Obama the Communist!

In a Blog titled, Is Barack Obama a communist? I don’t know. But here are five things I do know, a topic was brought up about Obama and the reasons behind why he is a communist. To fully understand what the author, Grundle, is saying about Obama read the following: Is Barrack Obama a Communist? October 18, 2012

Grundle argues five reasons in which he believes that Obama is a communist based on actions he has taken in the past. Most of the points Grundle hits on are about how Obama praising people who support Hugo Chavez, the Venezuela communist dictator. Obama spent 1.6 million dollars to save graffiti that glorified communist murders, Che Guevara and Fidel Castro. Also, Obama supports these two communist murders. At the end, Grundle shows that Obama denied, Lech Walesa, entry into the White House and explains that she was a major help in defeating communist in Eastern Europe. Grundles five points are eye opening but hard to see proven, because he has no evidence from credible sources in his writing.

The audience that Grundle is trying to reach out to, would be the American people who plan to vote in this next election that is coming up. He wants to try and get his point across that Obama is a Communist and that by voting for him in the election we risk our countries freedom. People who plan on voting need to see this because they need know have knowledge about everything that the presidential candidates are involved in or have done so that they can make educated decisions on who should run this country.

Grundle has no credibility, the reader doesn't even know if the facts he gives are true. There is no evidence of where he got his information, it is just a random guy writing his opinion on a topic and hoping people will read and be influenced.

I personally cant say if I agree with this blog or not because i don't know if the information is valid. If in fact, all the facts and information about Obama where true then I would believe he was a communist and I would never want to see him as president of the United States again.

Mandatory Paid Parental Leave

In a column in the USA Today magazine, Duncan Black, writes about why parents should get paid time off to spend with their children every year. A trip to Sweden opened his eyes to how limited America is when it comes to spending time with their children because they cant risk losing their jobs or paying the bills. Black stresses the idea of making a national paid parental leave program.

He claims in his column that, "Such a program would not be free, of course, but it would be affordable. Sweden's leave program is estimated to cost just 0.8% of its GDP, a small price to pay for a widespread benefit for families (Parag. 5)."

Blacks claim sounds logical because if parents have more time to spend with their kids they can take care of their needs and make sure they grow up the way they want them to. Children need help sometimes and it can greatly affect them if both or even one of the parents aren't around. Some kids have problems when either their mother or father are always gone working.

The authors intended audience is parents with young kids, because if they see this and read about it, they can help in creating the national paid parental leave program. Adults usually read the newspaper when they get home from work, and after seeing this column in it they might be encouraged to try and spend more time with their children.

Duncan Black is very credible because he writes columns for USA today, a blog called Eschaton under the pseudonym of Atrios; he is a fellow at Media Matters for America, and he holds a doctorate in economics.

I personally agree with Duncan Black because one dayIi hope to have kids of my own, and I would be so thankful to have paid time off to raise my children and make sure they have a good head on their shoulders. If you'd like to make your own opinion about getting a national paid parental leave program established in America read this article, 2012 U.S. Needs Paid Family Leave.

As Carney labels Libya strike terrorism, Obama continues to cite anti-Islam film

This past Thursday, September 20th, the White House labeled the attack on the US Consulate in Libya as a terrorist attack. Everyone wanted to hear what President Obama had to say about this claim, but he kept to the story that the blame was to be put on an anti-Islam film.

Obama claims that an offensive show lead to violent attacks to be seen in criminals. Obama was not solving the confused problems of the people with his word, so back in Washington Carney claimed it to be officially terrorism. Many people involved in this situation said that they thought it was a pre-planned attack and that it could happen again.

Belief that the administration is walking away from claiming this attack was spontaneous is rising. Watch the anti-Islam video and make your own opinions about this attack at, As Carney labels Libya strike terrorism, Obama continues to cite anti-Islam films ( September 20th, 2012)

I think this article is worth reading because it gives people the opportunity to make their own assumptions about the people involved in making decisions for our nation. Election time is quickly approaching and if you are voting but are not informed, now is the time to inform yourself and make sure you're making the right choice for the United States of America.