...the average citizen is intelligent enough to understand the difference between what is in a president's power to affect and what he can't control. Gas prices aren't the administration's fault any more than the oil crisis was Carter's fault. Presidents have only a few policy options at their disposal to affect economic change, and even then their policies can take years to reach full effect. Over the long haul, it's pretty obvious that conservative policies do more to stimulate the economy that liberal ones do. Protectionism, high wage laws and the like hurt our nation's prosperity and lead to higher unemployment and the like.

By the way, I wanted to correct the misconception that unemployment is "sky high." It's at 5.6%, down from 6.4% last year...which is higher than we in the U.S. like, but lower than in the 70s, 80s *and* 90s, and far lower than the rates in countries with more liberal economic policies and whopping welfare benefits. Germany, for example, frequently has unemployment in the double digits. The reason is that it's too dang expensive for employers to hire anyone new! There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch, as we conservatives try to get through to people over and over and over.

Also, the Labor Department uses two different surveys to establish the rate of job growth or loss, which often report widely varied results. That's because one survey does not cover startup companies & new businesses. The other surveys households to see how many are employed. The latter indicates a gain of 2 millions jobs over the last year; the other indicates a loss of 62,000 jobs. Of course, political opponents sieze on the loss indicator. But that survey covers only the payrolls of established businesses, not who is actually employed.

This is yet another case of rhetoric overshadowing reason. If you say "jobless recovery" long enough, people will believe it is a fact.