One Hundred Days Of Obama
May 11, 2009
By Humphrey Stevenson
Last Wednesday, President Barack Obama celebrated his first 100 days in office by treating us all to a press conference. First off, he gave an opening statement in which he reminded us to wash our hands and cover our mouth when we cough, pointed out the 150,000 jobs he has "saved or created" thus far, thanked his buddies in Congress for their work on the budget and explained how he is going to fix the health care system among other issues. The President then took questions ranging from the swine flu to what has been most enchanting. There were no questions on his massive budget deficit, the increase in violence in Iraq, his killing of the DC voucher program or any other tough questions; no surprise there. The questions at an Obama press conference are like the pitches at the Home Run Derby; they're designed to be hit out of the park.
A couple of early questions regarded his dropping of the Bush administration's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques." The President said that the use of these techniques did not fit with our "values and ideals" and his ending of these tactics takes away an important terrorist recruitment tool. I'd love to have seen that recruiting poster; "Join Al Qaida and Get Waterboarded." While he grudgingly admits that the use of these techniques yielded vital information that may have prevented further terrorist attacks on Americans, Obama said we could have gotten the information in other ways. Like how? Force the terrorist to listen to Barbra Streisand records 'til they cracked? President Obama touted that there have been no circumstances in his first 100 days to make him second guess his decision. Point taken; however, President Bush kept our nation safe for nearly eight years through the occasional using those techniques.
In response to a question about the Freedom of Choice Act, the President said, "The reason I'm pro-choice is because I don't think women take that -- that position casually. I think that they struggle with these decisions each and every day." According to this bizarre reasoning, it is fine to have a doctor kill an unborn baby as long as the mother has thought about it. Taking an innocent life is wrong no matter how much thought someone has given it. It's hard to believe he spent twenty years in a church and he doesn't know that. What did they teach in that church? They couldn't work in a little "Thou shalt not kill" between the Jeremiah Wright rants? Our founders declared that people have the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You do not give up those rights simply because you are very young. My problem with the so-called pro-choice position is twofold; one, the unborn baby isn't the one given the choice and two, the only "choice" the pro-choice people are uncomfortable with is the choice not to have an abortion.
In the last question, the President was asked now that he owns a bank and a couple of car companies, what kind of stockholder would he be? His response was that he did not want to own a bank or car companies. In reference to the auto manufacturers, his answer centered around assisting them to become viable and make difficult decisions about economic growth, market share and "what the market is going to look like." I'm sure every CEO in the world would love to have that economic crystal ball. Just how does he know what the market is going to look like, unless of course, he is going to shape that market?
Now Obama is ignoring or changing established bankruptcy law to force holders of secured Chrysler debt, and thereby have a superior claim, down the repayment list so that his constituents in the UAW can move up to protect their pension and health plans. We also find out that when one debt holder refused to accept the deal, Obama threatened to sic his attack dogs in the press on them. There are two problems with this that should alarm all Americans. One, a President should not care who wins or loses as long as everyone follows the rules. Two, we have a President threatening law abiding citizens with harassment by the media simply because they refuse to play his game. Not to mention that there are apparently those in an allegedly independent press willing to do Obama's bidding. I wonder who's next?