely to make Obama look good at precisely the moment his campaign hits rock bottom, then Hugh Hefner is a virgin.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/unemployment-7-8-october-surprise/

Following the first presidential debate on October 3^rd between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, one in which Romney repeatedly scored and Obama appeared lost, annoyed and disinterested; pundits, pollsters and political junkies alike unanimously declared Mitt Romney as the winner.

Obama, a long time card carrying member of the self-proclaimed institutionalized “progressive” left intellectual elite, was not simply one step ahead of the opposition.  He was so extremely clever he completely tricked, baffled and befuddled his own supporters.

What the entire watching world missed was, Obama’s apparently dismal failure in the Denver, CO debate was a well-planned, strategic, flawlessly executed tactic.

Barack Obama, being so much smarter than everyone else, thoroughly fooled the masses with his deliberately debased debate debacle.

His performance was so convincing that even Bill Maher and Chris Matthew swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker.  Maher, who has put lots of his own money behind Obama, bemoaned on Twitter “I can’t believe I’m saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter”.  Matthews was beside himself, tormenting himself by wondering aloud why the real Obama failed to show up for the verbal tussle.

You would think nobody had ever heard of Muhammad Ali shockingly conquering George Foreman in the historic Rumble in the Jungle.

This must have been Obama’s strategy going into the debate, to strategically pattern the three debates after the world famous Ali-Foreman heavyweight championship bout.  Play rope-a-dope and intentionally allow the opponent to attack, all the while knowing your adversary will tire and his skills will eventually wane.

For Barack Obama, who as demonstrated by his actions in office clearly considers himself vastly intellectually superior to even his White House predecessors, much less his backwards thinking Conservative yokel opponent, there can be no other explanation.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/romney-in-big-trouble/

For the better part of his time in the national spotlight, the current White House occupant, with a major assist from obedient "progressive" Party Pravda puppies so eager for approval from their anointed one they have adopted criminally negligent journalistic practices, has meticulously hidden his racist self.

Obama’s appointee for Attorney General Eric Holder, the man who said when it comes to race America is a nation of cowards, stopped a very clear cut case of voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party dead in its tracks.

The Department Of Justice did not prosecute the New Black Panthers for voter's rights violations, but they did sue the State of Arizona for enforcing border security.  They have sued states to stop enforcement of voter ID laws.

The hypocrisy is palpable.

Welcome to Barack Obama's post racial America.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9CeWH5gnbo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmU5UV3bnuM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

Republican Civil Rights Leader Martin Luther King must be rolling in his grave.

Where applicable, thank God he gave you enough grace, intelligence and common sense to remain open to hearing both sides, uncover the truth and see through the fraud that is Barrack Hussein Obama.  You were able to use your God given cognitive abilities to evaluate and judge him not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character.

You can proudly say that you never voted for him.

For those who were fooled by Obama into voting for him in 2008, forget it.  You cannot undo that vote. 

But you can avoid making that unfortunate mistake twice.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/03/post-racial-america/

America’s 2012 deficit has surpassed the already outrageous and immoral deficit of 2011.  Despite hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghani veterans not yet receiving their VA health care benefits Barack Obama has increased spending on foreign aid by 80 percent.

Where is that foreign aid going?  How much of it will fund America’s so-called allies in Libya, Egypt or Pakistan?  What portion of taxpayer’s money will end up in the hands of jihadists who posted threats on Facebook before their well-planned, coordinated 9/11 consulate attack in Benghazi, Libya; an assault that resulted in the death of four unprotected Americans?   Or will that money somehow end up in the coffers of the al Qaeda terrorists who bombed that same consulate twice in the weeks preceding the assault?

After repeated requests for increased security measures, why was the Benghazi consulate left unprotected by the Obama administration’s Departments of State and Defense?

If Benghazi is so unsafe that the entire U.S. staff has been pulled out, and the well trained, well equipped FBI cannot enter to investigate the “crime scene”, why were the U.S. Ambassador and three other Americans sent there?

Why is the Obama administration acting in full blown denial of al Qaeda and other elements of Islamofascism being alive and well and influential in the Middle East and North Africa?

With the Muslim Brotherhood in control of Egypt’s government, Egyptian women legitimately fear they will see their rights diminished.  In Afghanistan, where the Taliban and al Qaeda are patiently waiting out the pre-announced withdrawal of America’s armed forces, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s pledge to Afghani women that America will not abandon them and their rights is skating on thin ice.

At a meeting of the UN General Assembly in New York a senior North Korean diplomat warned that North and South Korea are 'on the verge of nuclear war'.

Feeling safer now that Obama’s policies of appeasement are in full bloom?

On the home front, while America speeds towards a fiscal cliff that will throw the economy into a double dip recession and lead to huge tax increases, the Obama administration coerced Lockheed Martin into dropping plans to issue legally required layoff notices to employees in the swing state of Virginia.  The Office of Management and Budget promised Lockheed Martin that the government would pay the legal costs if Lockheed was charged with violating the WARN Act.  That means taxpayers will get stuck with the bill for the Obama administration’s encouraging Lockheed Martin to break the law.

Meanwhile, the nanny state and the nanny state mentality continue to “evolve”.  Now, the government has plans to “urge” parents to pattern their family dinners after school lunches.  Since when is it the government’s job to use American children to dictate dinner table fare to parents?

Two more U.S. Border Patrol agents have been shot.  In what may turn out to be a replay of the Brian Terry catastrophe, one died.  In what the Obama administration will certainly describe as an “isolated incident”, Fast and Furious weapons were found in the possession of a Juarez drug cartel leader.

The healthcare reform law, which was sold on the promise that middle income families would see their premiums reduced by $2,500, has caused them to rise by $3,000.  For each and every middle income family, that is a harsh $5,500 reality being imposed upon their already falling incomes.  In addition, private property owners now face a new Federal Surtax to help pay for Medicare…and hospitals now face new fines for readmitting Medicare patients “too quickly”.  How “too quickly” is defined will be determined by an unelected, unaccountable oligarchy in Washington DC; not the hospital, not the doctor, not the patient.

Low and Middle incomes have fallen sharply since Obama took office.  The reckless spending of Obama and members of his “progressive” body politic ensures it is only a matter of time before middle income families see their taxes rise.

In the face of this evidence, Americans are expected to believe that Mitt Romney is the one who is out of touch and hostile to the interests of America’s middle class?

In such a target rich environment, Mitt Romney should attack Barack Obama’s policies and record in a grand, sweeping, big picture, presidential fashion.  By doing so, Romney will be able to draw a clear distinction between his plans for America and Obama’s.  By employing this strategy, Romney stands to win considerably more than the October 3^rd debate in Denver, Colorado.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/romney-attack-to-win/

Tea Party principles are based on a belief in the U.S. Constitution.  Across America, a huge natural constituency exists for the bread-and-butter American issues of lower taxes, reduced government, a strong national defense, secure borders and a return to the traditional American values of: E Pluribus Unum, Liberty and in God we trust.

E Pluribus Unum means from many, one. It does not mean unquestioning acquiescence to multiculturalism and diversity.  Liberty means opportunity for all, not equality of results.  In God we trust means reliance upon the Creator of all things.  It does not mean passive acceptance of secularism, atheism or submissive surrender to “progressive” statist mandates.

The Tea Party movement began as a peaceful protest against big government, reckless government spending, high taxes and oppressive regulations. The Tea Party’s Contract From America expressed principles held by its members. The most basic being that “Our moral, political, and economic liberties are inherent, not granted by our government.”

The principles of the Tea Party were clearly expressed in the Contract:  Protect the Constitution, reject Cap & Trade, demand a balanced budget, enact fundamental tax reform, restore fiscal responsibility and Constitutionally limited government in Washington DC, end runaway government spending, defund, repeal and replace government-run health care, pass an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy, stop the pork, and stop the tax hikes.

The American idea, the shot heard round the world, is that We The People can govern ourselves.  By the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God we are entitled, by virtue of our humanity, to the maximum amount of Individual Liberties consistent with law and order, and to the Right of private ownership, not the least of which is the Right to own and decide for ourselves.  These Liberties and Rights are to be equally protected by a Constitutionally limited, representative government that derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.  This is a distinctly exceptional American idea.

These are the Tea Party's principles, which today are largely viewed as being Conservative or "right wing".  Adherence to these principles are shared by members of many political Parties, but rejected wholesale by the institutionalized "progressive" left movement, which has co-opted today's Democratic Party.

If you are in the Tea Party, you believe in America.

If you believe in America, you belong in the Tea Party.

In an election where a decision will made between the American way of life and a nanny state "entitlement" society based on a European idea, the Tea Party Matters.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/01/why-the-tea-party-matters/

On Wednesday U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton finally admitted al Qaeda in North Africa was behind the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, where the American ambassador and three others were murdered.

Clinton’s statements further muddied the administration’s fumbled explanations about exactly what happened on Sept. 11.  For purely partisan political reasons, Barack Obama’s administration has denied terrorist involvement in the Benghazi attack.

To ever admit that the United States is still involved in fighting a war against al Qaeda flies in the face of Obama’s re-election campaign strategy of showcasing the killing Osama bin Laden and the debilitation of Al Qaeda.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/world/africa/clinton-cites-clear-link-between-al-qaeda-and-attack-in-libya.html?_r=0

Remember Vice President Joe Biden shouting from the Democratic National Convention stage: “Osama bin Laden is dead and GM is alive”?

To hear “progressive” politicians and their obedient sock puppets in the “progressive” Party Pravda tell it, to put two and two together and reason that al Qaeda had access to technology which allowed them to watch the DNC convention, hear what was said and plot a 9/11 revenge is angry, bigoted, conspiratorial racist hate speech from violent right wing extremists who cannot stand having a black man in the Oval Office.

It could not possibly have anything to do with the fact that his domestic and foreign policies can be defined as “man caused disasters”.

While taking care of extremely important, top priority re-election business on a daytime television talk show, Obama cautioned the ladies that describing the incident was impossible due to an ongoing FBI investigation.  However, more than two weeks after the fact, FBI agents are still not in Benghazi, much less at the crime scene conducting an investigation.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/26/world/africa/libya-investigation/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

The more America learns about the 9/11 terrorist attack on the Benghazi consulate, the more it looks like a complete security failure and a calculated government cover-up.

This foreign policy sleight of hand deceit matches the consistent pattern of “evolving” economic news at home.

The latest economic reports reveal that second quarter GDP growth was revised down from 1.7 percent to 1.25 percent.  New orders for U.S. manufactured durable goods fell in August by the most in 3-1/2 years, the biggest drop since January 2009.  This clearly indicates a sharp slowdown in factory activity.

Fear that Washington will fail to reach an agreement and avoid the "fiscal cliff" has reduced businesses incentive to boost production.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/27/us-usa-economy-durables-idUSBRE88Q0S720120927

From Benghazi to an Ohio manufacturing facility, the strategy and tactics are always the same.  Make the news sound better that it is then enlist your multiple press secretaries within the “mainstream media” to put that “ news” on the front page of the paper, make it a magazine cover story, or put it on as breaking news television.

When far fewer people are paying attention, have those same media minions disclose the truth in a far less prominent place and in a far less spectacular manner.

Welcome to Obama’s America.  Is this really what America wants?

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/domestic-policy-foreign-policy-failure/

Yahoo News and ABC News, two dependable card carrying members of the “progressive” Party Pravda, completely ignore spreading violence in the Islamist world, the White House cover up of the Benghazi consulate terrorist attack and Barack Obama’s decision to appear on a daytime talk show rather than meet with world leaders.

Nothing to see here folks, keep moving along.

Instead, they focus the Yahoo website headline on attacking GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney.  This is done by using an ABC News/Washington Post poll to “report” that criticism of Romney's campaign has grown.  The poll of 1,012 adults claims that sixty-one percent of those asked rated his efforts negatively.  Poll results show that number has risen by twelve percentage points since mid-July.

The poll also shows that a majority of Americans have an unfavorable view of Romney’s comments about the forty seven percent who pay no income taxes.

The article then gushes all over Obama’s positive grades for handling his presidential campaign.

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/criticism-romneys-campaign-grows-six-10-rate-efforts-100132981--abc-news-politics.html

Leave it to the “progressive” Party Pravda to use their online footprint to “nudge” voters leftward in Obama’s direction based solely on polling information about how the two candidates are running their campaign.

Never mind the lack of jobs.  Never mind the consistently high unemployment, never mind pocket book crippling inflation at the grocery store, the gas pump, or on the family electricity bill.  Forget about the rising cost of college tuition or escalating healthcare premiums.  That there are Islamist countries around the globe burning American flags, burning Obama in effigy, while attacking American embassies and consulates is not important.  Having four Americans, including the ambassador to Libya, butchered in a premeditated terrorist attack on 9/11 is just a “bump in the road”.

What is important is to indoctrinate low information voters into judging the two presidential candidates based on how a handful of voters, carefully selected by ABC News and the Washington Post, view the way the two candidates are running their campaigns.

That makes understanding the presidential race more like watching American Idol or Dancing with the Stars, something those who are not fortunate enough to be included among the “intellectual elite” can comprehend.

Of course, if you believe those 1,012 voters have in no way been influenced by the openly biased reporting of Yahoo News, ABC News and the Washington Post you are seriously prone to stating that Brian Williams is a straight shooter…and to buying more snake oil from a certain salesman hailing from Hawaii, by way of Indonesia, by way of Chicago.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/09/26/todays-yahooabc-hit-piece/

Despite recognition by virtually everyone but the Oval Office that the White House trumpeted anti-Islamist video trailer has next to nothing to do with violence in the Middle East, and that it is simply a re-election distraction ploy that deflects blame from Obama’s failed foreign policy; in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly Barack Obama continued to blame the video for Mid-East riots and violent demonstrations.

Obama used that narrative as the backdrop for saying there is "No speech that justifies mindless violence.  There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents" and "No video that justifies an attack on an embassy".  Obama also said that the video "is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well."

 http://news.yahoo.com/obama-condemns-violence-tied-anti-muslim-film-145204587--election.html

How is the exercise of free speech by an American an insult to America?  Is Obama ever going to make a similar statement about artists who dip Crucifixes in urine?

Obama also said “I know that not all countries in this body share this particular understanding of the protection of free speech. We recognize that.”

So Obama recognizes that UN member states do not share American views on the protection of free speech by the U.S. Constitution.

What is Obama doing about it?  Recognizing that Islamists will continue to launch military assaults upon American embassies and consulates around the world while he continues to lay the blame at the feet of Americans exercising their right to free speech?

GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, giving an address before the Clinton Global Initiative's annual conference, made the case for the inherent strength and endurance of the private sector and the dignity derived by individuals reaping the rewards of their own labor.

"That must be at the heart of our effort to help people build economies that can create jobs for people, young and old alike. Work builds self-esteem. It transforms minds from fantasy and fanaticism to reality and grounding.  Work will not long tolerate corruption nor quietly endure the brazen theft by government of the product of hardworking men and women."

Romney said if he wins the White House, he will "remind the world of the goodness and bigness of the American heart.  I will never apologize for America. I believe that America has been one of the greatest forces for good the world has ever known.  We can hold that knowledge in our hearts with humility and unwavering conviction."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/romney-jokes-clinton-influence-2012-election-143506618--election.html

Two candidates for one high office offer distinctly differing world views.

Obama’s view is to preach moral equivalence while shrinking from defense of the U.S. Constitution and the God given rights it protects for all Americans.

Romney’s is to stand up for America and its economic system while celebrating the prosperity and good America has both created and symbolized for over two centuries.

Does the distinction need to be drawn more clearly?

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/09/25/romney-obama-two-speeches-two-views/

In comments made during a CBS '60 Minutes' interview, Barack Obama described violent attacks on embassies in the Middle East and the murder of US ambassador Chris Stevens and three others, as “bumps in the road”.

When asked if recent events in the Middle East had changed his outlook on supporting the Arab Spring, Obama responded: “Well, I’d said even at the time that this is going to be a rocky path. The question presumes that somehow we could have stopped this wave of change.  I think it was absolutely the right thing for us to do to align ourselves with democracy, universal right, a notion that people have to be able to participate in their own governance.   But I was pretty certain and continue to be pretty certain that there are going to be bumps in the road because, you know, in a lot of these places, the one organizing principle has been Islam.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207861/Obama-describes-wave-Middle-East-violence-murder-U-S-ambassador-Libya-bumps-road.html

A coordinated military maneuver, confirmed by the head of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center as a terrorist attack, that employed rocket propelled grenades and other heavy weapons, which was launched on the anniversary on 9/11 against an American embassy that directly led to the death of four Americans, including an ambassador, is a “bump in the road”?

During the interview, Obama admitted that his campaign ads had made mistakes, but somehow, CBS News didn’t find that piece of information newsworthy enough to share with their viewers.

When asked if he was disturbed by fact checkers proving assertions in his ads were untrue, Obama responded:  "Do we see sometimes us going overboard in our campaign, are there mistakes that are made, areas where there is no doubt somebody could dispute how we are presenting things? You know, that happens in politics."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cbs-doesnt-air-obama-admitting-mistakes-campaign-ads_652973.html

That happens in politics when a campaign cannot run on its record in office, is so desperate to win that it deems it necessary to employ every long used dirty “progressive” smear tactic and suffers from a severe shortage of ethics, morals and socially redeeming qualities.

Remember when the United States was unquestionably Israel’s strongest ally?  Not anymore.  According to Obama, Israel is merely “one of our closest allies in the region”.

Since his inauguration, Obama has attempted to appease the Islamist world with an “even-handed” approach.  Now Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has serious doubts about American resolve to stand behind Israel. 

For his part, Obama admitted to viewing Netanyahu’s requests for the U.S. to take a harder stance against Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons as “noise” he must ignore when making American security decisions.

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/09/24/obama-israel-closest-allies-region/

Is it sheer coincidence that the exact same word was used to describe Israel by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?   “I have spoken about this topic at length, previously. We generally speaking do not take very seriously the issue of the Zionists and the possible dangers emanating from them. Of course they would love to find a way for their own salvation by making a lot of noise and to raise stakes in order to save themselves. But I do not believe they will succeed. Iran is also a very well recognized country and her defensive powers are very clear.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-refers-israel-concern-over-iran-noise_652967.html

Is this any way for America to conduct foreign policy?  Does having cities in twenty different countries descend into weeks of anti-American violence and murder sound like a “bump in the road” or more like just cause for alarm?  Does treating long-time ally Israel like they are simply “one of our closest allies in the region” sound like a recipe for successfully enlisting new allies in the future?  Is this what Americans view as making America safer?  Is this what Americans see as elevating America’s standing in the world view?

Is it accidental that a large number of Americans who are currently engaged in early voting are oblivious to this information?

America deserves better than this, does it not?

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/09/24/to-obama-mid-east-violence-and-murders-bumps-in-the-road-israel-noise/