October 21, 2012

Big Picture: Obama Believes His Campaign More Important Than National Security---Truth Comes Out In Latest Coverup

by Dr. Alan Bates, MD

Candy Crowley, Communist News Network’s chief political correspondent and a known supporter of Marxist Obama and his rogue regime, went from role of debate moderator to ‘accessory to coverup’ when Governor Romney confronted Obama about his administration’s campaign-driven coverup of the facts surrounding the murder of four Americans at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Ms. Crowley misrepresented the transcript of Obama’s comments made in the White House Rose Garden the day of the attack, during which he implicated a virtually unknown video about the Islam prophet Mohammed as the cause of the attack (which he called a protest) rather than Al-Qaeda terrorism. This ‘video myth’ was perpetuated by the Obama Administration for at least two weeks despite their having been informed by intelligence officials in Libya within 24 hrs that the attack was pre-planned and carried out by Al-Qaeda. Complicit liars in the Administration included Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, UN Ambassador Susan Rice, Obama’s press secretary Jay Carney, and even ‘Bully’ Joe Biden who believed that blaming a video would provide cover for Obama’s main campaign theme that killing Bin Laden was America’s victory over Al-Qaeda and that Al-Qaeda was not responsible for the Benghazi tragedy. But the truth caught up with the Administration as intelligence officials not only debunked the myth but even revealed that the Obama Administration had turned down numerous requests for enhanced security from Ambassador Stevens and others as late as the day of the attack—even reduced protection in order to make a positive impression on the Libyans---on the heels of other Al-Qaeda attacks on the Red Cross and British embassy. Obama showed more concern about getting on with his campaign fund-raising trip to Vegas than the deaths of four Americans and the truth behind the attack, behavior not seen in any president during my lifetime! This entire incident is yet another example of intentionally misleading Americans for the purpose of protecting Obama’s Islamic friends (The Muslim Brotherhood) AND getting himself reelected, just as occurred with the Fort Hood terrorist massacre of 13 American servicepeople (called a ‘workplace incident’ by the Administration) and the shooting down of an American Chinook helicopter by Afghan insurgents in August of 2011. Obama and Clinton offer our servicemen and women as sacrificial lambs to the Jihadists! This administration does not know what ‘peace through strength’ means.

This was not the only lie told by Obama during the second debate. Demonstrating his narcissistic personality disorder by constantly challenging Ms. Crowley for the last word anytime Governor Romney cited FACTS which hurt Obama’s credibility, Obama lied about his own motives and accomplishments (or lack thereof) while misrepresenting or distorting Romney’s record of achievements and plans for moving America forward. Perhaps Obama’s only accomplishment during the debate was that he smirked and laughed with contempt fewer times than ‘Bully’ Biden did during his ‘debate’ with Paul Ryan. Here are a short list of other lies and distortions by Obama noted during the second presidential debate:

1. Energy security and prices: Obama denied the fact that oil drilling permits on public lands had decreased some 62 percent during his first three years in office when compared to the Bush Administration (fewest granted by any recent Administration), due to the regulatory roadblocks put in place by his Dept of Energy. He tried to blame any denied permits on “lose it or use it” by oil companies. Facts show that Obama blocked approval of oil drilling permits for the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska and most recently blocked development of the Canadian XL pipeline in order to please his tree-hugger environmentalist supporters, thereby costing the nation thousands of new jobs and a long overdue move towards American energy security (this so aptly illustrates Obama’s narcissism over what is best for America). Obama emphasized ‘green energy’ but failed to mention the multimillions of ‘middle class’ taxpayer dollars wasted on failed green companies such as Solyndra. He naively blamed current high gas prices on the low prices which accompanied the recession when he took office. Obama lied when he said he supports coal plants; Romney pointed out that Obama’s EPA has caused many coal plants to shut down, costing jobs and leaving many in the coal-mining business praying for a Romney victory.
2. National debt: as expected, Obama blamed Bush and the Republican Congress for the nation’s economic woes when it is clear the Democrats engineered the policies which culminated in the housing crisis---inflicting the greatest damage on the middle class in national history. Romney pointed out that Obama had two years with a Democrat majority in both Houses of Congress and kept not one of his campaign promises, whether dealing with immigration or entitlement reform or cutting the national debt even though Obama appointed and then ignored all recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson Commission, instead continuing to spend our nation into massive debt with no solution (during the debate) except to ‘make the rich pay their fair share of taxes’ (they already pay MORE than their fair share and even confiscating their wealth would run Fedzilla for only 9 days!). Obama STILL does not understand basic economics which even his Democrat predecessor John F. Kennedy and Republican Ronald Reagan understood---that lowering taxes across the board and on corporations generates jobs and creates a broader tax base and MORE tax revenue than increasing taxes on anyone including ‘the rich’ (as Reagan would say: “there he goes again”).

3. Immigration: Obama had promised immigration policy reform during his term but instead broke numerous existing laws with executive orders permitting illegals to stay in America, while suing states for trying to protect their citizens by enforcing existing laws. Romney emphasized enforcement of current laws which encourage legal immigration, protection of our borders, and working to find bipartisan solutions for related issues.

4. Second Amendment rights: Obama lied by stating he supports the Second Amendment. He and his DOIJ have a clear longterm record of opposing the Second Amendment and always trying to find ways to nullify that freedom, the most blatant being the Fast and Furious scandal, the purpose of which Romney properly pointed out was the subject of a coverup by the Administration for ‘unknown’ reasons (tongue in cheek). An undereducated questioner asked Obama if he would reinstate the ‘assault weapons’ ban, as if to blame select guns for crimes and not the people who commit illegal acts with firearms. Obama said he wanted to reinstitute that ban despite the facts that assault weapons are (a) not automatic as many believe, (b) the guns labeled as such are less powerful than many other rifles used for hunting, and (c) AK and AR rifles are false symbols for the Left to take away all guns from American citizens when these type guns are almost never used in gun crimes. Obama’s record on the Second Amendment is the subject of my September 30 commentary entitled ‘Disarming America’.

5. Womens issues: Obama lied about his record towards women who have suffered during his administration with higher joblessness and more poverty. The Left insults the intelligence of women by trying to claim that taxpayer-funded contraception and abortion are their primary concerns, when women have far greater concerns---jobs, the Left’s corruption of their children in our public schools, as well as infringement on religious freedom. Romney was able to convincingly counter Obama’s false claim that he does not care about women.


Romney had several opportunities to expose more of Obama’s lies but instead concentrated his efforts on drawing a stark contrast between his public and private record of business expertise, charity and ability to work in a bipartisan manner AND Obama’s lack thereof. Noticeably, Romney failed to touch on why Obama, Holder and the Democrats are opposed to fair elections through Voter ID and purging voter roles of felons, the dead and illegals.

In conclusion, you have a choice between Barry Soetoro---alias Barack Hussein Obama---an amateur, dishonest, egocentric Marxist with deep racist views, who disrespects American exceptionalism, our Constitutional freedoms with limited government, our rule of law and our military (through imposing political correctness, disarming them at certain times and the White House giving away intelligence to our enemies), elected on an empty platform promise for undefined ‘hope and change’ by naive uneducated voters, the Left, and those who felt the need to elect the first black president (shallow ‘skin-deep’ thinking), AND former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, an experienced, honest, charitable, business-savvy, pro-Constitutional, non-racist candidate with a known constructive bipartisan track record, who respects American exceptionalism and the military strength to defend our freedoms. Romney is the only rational choice Americans have for economic recovery, cost-effective energy independence, fair trade, lifting the oppressive lead boot from the necks of small businesses which provide the bulk of employment, and repealing/changing the destructive and bankrupting Obamacare. America is at the proverbial fork in the road---and the choice is preservation of the American dream for our children or the Left’s transformation of the once strongest and most prosperous country on Earth to the throes of Marxism or worse. Let us pray!

Copyright 10/21/2012 by Gulf1

NO, CANDY, OBAMA DID NOT CALL BENGHAZI “TERRORISM" AND, BY THE WAY,…BUTT OUT!

from THE DAILY PEN by Penbrook One

TWO AGAINST ONE: In an unprecedented violation of presidential debate moderation protocol, CBS' Candy Crowley takes sides during a critical discussion between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama over the September 11^th terrorist attack in Benghazi further confirming the reasons why commissioners and organizers did not want her to moderate the debate.

Commentary by Dan Crosby of The Daily Pen

HEMPSTEAD, NY – The September 11^th tragedy in Benghazi is yet one more reason why you should never vote for an illegitimate president. The election of an ineligible candidate breeds a weakened sense of sovereignty among the people and, therefore, a diminished sense of unity as a nation which, ultimately, leads to a slackened appreciation of the need to remain diligent in the security of Americans overseas.

The terrorist attack in Benghazi is the seventh terrorist attack attempted or carried out against Americans since Obama became president.

Moreover, now we understand why the Commission on Presidential Debates should never allow a liberal member of the media to moderate a presidential debate in a liberal state.

In moderator Candy Crowley’s vigor to help the usurper, Barack Obama, she committed the cardinal sin of argument facilitation during the second of three 2012 Presidential debates. At Hofstra University on Tuesday night, in the bastion of all blue states, New York, CBS' Crowley plumed her true liberal colors and allied herself with Barack Obama.

 

 Surprise, surprise.

Crowley’s shocking intrusion into the debate between Mitt Romney and Obama occurred near the 66 minute mark of the hour and a half debate when she actually joined the discussion in defense of Obama, thereby committing and act of journalistic malpractice.

During a tense exchange, Romney questioned whether Obama had explicitly called the Benghazi attack an "act of terror" rather than "spontaneous" violence that grew out of a protest against an anti-Islam video.

“I think this is interesting. The president just said something which is, on the day after the attack, he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.”

“That's what I said.” interrupted Obama.

Romney fired back, “You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror. It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you're saying?”

“Please proceed governor,” said Obama.

“I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.” said Romney.

“Get the transcript,” quipped a visibly annoyed Obama.

Crowley then intervened by taking Obama’s side, “It -- it -- it -- he did in fact, sir ... call it an act of terror.”

Taking Crowley’s queue, Obama turned into a five year old brat, “Say that at little louder, Candy.”

Crowley seemed to immediately acknowledge her error telling Romney, “It did as well take — it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.”

 

After the debate, Crowley said, “He (Romney) was right in the main. I just think he picked the wrong word.”

“Regardless of her assessment of who was right or wrong, it is not the place of any moderator to correct what a candidate says. A debate is meant for the candidates to display their level of understanding to the people!” says TDP editor, Penbrook Johannson.

“Unfortunately for Crowley and Obama, Obama did not explicitly call the attack in Benghazi an act of terrorism. He merely made a broad statement about any act of terrorism, not this one specifically.”

Here is what Obama actually said:

"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for," Obama said a day after the attack.

If you are an Obama supporter, this statement was in direct reference to the Benghazi attack, even though Obama does not explicitly say that the Benghazi attack is one of those acts of terrorism he is referring to. This lack of referential integrity is further indicated by his next sentence:

"Today we mourn for more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done. But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers."

Notice he never says that the attack in Benghazi was an act of terror, just that any act of terror will never shake the resolve of this great nation. More specifically, Obama never put the words “Benghazi” and “terrorism” in the same sentence for two weeks.

If you are not an Obama supporter, this statement was nothing more than a premeditated c.m.a. “escape hatch” intentionally put in place by a calculating politically-minded creature just in case he might be challenged on his competency on the issue of terrorism. This way, Obama knows he could, at least, stand on the word “terrorism” during his reaction to the Benghazi attack without actually calling that specific attack terrorism.

 

He made the broad sweeping statement intentionally to avoid the specific accusation which would appear unfavorable to his intellectually dishonest position that terrorism has been diminished because of his administration’s efforts in the Middle East.

People love to laud Obama’s intelligence. However, the Obotic horde fails to remember that Obama is the first Nobel Peace Prize winner with a kill list. He is a man divided among himself.

The problem with Obama’s lack of commitment to his wobbling position is that his administration said the attack was a spontaneous riot spurred by a YouTube video for almost two weeks while intelligence sources contended it was terrorism from day one.

Four days after Obama’s speech in the Rose Garden, Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., went on five networks' Sunday shows and cast the attack as hardly a coordinated strike by terrorists.

"We are obviously investigating this very closely. The FBI has a lead in this investigation," Rice said Sept. 16 on "Fox News Sunday." "The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack.

That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video. People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are quite common in post-revolutionary Libya and that then spun out of control.

"But we don't see at this point signs this was a coordinated plan, premeditated attack. Obviously, we will wait for the results of the investigation and we don't want to jump to conclusions before then. But I do think it's important for the American people to know our best current assessment."

Obama, himself, cited the video as the culprit six times in his address to the United Nations…eight days after his appearance in the Rose Garden.

Flip-Flopper or was he just for a terrorist attack before he was against it…before he was for it again?

All this ugliness and tragedy…and just think…the guy is not even eligible to hold the office.

ILLEGITIMATE JOBLESS REPORT OMITTED LARGEST STATE’S LABOR STATS

from THE DAILY PEN by Penbrook One

by Dan Crosby

of The Daily Pen

NEW YORK, NY- The state of California has the largest population of any state in America. It has an economy which, if it were an independent nation, would rank in the top 10 in the world.

It also has one of the highest rates of unemployment in America, above 10%. In some counties in the state’s central agricultural region, unemployment is around 25%.

Considering these metrics, one would think it might be necessary for a federal government report on the national labor rate to include the Golden State.

One would think this, unless you are a democrat seeking re-election by padding job numbers to make it appear like your liberal economic policies are working when they are not.

After this week’s surprisingly positive jobless claims number was released, three things happened according to Business Insider.

1. Lots of people felt better about the economy

2. Democrats cheered because they thought the number would help Obama

3. Republicans seized on confusing reports that the numbers had "excluded claims from one large state" (probably California) and blasted the number as wrong and misleading.

Since then, the argument has raged on, and there have been a variety of different reports and interpretations. Well, we're glad to say that we've finally gotten to the bottom of what happened.

We spoke to a source at the Labor Department. According to this source, who is an analyst at the Department, here's what happened:

• ALL STATES WERE INCLUDED in this week's jobless claims. Assertions that "a large state" was excluded from the report are patently false.

However, dissenters are not saying California was excluded. They are saying that California did not provide its state labor statistics before the deadline required by the publisher of this particular report. Of course, California was not excluded. It was included and the number published was 0. Zero because California did not provide statistics. Here’s how economists explain:

• It is likely that some of the jobless claims in one large state--California--were not included in the claims reported to the Department of Labor this week. This happens occasionally, our source says. When a state's jobless claims bureau is short-staffed, sometimes the state does not process all of the claims that came in during the week in time to get them to the DOL. The source believes that this is what happened this week.

• The California claims that were not processed in time to get into this week's jobless report will appear in future reports, most likely next week's or the following week's. In other words, those reports might be modestly higher than expected.

• The source believes that the number of California claims that were not processed totalled about 15,000-25,000. Thus, if one were to "normalize" the overall not-seasonally-adjusted jobless claims number, it would increase by about 15,000-25,000.

• This week's "normalized" jobless claims number, therefore, would be about 355,000-365,000, not the 339,000 that was reported. This compares to the 370,000 consensus expectation.

In other words, had all of California's jobless claims been processed in time to make the jobless-claims release, this jobless number would still have been better than economists were expecting--but not as much better as it appeared.

Again, the as-yet-unprocessed claims will appear in future reports. So next week's number may well be higher than expected.

So, who's right about today's jobless claims number?

Everyone's right!

• Jobless claims were better than expected, even after adjusting for an unusual anomaly
• There was an unusual anomaly that made this week's jobless claims look better than they would otherwise have been.

Of course, there was a motive to create good news after Barack Obama's abysmal performance at the first 2012 presidential debate, just before the jobs reports came out. One way to do that is fake key economic indicators in favor of Obama.

Still Don’t Know Who To Vote For? Then Read This

by Dr. Alan Bates, MD
October 15, 2012

There are actually some voters who are still ‘undecided’. Imagine that! There are two reasons for this: either they have been brainwashed by the Leftwing media networks such as CNN and MSNBC which distort reality and thrive on dishonest reporting, or they have no understanding of world history as it relates to the likes of Hitler (and other murderous dictators) or the freedom-crushing ideologies of Communism and Marxism, both of which are alive and well today.

To sum it up, you can vote for a ticket which will defend our Constitutional principles and American free enterprise whereby We the People control our government, OR you can vote for a Marxist ticket rife with corruption which despises American exceptionalism (in the areas of liberty and free enterprise) and believes We the People should be subservient to Fedzilla. It is that simple, folks! Reread this til you get it!

Here are some significant events since my last commentary:

*As if the Administration’s Fast and Furious scandal was not enough, they have now unsuccessfully engaged in a coverup of lax security at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya which resulted in at least four American deaths, despite numerous requests by the diplomatic staff to provide greater protection due to recent Al-Qaeda attacks and known threats to the consulate, even as late as the day before that fateful anniversary of September 11. The Obama administration’s goal was to bury the facts of this debacle in order to preserve the myth confabulated by his election campaign that Al-Qaeda went away after Obama killed Bin Laden. But Al-Qaeda is still a huge force to be reckoned with, and that was clearly demonstrated at a most inconvenient time for the Obama campaign.

Upon further dissection, we note that Obama had but two ‘accomplishments’ during his four years as Criminal-in-chief---the salvage of General Motors (by use of taxpayer stimulus funding for his union cronies and illegally cancelling claims of bondholders) and his killing of Osama bin Laden, the plan for which was already in the works by the Bush Administration when Obama took office, and which narcissist Obama jealously took credit for as a symbol that Al-Qaeda would no longer be a threat without Bin Laden. The campaign’s intent was to milk the death of Bin Laden as cover for lack of any other achievements. To carry this a bit further, Muslim Barry Soetoro Obama has a cozy relationship with The Muslim Brotherhood whose objective is to infiltrate the Free World with Islamic doctrine and Sharia Law. They are well on their way to that goal in parts of Europe but have been rebuffed by Australia. The Obama Administration financially supported them with taxpayer dollars in their quest to become the new ruling party in Egypt as part of the ‘Arab Spring’. Don’t forget that as an Indonesian child, Barry Soetoro was schooled in Muslim doctrine, before his ideology ventured into Lenin’s doctrine of Marxism and Alinsky’s rules for radicals to achieve the Marxist goals to which he clings today (while labeling American patriots as potential terrorists and accusing us of clinging to our Bibles and our guns!). So in an attempt to preserve Obama’s claim to fame, the Admininstration at all levels falsely and wilfully blamed the attack and murder of our consultate officials on an irrelevant 13 minute video for more than one week, until that myth was debunked at Congressional hearings last week by chief military and intelligence officials to whom the Obama Administration is now trying to shift the blame. Even during his VP debate, Joe ‘Bully’ Biden stated that neither he nor Obama had any idea that Al-Qaeda was responsible for the attack, when in fact they either did and lied about it, OR did not because they were missing about 40 percent of the daily national security briefings (a known fact).


* What other coverups by this Administration are lurking out there, hidden from the eyes of Americans?
Can you spell FRAUD? According to The Daily Caller, RNC Chairman Priebus has demanded an immediate investigation into Obama campaign donations in regards to Obama's massive foreign campaign donations, the Secret Service concerning apparent overseas money laundering, and credit card fraud in connection with a third party campaign site, Obama.com, a website owned by Obama bundler Robert Roche, a U.S. citizen living in Shanghai, China who also happens to be Chairman of ACORN International (we all know about ACORN’s massive election fraud tactics). Did I not warn you about the necessity for fraud if Obama is to be reelected? Obama's overseas fund-raising scheme appears to violate Patriot Act laws concerning international money laundering. The Government Accountability Institute issued a 108 page report concerning massive Obama campaign fund-raising irregularities. And don’t forget the number of requests by our military for absentee ballots is only ten percent of that in the last election. It appears the Obama Administration not only opposes voter ID but is trying to block our military men and women from their right to vote.

*The VP debate has received a lot of press when in fact it was no debate at all, but simply a perfect display of VP Joe ‘Bully’ Biden’s liberal mental disorder pathology--and bad teeth. Paul Ryan and the audience of normal Americans saw his pathology immediately and Ryan conducted himself quite well under those circumstances. Biden engaged in repetitive lies in an attempt to run cover for the Obama Administration’s failures such as the Libyan consultate disaster amongst others. As expected, he displayed the classic tactics of Saul Alinsky through nonstop interruptions, incessant talking over his opponent, denial of facts, changing the subject when put on the spot, outright lying, and emotional displays to bury the reality of the moment. And the Dems actually think he set a good example for Obama’s style in his next debate! No one (especially women) likes bullies or dishonest politicians like Biden (except the leftwing media and socialists).

Undecided voters must look past the Leftwing’s misrepresentations of the Romney-Ryan ticket designed to divert attention away from the abysmal failure and willful destruction of this Marxist president. It is categorically false that Romney does not care about women or the middle class (a label which was invented by Marxists as they created various classes of society). In contrast, the DNC is adverse to Christian and Jewish women by removing any reference to God from their platform, by preventing Christians but NOT Muslims from handing out literature outside the Charlotte Convention center, and by trying to make contraception a tax-payer funded mandate as a ploy to secure the vote of naive younger women. With regards to the ‘middle class’, Biden stated it best through his gaffe a few weeks ago that the middle class has been buried during the past four years---TRUE! They have suffered during the longest recession since the Great Depression with high unemployment due to Obama’s policies of rewarding cronies with stimulus money instead of reducing burdensome regulations and taxes on small businesses which are responsible for the majority of jobs in America. We must make a change before the Left drives all of us off the cliff. Vote accordingly if not for your children’s sake to save the American dream!
Copyright 10/15/2012 by Gulf1

Governor Romney, please ask Obama these questions during the foreign policy debate

 

Governor Romney:

In the upcoming foreign policy debate I expect the moderator to ask Mr. Obama softball questions he can answer with well-rehearsed talking points. If the moderator does not ask pressing questions, perhaps you can challenge your opponent. Here are some suggested questions:

There were 13 threats and two attacks against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in the six months leading up to the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. Why, Mr. Obama, did you not increase security there?

According to a State Department whistleblower, security at the consulate was actually reduced in the six months prior to the September 11 attack. Why, Mr. Obama?

Why, Mr. Obama, did you believe a handful of Libyan nationals would be sufficient to protect the lives of Americans working at the consulate in Benghazi, a city that had become arguably more dangerous after the overthrow of Moammar Gaddafi than it had been in the past?

In your eagerness to overthrow the Gaddafi regime, you supplied the Libyan rebels with weapons. Did you even know the identities of those rebels? How did you know you were not supplying al-Qaeda with weapons? Can you assure the American people that none of those weapons were used in the attack against the U.S. consulate? How can we be certain that the four Americans were not killed with American weaponry?

Mr. Obama, tell us again why it was in the interests of the United States to intervene in Libya’s internal affairs? Is the loss of four Americans and the loss of confidential security documents in the nation’s best interests?

One year ago, Mr. Obama, you said we did not have to worry about the radical Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt because it had little power. The Muslim Brotherhood has since won the elections, installed a president, now controls the country, and is threatening to tear apart Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. Tell us again, Mr. Obama, why you thought it was a good idea to oust President Mubarak, an ally of the United States.

Mr. Obama, while you talk frequently about improving U.S. relations with the Muslim world, radical Islamists are persecuting and killing Christians in Egypt, Nigeria. Sudan, and elsewhere. You have neither condemned those actions nor done anything to stop them. Why not?

Mr. Obama, how could you possibly have demanded that Israel return to its pre-1967 “Auschwitz borders” as a pre-condition for negotiations with the Palestinians? Do you not understand that those borders are utterly indefensible? Why do you demand concessions from Israel, but not from the Palestinians?

Mr. Obama, why have you treated the Israeli prime minister with such disdain and contempt? Why did you make rude comments about him to French president Sarkozy?

Mr. Obama, why did you select anti-Semitics like Susan Rice, Samantha Power, and Hillary Clinton for important positions in your administration that deal with foreign policy and Israel?

Mr. Obama, why does your administration refuse to defend Jerusalem as Israel’s permanent capitol? Why does your State Department say it is subject to negotiations?

Mr. Obama, you claim you have imposed “tough sanctions” on Iran, yet agreed to waivers to allow Russia and China to bypass those sanctions. What good then are the sanctions?

What did you mean, Mr. Obama, when you told the Russian president you would be “more flexible” after the election? More flexible about what? What secrets are you keeping from the American people?

Mr. Obama, what was your role in Operation Fast and Furious? If you had no role, why did you claim executive privilege to withhold White House documents? If you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding it?

What was Attorney General Eric Holder’s role in Operation Fast and Furious? Why has he not been fired for incompetence? Why have you not apologized to the Mexican people for an ill-advised scheme that resulted in the murder of several hundred Mexican citizens? If the buck does not stop with Mr. Holder and with you, where does it stop? Why has no one been disciplined or fired because of Operation Fast and Furious?

Mr. Obama, you once said, ‘I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.’ Do you still believe that the United States is no more exceptional than any other nation on earth? I believe the United States is the greatest nation in the history of mankind. Can you tell me why I am wrong?

I would be very grateful, Governor Romney, if you can force Mr. Obama to address some of the above issues. In fact, America’s future may depend on it.

Thank you,

Don Fredrick

October 5, 2012