I was listening to Dave Ross this morning as I was driving on the highway. Since Dave added Luke Burbank to his show, the content of that 9am to Noon time slot has gotten even more liberal. I would not characterize the change as a positive one.
Dave and Luke were talking about how disappointed they were that President Obama has decided to move forward with military tribunals at Gitmo even though in the campaign he was clear about closing the prison and trying the inmates in civilian courts. Rather than being upset that he made a commitment to voters and reneged like he has done on about every important issue in the election Dave and Luke were talking about how much they admired the President for being flexible when presented with information that led to a different action.
Luke Burbank characterized Obama as being squishy. He like the fact that the President was squishy.
There have been a number of times when the President has “realized the error” of his campaign rhetoric and directed his administration to act 180 degrees different from the promises in the campaign.
If you didn’t know enough about his record or his political leanings before the election in 2008 to vote for him you were looking for a reason to choose one candidate over the other. You were listening to the words he was speaking so eloquently and were convinced he was your guy because of those words. When he said he would close Gitmo and that was your issue, you decided to vote for him.
So how do you feel now?
The reason Dave and Luke characterize Obama as squishy is because he is not afraid to say what you want to hear but act completely different when a decision has to be made. Think about how many times he promised to act if you voted for him but when push came to shove, he flip-flopped. Is that the president you thought we elected? Is that the kind of man we want leading our country?
If there was ever a “bait and switch” president, this is him.
We have a huge task before us to hinder him from delivering any more of his true agenda during the remainder of this term of office; and to replace him with a candidate who stands behind his words. Where I am more likely to support conservative candidates, some of you might just want a candidate of your own persuasion that is not a prevaricator.
In the remaining months of his presidency Barak Obama will make every effort to convince voters that he is a moderate with his words like he does so well. What will be important is to watch what he does. His actions are a much better indicator of his political agenda than his words.
If he has any leadership he should be showing it now. Skyrocketing fuel prices caused by the crisis in the Arab world; two significant issues requiring leadership. What is he doing to address either?
In the State of the Union speech he talked about cutting the deficit. The Republicans in the House sent a bill to the Senate addressing last year’s budget with 60 billion in cuts. If the President is serious about his words in the speech, he works to get the Democratic Senate to approve the House Bill. Let’s see what kind of leadership he has with his own party?
During his campaign, he talked about putting on a comfortable pair of shoes to walk the picket line with union members because everyone is entitled to union representation. State Budgets are hemorrhaging red ink because of commitments to made to unions and the President is more concerned about the workers.
Leadership is what we need and this guy doesn’t appear to have any. He is a good looking smooth talking politician but a leader he is not.
No Loss for Words 
NPR Off the Dole!
by Steve DanaWhat are we to think about this current flap at National Public Radio? The guy who is at the center of the controversy was not a low level employee in a remote location that strayed from the company line; he was a highly placed executive responsible for fund-raising at NPR. It is not unreasonable to conclude that others that worked for and with Ron Schiller may have shared his views in their efforts to raise money for the organization.
That concerns me.
When NPR terminated Juan Williams a couple months ago for making comments about his personal feelings, NPR said that company policy limited the types of comments their commentators could make and Mr. Williams violated that policy.
Executives at NPR lost their jobs following the Juan Williams controversy and now top executives are again losing their jobs suggest that the organization has serious problems at the very top of the heap.
You would think an organization called National Public Radio would offer diverse opinions about issues of interest to all Americans; a mix of liberal, moderate and conservative staff that provided something for everyone.
Apparently the National and Public parts in the name just have to do with who pays for it. The federal government gives NPR $400 million per year to an organization that has demonstrated a couple times now that they have more than a liberal bias, they have serious animosity about anyone who doesn’t share their views.
It’s too bad that our public money is given to organizations clearly not supporting mainstream public benefit causes.
I hope the government suspends future federal contributions to NPR. I don’t object to a private organization having their opinions, but I don’t want public money paying for it. I suspect liberals don’t want to pay for conservative media either.
Posted in Political commentary | Leave a Comment »