Barack Obama likes to state that he has been on the case since day one in regards to the BP oil spill, he also likes to claim that the federal government is doing everything they can to help with this disaster, but his rhetoric doesn’t quite match his actions since oil began spilling into the Gulf.
It has been reported that many foreign countries have offered to help with the oil spill by providing oil skimming ships or chemical dispersants, but the Obama regime has declined all of these offers.
“Belgian, Dutch, and Norwegian firms” all offered to help by providing the oil skimming ships, while Britain offered to provide the chemicals that potentially could have helped to absorb the oil that continues to spill into the Gulf immediately following the explosion of the oil rig. This hardly sounds like the actions of a federal government which is serious about containing the leak and cleaning up the Gulf in a more timely manner, and it hardly sounds like a government that has been on the case since day one.
Governor Bobby Jindal asked for a waiver from the federal government that would have allowed Louisiana to build berms to stop the oil from reaching the shore but received no authorization from the federal government. As he waited for approval the oil eventually made it to the shores, yet the government remained inactive so Governor Jindal eventually built the berms without permission. He had no choice, someone had to do something but regardless of the Obama regime’s claims no help came.
Now it is being reported that the barges the governor ordered to begin sucking up the oil from the water were halted from continuing their efforts to clean up the oil by the Coast Guard.
It’s the most frustrating thing,” the Republican governor said today in Buras, La. “Literally, yesterday morning we found out that they were halting all of these barges
Sixteen barges sat stationary today, although they were sucking up thousands of gallons of BP’s oil as recently as Tuesday.
The Coast Guard came and shut them down,” Jindal said. “You got men on the barges in the oil, and they have been told by the Coast Guard, ‘Cease and desist. Stop sucking up that oil
The Coast Guard is claiming that the barges needed to be shut down so that they could verify that they were carrying the proper amounts of both fire extinguishers and life jackets. After a 24 hour delay that allowed untold gallons of crude to continue to spill into the Gulf, the barges were given the go ahead to resume their efforts to slow down this disaster.
While this interruption in the clean up effort cannot be directly laid at the feet of Barack Obama as can be the fact that he has declined to accept the help of other nation’s goodwill offers to help, Bobby Jindal does make a valid point:
The governor said the problem is there’s still no single person giving a “yes” or “no.” While the Gulf Coast governors have developed plans with the Coast Guard’s command center in the Gulf, things begin to shift when other agencies start weighing in, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.”It’s like this huge committee down there,” Riley said, “and every decision that we try to implement, any one person on that committee has absolute veto power
There is no one person calling the shots but rather a committee of people who sometimes are at odds with each other trying coexist in and command the cleanup effort. There should be one person in charge of this effort– not big, bloated government bureaucracies with differing goals in their best interests. And that one person should either be Barack Obama or a person named by him, so yes, this delay implemented by the Coast Guard can be attributed to the fact that Barack Obama has failed to assert the proper leadership that is needed in this crisis.
We are left to wonder whether Barack Obama has just been inept or if he wants this disaster to be as bad as possible in order to gain more public support for his leftist cap and trade agenda.
During an interview about Arizona’s controversial immigration law with NTN24 with a reporter who I can only identify as Andrea, Hillary Clinton admitted what we all knew was eventually going to happen– the Obama regime is going to file a lawsuit against Arizona and their new immigration law.
the Justice Department, under his direction, will be bringing a lawsuit against the act
The position of the Obama regime is that it is up to the federal government to pass and enforce immigration law, therefore the Arizona law is unconstitutional.
The Obama regime is right about this; it is up to the federal government to enforce immigration law. But the problem here is that the federal government is NOT enforcing the immigration law and something needed to be done to stop the violence that law abiding Arizona residents have been dealing with on a daily basis. If the federal government had been enforcing immigration law, Arizona wouldn’t have had to take the measures to enforce the law that the federal government is unwilling to enforce.
Instead the regime is seeking to provide amnesty to some of the very people that are responsible for the violence at the Arizona border. This is not a new problem and it isn’t a problem that is isolated within the Democrat party alone; no administration, Republican or Democrat has been willing to deal with this problem for varying reasons. Arizona passed an immigration law that virtually mimics the federal law, if the Obama regime has a problem with the Arizona law, it is because they likewise have a problem with the federal law.
I for one am glad that the Obama regime is going to challenge the Arizona law and I hope that Arizona does not back down because of this threat because this will provide the general population the chance to see exactly what citizens of the border states have to deal with every day.
The Obama regime has decided to use the Arizona law not as a catalyst to enforce the laws that already exist, but to use the new law as a tool to promote granting amnesty to illegal aliens and the American people seem to be catching on to this. In a debate over the immigration policy of America, the American people have decided to support Arizona in her efforts to quell the violence and if the regime decides to oppose the efforts of that state the repercussions will be felt at the ballot box in November.
The American people are sick and tired of watching people who come to this country illegally gain more rights than the citizens and legal immigrants to this country enjoy. The system is working backwards as we reward bad behavior with the chance for citizenship in the greatest country in the world. All that we want is for justice to be served and when people see the federal government oppose justice there will be a revolt in this country the likes of which has not been seen in quite a long time.
To the Obama regime I state the following: bring it on! We are waiting for you and we are glad that you are going to expose yourselves for who you really are!
As I have written about in the past, Barack Obama is going to use Rahm Emanuel’s adage that you should never let a good crisis go to waste in regards to the BP oil spill. Barack Obama is going to use this crisis as a catalyst to push through global warming legislation.
It had been reported that Barack Obama would use his speech from the Oval Office to promote climate change legislation and he did not disappoint. While an anxious American public waited for Barack Obama to outline his plan to help BP stop the oil from leaking into the Gulf, Barack Obama instead used this as a forum to push his leftist agenda and never once mentioned what he was going to do to gain control over the immediate crisis.
This is not the time or the place to push for a long term solution to the nation’s addiction to oil, there will be time for that after the crisis at hand is solved. Much like the borders need to be secured before immigration reform can be… nevermind, that isn’t going to happen either. What I meant to say was that while the oil is still spilling into the Gulf the president’s focus should be on stopping the oil from spilling into the Gulf; his priority should be showing the American people that he is on top of this disaster and that he will get the situation under control. But instead he has decided that it was time to persue a national energy tax claiming that “some believe we can’t afford those costs right now. I say we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy because the long-term costs to our economy.”
Even Dianne Feinstein feels that the president’s priorities are misplaced, stating, “the climate bill isn’t going to stop the oil leak. Stopping the leak should come first.”
I am not against searching for alternative energy but this is not where his focus should have been last night. Barack Obama has decided that it is more important to realize his climate change dream than it is to deal with the crisis at hand.
Mitch McConnell summed it up best when he said Barack Obama was, “holding the Gulf hostage to a national energy tax.” That is exactly what Barack Obama is doing. Instead of focusing his attention where it should be, he has decided to politicize the oil spill to further his cap and trade agenda while neglecting the inconvenient truth that people’s livelihoods are being ruined and cap and trade will do nothing to help them.
What better way is there to describe what Barack Obama is doing?
Chris Matthews, Howard Fineman, and Keith Olbermann trash Barack Obama’s BP oil spill speech
Last night Barack Obama finally addressed the nation about the BP oil spill, but all is not well in the land of the left. Much criticism has been levied at the president’s speech by the right. Some have even stated that Barack Obama went on national television and actually admitted that he had no clue on what to do next. Barack Obama’s mention that “we don’t yet know precisely how to get there,” is being used by local Boston radio hosts as proof that Barack Obama doesn’t know what to do.
This is expected from the right, and frankly, I believe that this president has no clue as to what he should be doing about this disaster. But the right isn’t the only place that criticism of Barack Obama’s BP oil spill speech is coming from; some of his most ardent supporters on the left are also criticising the speech. James Carville has already left the Obama reservation and has criticised the president’s response– or lack thereof– to the BP oil spill, but now we are hearing people such as Chris– I feel a thrill run down my leg when I hear Barack Obama speak– Matthews, Howard Fineman, and of all people, Keith Olbermann reacted harshly to Barack Obama’s speech.
Keith Olbermann had perhaps the harshest criticism of the speech, stating that “it was a great speech if you were on another planet for the last 57 days.” That was a great line in part because it is so true. Barack Obama did nothing for the first 57 after the oil spill and continues to do nothing except tell the American people that he has been on the case since day one. Nobody is buying that line and that is why even people like Keith Olbermann found Barack Obama’s claim that they will be able to recover 90% of the spilled oil laughable.
But while that might have been the best line of the day, the criticism from the left did not stop there. From this article, here are some of the excerpts from the debate on Barack Obama’s big PB speech:
Matthews compared Obama to Carter.
Olbermann: “Nothing specific at all was said.”
Matthews: “No direction.”
Howard Fineman: “He wasn’t specific enough.”
Olbermann: “I don’t think he aimed low, I don’t think he aimed at all. It’s startling.”
Howard Fineman: Obama should be acting like a “commander-in-chief.”
Matthews: Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] Chu has a Nobel prize. “I’ll barf if he does it one more time.”
Matthews: “A lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk.”
Matthews: “I don’t sense executive command.”
Both Howard Fineman and Chris Matthews criticised the president’s lack of leadership during the crisis by claiming that he is not acting like a commander-in-chief and that there is no sence of executive command being demonstrated by this president. They even went so far as to compare him to Jimmy Carter, a comparison that is normally reserved for use by people on the right.
But there is one aspect to the criticism leveled by all three men that I actually find laughable; all three men mentioned the fact that Barack Obama didn’t have any specifics laid out in his speech. Is it surprising to these people?
Barack Obama has never been specific on any issue, this is nothing new.
Olbermann made the comment about living on another planet for the last 57 days, but he must have been living on another planet for the last three years if he expected Barack Obama to be specific on this or any other issue. I have said it in the past, but it needs to be repeated; Barack Obama as a candidate was a clean slate, he was perceived to be different things to different people because he carefully and purposely did not take a clear position on any issue while he was a state senator in Illinois, voting present on any bill that could have defined him to the American people. He did this so that he would not have a clear cut record and would be able to seem as if he were whatever a person wanted him to be.
But people like these three did not see this. They did not see– or chose to ignore– the fact that candidate Obama never sighted specific plans while running for president. Hell, he changed his Iraq war withdrawal strategy on a daily basis as a candidate. But Matthews, Olbermann, and Fineman are finally waking up to the fact that Barack Obama is an empty suit with no ideas and no clear vision on what he should be doing as millions of gallons of oil spill into the waters in the Gulf.
I am glad that these people are finally waking up, as are millions of Americans, and are finally realizing that maybe– just maybe– Barack Obama was not ready to be president. It is just too bad it took a disaster of this magnitude to show these people that those of us who were leery of Barack Obama from the beginning were not leery of him because he is black– we were leery of him because he is not fit to be president; he had no leadership or executive experience and now we are seeing the results of his inexperience. We were right about Barack Obama all along and when people like James Carville, Keith Olbermann, Howard Fineman, and Chris Matthews begin to turn on him it justifies the position that we have held about Barack Obama for three years.
Two Massachusetts teachers protest at a ceremony to honor high school seniors who joined the military
During a ceremony at Dennis-Yarmouth Regional High School in Massachusetts last week, six students were being honored for their decision to join the military upon their graduation. These students received a standing ovation from their classmates for their decision, but not everyone was pleased that these students decided to dedicate their lives to defending the United States of America.
While the student body was giving these students a standing ovation, two of the TEACHERS in the school decided that it was a proper setting for a war protest, holding up protest signs and refusing to cheer on the decision that these high school seniors made.
Regardless of how these teachers feel about the war, they should have shown a little common decency and respect for the decision that these students made. Obviously these students felt that the military offered them an opportunity to better themselves, and possibly they even feel that America is worth fighting for.
I am not saying that these teachers do not have the right to protest the wars, but there is a proper time and place for their protests, and to denigrate the choice that these students made just because they do not agree with them during a situation where these students were being honored is just disgusting.
Can you imagine being the proud parents of these students– who probably are already concerned enough about the safety of their children, and anxious about their wellbeing– watching what was supposed to be an honoring of their children being turned into a political statement?
These teachers are now trying to claim that this was a teachable moment because they were showing the students the proper way to “exercise dissent,” to which I declare bullshit! They had no interest in providing a context in which students could see what an acceptable protest looked like; they were simply using this forum to protest the wars.
These two teachers have been suspended–with pay nonetheless– as the principal tries to distance himself from them, but upset parents and students are not satisfied. In a turn of events that is extremely gratifying, the students are now forming a protest against these two teachers.
Some students are calling for the firing of two Dennis-Yarmouth Regional High School teachers who held an anti-war sign during a school assembly Friday.History teacher Marybeth Verani and English teacher Adeline Koscher made their silent protest during the part of the assembly in which school officials recognized graduating seniors who are entering the military.
“They not only imposed their political will, they imposed it at the wrong time,” said D-Y junior Andrew Bowles Jr., who organized an after-school protest yesterday that drew about 30 students
It makes me feel good to know that the attempts at indoctrinating our children by liberal teachers is not always successful; and it makes me feel good to know that our youngsters for the most part are growing up to respect the military and those that choose to serve in spite of what teachers like these are trying to teach our children.
As I stated above, while I disagree with the position these teachers have taken, I understand that they have the right to do what they did. I just feel that this was not the proper place for them to protest the wars. This was meant as a ceremony to honor the students who chose to serve our country and because these teachers did not agree with the student’s decision, they decided to make themselves the focal point of this ceremony, taking the limelight away from those for whom it was intended.
Last Friday night I attended the High School graduation of my oldest son, Andy. My wife and I were so full of pride in our son, watching him take the next step in his life. He is a great child, we couldn’t ask for a better son than either him or our other son, Tim. Seeing Andy receive his diploma was one of the proudest moments I have had as a parent.
There was a moment in the graduation ceremony that had me feeling proud– not as a parent, but as a member of the community. At one point in the graduation ceremony, three students were asked to stand up. It was revealed by the principal that these three students had signed up for the military; two joined the Marines, while the third joined the Navy.
The applause started slowly at first and built up until the whole auditorium was giving these students a standing ovation. I took notice of the fact that the first people to actually stand up were the graduating seniors, showing that they truly understood what these three students had signed up to do. Once the ovation was over, the three students were asked to stand once again so the obviously choked up principal could continue with her salute to them.
I remember thinking how proud I was to live in a community that still understands how important our military is and how much we owe to them. I remember feeling proud that even the young people who were in attendance realized that the sacrifice that these three students was something to be honored and admired.
And when I read the story about these two teachers it makes me think that they could learn a thing or two from the graduating seniors in my son’s class.
Up until she was suddenly granted asylum last month, Barack Obama’s Aunt Zeituni was living in this country illegally while receiving welfare and public housing. In 2002 Aunt Zeituni applied for political asylum and in 2004 her request was denied and she was ordered to be deported.
She never left the country and has been living in this country illegally and on the public dole ever since. In his Book, Barack Obama claimed to have lost contact with his beloved aunt, and during the 2008 presidential race when it was discovered that she was living illegally in Boston, Barack Obama claimed that he had no idea what her immigration status was.
After being turned down for asylum in the past, Barack Obama’s illegal immigrant aunt was granted asylum last month. The White House has denied any involvement in the case, but not everyone is so sure that the White House did not have any influence in Aunt Zeituni’s sudden change of luck in her request for asylum. Representative Steve King is requesting that Aunt Zeituni testify in front of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law.
“[i]n order to better determine whether favoritism played a role – especially because Ms. Onyango had been earlier turned down for asylum and ordered deported in 2004 before her nephew became president – the Subcommittee needs to hear from Ms. Onyango hersel
There is the very real chance that Barack Obama did not officially interfere in this case, but there is no doubt that even if he did not, the decision was influenced by the fact that Barack Obama is president. We need to find out for sure one way or the other whether Barack Obama played a role in his aunt being granted asylum because comprehensive immigration reform is one of Barack Obama’s domestic agenda priorities. She has been breaking the law for years, but instead of being punished, she was rewarded; we can expect more of this if comprehensive immigration reform is passed.
The committee hearing is scheduled for tomorrow and if the regime has nothing to hide I do not see why Aunt Zeituni would be leery of testifying; and I do not see a reason why the regime would be leery of letting her testify.
She was denied asylum when she was just another immigrant to this country, when her visa expired and she was supposed to leave the country she applied for political asylum, she was denied but refused to leave the country. Nothing has changed since then in regards to her immigration status with the exception that her nephew became president, yet surprisingly it was determined that she was suddenly a political refugee. We are suppose to believe that neither her now famous nephew or his position had anything to do with this.
There is only one way to determine if favoritism played a role in this sudden reversal; Aunt Zeituni must take the stand and give the American people her side of the story because this issue goes well beyond just this one case. Comprehensive immigration reform is going to be one of the next issues that this regime tackles and we can expect illegal immigrants to be granted amnesty if it passes. Aunt Zeituni provides us with the classic example of a person who was rewarded for bad behavior and we can expect more of this in the future if the immigration reform bill is ever passed.
Somehow those immigrants that follow the law and emigrate to this country using the proper procedure will be screwed over, while those like Aunt Zeituni– who refused to adhere to the law– will be rewarded. This is ass backwards and the American people deserve an answer in the Aunt Zeituni case because it is a microcosm of what we can expect under this regime’s version of immigration reform.
I have previously written a post about how Barack Obama was going to use the BP oil spill to push climate change legislation. That post can be read here. Word is now coming out that Barack Obama will use his speech to the nation tomorrow night to, in part, promote the need for climate change legislation.
We are now getting word that Joel Benenson– a pollster for the Democrat National Committee– has released a briefing that urges the Obama regime and Democrats to use this crisis to promote climate change legislation. Again, as Rahm Emanuel has famously stated, never let a good crisis go to waste because it provides an opportunity to pass legislation that you wouldn’t otherwise be able to pass– that is what the Democrats are planning to do.
From the briefing:
The oil spill is intensifying the public’s desire for clean energy investments and increased regulation on corporate polluters
In the aftermath of the spill, people firmly believe Congress needs to do more than just make BP pay. Even when pressed with opposition messaging that now is not the time for some ‘job killing energy tax,’ people coalesce around comprehensive clean energy reform. Consequently, support for a comprehensive energy bill is very high. With the right messaging, that support holds strong in the face of harsh opposition attacks
I do not have a problem with “making BP pay” for the oil spill; they are responsible for the spill– unless the reports on various international media sources are correct and North Korea actually torpedoed the oil rig– and they should pay for the damages. But the briefing goes on to say that “making BP pay” isn’t enough.
Benenson’s briefing argues that “Making BP Pay Isn’t Enough.”
His briefing then states the Obama regime needs to “frame” the argument so that people will buy into climate change legislation and disregard the argument that cap and trade will amount to nothing more than a national energy tax. He does not deny that cap and trade will be a tax on all Americans, but feels as if this crisis will weaken the opposition to the tax within the hearts and minds of the American people if only the crisis is used to properly frame the argument.
First, “frame the opposition” as “Big Oil and corporate polluters who have blocked energy reform for decades” and “politicians protecting the special interests that fund their campaigns.” Second, “illustrate the costs of our dependence: … $1 billion a day on foreign oil … Oil spill destroying jobs and livelihoods.” Third, “tap into deeply held values.” “Put America back in control of our energy situation. Cut foreign oil spending in half. Invest in energy that’s made in America and creates millions of jobs for Americans
Barack Obama himself has compared the BP oil spill to September 11th by stating that 9/11 shaped the way Americans felt about foreign policy and that the oil spill should be used to shape the way Americans feel about climate change legislation. He now intends to use this disaster to shape the way Americans feel about climate change.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not against alternative energy; I support any technology that will bring down the price of energy– including the expansion of oil drilling, wind, solar, and nuclear power. That is not the issue here. What is at issue here is the president’s politicizing of the BP oil spill to push through a climate change bill that the American people are against.
The president’s first priority should be stopping the leak. If BP is unable or unwilling to do so than it is up to the president to step up and lead the way. Yet he seems only concerned with using this crisis to promote a leftist ideal that most Americans are against, hoping that Americans will be too afraid to appear politically incorrect on this issue as oil continues to spill into the gulf.
As the president plays golf and does nothing to show that he is leading an effort to stop this disaster, one has to wonder if his lack of action is due to the fact that he wants oil to leak into the gulf so that he can use this catastrophe to push his leftist agenda.
One has to wonder where the president’s priorities are.
According to this article, Barack Obama has sent a letter to congress requesting another $50 billion in spending to shore up the economy.
In a letter to Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, the president said that more spending is needed immediately to avert a devastating double dip recession, and that concerns about the deficit, while important, may have to wait. For now, he said, the federal government needs to spend money to provide immediate economic aid to the still-struggling economy, and especially to states that otherwise may have to lay off workers to fill their own budget holes
According to the president, the economy needs this additional influx of taxpayer dollars so that various states won’t have to layoff firefighters, teachers, police officers, and the like. Isn’t this at least partly the same argument we heard about the $700+ stimulus bill in the first place?
What happened to all the stimulus money? According to Recovery.gov— the official stimulus fund tracking website– most of the individual states have received roughly one-quarter of the stimulus money they were promised. Why is Barack Obama looking for more money when most of the stimulus money has not been spent?
It seems to me that before we spend an additional $50 billion on the economy, we should at least finish spending the stimulus money. If the economy is recovering– as we are being told– and the stimulus money is the reason the economy is recovering, and if we have only spent about one-quarter of the stimulus money, wouldn’t spending the other three-quarters of the stimulus money send the economy skyrocketing? Or at least stop it from sliding “backward just as recovery is taking hold,” if the economy is indeed recovering?
The Provincetown Massachusetts School Committee has passed a new condom policy that will allow both its high school and ELEMENTARY school to pass out condoms to CHILDREN who request them.
The vote was unanimous but it does come with some controversy within the school committee– although not for the reasons you would think. Those who voted for the policy, but voiced some concerns over the policy are upset that the new policy isn’t liberal enough.
Dr. Beth Singer, school superintendent, argued that since there is no age limit on the distribution policy, she wanted to ensure that younger students requesting condoms receive information on their use.
The quote above is what some on the committee have a problem with. Putting aside for a moment– if possible– the entire fact that it is absolutely ludicrous that the school committee voted to pass out condoms to anyone regardless of age, what is even more ludicrous is the fact that the concern raised about this policy was because students are required to see the nurse to get the condoms.
I don’t like that students can’t be discreet about this,” said school committee member Shannon Patrick. “They have to go and ask for it. I’d rather them not have the conversation [with counselors] and have the condom than not have the condom.”
“I can see some kids opting out because of the conversation. I’m not against [the policy]. I’m just trying to put myself in that teenager’s spot
The concerns raised about this policy center around the fact that a child would have to ask a nurse for a condom; the opponents feel that the condoms should be available without a child even having to ask for them. Asking for them will put too much stress on them and scare them away from getting a condom according to these people.
But this story does not end there; it gets even worse. Written into the policy is the statement that the schools will not honor a parent’s request that their child not be given a condom. The school knows better than the parent and the parent has no say in this matter, that is the message that is being sent by the Provincetown School Committee.
The idea that a twelve year old can go to the school nurse and request a condom even after the parents of that twelve year old have told the school that they do not wish their child be given that condom is unbelievable on its own. But when you couple it with the fact that there are school committee members who believe that the twelve year old should just be able to get the condom from a free condom dispenser in the bathroom– or some other means like this– without at least having to learn how to actually use it is astounding to me.
Somehow educating a CHILD before they give that CHILD a condom is wrong in the minds of those that are supposed to be educating our children. Even having a conversation about sex and condoms is wrong according to some members of the Provincetown School Committee; they believe our CHILDREN are better left in the dark as long as they can get their condom, that is the important thing in their mind. But it isn’t surprising considering that the Provincetown School Committee decided it was okay to hand out condoms to CHILDREN in the first place.
Britain to Obama: Stop the anti-British rhetoric
I have to give Barack Obama credit because there are two things that he does exceedingly well; bow to world leaders as a sign of subservience and pissing off our allies. The latest example of the latter comes from this story about British leaders who are less than happy with what they consider to be Barack Obama’s bashing of their country over the BP oil spill.
Mayor Boris Johnson demanded an end to “anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling” after days of scathing criticism directed at BP by the President and other US politicians.
Former Conservative Party chairman Lord Tebbit branded Mr Obama’s conduct “despicable”.
But the criticism from our greatest ally did not stop there:
He spoke as the US onslaught against the firm became a “matter of national concern”
Well I do think there is something slightly worrying about the anti-British rhetoric that seems to be permeating from America. Yes I suppose that’s right. I would like to see cool heads and a bit of calm reflection about how to deal with this problem rather than endlessly buck-passing and name-calling
Barack Obama has said that the time for finger pointing was over and that is was time to solve the problem; yet he has continued to point the finger– even blaming the Bush administration for the oil spill at one point– at everyone but himself, and he has done nothing to solve the problem. This has not been lost on Britain and they are now calling for Obama to stop passing the buck– and stop bashing their country.
Barack Obama’s response to the oil spill has been nonexistent from the beginning despite the regime’s claim that they have been all over it since day one. In order to deflect the blame for his utter lack of leadership, Barack Obama has been doing exactly what he is telling everyone else not to do– point the finger.
The BP oil spill provided Barack Obama with an opportunity to show the American people that he was a leader, but he dropped the ball and now he is trying to save face. And in Barack Obama’s mind, if saving face means upsetting Britain– so be it!
America's Watchtower 