Emotionless Obama. Emotionless Man.

 Recently, news about a tearful speech Obama made after being reelected has been circulating all over the web. Why did this speech gain so much coverage? According to USC Annenberg News, Obama shed tears by saying, "What you guys have done means what I have done means what I'm doing is important, and I'm really proud of you. I'm really proud of you."To read more click here Why did Obama receive so much attention about a speech where a tear was shed? 

;

    Throughout our history it has been looked down upon and a sign of weakness for men to "cry or show emotion". In our society we have adopted this idea of men and these ideas are not only ridiculous, but also should be a concern to us. Our nation has come to define strength as being cold and disconnected, both of which are characteristics a President should not display. The president needs to be connected and approachable. I think by crying, Obama can be seen more as a human-being, rather than an emotionless-being. 

 What do you think? Do you think president Obama should show more emotion? In general do we have a skewed view on how we see men and emotions? 

4th Time's a Charm?

    As the third presidential debate came to an end last night, Candy Crowley followed the paths of Martha Raddatz and Jim Lehrer. All three moderators have had trouble keeping the candidates in line as they debate their way to presidency. The first debate was moderated by Jim Lehrer and many were upset with him for not intervening and letting the Governor and President "run" the debate. Conservatives were upset with Martha Raddatz as she has had previous connections with Obama and last night, According to the Washington Post, "Republicans pilloried moderator Candy Crowley for her attempted litigation of who was right and who was wrong when it came to how and when the White House had labeled the Benghazi attack in its immediate aftermath."To read more, click here. 

   Why is it that all three moderators have had issues on controlling the debate? Some say it is virtually impossible to be a moderator. When I was watching the debates I noticed that the candidates would answer the questions they wanted to answer, and not the questions that they were asked. Also, they ignored the alloted time they were given and spoke on their own terms. Do you think that people should be focusing so much on how the moderators do? Or should we just focus on what the candidates say and ignore the moderators performances?