First, the proposed rule you mentioned was from April, and it has already been tabled - it is going nowhere. 

Second, your anti-Obama message assumes that Romney would not approve similar taxes.  The truth is that neither party has advocated taxing the Internet, but both candidates agree that the changes are necessary to level the playing field among online and offline businesses. 

Third, what you should be focusing on is the candidates plans to make braodband access more accessible and their positions on net-neutrality (whether Internet service providers should be able to favor some Web sites over others).  President Obama supports net-neutrality - Romney doesn't.  That means that under Romney, it would be acceptable for your ISPs to filter what you can access. For example "Block Daily Kos, Talking Points Memo, Moveon.org (and its emails), because of an "exclusive" deal with other blogs. Or alternatively, block FoxNews.com because of a deal with NBC and MSNBC."  Without Net neutrality rules, search engines could suppress search results down several pages, if small Web sites like Source of Title refuse to pay for advertising fees.  The Internet should remain free and open for everyone.

President Obama also favors expanding broadband access into rural communities, with subsidies, just like we did with basic phone service years ago.  Romney opposes it.  Expanding bradband access into rural communities is important to make sure that everyone has the same access to the Internet, for education of children in poorer rural communities, to give rural businesses the same access to customers, etc.

Using an outdated FCC proposed rule, that has already been dropped, with a tagline "Obama Expands Plans to Tax Internet" is extremely misleading.