Sunday, September 20, 2009

Questions You Most Likely Won't Hear Today During Obama's Five (5) TV Appearances

Obama is afraid to go on Fox News. Is that because the questions Chris Wallace would ask him would be unfair? No, I don't think so. Wallace is a professional who has consistently shown himself to be fair to the guests on his show. Rather, I think the questions Obama would be asked on Fox would be tough questions, and for some reason President Obama, the leader of the free world, isn't willing to expose himself to the tough questions. I say the reason is fear, a fear which comes from finding himself in over his head in his position as President of the United States, a fear of exposing himself to real rather to softball, partisan questions.

This is a man who was elected to the toughest job in the world before he was ready. His resume of community organizing, adjunct professorship, and his short stay in both state and federal Senate positions, is too thin to have provided him with the executive experience he needs for the job he now finds himself in. People on both the Right and the Left tried to make that point during the campaign--he was just too inexperienced--but big money and a formerly mainstream media that fell in love with the idea of electing a "Black President" put him into office. We heard the argument made on the Right 1,000 times: If Sarah Palin doesn't have the experience to be Vice President, how in God's name can we think of putting Barack Obama in as President? The argument was made, but obviously never answered. And now, we have to ask, are the chickens coming home to roost?

If Obama were experienced enough to be President, he would surround himself with people who would be giving him better advice. If Obama were experienced enough to be President, he would understand that "voting present" or "leading from behind" isn't leadership. If Obama were experienced enough to be President, he wouldn't be so thin-skinned around his critics. If Obama were experienced enough to be President, he wouldn't be afraid of questions like these.
  • Why did your administration continue to insist publicly that cap-and-trade would cost the average household $175 per year when an analysis from Treasury showed the cost more than ten times that amount? Why did it take a FOIA application to release that study in the “most transparent administration ever?”
  • Why did you pick the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion to reverse course on missile defense in Poland?

  • You suggested that an amnesty program would solve the problem of illegal immigrant access to the health-care system in the US after your overhaul. Do you think Americans should subsidize health-insurance coverage for people who entered the country illegally?

  • Two years ago, you told people on the campaign trail that paying for more coverage through efficiency savings in the health-care system was a myth, and that it would take higher taxes to overhaul the health care system. Now you argue the opposite. Why?

  • Unemployment is at a 25 year high. Indications are, your previous predictions to the contrary, that unemployment will continue to rise. Why is health care the #1 priority of your administration?

  • You pledged to bring a new spirit of bipartisanship to Washington. Yet you have not spoken to any member of the GOP about healthcare, your "premier issue," since April. Do you support the use of the so-call nuclear option that would pass health care reform on a strictly partisan basis?

  • If Congress sends it to your desk, would you sign a bill that cuts all federal funding to ACORN? Will you explain and/or disavow your ties to ACORN?

  • Recently, the cry of "racism" against people who disagree with your policies has become increasingly shrill. During the campaign, you promoted yourself as the "post-racial" candidate, and in March of 2008, you gave a speech on race where you said, "race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now." If race was an issue that was so important to your candidacy, then why have you not spoken up more about the voices crying "racism" during your Presidency? Will you speak out against the increasing "racism" attacks, including those of Jimmy Carter? 

  • What would you say to the American people who are concerned about the many "czar" positions that you have created in your administration? Many of these positions seem to overlap with positions already in place in your Cabinet, leaving people to wonder who is calling the shots. Would you be willing to publish a White House organizational chart (with budgets) so that the American people would have a better understanding of these positions, most of which did not require Senate oversite?

  • Valerie Jerrett, your Senior Advisor, said this to Netroots Convention: "Van Jones--we were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House." She went on to give Van Jones high praise, saying that "we've been watching him . . . for as long as he's been active out in Oakland." If we take her at her word, your own Senior Advisor knew Van Jones quite well and so presumably knew what he stood for. If Van Jones was such a strong candidate for the Green Jobs Czar position, why didn't your administration stand behind him? Why did you accept his resignation?

  • During your campaign, you made the case for Iraq being the "bad war" and Afghanistan being the "good war." Your own Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has called for more troops in Afghanistan. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top American commander in Kabul, will submit a formal request later this month for more troops. Unlike during George W. Bush's Presidency, the escalating death toll on your watch is largely underreported by the media; yet regardless, many Senators and House members, as well as supporters from your own party, are signaling their opposition to more troops. As Commander-in-Chief, will you support the recommendations of your Generals in Afghanistan?

  • One of the most frequently repeated promises of your campaign for Presidency was your promise to close Guantanamo Bay: "I don't want to be ambiguous about this. We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution." You were very clear that Gitmo must be closed, yet now that you are President Obama and no longer Candidate Obama, you seem to have found closing the facility to be a difficult, complex task. What is the current status of your policy on closing Gitmo?

  • Why did you initially call for preconditions in talks with Israel (a demand that all settlement construction cease), when now you have put those preconditions aside?

  • Where is your Secretary of State?
I'll be listening for these questions and others like them today when Obama goes in front of cameras on five different networks. I'm willing to sort of keep an open mind (with "all due respect" to the lame stream media--heh), but I won't be holding my breath.


nobackindown said...

excellent questions ... certainly he would melt into a puddle of goo if he actually had to confront those issues -- let's face it -- we have a GHOST president (whose past is sealed tight), and a SHADOW government run by appointees cobbled together without any vetting whatsoever ... this whole scenario is something we've never encountered before, and is akin to an internal attack against everything our forefathers held to be sacred ...

Labwriter said...

"Ghost" president--is that racist? Hahahahaha.