A few interesting statistical facts about this newspaper insert being put out by Mitt Romney:

Research from Scarborough Research found that ‘old-fashioned newspapers represent an undervalued political advertising opportunity’ because ‘newspaper readers are more likely to vote than users of other media.’

The annual survey of over 200,000 adults nationally found those who watch television most regularly in addition to those who read newspapers most regularly are more likely to vote, consume news and information about politics and tend to be older.

On the other hand, the heaviest internet users are likely to be younger and therefore less likely to vote, the study found.

The research also found ‘the partisan profile of national newspaper readers is slightly left of center, making it an effective vehicle to reach disaffected 2008 Obama voters and the older Reagan/Clinton ticket-splitter.’

They also included a crossword puzzle. It is only a cryptic crossword if you base your news on The New York Times or The Age:

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will create 12 million more ____

Since Obamacare, insurance rates ___ very fast

First name of the teenage girl whose life was saved by Mitt Romney

Obama’s message to small business (goes with 24 across)

Mitt Romney can __ the country out of the economic mess

Hmmm. A two word clue on “Obama’s message to small business”. Many possibilities come to mind, but I suspect they’re not the ones the Romney campaign included.

You have the president of the United States being asked for assistance during the raid on the consulate in Benghazi on September 11 but because he is running for re-election in part based on his having defeated al Qaeda he refuses to send support and instead heads off to a fund raising dinner in Las Vegas. Meanwhile, for two weeks or more, he insists in public that the reason for the attack on the consulate was a spontaneous demonstration about a Youtube video on the birth of Islam. He therefore does not do what he was elected to do, he fails to defend his ambassador when under attack when he could have done so, has the maker of the video which had nothing to do with the raid arrested and put in jail and then lies repeatedly for the following two weeks about what he had known almost from the very first hours of the attack.

There is something so sickening about this that it defies my ability to understand such duplicity and deceit. Not only should the American people not re-elect this man; he should be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. He should be shunned by all decent citizens. He should become an electoral pariah, poison to any other Democrat who might in any way be associated with him.

The story of Benghazi is coming out and in a rush. The mainstream media, Obama’s enablers, are still doing what they can to cover up but this is now so far beyond the political normal that it will very soon become impossible to deny what is now evident beyond argument to anyone who has been following the story up until now. Here is an excerpt from just one such story of the many that are now rushing into the daylight from the few remaining media outlets in the United States that are not themselves lying and suppressing the fact in order to save this scoundrel of a president from becoming the ex-president in a few weeks’ time.

With all this information – from frantic messages sent by operators on the ground to highly detailed overhead battle-scene video – who invented the asinine idea that the attack was collateral damage from a flash-mob reacting to a provocative video? The record there is incriminating. For weeks afterward, the administration party-line was that the video, not al Qaeda, was responsible for the disaster, a major point of President Obama’s September speech to the United Nations. But when that story had morphed into an indefensible fiction, the party line shifted again, memorably summarized by Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. during his debate with Congressman Paul Ryan: ‘We didn’t know’ because the intelligence establishment was still beavering away.

What I cannot understand is the nature of the greater good the media see in Obama relative to Mitt Romney that doing all they can to hide these disastrous and dishonest actions they are hoping to preserve in having this man re-elected.

Clarice Feldman says the same: This is from The American Thinker where Clarice is trying to make the same point of exasperation. Where will the line be drawn for some people? If this isn’t beyond the realm of acceptability in a President, then when can a president be said to have gone too far? Over to Clarice:

In the simplest of terms, we knew there was general danger and had made inadequate security arrangements. When those arrangements failed (as they were almost certain to) we had a number of opportunities to protect the Ambassador and others — nearby military support, assistance from a nearby Spectre gunship and from teams stationed 2 hours away at Sigonella Air Base, All of this help was denied as coldly as the earlier requests for additional security and 4 Americans were murdered, giving our enemies an unwarranted victory.

From which she concludes in much the same was as I did:

Stand Down, Obama and your administration. All of you. Stand Down. You’ve failed to carry out your responsibilities of office. You treated American lives, including that of an ambassador — the official representative of your country — with utter disregard for their safety. You’ve lied to us about this tragedy so many times and in so many ways you can no longer credibly lead. You’re crass and vulgar and without regard for truth, law or common decency and deserve to be drummed out of office.

I don’t know what else there is to say other than to thank Token for the suggestion to include the above cartoon as well. The core of the mainstream American media are themselves beyond disgusting.