FEMA Administrator Responds To Michael Brown's Criticism

FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate dismissed criticisms of President Barack Obama's response to Hurricane Sandy lobbed by Michael Brown, who oversaw the disastrous Bush administration response to Hurricane Katrina.

"Better to be fast than to be late," Fugate said in an interview on NPR Tuesday morning.

Brown, whom President George W. Bush infamously praised for doing a "heckuva job" in the aftermath of Katrina in 2005, told a Denver paper that Obama had acted too quickly in mobilizing relief for Sandy.

"Here's my concern," Brown told Denver's Westword on Monday, suggesting that the prompt official response was actually making people complacent. "It's premature [when] the brunt of the storm won't happen until later this afternoon."

Fugate also addressed the role of FEMA, which has been a hot topic since Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said he wanted to abolish the agency so that states would have direct responsibility for disaster response.

His campaign later clarified that he would not eliminate FEMA.

"Governor Romney believes that states should be in charge of emergency management in responding to storms and other natural disasters in their jurisdictions,' said campaign spokeswoman Amanda Henneberg. 'As the first responders, states are in the best position to aid affected individuals and communities and to direct resources and assistance to where they are needed most. This includes help from the federal government and FEMA.'

But as Fugate explained on Tuesday, this is exactly how FEMA already works.

"We're a federal government; we're not a national government," he said "Disasters are local. Through state constitutions, the governors are the primary incident commanders for the entire state response in support of that. And the role of the federal government is to support the states when the disaster exceeds their capabilities. And when it's this bad, we work as one team. But we are in support of the governors, as they are in support of the local officials. It's a federal system of government."

When host Steve Inskeep asked whether that meant state governors are in charge of disaster response, Fugate replied, "The president's direction is, when he declares these disasters, they are to make sure that all of the federal resources are brought to bear at the request of the governors."

Listen:

Poll: Most Americans Say Climate Change And Natural Disasters Related

Climate scientists have warned that more frequent hurricanes may be related to climate change, and a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds that half of Americans think that climate change is indeed related to more frequent and severe natural disasters, although they are more divided on whether Hurricane Sandy specifically was related to global warming.

According to the new survey, conducted Oct. 29-30, 51 percent of Americans say climate change is related to more frequent and severe natural disasters, while 23 percent say it is not. Republicans were the only demographic group in the survey in which more respondents said that more frequent and severe disasters were unrelated to climate change (51 percent) than those who said that the disasters were related to climate change (25 percent). Americans ages 65 and over were also somewhat less likely than other groups to say the two phenomena were related -- 40 percent said they were and 37 percent said they were not.

The 23 percent of respondents who said that climate change and natural disasters are unrelated likely overlap highly with the 18 percent who said that they don't believe global warming is happening at all. Sixty-one percent of respondents said that global warming is, in fact, occurring.

Respondents were equally divided about whether Hurricane Sandy was related to global warming: 32 percent said it was, 34 percent said it was not, and another 34 percent said they were not sure. The two groups that were the least convinced that climate change and natural disasters were related, Republicans and older Americans, also expressed the most certainty that Sandy was not related to global warming: Sixty-seven percent of Republicans and 46 percent of Americans aged 65 and over said that the storm was not related to global warming. Fifty-one percent of Democrats said the storm was related to global warming.

Although the findings of the survey suggest that most Americans think climate change could be having a big impact on the nation's weather patterns, the survey also found that most Americans aren't personally willing to take a big hit to the pocketbook to pay for it: Fifty-four percent of poll respondents said they would not be willing to pay 50 percent more on their gas and electricity bills, even if it meant we could stop climate change from occurring, and only 21 percent said they would.

While the new poll shows Americans are wary about taking a big financial hit themselves, a previous HuffPost/YouGov poll, conducted before the storm hit, found that most Americans did support increased fuel efficiency standards for vehicles as well as emissions standards for coal-burning power plants. That survey also found a 45 percent to 24 percent plurality saying that it was possible that with the right policies, the US could help to curb global warming (13 percent said it was not occurring)

The new HuffPost/YouGov poll was conducted online Oct. 29-30 among 1,000 U.S. adults and has a margin of error of 5 percentage points. It used a sample that was selected from YouGov's opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population. Factors considered include age, race, gender, education, employment, income, marital status, number of children, voter registration, time and location of Internet access, interest in politics, religion and church.

Patricia McGuire: Acts Of God, Deeds Of Men

Still don't believe all that climate change stuff? Have I got a "Frankenstorm" for you!

Well, OK, so maybe Hurricane Sandy is just a random Act of God. Indeed, maybe it's true that God really intended the entire east coast to shut down for a few days to escape the rising frenzy of early voting spawned by citizens who are just plain over the presidential campaign. Maybe only divinely ordered power outages could stop the barrage of campaign ads. Maybe the Almighty really does side with those who see only blessings in shutting down the Federal Government.

But it's also quite possible that we brought this on ourselves. I don't think it takes an Al Gore groupie to notice that the weather has been increasingly wild, dangerous and destructive. Is that a result of human behavior?

Basic science tells us that the very things that make modern civilization so comfortable -- automobiles, electrical grids powered with coal or nuclear energy, homes warmed by oil or natural gas, air conditioners, flush toilets, refrigerators, the pervasive availability of synthetic goods all wrapped in excessive plastic packaging -- all of this places increasing stress on the environment. No wonder that Mother Nature pushes back hard, shutting down our power and making it impossible to drive. These major storms return human life to its most primitive state, forced to eat Pop Tarts untoasted.

Regardless of its ability to prove or disprove theories of global warming, each increasingly wicked storm illuminates the intense struggle between human inventions and nature's interventions. Reporters stand atop seawalls, fearsome oceans at their backs, breathlessly repeating the wave-by-wave story of beachfront homes and businesses smashed to splinters by the untamed power of wind and water. Shop owners in riverfront towns like Alexandria and Annapolis pile up sandbags against the floods that come again and again -- a test of wills between river and man made walls that the river will eventually win.

Levees fail, dunes are breached, roofs sail aloft on big gusts of wind. A tree on a power line is the ultimate symbol of the battle, Man v. Nature, what we have harnessed versus what we cannot control.

When the waters subside and the lights come back on, we'll tally our losses and make claims on our insurance. And in the kind of act of defiance that proves the resilience of the human spirit, we'll rebuild the homes and roads and stores in exactly the same places where the water claimed them before. We'll keep driving fossil-fueled cars and enjoying the luxuries that the deeds of men make possible. We'll use up the leftover supplies of toilet paper and batteries, lulling ourselves into a belief that the storm was a freak, it won't happen again, we're not really responsible.

It was simply an Act of God.

Follow Patricia McGuire on Twitter: www.twitter.com/TrinityPrez

Obama, Romney Place Ad Buys In Pennsylvania

WASHINGTON -- With just days before the election, both presidential campaigns are engaging more fully in Pennsylvania, a state that once seemed -- and very well still could be -- solidly in President Barack Obama's camp.

A Republican source passed along the following ad buy information on condition of anonymity.

• Karl Rove's super PAC American Crossroads has purchased at least $625,000 worth of broadcast and cable ads in support of Mitt Romney in Pennsylvania between Oct. 31 and Nov. 2. The group is placing its ads in the following markets: Erie, HLLY (Harrisburg-Lancaster-Lebanon-York), Johnstown-Altoona, Pittsburgh and Wilkes-Barre.
• The Mitt Romney campaign is spending an unknown amount of money on ads in the Philadelphia market airing on Nov. 5 and Nov. 6.
• Counteracting those two entities, the Obama campaign is spending at least $650,000 on broadcast and cable ads in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh from Oct. 31 through Nov. 6.

It was previously reported that Pro-Romney super PAC Restore Our Future was running $2.1 million worth of ads statewide.

The fact that this money is being spent doesn't necessarily suggest that Pennsylvania is now a toss-up. Polling shows it close, though it certainly gives the president a strong edge. Moreover, if Romney felt that the state were in play, he'd likely go there himself, or at pay for more than two days' worth of advertising.

The more likely explanation is that each campaign and allied group has more money to spend on ads than there is available airtime in swing states. And so, when American Crossroads threw money into Pennsylvania, Obama responded.

But the Romney campaign is certainly posturing as if it has a real shot in Pennsylvania. On Tuesday, Rich Beeson, the campaign's political director, put out a memo indicating he sees it as fertile ground for an Electoral College pick up.

Pennsylvania presents a unique opportunity for the Romney campaign. Over the past few years we have seen Pennsylvania voting for a Republican senator and a Republican governor, and Republicans win control of the State House in addition to the State Senate. The western part of the Keystone State has become more conservative (and President Obama's war on coal is very unpopular there), and Mitt Romney is more competitive in the voter-rich Philadelphia suburbs than any Republican nominee since 1988. This makes Pennsylvania a natural next step as we expand the playing field.

Related on HuffPost:

Lloyd Chapman: Heart Disease, Cancer or Terrorist Attacks: What's Killing More of Your Friends and Family?

In the past few months, one of my best friends and motorcycle buddies dropped dead of a heart attack at 62. My accountant died recently of pancreatic cancer, and my brother in law is dying of throat cancer. Another friend has recently been diagnosed with thyroid cancer, and my girlfriend's father has prostate and lung cancer. I have already had one cancerous spot cut off my face, and my doctor says I can expect more. I'm sure the world's two most common killers have touched your life in similar ways. On the other hand, I don't personally know anyone who has been killed or injured in a terrorist attack.

I believe the latest national statistics indicate we all have about a 25 percent chance of dying from heart disease and a 25 percent chance of dying from cancer. During the past decade, of the 300 million people in America, about 3,000 have been killed in terrorist attacks. That means your chances of dying in a terrorist attack are about 0.00001 percent. That's one ten thousandth of a percent.

While your chances of dying from heart disease or cancer are about 50 percent.

Here is my question. If the chances of dying in a terrorist attack are so infinitesimally small and the chances of dying from heart disease or cancer are so staggeringly high, why is America spending over a trillion dollars a year on defense and just about $10 billion on research for cures for heart disease and cancer?

Even though we spend more on defense than the next 10 largest countries in the world combined, a bunch of guys with box cutters defeated our multi-trillion dollar defense network and carried out the most significant attack on America since Pearl Harbor. It doesn't seem like we are getting our money's worth. That seems to shoot a major hole in any argument that the reason we are not being killed by terrorists is because the government spends massive amounts of our hard earned tax dollars on defense.

My belief is the "War on Terror" has actually created more terrorists and has made the world a more dangerous place for all Americans. If you doubt that, turn on your television and watch the anti-American riots going on in countries around the world. Could it be that our massive defense budget has actually made it more likely you will be injured or killed in a terrorist attack? It looks that way to me.

Are you more concerned about heart disease and cancer or terrorist attacks? I have no fear whatsoever of being killed in a terrorist attack. When I leave my home in the morning, I don't carry a gas mask or wear a bulletproof vest.

I am extremely concerned, however, about heart disease and cancer. I wear SPF 60 sunscreen so I don't get skin cancer. I get regular and unpleasant rectal exams by my doctor to make sure I don't have prostrate cancer. I get a colonoscopy every few years to make sure I don't have colon cancer. I drink Citrucel every morning and eat a high fiber diet to reduce my chances of getting colon cancer. When I go to the dentist and get my teeth X-rayed they make me wear a big lead vest with a lead thyroid collar to reduce my risk of getting thyroid cancer. I try to eat right. I spend several hours a week at the gym to reduce my risk of heart disease, heart attack and stroke.

On the other hand, I spend no time during my busy week concerning myself or preparing for a terrorist attack.

I read a story in the Nation that presented a very compelling case that the actual dollar amount spent on national defense is around $1 trillion. The actual volume of your tax dollars that are spent on national defense is almost twice the $530 billion we are misled to believe.

So here is my suggestion. Why don't we allocate our tax dollars in a more reasonable and cost-effective manner to address the real threats facing each and every person in America? Instead of spending over a trillion dollars a year on defense, let's cut defense spending to around $700 billion and allocate the other $300 billion to finding cures for cancer and heart disease. I believe the math and the logic in this formula are irrefutable.

Of course, I'm a realist, and I know this will never come pass. It makes too much sense for the bureaucratic morons that run the government in Washington to embrace. There is no graft, corruption, bribes -- I mean campaign contributions in it for them. The strangle hold the defense industry has on our government is too strong.

I'm sure the United States will keep spending trillions chasing the boogieman in every country in the Middle East, keep sticking our nose into problems around the world that are none of our business, developing new ways to kill our fellow man in more efficient and horrifying ways and even keep looking for signs of life on Mars.

In the meantime, you and your friends and family will continue to die from two of the biggest killers in the world today, heart disease and cancer.

Maybe NASA should launch a project looking for intelligent life on this planet.

Follow Lloyd Chapman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LloydChapman

Arizona Rep Voted No On Disaster Bills Again And Again

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), a candidate for the U.S. Senate, has voted at least five times against bills aimed at preventing and responding to disasters, in two cases even though a resounding majority of his own party supported the bill.

Flake is a frequent "nay" voter in general, particularly on spending bills, yet he votes with the Republican Party nearly 90 percent of the time. His office could not be reached for comment on Tuesday morning, nor could his Senate campaign.

Most recently, Flake voted against appropriations for disaster relief for the 2012 fiscal year, as did 65 other GOP House members and one Democrat, Rep. Jim Cooper of Tennessee. The bill was nonetheless passed by Congress and signed into law at the end of December 2011.

Also last year, Flake voted against the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2011, which passed the House with bipartisan support from 218 Republicans and 188 Democrats.

Flake opposed the 2010 version of that legislation, albeit with more colleagues on his side. The bill passed the House despite 90 "no" votes -- from 89 Republicans and then-Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.). In that case, a slight majority of his fellow Republicans were with Flake: Only 85 GOP House members supported the bill.

Even during his first term in Congress, Flake was one of only three House members to vote against a bill aimed at forecasting inland flooding. The Inland Flood Forecasting and Warning System Act of 2002 passed the House with 413 "ayes" and only three "nays": Flake, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and then-Rep. Brian Kerns (R-Ind.).

And when the House in September 2005 approved supplemental emergency funds to handle damage from Hurricane Katrina, which had devastated the Gulf Coast, Flake was one of only 11 members all of them Republicans, to vote against the bill. Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas), Steve King (R-Iowa) and Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) were among the others to vote no.

Flake is currently running to replace retiring Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). He leads his Democratic opponent, Richard Carmona, by 1.2 percentage points, according to an estimate from HuffPost Pollster.

Related on HuffPost:

• Virginia

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Missouri

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Massachusetts

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Ohio

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Nevada

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Montana

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Florida

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Michigan

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Wisconsin

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• New Jersey

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Pennsylvania

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• Arizona

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

• New Mexico

  <strong>For more presidential and congressional polls, maps and forecasts, <a href="http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map?hw" target="_hplink">visit HuffPost Pollster</a>.</strong>

Obama Cancels Campaign Events To Focus On Hurricane Sandy

Senior hurricane specialist Dan Brown, right, points to a satellite image of Sandy to James Franklin, chief hurricane specialist, in preparation of the 11:00 EDT advisory at the National Hurricane Center in Miami, Saturday, Oct. 27, 2012. Early Saturday, the storm was about 335 miles southeast of Charleston, S.C. Tropical storm warnings were issued for parts of Florida's East Coast, along with parts of coastal North and South Carolina and the Bahamas. Tropical storm watches were issued for coastal Georgia and parts of South Carolina, along with parts of Florida and Bermuda. Sandy is projected to hit the Atlantic Coast early Tuesday. (AP Photo/Alan Diaz)

Joe Peyronnin: Racial Prejudice in 2012

The 2012 presidential election campaign has been disappointing. Perhaps the most disappointing thing about this election is that were President Barack Obama white it is likely he would be on his way to a landslide victory.

President Obama inherited a disastrous mess. When he entered office the economy was shrinking at 9 percent annually due to the Bush Recession. About 800 thousand Americans were losing jobs each month. The banking system was on the verge of collapse, the housing market was a disaster, and the American car industry was dying. The country was engaged in two difficult and costly wars, both in lives and resources, with no end in sight. Meanwhile, Osama bin Laden, the leader of Al Qaeda, and mastermind of the worst attack on U.S. soil, continued to plot against America and its allies.

In his inaugural speech, at the U.S. Capitol before nearly 2 million people, the president said, "On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord." But, inside the Capitol, Republicans met and formulated a plan to obstruct, deny and delay the president's agenda. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell would later publicly state that making President Obama a one-term president, not the economy, was the number one priority of his party.

The new president, facing fierce partisan opposition, signed into law the Recovery Act, a.k.a. the stimulus package. Although it was smaller than he originally proposed, most economists credit it with righting the stalling economy. Even Representative Paul Ryan requested stimulus money to help businesses in his district. The president also signed tough banking reform legislation to assure a similar crisis would not occur. He enacted the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that assures fair pay for women. He bailed out the American auto companies over the objections of many Republicans, including Governor Mitt Romney, who wrote in a New York Times op-ed piece that they should be allowed to go bankrupt. The auto bailout saved one million jobs, and now the industry is vibrant again.

The president's signature legislative achievement, the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare) will make health care more affordable and accessible to all Americans, and protect consumers from abuses by insurance companies. For instance, no longer can insurance companies deny people health care benefits because they have a pre-existing condition. More importantly, 40 million uninsured Americans will be covered and the government will realize $1 trillion in health care savings over the next decade, according to its sponsors. .

But Republicans have used Obamacare (rhymes with Romneycare) as a major rallying cry against the president, falsely charging it is a government take over of health care, that it would restrict an individual's choices, and that it would set up death panels. While they offered no credible alternatives, they demonized the president as a socialist.

The president had promised to end the war in Iraq, and he did. But Republicans were vociferous in their criticism, saying he withdrew too early. The president promised a military build up in Afghanistan, where the war was nearly in its tenth year, and he did. The president also set a deadline of June 2014 for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from that country. But Republicans criticized the president for announcing a deadline. And just last week candidate Mitt Romney announced at the third debate that he agreed with the president's deadline after all.

The president made getting Osama bin Laden a top priority early on in his administration. Bin Laden had eluded capture for nearly a decade, and was a low priority for both President George Bush and candidate Romney. But in May 2011, U.S. forces killed the world's most heinous terrorist leader in Pakistan. The president took a huge political risk by ordering the killing, but now Republicans claim that anyone would have done the same thing.

The president has had some missteps during his first term. The U.S. economy is still sluggish and too many people remain unemployed. But the world is a different place today than it was in the early 1980's, when President Ronald Reagan revived a bad U.S. economy. Economic growth in China and India has slowed; much of Europe is still in a recession. Nonetheless, under President Obama the U.S. economy has enjoyed 31 straight months of jobs growth and unemployment is at its lowest point, 7.8 percent, since he took office.

At the Democratic Convention, President Bill Clinton said, "No president, not me, not any of my predecessors, could have repaired all of the damage he found in just four years." When one considers the animus and vitriol that has roiled the American political scene, stirred by Republicans and Tea Party loyalists, it is a wonder that the man who called for "unity of purpose" has succeeded at all.

Mr. Obama has been labeled "the food stamp president" and an "anti-colonialist" by leading Republicans. He has repeatedly been treated with unprecedented disrespect, including on the floor of the House of Representatives. His place of birth has been constantly questioned, as have his academic records. About a third of all Republicans think the president is a Muslim and not a Christian. Most recently, when General Colin Powell, a leading Republican, war hero and African American, announced his thoughtful endorsement for the president's reelection, right wing critics sniped. Former Vermont Governor John Sununu, and chief Romney surrogate, said, "Well, I think when you have somebody of your own race that you're proud of being president of the United States, I applaud Colin for standing with him."

On Saturday, the Associated Press released a poll that found, "51 percent of Americans now express explicit anti-black attitudes, compared with 48 percent in a similar 2008 survey." According to AP, "Overall, the survey found that by virtue of racial prejudice, President Obama could lose 5 percentage points off his share of the popular vote in his Nov. 6 contest against Republican challenger Mitt Romney." Racial prejudice actually increased in America over the past four years with an African American in the White House, a president who has rarely raised the issue of race.

Americans should vote for the candidate who they believe will be the best president. But to use race as a factor would only reward those who have divided the nation by using fear and hatred to achieve their political agenda.

Follow Joe Peyronnin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/joepeyronnin

WATCH: David Stern: Obama's 'Not That Good' At Basketball

David Stern, the NBA commissioner, weighed in recently on President Barack Obama's basketball game.

And he wasn't too complementary.

"He's not that good." Stern told Reuters TV's Robert Wolf. "He's a lefty -- he goes the same way every time."

For Stern, who calls himself "a loyal Democrat," it's not political.

"I'm a passionate Democrat," Stern told Wolf. "He's not as good as he thinks he is."

President Obama plays basketball regularly, and, according to a recent profile in Vanity Fair, often with players who played in college or were on professional teams overseas.

Michael Lewis describes a basketball game with the president in Vanity Fair:

Obama was 20 or more years older than most of [the other players], and probably not as physically gifted, though it was hard to say because of the age differences. No one held back, no one deferred. Guys on his team dribbled past him and ignored the fact he was wide open. When he drives through the streets, crowds part, but when he drives to the basket large, hostile men slide over to cut him off. It's revealing that he would seek out a game like this but even more that others would give it to him: no one watching would have been able to guess which guy was president.

Stern announced earlier this week that after 30 years, he will be retiring as the commissioner of the NBA in February 2014. Adam Silver, the league's Deputy Commissioner, will take his place.

Read Lewis' entire profile of President Obama at Vanity Fair, and catch the full interview with David Stern on Reuters TV on October 28.

Earlier on HuffPost:

Paul Ryan Staff Emails Show Sensitivity To Stimulus Hypocrisy Charge

WASHINGTON -- In late September 2011, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's office notified Rep. Paul Ryan's office with some good news. The U.S. Department of Veteran's Affairs had awarded a grant to a Wisconsin veteran's home to help renovate its water distribution system. Walker's office just needed Ryan's people to sign off on the press release. But what started out as a routine matter quickly turned into a minor panic among aides to the two Republicans.

Wendy Riemann, Walker's director of federal relations, sent an email to Ryan's communications director, Kevin Seifert, asking for a quote from the congressman.

"Not sure if you're doing your own release, etc.," Riemann emailed on Sept. 26. "Let me know -- we'll wait to hear from you either way before putting it out."

Seifert replied with a simple message: Stop the presses. He had one concern. Could the grant be tied to federal stimulus funds?

"Not to create more work for you all but -- do you have any idea where the money for this grant came from? Was it from the stimulus/the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act?" Seifert wrote. "Our concern is that if it's stimulus funds, we won't want to highlight (and would think you guys wouldn't either)."

Seifert did not want Ryan appearing to support President Barack Obama. "The Administration is encouraging lots of agencies to spend un-spent stimulus funds and we generally won't do press on things we actively oppose," the congressman's communications director concluded.

The emails were obtained by The Huffington Post through a public records request with Walker's office. The email exchange underscored a routine problem facing Republicans in the House of Representatives at the time. Having opposed the president's stimulus bill publicly, many (including some of the foremost conservatives) privately concluded that the legislation did some good in their districts. But rather than back off their opposition, or risk charges of hypocrisy -- even for something as mundane and worthy as a veteran's home water system upgrade -- they did what they could to secure money without public notice.

Seifert's worry in September 2011 was prescient.

During the recent vice presidential debate, Vice President Joe Biden chided Ryan for asking for stimulus funds. Ryan had sought stimulus funds for four projects, including two involving Environmental Protection Agency funds.

The congressman routinely sought grant money for projects in Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District, which encompasses his hometown of Janesville. He sought EPA grant money for environmental studies of potentially hazardous industrial lands, and for clean diesel fuel assistance for a school association.

Ryan's spokesman Brendan Buck told HuffPost several weeks ago that the requests amounted to basic constituent services. "Part of being a congressman is vouching for constituents and helping them navigate the federal bureaucracy when asked," Buck said.

Ryan received a $735,000 earmark to construct a bus transit center in Janesville while slamming the practice. In 2008, he sought a moratorium on earmark spending.

The next day, after researching the veteran's home grant, Riemann, in Walker's office, emailed Seifert, Ryan's communications director, with what she discovered. The grant came from federal funds from an annual appropriation -- not the stimulus bill. But there was one potential caveat. "My Google shows there was an audit for this work with recovery funds ... but it also looks like this grant program has been around for awhile," she wrote.

Too risky, Seifert suggested. "Feel free to proceed without us on this one," he said. "Thanks for checking."

Also on HuffPost:

• Where Have You Been (Rihanna)

  US Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (L) shakes hands with his running mate Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan in front of the campaign bus prior to each boarding their own campaign airplanes at General Mitchell Airport in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, August 12, 2012. (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/GettyImages)

• Happy Together (The Turtles)

  WAUKESHA, WI - AUGUST 12: Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and vice presidential candidate and Wisconsin native Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (L) greet supporters during a campaign event at the Waukesha Expo Center on August 12, 2012 in Waukesha, Wisconsin. (Photo by Darren Hauck/Getty Images)

• Right By My Side (Nicki Minaj, Chris Brown)

  Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, left, listens to his vice presidential running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan R-Wis., as they campaign Sunday, Aug. 12, 2012, in High Point, N.C. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)

• Only Wanna Be With You (Hootie & The Blowfish)

  WAUKESHA, WI - AUGUST 12: Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and vice presidential candidate and Wisconsin native Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (L) hug after speaking at a campaign event at the Waukesha Expo Center on August 12, 2012 in Waukesha, Wisconsin. (Photo by Darren Hauck/Getty Images)

• I Cry (Flo Rida)

  WAUKESHA, WI - AUGUST 12: Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R) looks on as his running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) wipes away tears during a homecoming campaign rally at the Waukesha County Expo Center on August 12, 2012 in Waukesha, Wisconsin. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

• You're My Best Friend (Queen)

  Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, left and running mate Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., talk in the campaign bus before an event at the Waukesha county expo center, Sunday, Aug. 12, 2012 in Waukesha, Wis. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)

• Wouldn't It Be Nice (The Beach Boys)

  WAUKESHA, WI - AUGUST 12: Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and vice presidential candidate and Wisconsin native Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (L) greet supporters during a campaign event at the Waukesha Expo Center on August 12, 2012 in Waukesha, Wisconsin. (Photo by Darren Hauck/Getty Images)

• I'll Stand By You (The Pretenders)

  Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, right, and his newly announced vice presidential running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., left, greet supporters, during a campaign rally in Manassas, Va., Saturday, Aug. 11, 2012. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

• Two Tickets To Paradise (Eddie Money)

  Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, right, and vice presidential running mate Rep. Paul Ryan R-Wis. are joined by Ronmey's granddaughter Chloe while talking to reporters on the charter flight between Virginia and North Carolina, Saturday, Aug. 11, 2012. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)

• We Found Love (Rihanna)

  WAUKESHA, WI - AUGUST 12: Republican vice presidential candidate and Wisconsin native Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (L) wipes away tears as he and presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney greet supporters during a campaign event at the Waukesha Expo Center on August 12, 2012 in Waukesha, Wisconsin. (Photo by Darren Hauck/Getty Images)

JACKPOT: Romney Campaign Spends Jaw-Dropping Sum On Firms Tied To Top Staffers

Sarah Palin: Interior Department Secretary

<strong>Pros:</strong> The former GOP Alaska governor could condense management of the nation's public lands and conservation efforts into catchy three-word slogans. "Drill, baby, drill," "log, baby, log," etc. <strong>Cons:</strong> We can't think of any.

Joseph Graziano: The Mystifying Misperception

Two months after September 11, 2001 my father, the severely injured, sole survivor of Engine 22 Ladder 13, sought help in securing disability benefits from the New York City Fire Commissioner's Office. The Office responded that the government of New York believed he was dead and refused to help him. A deserving public servant, my father's struggle to obtain benefits from the state following 9/11 is not unlike that of the millions of veterans who struggle to secure disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs after they return home from duty. My father's experience sensitized me to this enduring injustice, and subsequently, I have spent the last decade committed to serving those who have served.

Traditionally, veterans have been dependable supporters of the Republican Party. Although veterans are no longer a homogenous voting group, this continues to ring true. According to recent polling by Politico, Governor Romney has a commanding 20 point lead over President Obama in the veteran vote. This unhealthy pairing can be explained by the existence of a persistent and complexing misperception that hawkish republicans, those most likely to send our soldiers off to war, are the same people most likely to stand beside and serve our veterans when they return home. Nothing is further from the truth.

Let me first be very clear: neither party has done enough to fulfill all of the promises made to our soldiers and their families. Although the post-World War II GI Bill of Rights was a transformative milestone in the lives of hundreds of thousands of ex-servicemen, American history is deeply embedded with examples of our failures to adequately serve our most vulnerable veterans. We are a forward-looking nation prone to forget its past, especially when that past is burdensome. Since the American Revolution, we have consistently failed to adequately care for our disabled veterans.

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have raised our historical ineptitudes to a crisis level. The prevalence of traumatic brain injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder have left thousands of returning soldiers incapable of managing their own care. Further, dramatic improvements in emergency medicine have enabled wounded soldiers to survive what were once deadly wounds. We also remain a nation at war, the longest war in U.S. history. The combination of the above factors has inflicted an unprecedented strain on the resources available to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Unfortunately, the plight of the American veteran is not a new ticket item in electoral politics. Our political leaders have been called to step up and honor the promises made to our veterans for over ten years now. And the notion that the American veteran deserves better can -- and by now should -- be a bipartisan issue around which both sides of the aisle rally to action.

However, the Democratic and Republican parties have answered this call to duty with shockingly different levels of concern. One needs only examine the past two presidential administrations to highlight the stark differences.

During President George W. Bush's administration, his Veterans Affairs Undersecretary for Benefits, Daniel Cooper, acknowledged that the administration faced a backlog of over 400,000 disability claims, the majority from veterans of previous wars. Yet, the administration never offered a solution to reduce the number of claims, or the two-to-four year lag time it took to have a claim adjudicated by the VA. Instead, veterans were left wondering if the Bush administration was just waiting for them to die.

Also during the Bush years, newspaper stories, most notably The Washington Post's series on the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, catalogued the appalling manner in which our nation's most vulnerable veterans were being discarded to the margins of society. Although Walter Reed was part of the Department of Defense, most of the patients there eventually became part of the VA. These veterans, veterans like Patrick Feges, a young man severely injured in Iraq who waited more than seventeen months for this first disability check, found themselves forced into homelessness. On any given night during the Bush administration there were 300,000 homeless veterans in the U.S. Just one would have been too many. And even for those veterans who were granted disability benefits, the compensation was minimal. A veteran with a disability rating of 100 (meaning that he or she cannot work because of service related injuries) only received $2,400 a month. Yet no solutions were offered, only excuses.

Even after the former Commerce Department official under President Clinton, Linda Bilmes, predicted that 700,000 veterans from the global war on terror would eventually enter the VA, the Bush administration continued to allow budgetary demands to far outpace VA funding. For instance, in 2006 Congress had to pass an emergency $2.7 billion infusion for veterans' health programs because the Bush budget had severely underestimated the number of veterans needing care. Nevertheless, the Bush Administration still planned consecutive cutbacks on the VA budget in 2009 and 2010, even as the number of veterans entering the VA system was being estimated to increase by more than 5 percent. To compound these shortcomings, under President Bush the VA itself was structured to deny rather than facilitate compensation. As Craig Kabatchnick, a former senior appellate attorney for the VA's Office of General Counsel, admitted: "Our job was to deny claims."

In stark contrast, the Obama administration has brought a passionate problem-solving approach to this historically intractable issue. Since General Shinseki, a disabled veteran himself, was confirmed as VA Secretary, he has sought to overhaul what was an adversarial agency and shape it into a veteran advocacy organization. Shinseki's call to action implores VA claims adjudicators to adhere to their duty to assist veterans with their claims and to employ "the benefit of the doubt" as the legal standard of proof. Congress responded to Shinseki's leadership by providing a 2010 budget of 112.3 billion, an increase of 15 billion from the year before. This constituted the largest increase in VA budget in 30 years. It immediately enabled 266,000 veterans who had lost their VA benefits under the Bush administration to re-enroll.

General Shinseki recently praised Obama's commitment to our veterans in his speech at the Democratic National Convention: "Since President Obama took office, nearly 800,000 veterans gained access to VA healthcare. There's been a historic expansion of treatment for PTSD and traumatic brain injury. President Obama has expanded job training to prepare vets for the jobs of the future. And we're on track to end veterans' homelessness by 2015. No president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has done more for veterans."

Most important to the health of our veterans, in contrast to their predecessors, Obama and Shinseki have accepted accountability for the lack of transparency and coordination between the VA and the Department of Defense that contributed to tragically long delays between a veteran submitting a claim and it being adjudicated by the VA. Obama's pilot program, which creates a joint electronic medical records system to enable a soldier's information to be shared between the VA and the DoD has begun to ease the transition to veteran status and eliminate senseless bureaucracy.

President Obama and his administration have taken and continue to take unparalleled steps to address the plight of veterans. Obama truly understands that ensuring that we serve those who have served will define the character, conviction, and conscience of our country.

Even long-time Republicans have noticed Obama's dedication to veterans. Larry Pressler, a Vietnam veteran with 22 years of service as a Republican member of the Senate and the House of Representatives, recently endorsed President Obama and his commitment to our troops in The Huffington Post.

It is tempting, in light of the above, to believe that President Obama is just much more committed to the concerns of our veterans than President Bush was and have that be the end of the story. But the stark differences between the Democratic and Republican parties' commitment to our veterans extend far beyond the last two presidential administrations. Instead, these differences were most recently on display during last month's Senate vote on the Veterans Job Corps Act of 2012.

This Act should not have been a controversial issue that divided our Senate along party lines. The Veterans Job Corps Act proposed spending $1 billion over 5 years to help put veterans back to work by offering our veterans jobs servicing federal lands and bridges, while helping other veterans secure positions as police officers and fire fighters. Unfortunately, Senate Republicans placed their hatred of Obama in front of their duty to serve our veterans. The bill fell two votes short of passing when 40 Republicans voted to kill the bill, claiming that it was too expensive.

In response to the Republicans' alleged concerns over the cost of the veteran job plan, Senator Bill Nelson, D-Fla. chief sponsor of the bill, chastised Republicans, stating "Veterans don't care to hear about why we cannot support them ... Veterans don't care about a budget point of order."

The Republican Party's aversion to honoring the past commitments we made to our soldiers when we sent them to war extends to the party's current leader. Mitt Romney has offered no call to action or "five point plan" to honor the promises we have made to our returning soldiers. And Romney failed to even mention our soldiers in his address at the Republican National Convention.

Instead, it is President Obama who continues to bring attention to the struggles of our veterans and who offers solutions, such as improving the post 9/11 GI Bill and creating a Veterans Jobs Corp, both of which will aid our veterans in reintegrating into society.

Most recent, during the third presidential debate, it was President Obama who twice highlighted our duty to serve those who have served. "What I think the American people recognize is after a decade of war it's time to do some nation building here at home," Obama said. "And what we can now do is free up some resources, to, for example, put Americans back to work, especially our veterans -- rebuilding our roads, our bridges, our schools, making sure that our veterans are getting the care that they need when it comes to post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury, making sure that the certifications that they need for good jobs of the future are in place. "You know, I was having lunch with a veteran in Minnesota who had been a medic dealing with the most extreme circumstances," Obama continued. "When he came home and he wanted to become a nurse, he had to start from scratch. And what we've said is let's change those certifications. The first lady has done great work with an organization called Joining Forces putting our veterans back to work. And as a consequence, veterans' unemployment is actually now lower than general population. It was higher when I came into office."

Romney's response to President Obama was emblematic of the entire Republican Party's apathy towards our veterans' plight. He said nothing, failing to even mention our veterans once during an entire debate focused on the foreign policy our soldiers in large part are responsible for implementing across the globe.

I grew up in a house that honored those who live lives of service, heroic service, with a total commitment to the public good. Their ideals are mine. I also want to live a life of public service, and I want to protect and secure justice for those who offer a service far greater than any I might give. And the greatest service I can currently offer our veterans right now is to vote Democrat on November 6th.

Nancy K. Kaufman: The Supreme Court: The Elections and Beyond

Just a few elections ago, I remember people wore button that said, "It's the Supreme Court, stupid." But during this fall election season, the future of the Supreme Court has received very little mainstream attention, even though decisions by that august body have an impact that can last far longer than the term of a member of the House or Senate and certainly longer than that of any single president. On the current court, four justices are 74 years old or older -- two from each side of the ideological divide, and it is quite likely the next president will pick at least one new one.

What hangs in the balance? Many issues but of particular note is: Roe v. Wade. It need not be completely overturned for abortion to become out of reach for the vast majority of American women, or to undermine their autonomy in making this most personal decision. In fact 87 percent of all U.S. counties -- counties in which 35 percent of all women in the US now live -- already lack an abortion provider. Efforts to make abortion even more inaccessible continue apace, with many states passing huge increases in anti-abortion regulations after the election of 2010. The fate of those laws with this Supreme Court remains to be seen, but should any of them reach the court, a majority may well seize the opportunity to strike down Roe in its entirely or eviscerate it beyond recognition.

Years of progress on keeping the principle of separation of religion and state alive and well is also endangered. Despite a track record in the law that upholds government enforcement of anti-discrimination laws regardless of religious belief -- for example, you can't refuse to serve an African-American a cup of coffee based on a biblical belief of inferiority -- the current court may give employers the right to cite their religious beliefs as a justification for discriminating against women by denying them insurance coverage for contraceptives, even when the employer isn't paying for it.

Other reforms of the mid-20th century are also at stake. Laws that finally made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, religion, gender, and national origin are under attack. The basic principles may remain, but the ability to enforce them has repeatedly been weakened by the Supreme Court, most recently in the Lilly Ledbetter case when the court rendered an unreasonably narrow interpretation of the federal law against job discrimination. The long Supreme Court campaign against affirmative action could produce another setback by spring in Fisher v. Texas case heard October 10, if efforts to achieve diversity in higher education are overturned.

Voting rights protections, the bedrock of the 1960s civil rights revolution, are being unraveled in many states, and appeals to the Supreme Court are certain to happen in the next session. The new state laws undermine the idea that government should make voting as easy as is reasonably possible. The Supreme Court's faulty 2008 decision in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, an Indiana case upholding photo ID requirement without any inquiry into their chilling effect, has reaped a whirlwind of efforts to disfranchise millions.

The Supreme Court's willingness to reverse long-standing precedent in the service of an ideological agenda is epitomized by its decision in Citizens United where the court went out of its way to rule that corporations have the same free speech rights as living people. That ruling overturned a principle of 70 years' standing and unleashed a flood of money into the election process that eclipses the Watergate era and has seriously altered the political landscape of this election.

A look back at the last decade is not encouraging to those who believe as I do that our courts should dispense justice in keeping with the progress we have made in upholding individual rights, ending discrimination, and adhering to our founding principles of liberty and justice for all. Often we can't quite put our finger on the correlation between a judge's background and life experiences and the rulings rendered by the courts on which he or she presides. But it is surely there. It is widely conceded that a majority of those who sat on the Supreme Court before the Civil War were in fact slaveholders. It's pretty hard to imagine that their decisions weren't influenced by that fact. The first black justice, Thurgood Marshall, did not serve until 1967; the first woman, Sandra Day O'Connor, not until 1981. Their life experiences, for centuries excluded from our judicial system, were certainly linked to their legal decision-making.

Today with the court polarized, every presidential nomination to the Supreme Court matters. Each can help further the progress our country has made in achieving equality and justice, or transport us back to a time when the courts ignored the rights of women and African Americans, of religious and ethnic minorities, of criminal defendants and others to equal treatment and due process. As voters, we bear the ultimate responsibility for making sure we know what kind of justice the candidates for president would likely appoint.

Follow Nancy K. Kaufman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NCJWCEO

Mitt Romney Hammers New Phrase For His Campaign: 'Big Change'

CINCINNATI -- Mitt Romney began a two-day swing through the crucial swing state of Ohio on Thursday by repeating a phrase that got big roars from a rally with several thousand supporters.

"Do you want real big change in this country?" Romney asked the crowd. "Well then you're going to get it on Nov. 6!"

The Republican nominee for president mentioned the phrase "big change" at least four other times in a roughly 20-minute speech.

"Americans want to see big changes, and I'm going to bring it to this country," Romney said, at the beginning of his remarks.

Each time Romney used the phrase, the crowd -- estimated by the Romney campaign at 3,000 people -- stood and yelled its approval. It is one sign of how the Republican base is energized by an intense disagreement with President Barack Obama and a desire to remove him from office.

Cincinnati, in southwest Ohio, is one of the strongest Republican parts of the state. Cincinnati's Hamilton County went for Obama in 2008 after voting for George W. Bush twice, but the three counties around Hamilton -- Butler, Warren and Clermont -- are solidly Republican.

The Obama campaign quickly responded to the Romney campaign's new message focus.

"Here's the 'big change' Mitt Romney is offering: going back to the same failed policies that caused the economic crisis and empowering the extreme voices in his party like Richard Mourdock," Obama spokeswoman Lis Smith said Thursday in a email to The Huffington Post.

This story has been updated to include the Obama campaign's response.

Also on HuffPost:

• Photos Of 17-Year-Old Mitt Romney

  Mitt Romney, right with his mother and brother Scott, shortly after departing a plane at San Francisco International Airport. He was in town for the GOP Convention.

• Photos Of 17-Year-Old Mitt Romney

  Mitt Romney with his mother and father George Romney in San Francisco, days before the 1964 GOP Convention at the Cow Palace.

• Photos Of 17-Year-Old Mitt Romney

  Mitt Romney with his mother and father George Romney shortly after arriving at San Francisco International Airport.

• Photos Of 17-Year-Old Mitt Romney

  Can you spot Mitt? A wide shot of the floor of the GOP Convention at the Cow Palace. Look closely and you'll see Mitt Romney.

• Photos Of 17-Year-Old Mitt Romney

  Right under the Michigan sign.

Paul Rieckhoff: How Mikayla Bragg and 31 Soldiers "Fell Through The Cracks"

Alone in a guard tower 6,800 miles from her home in Longview, Wash., Specialist Mikayla Bragg took her own life last December. Bragg's commanding officers at Forward Operating Base Salerno, Afghanistan, had no idea that in the months prior to her deployment the 20-year-old Army specialist had multiple encounters with the military mental health system. Had her mental health care history been shared by those treating her at Fort Knox, Bragg's COs in Afghanistan would have known that the young soldier had previously made an attempt on her life, that she had spend 45 days in an Army hospital for mental health treatment prior to deploying, and that six months before she committed suicide she had ceased using prescription anti-anxiety medication so that she could deploy.

In the 135-page report following the Army's investigation into Bragg's death, a behavioral health officer at FOB Salerno said that it was his/her opinion that Bragg "fell through the cracks" thanks to a lack of communication between officials at her duty station stateside and her commanding officers in Afghanistan. For Bragg's CO to be left in the dark about her mental health care needs is unconscionable; our leaders (and our systems) cannot allow our troops to fall through so-called cracks.

Last Friday, the Army released suicide numbers for the month of September. There were 31
potential suicides for the month: 15 among active-duty soldiers and 16 among the reserve and Guard components, bringing the total number of Army suicides so far in 2012 to 247. After just nine months of 2012, the number of suicides has almost surpassed the total number of suicides in 2011.

Despite the attention of leaders like President Obama and Defense Secretary Panetta, the trend is going in the wrong direction. In August, President Obama issued an executive order entitled "Improving Access to Mental Health Services for Veterans, Service Members, and Military Families," expanding mental health care access and promoting suicide prevention across the board. Secretary Panetta has called the military's struggle with suicide "perhaps the most frustrating challenge" he's dealt with since assuming the top post at the Pentagon.

Eleven years of war, multiple deployments, and short dwell time in between have severely stressed our forces. The newest data on VA health care utilization by OIF/OEF veterans shows that close to 30 percent of the 848,616 new veterans enrolled in VA health care have been diagnosed with PTSD. And with VA wait times exceeding 365 days in many cities around the country, we can and must do better. We have asked much of our troops. At the very least, they deserve to come home to a system that is prepared to meet their physical and mental health care needs. And they deserve to be mentioned by the men aspiring to be America's next Commander in Chief. But this is an issue you didn't hear in any of the debates -- and you're unlikely to hear on the campaign trail in the next few weeks.

Combating an enemy as dangerous as suicide requires leadership at every level of command. It requires concrete efforts by the DoD and VA to eliminate stigma and improve access to mental health care. And most of all, it begs for a national commitment from every citizen to look out for our service members and veterans. Supporting the men and women on your left and right is our duty, overseas and here at home.

Right now, you can make that commitment by using IAVA's voter guide to cast a smart vote for veterans in this election. The candidates running for office this year at every level, from every party, are not stepping up. In the debates, you heard almost nothing about the issues that matter to us most. After 10 years of war, you heard more about Big Bird than you did about veterans. After every debate, the Democrats and Republicans clamber to claim victory, but only one thing is for sure -- our veterans and their families lost. 

At IAVA, we think we can change that -- but we need your help. Download IAVA's short, smart, non-partisan Voter Guide now and make your voice heard. Don't let candidates off the hook when they say "I support our troops" and pose for a photo. Ask them tough questions:

How will you keep our troops from "falling through the cracks"?

IAVA has partnered with the Veterans Crisis Line to bring resources to events and to provide IAVA's membership with direct and immediate access to mental health professionals. Add the Veterans Crisis Line number to your phone, it only takes a second: 1-800-273-8255 press 1 for veterans or text "838255" for support. If you're a veteran, join our discussion at Community of Veterans (COV) to learn more about the partnership and the warning signs of suicide.

Crossposted at IAVA.org.

Follow Paul Rieckhoff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/PaulRieckhoff

Obama And Romney Spar On China, Trade Despite Similar Plans

WASHINGTON -- With just two weeks left before the November election, President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney are treating Ohio as 2012's must-win battleground state. And as polls tighten, both campaigns are focusing their Buckeye State message on trade, with a surprising policy consensus emerging between the two candidates beneath their sharp campaign rhetoric.

While both Obama and Romney pledge to be more aggressive in enforcing trade deals with other countries -- especially China -- the two candidates also vigorously defend high-profile agreements that send U.S. manufacturing jobs overseas.

You wouldn't know it from listening to stump speeches in Ohio, where neither candidate has missed an opportunity to knock his opponent's purportedly soft trade enforcement plans.

"He's been talking tough on China," Obama said at a Sept. 26 rally at Bowling Green State University. "It sounds better than talking about all the years he spent profiting from companies that sent our jobs to China. So, you know, when you hear this new-found outrage. When you see these ads he's running promising to get tough on China -- it feels a lot like that fox saying, 'You know, we need more secure chicken coops'... It's just not credible."

That same day, Romney threw his own jab at Obama during a speech at a wire manufacturer in Bedford Heights, Ohio:

"A lot of people can talk. Talk is cheap," he said. "You can be extraordinarily eloquent and describe all the wonderful things you can do, but when you cut through the words you can look at the record, and when you can see policies that have not created the jobs America needs, then you know it's time to choose a new leader, get a new coach, get America growing again. That is why one thing I will do from Day One is label China a currency manipulator."

But in spite of Romney's tough talk on China, respondents to a national HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted between Oct. 18 and 19 were skeptical that the GOP nominee's rhetoric would match his actions when he took office. Fifty percent of respondents said they were skeptical that Romney would follow through on his promise to crack down on China trade policies, while 23 percent said they were confident that he would.

According to data provided by their campaigns, Obama has traveled to the state 13 times this year, while Romney has made a total of 22 trips -- 10 during the GOP primaries and 12 while campaigning for the general election.

Bolstered by outside groups, both presidential campaigns have also devoted a tremendous amount of ad spending toward Ohio. FCC data shows Romney's campaign and conservative allies spent $12,060,330 between Oct. 1 and Oct. 22 in Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati -- the state's largest media markets -- on a total of 8,278 ads. The Obama campaign and its affiliates spent $11,280,720 on 10,753 ads in those markets over the same period. Several of those spots have included promises from each candidate to get tough on China, or charges that his opponent would do little more than send U.S. jobs there.

Tough-on-China rhetoric plays to a host of American anxieties about China's economy -- the U.S. dependence on borrowing from China, which owns more than $1 trillion in U.S. government debt; the frequent unlicensed use of U.S. corporate intellectual property in China; the artificially depressed value of China's yuan against the U.S. dollar; and the strong growth China's economy has shown as the U.S. has stagnated.

When candidates bring up any of these factors, they tap into voter unrest over the offshoring of American jobs -- even though some issues are incompatible or overblown. China manipulates its currency by purchasing U.S. government debt, so going after China on currency effectively means demanding that China stop buying American Treasury bonds. China owns less than eight percent of America's debt, giving the nation far less economic leverage over the U.S. than bombasitc campaign ads suggest.

But currency manipulation does give China a manufacturing edge, and could be deemed a violation of World Trade Organization treaties. Winning a WTO judgment against China would allow the U.S. to slap tariffs of 20 percent or more on all products made in China, leveling the playing field, and also declaring what would amount to a trade war.

The U.S. has made significant progress on the currency problem in recent years, without taking that step. China stopped explicitly "pegging" its currency to a specific value of the dollar in 2010, and now permits a broader range of valuation. The yuan has been steadily appreciating over the past year, reaching an all-time high this month.

What's more, such "cheating" only exacerbates problems for U.S. producers that are created by free trade treaties themselves. By packing in low labor standards, poor environmental protections and other provisions, WTO treaties and other pacts modeled on the North American Free Trade Agreement have encouraged U.S. corporations to send jobs abroad.

Beltway think tanks and politicians have long favored these free trade policies, but in states that have hemorrhaged jobs in the past 20 years, there remains bipartisan resistance to such trade pacts.

"I voted against almost every free trade agreement negotiated by the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations," said Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio).

"I've disagreed with presidents of both parties," said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), referring to free trade pacts. "I think trade policies have contributed -- as have our tax policies -- to a huge loss in manufacturing jobs between 2000 and 2010. We lost 5 million manufacturing jobs in this country ... 60,000 factories closed in those 10 years."

No swing state has seen its economy hammered as hard as Ohio's since the U.S. joined the WTO in 1994, with employment in the manufacturing sector plunging by one-third, according to the consumer protection nonprofit group Public Citizen. According to a study by economist Robert Scott with the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think-tank, Ohio shed 91,800 jobs between 2001 and 2010 due to the rising trade deficit with China.

But Brown argues the state's manufacturing industry has been on the mend lately due to a combination of the president's auto bailout and his trade enforcement record.

"Obama has been more aggressive in trade enforcement than any of his immediate predecessors of either party," Brown said. "Since early 2010 -- in part because of the auto rescue and in part because of the president enforcing trade law -- we've seen job increases in manufacturing."

But when it comes to the actual terms of free trade agreements, Romney and Obama have nearly identical platforms. Obama pushed through free trade deals with South Korea, Colombia and Panama that were negotiated by President George W. Bush, and is currently pressing for a pact with 10 Pacific nations called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Obama has enthusiastically defended this record.

"I've signed trade agreements that are helping our companies sell more goods to millions of new customers, goods that are stamped with three proud words: Made in America," Obama said during his speech at the 2012 Democratic National Convention.

According to U.S. census data, the trade deficit with South Korea and Columbia has widened by 29 percent since the agreements were ratified, with exports to South Korea falling by 9 percent.

Romney's jobs platform explicitly defends those pacts, and praises NAFTA-style free trade as a general policy principle. "Free Trade Agreements are one of the best routes to accomplishing our goals," reads his official jobs platform, which calls for more NAFTA-style pacts. Romney also pledges to sign the Trans-Pacific deal "at the earliest possible date."

The Trans-Pacific deal, like the three agreements Obama pushed through Congress, is strongly supported by almost every major American corporation. Opening up new markets gives companies additional customers, but since the U.S. is already the largest consumer market in the world, the primary corporate benefits accrue from the very policies that trouble Ohio voters: Cheaper production costs abroad boost corporate profits and shutter factories at home.

New Balance, the only major footwear company that still manufactures shoes in the U.S., has repeatedly warned the Obama administration that it may have to close its remaining domestic factories if the Trans-Pacific deal is finalized, due to draft terms offering Vietnam tariff-free access to American markets. Vietnam was cited by the U.S. Department of Labor in September for relying on child labor and forced labor in its garment industry, and for the human trafficking of children.

Romney insists, however, that America's basic trade problem is the Obama administration's weak enforcement of these free trade deals. That sentiment was echoed by Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), who told The Huffington Post that the president has failed to crack down on unfair Chinese trade practices, earning the country a "free ride."

"There's no such thing in the world as free trade -- you need fair trade," Shuster said. "The Chinese aren't fair traders and we have to be after them enforcing the laws. I'm for international trade, but it's got to be fair, and at this point -- especially with a country like China -- it's not fair."

But Obama has been more aggressive at promoting American products through trade enforcement than any president in decades. He has won WTO judgments against China for foul play on tires and solar panels, while his International Trade Commission has approved tariffs on steel subsidized by the Chinese government.

Without winning Ohio, Romney's path to election is close to impossible, so it's not surprising that both candidates are cherry-picking from their trade proposals to appeal to the state's voters. But LaTourette isn't buying the tough talk from either candidate.

"I've been here long enough that I really don't put a lot of stock in what someone says, I put more stock in what someone does," he said. "That's how I judge the president's record, and if Mitt Romney's elected in November, that's how I'll judge him."

-- Paul Blumenthal contributed reporting.

This story has been updated to include the results of the HuffPost/YouGov poll.

Related on HuffPost:

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney gestures beside his wife Ann following the third and final presidential debate with US President Barack Obama at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, October 22, 2012. The showdown focusing on foreign policy is being held in the crucial toss-up state of Florida just 15 days before the election and promises to be among the most watched 90 minutes of the entire 2012 campaign. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney gestures following the third and final presidential debate with US President Barack Obama at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, October 22, 2012. The showdown focusing on foreign policy is being held in the crucial toss-up state of Florida just 15 days before the election and promises to be among the most watched 90 minutes of the entire 2012 campaign. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

• Barack Obama, Michelle Obama,

  President Barack Obama, left, gives a thumbs-up as he is joined on stage by first lady Michelle Obama, right, at the end of the last debate against Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

• President Barack Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney smile during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Rick Wilking)

• President Barack Obama greets members of the family of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Rick Wilking)

• Barak Obama, Michelle Obama

  President Barack Obama kisses his wife Michelle after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

• Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, Ann Romney, Michelle Obama

  President Barack Obama, right, and first lady Michelle Obama wave as they walk off stage as Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and his wife Ann, say goodbye to the crowd before departing after the third presidential debate on Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)

• President Barack Obama and First lady Michelle Obama kiss after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Michael Reynolds)

• Mitt Romney, Barack Obama

  President Barack Obama greets members of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's family after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

• President Barack Obama and First lady Michelle Obama wave to the audience after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Michael Reynolds)

• Barack Obama, Mitt Romney

  Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, right, and President Barack Obama, left, greet members of the audience at the end of the final debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

• Barack Obama

  President Barack Obama shakes hands with the audience after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Win McNamee)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, right, and President Barack Obama shake hands with audience members following the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

• President Barack Obama and Michelle wave to members of the audience following the third presidential debate with Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• Barack Obama, Mitt Romney,

  Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama walks past each other on stage at the end of the last debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

• Ann Romney, Mitt Romney,

  Ann Romney, wife of Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, laughs as she pulls her husband away from the edge of the stage after the third presidential debate with President Barack Obama at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

• President Barack Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney meet family members after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Michael Reynolds)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, left, shakes hands with President Barack Obama following their third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

• President Barack Obama, left, hugs his wife Michelle while Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney kisses his wife Ann following the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• Barack Obama, Mitt Romney

  President Barack Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney pass each other after the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

• President Barack Obama, right, and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney shake hands following their third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  US President Barack Obama (R) greets Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (L) following the third and final presidential debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, October 22, 2012. The showdown focusing on foreign policy is being held in the crucial toss-up state of Florida just 15 days before the election and promises to be among the most watched 90 minutes of the entire 2012 campaign. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, left, shakes hands with President Barack Obama following their third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

• President Barack Obama makes his closing argument during the third presidential debate with Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (L) speaks during a debate with U.S. President Barack Obama as moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS (R) looks on at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama debates with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (not seen) at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  US President Barack Obama debates Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in the third and final presidential debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, on October 22, 2012. The final debate before the November 6 election is focusing on foreign policy. AFP PHOTO / Jewel Samad (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during the third and final presidential debate with US President Barack Obama at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, on October 22, 2012. The showdown focusing on foreign policy is being held in the critical toss-up state of Florida just 15 days before the election and promises to be among the most watched 90 minutes of the entire 2012 campaign. AFP PHOTO/Jewel Samad (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

• President Barack Obama, right, speaks to Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• Mitt Romney, Barack Obama

  Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama react to moderator Bob Schieffer during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, left, and President Barack Obama laugh after being interrupted by moderator Bob Schieffer during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during a debate with U.S. President Barack Obama at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Marc Serota/Getty Images)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama debates with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (not seen) at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney makes a point during the third presidential debate with President Barack Obama at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• President Barack Obama speaks during the third presidential debate with Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

• President Barack Obama smiles as Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney speaks during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Rick Wilking)

• Mitt Romney, Barack Obama

  Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama answer a question during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Win McNamee)

• President Barack Obama listens as Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney speaks during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Pool-Rick Wilking)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (L) debates with U.S. President Barack Obama at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Rick Wilking-Pool/Getty Images)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama debates with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Michael Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama (L) listens as moderator Bob Schieffer of CBS speaks during the debate with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney debates on October 22, 2012 during the third presidential debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida. The final debate before the November 6 election is focusing on foreign policy. AFP PHOTO / Saul LOEB (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney listens during the third and final presidential debate with US President Barack Obama at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, on October 22, 2012. The showdown focusing on foreign policy is being held in the critical toss-up state of Florida just 15 days before the election and promises to be among the most watched 90 minutes of the entire 2012 campaign. AFP PHOTO Jewel Samad (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

• President Barack Obama speaks during the third presidential debate with Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: U.S. President Barack Obama (R) debates with Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Marc Serota/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  US President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney participate in the third and final presidential debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, on October 22, 2012. The final debate before the November 6 election is focusing on foreign policy. AFP PHOTO / Jewel Samad (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

• US-VOTE-2012-DEBATE

  US President Barack Obama debates in the third and final presidential debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, on October 22, 2012. The final debate before the November 6 election is focusing on foreign policy. AFP PHOTO / Jewel Samad (Photo credit should read JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

• President Barack Obama speaks during the third presidential debate with Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

• Obama And Romney Spar In Final Debate Before Presidential Election

  BOCA RATON, FL - OCTOBER 22: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during a debate with U.S. President Barack Obama at the Keith C. and Elaine Johnson Wold Performing Arts Center at Lynn University on October 22, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida. The focus for the final presidential debate before Election Day on November 6 is foreign policy. (Photo by Marc Serota/Getty Images)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney speaks during the third presidential debate with President Barack Obama at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

• Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, left, listens to President Barack Obama during the third presidential debate at Lynn University, Monday, Oct. 22, 2012, in Boca Raton, Fla. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)