"Acts of Terror"

President Obama, Candy Crowley, Governor Romney

Two Weeks Later or the Next Day

David Dayen wrote an article in the Fire Dog Lake Blog where he writes over a certain part on the other night's Town Hall style debate between President Obama and Governor Romney. He writes on the part of the debate where the two spoke on the tragedy in Syria that cost the life of four Americans. The author starts off by declaring President Obama the winner of the debate. He talks about how the President was more prepared for Governor Romney's attacks. Then he goes back to talking about the specific part in the debate where they speak about the tragedy in Syria. During the debate Romney was attempting to make a point that the President was not calling the tragedy an act of terrorism. Candy Crowley the mediator interjected by saying that the President had in fact referred to the event as an "act of terror". David Dayen refers to this interjection by the mediator as a something the american public needs and was waiting for. I do agree that the mediators and media should challenge the "elite" or "powerful". Where I disagree with him is where he refers to what Governor Romney said as made up or lies. When Romney said that the President did not call the attacks an "act of terror" he was correct. I have heard and read the transcript about the speech in question and the President makes a mention to acts of terror in general. He condemns all acts of terrors and never referred to the specific event as a act of terrorism. So that means that Crowley was wrong and she was wrong in front of millions of viewers and she made Romney look as if he was wrong. I believe that if this administration was allowed to have it’s way, we’d all still be hearing about how a US ambassador was killed in a protest resulting from a YouTube video.

Jobs Report

The article Jobs Report Brings Unexpected Good News for Obama in the New York Times by David Leonhardt and Mark Landler reports that this new positive jobs report helps Obama campaign. I agree that the report helps his campaign and like them I also believe that one report won't change the outcome of the elections but it does help. I am happy to see the unemployment rate go down. But I'm not happy about the reason it went down, it is true that a larger number of people are employed but the rate didn't go down because of policies put in place by President Obama  but because a large number of people have simply given up on looking for jobs or didn't actively look for jobs in the past 4 weeks therefore they are not included in the unemployment rate. These people are still unemployed. I do agree this will give the President's campaign a boost yet I don't believe it should. Total employment rose in September after 3 months of little change. 7.8 is this a high amount of Americans that are unemployed because a stagnant/down economy. Not to mention the underemployed. What I find curious is that unemployment is even higher among the President's main supporters 23.7% for teenagers 13.4 for blacks and 9.9 for Hispanics. So I agree and believe this report will help President Obama on his goal of being reelected to office just don't believe it should. The article also mentions that there are a large number of people on twitter and other social media websites claiming that the job reports are somehow being manipulating by economists to favor the President.