Eli and Seth Lovell, twin brothers who were deployed to Afghanistan, share how serving their country overseas together brought them strength—and why they both support President Obama. Watch Eli and Seth discuss what the President’s support for veterans means to them, and then pass along their story to your family and friends.
As commander in chief, a president's fundamental responsibility is to protect the American people—and that requires sound judgment and strong values. Over the last four years, President Obama has led with a steady hand—promoting our values and interests overseas while keeping our country safe. Mitt Romney, however, has left a trail of dangerous blunders and endless bluster without offering any specific policies.
In the last presidential debate, the President and Romney will illustrate which candidate is capable of passing the commander in chief test. With a series of missteps under his belt, Romney must—at minimum—answer key questions in detail to prove whether he meets the threshold necessary to be the leader of the free world.
Responsibly ending the wars
What we know: The President kept his promise to end the war in Iraq, has a plan to responsibly end the war in Afghanistan in 2014, and has refocused our efforts on the greatest threats to our security, like al-Qaeda. Romney has refused to outline a specific plan to end the war and called the President's decision to bring all our troops home from Iraq "tragic."
What Romney needs to answer: Will Romney commit to ending the Afghanistan war in 2014, as outlined in the plan that the President, alongside our allies and partners, has in place today? Under what circumstances would he push back our end date from 2014?
What we know: Under President Obama, we have devastated al-Qaeda's top leadership and have brought Osama bin Laden to justice. Romney said it was "not worth moving heaven and earth" to capture bin Laden and has failed to put forth any specific policy on his plans to finish the job against al-Qaeda.
What Romney needs to answer: Would Romney continue the targeted counterterrorism operations that have been so successful under the Obama administration? What would he do differently?
What we know: As he's said before, the President will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon and has implemented the toughest sanctions on Iran in history to assure Tehran complies. As a result, Iran's economy is buckling—its currency has fallen about 80% since 2011. After months of dangerous saber-rattling, Romney now says the President's sanctions are working.
What Romney needs to answer: What exactly would he do differently on Iran if he agrees with the President's approach? Does he think it’s time to take military action?
What we know: Rejecting the failed go-it-alone approach of the previous administration, President Obama made it a priority to rebuild our strategic partnerships and international coalitions to confront shared challenges like the Afghanistan War, intervening to protect the Libyan people, and imposing the toughest sanctions on Iran in history. By contrast, Romney has managed to insult our closest ally, the United Kingdom, during his foreign trip and talks like he wants to return to the go-it-alone policies that came with a heavy cost.
What Romney needs to answer: How would Governor Romney work with our closest ally, the United Kingdom, if he couldn’t even get through a photo-op visit without insulting its leaders and its people? How would he work with the G-8 to continue helping the world recover from a deep global recession, when he’s talked negatively about nearly every member of the G-8 on the campaign trail? And how would Governor Romney get Russia and China on board with sanctions against Iran, when he blusters about both and claims that Russia is "our number one geopolitical foe"?
Standing up to China
What we know: President Obama has fought back against China's unfair trade practices, bringing more trade cases against China in four years than President Bush did in eight. He also took aggressive action to protect American tire workers when China was flooding the market with Chinese tires, saving American jobs as a result. Romney called the President's action "bad for the nation and our workers." And now, Romney’s policies on China could cause a trade war, and have been roundly criticized by Republicans and Democrats alike.
What Romney needs to answer: Would Romney really designate China a currency manipulator on day one of his presidency, even though Republicans like Sen. Marco Rubio and Speaker John Boehner have said it’s a bad idea that risks a trade war? Why is he now taking such a hardline on China, when in his recent book he called President Obama’s actions to protect American tire workers “protectionism”?
What we know: When Muammar Qadhafi threatened to attack and kill his own people, the President led an international coalition to stop an advancing army, prevent a massacre, and support the Libyan people as they overthrew a dictator. By working with NATO and Arab partners, the President accomplished this without putting a single U.S. soldier on the ground.
Romney has been all over the map on Libya, calling for action on one hand and criticizing the President for acting on the other. Rather than clarifying his policy, he actually ran down a hallway to duck reporters' questions. When finally pressed, he said the intervention was too aggressive and then said the world was a "better place" because the intervention succeeded.
What Romney needs to answer: After taking so many conflicting positions, what exactly would Romney have done to protect the Libyan people? How does he square his contradictory positions that American intervention in Libya was at once too slow and too aggressive, or that he alternately questioned the removal of Qadhafi and then celebrated it? And does Governor Romney agree with Rep. Darrell Issa’s decision to release State Department cables that exposed the names of Libyans working with the United States on security and to fight extremism?
Mitt Romney has traded strong convictions and sound policy for bluster and blunder on foreign policy. The President has set the threshold for what it takes to be commander in chief. Given his current record, Romney has a lot of work to do before he can pass the test to be the leader of the free world.Read More…
President Obama and Mitt Romney will meet for the final presidential debate tomorrow night, October 22nd, at 9:00 p.m. ET at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida.
Before the debate, make sure to share this video on the clear difference between the candidates when it comes to leading America on the world stage.
In the town hall debate, Mitt Romney ignored the facts on the Libya attack to try and score cheap points. See why his political bluster fell flat—then share this video with your friends.Read More…
During the town hall presidential debate, one native of New York posed an important question to Mitt Romney: "What plan do you have to put back and keep jobs in the United States?" When it comes to outsourcing, the difference between the candidates could not be more stark: President Obama is the only candidate with a plan to bring jobs back home.
But rather than telling voter the truth, Romney offered the complete opposite assessment of what his policies would do:
"We have made it less attractive to stay here than to go offshore from time to time. What I will do as president is make sure its more attractive to come to America again. This is the way we're going to create jobs in this country."
Here's the problem: Romney's policies would not accomplish what he promises. Romney is proposing tax reforms that would eliminate U.S. taxes on foreign profits companies earn overseas, which critics say “would prompt U.S. to shift offshore even more income than they already do.” According to one economic analysis, this could result in 800,000 jobs created offshore instead of here at home. And by slashing investments in education, innovation, clean energy, and infrastructure, Romney would make the United States a less attractive place for companies to invest and to hire.
And these policies reflect a pattern. Just take a look at his professional record:
Governor: Vetoed a bill that would’ve prevented Massachusetts from sending state jobs overseas, and signed a contract that included a call center in India.
Corporate buyout specialist: Invested in companies “that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories” in countries including China and India.
President Obama has a clear plan to encourage companies to insource jobs. He supports closing corporate loopholes and tax breaks that encourage outsourcing, and creating a tax credit that rewards companies that bring jobs back to the United States. He's also signed multiple tax credits to help growing U.S. industries create more jobs and remain globally competitive. These steps have already resulted in more companies looking to bring jobs back to the United States—and the President's policies would build on that progress.
Find out more about where the candidates really stand on on job creation here, then share the facts with your friends.Read More…
Mitt Romney’s extreme immigration positions were on full display at Tuesday’s debate. From doubling down on his opposition to the bipartisan DREAM Act, to reiterating his support for the inhumane policy of “self-deportation,” Romney showed once again why he is the most extreme presidential nominee on immigration in modern history.
At the debate, Romney justified his support for “self-deportation” by claiming that it “let[s] people make their own choice.” But as the New York Times noted, Romney’s approach to immigration is “mass expulsion: a fantasy of ridding the country of 11 million unauthorized immigrants by making their lives unbearable.” And he’s not backing down from these extreme policies—after all, Romney’s immigration adviser, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, advocates a “true nationwide policy of self-deportation.”
Romney once again called undocumented immigrants “illegals,” proving just how little he understands and respects the Latino community. Romney has praised Arizona’s controversial S.B. 1070—which requires police to check people’s immigration status if officers believe there is “reasonable suspicion” someone could be an undocumented immigrant—as a “model” for the country. As President Obama pointed out, Kobach, Romney’s immigration adviser, is the author of Arizona’s immigration law. And Russell Pearce, who helped Kobach write the anti-immigration law, said Romney’s policy is “identical to mine… Attrition by enforcement.” President Obama opposes S.B. 1070 and believes that “no American should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like.”
The DREAM Act
Romney stood by his opposition to the DREAM Act, which would allow young undocumented immigrants—many of whom were brought to America as children through no fault of their own—a chance earn a path to U.S. citizenship by pursuing a higher education or serving in the military. Romney has even gone so far as to dismiss the DREAM Act as “favoritism” and a “handout”—a slap in the face to talented and hardworking young immigrants who are caught in legal limbo and want nothing more than to contribute to the country they call home. The Romney campaign also said it would end the Obama Administration’s deferred action policy, which lifts the shadow of deportation from responsible young immigrants by giving them a chance to continue their education or apply for work authorization.
Click here to get the facts on how the two candidates compare on immigration.Read More…
Last night’s debate crystallized the clear choice American women face in this election. While President Obama outlined his strong record of cracking down on pay discrimination, ensuring women’s access to affordable health care, and making sure women can make their own health care choices, Mitt Romney revealed his plans to roll back reproductive rights and take women back to the 1950s. Here are three moments from last night’s debate that demonstrate President Obama’s unshakeable commitment to women’s rights and show why Mitt Romney would be the wrong choice for women across the country.
Planned Parenthood and access to birth control
Mitt Romney supports the Blunt Amendment, which would allow employers to deny women coverage for contraceptive care, as well as other health services, if doing so conflicts with their "religious beliefs or moral convictions." While Romney clearly feels comfortable letting politicians in Washington decide women’s health care choices, President Obama believes that women should make their own health care choices and have affordable access to health care services, including birth control. As the President noted last night, access to health care services isn’t just a health issue, “it’s an economic issue for women. It makes a difference. This is money out of that family’s pocket.”
Romney also wants to ban all federal funding for Planned Parenthood, saying, “We’re going to get rid of that.” But President Obama understands that women depend on Planned Parenthood for basic health services they can’t afford to lose. As he pointed out at the debate, “There are millions of women all across the country who rely on Planned Parenthood for not just contraceptive care,” but for preventive health care like annual exams and breast and cervical cancer screenings.
Equal pay for equal work
As he emphasized last night, President Obama is fighting to guarantee that women aren’t paid less for doing the same work as men. That’s why the first bill the President signed into law was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which helps ensure that women can fight for equal pay after they've learned about an unfair pay disparity.
Romney, on the other hand, has wavered for months on whether or not he would have signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act into law. After finally acknowledging that Romney opposed the bill, the Romney campaign immediately walked his position back to one of deliberate ambiguity, claiming that he “never weighed in on it.” Instead of giving a yes or no answer on the basic question of fair pay, the Romney campaign is making what should be an easy answer extremely complicated. As the President pointed out last night, “That’s not the kind of advocacy that women need in any economy.”
“Whole binders full of women”
In an effort to avoid owning up to his extreme positions on women’s rights, Mitt Romney tried to tout his efforts to hire women as governor of Massachusetts, claiming that he reached out to women’s groups who brought him “whole binders” of women qualified to serve in his cabinet. But the facts show that the percentage of senior-level appointed positions held by women actually declined throughout the Romney administration, from 30.0% prior to his taking office, to 27.6% near the end of his term in November 2006. And during the 1980s and 1990s, Romney did not have any women partners as CEO of Bain Capital.
But Romney didn’t stop there: “I recognized that if you're going to have women in the workforce that sometimes you need to be more flexible,” he said. But there is no “if”—women make up nearly half the workforce and they deserve to be paid equally for the same work and the same qualifications.
From his now-infamous "binders full of women" comment to Romney's opposition to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to help end wage discrimination, Mitt Romney just doesn’t get it.
But women in New Mexico do.
“There is an abundance of qualified women in America and many are heading powerful corporations and admirable organizations. We don't need to be put in a binder for Romney to employ us. We can do that on our own." – Erin, Albuquerque
"I'm disappointed that Romney's response to helping women everywhere is a personal anecdote of one time he helped some women. Obama can point to a record of actually ushering change in women's rights." - Ellen, Los Alamos
President Obama is dedicated to equal opportunity for our friends, sisters, mothers, loved ones, and ourselves. The first bill he signed into law was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, legislation to fight wage discrimination against women and make sure we get an equal wage for equal work. Through his leadership on health care reform, Barack Obama is putting an end to insurers charging women more than men for health care coverage. He's committed to ensuring that women can make their own health care choices.
New Mexico's women stand with Barack Obama because he stands with us. Will you help?
President Obama has our backs. Will you have his? Less than three weeks remain until election day and expanded early voting in the Land of Enchantment begins this Saturday. Please sign up today to help get out the vote for the candidate who has stood with women from day one. Sign up to volunteer today at http://ofa.bo/nmvolunteer.
But the percentage of senior-level appointed positions held by women declined throughout Governor Romney’s administration.
And there wasn't a single woman partner at Bain Capital when he was CEO.
Midnight tonight is the final FEC fundraising deadline of this campaign.
Check out these highlights from last night’s debate—from Mitt Romney’s already-infamous “binders full of women” comment to President Obama’s powerful closing remarks.