Bill O’Reilly: A Personal Note To President Obama

Dear Mr. President:

You must be tired. Please take some time off. You worked very hard to get re-elected. As a loyal American, I want you in good health, and that means some rest and relaxation once in a while.

But when you ramp it up again, I hope you will consider some suggestions from a citizen who’s a bit disappointed in your overall performance. Please understand that I am not looking at this from an ideological perspective, but rather from a sports point-of-view.

I want American leadership to win the game. That means improving the economy, bolstering protection for the folks and running an honest operation from the White House. At this point in history, that’s what winning means to me.

Let’s take the economy first. Apparently, you believe that massive government spending can create well-paying jobs in the private sector. But after four years and almost a trillion dollars of federal money being fed into the economy, it hasn’t worked. Unemployment is about the same as it was when you took over in 2009, and wages are down sharply.

You spent a ton of our money, Mr. President, and we didn’t even get a T-shirt.

Now, I know some of my fellow citizens see it differently and voted for you believing your economic vision is sound. But let’s be honest: The voter breakdown clearly shows that folks receiving some kind of government largesse supported you big-time, while those avidly competing in the marketplace voted for Gov. Romney.

It was no accident that the day after your victory, the stock market plummeted 313 points.

So I hope you’ll rethink the big spending and begin to make it easier for small-business people to make money. When they are flush, the job market surges. When they feel threatened, hiring shuts down.

I well understand that the “tax the rich” mantra got you some political currency. But we both know that strategy will do little to stimulate anything other than jealousy.

On the security front, may I suggest that you be a stand-up guy? Please hold a press conference and tell the folks what you know about the terror attack in Libya and why things are such a mess. This “we’re investigating” stuff is a ruse. Telling us what you know does not impede an investigation.

Dodging Libya hurt your honesty index. And that hurts the country. It is very important that the folks trust you even if they don’t like you. Take that from me. My television program has been top-rated for nearly 13 years, and it’s not because I’m Dale Carnegie. Most Americans respect straightforward talk even if they are annoyed by it.

In closing, congratulations on your victory. You and your guy Axelrod designed a campaign that Romney’s Boston boys could not match. But that’s not what’s important now. Fixing the economy is.

Do that, and your legacy will be assured. Fail, and all hell will break loose.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bill O'Reilly, Creators Syndicate

Bill O'Reilly, Creators SyndicateVeteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of many books, including the newly released "Killing Jesus." . This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

More Posts - Website

Bill O’Reilly: Missed Opportunities

Photo courtesy of Austen Hufford

Here’s the good news for Mitt Romney: In the first two debates, he established himself as President Barack Obama’s equal on the events of the day. The governor is well versed on the issues and has shown a mastery of both foreign and domestic policy.

Here’s the bad news: He has failed to pin down the president on his obvious policy shortcomings.

As someone who makes a nice living debating on television, I watch the president and the governor go after each other with a professional eye. And I can’t understand why Romney doesn’t close the deal. Three examples:

First, when Obama says his energy programs are helping the nation, all Romney has to do is keep it simple and ask: “Why then have gas prices more than doubled on your watch, Mr. President? That doesn’t sound like good policy to me.”

Second, the president continues to say he has created millions of jobs. But all Romney has to do is retort: “So what? The average income for working-class households in America is down almost $5,000, Mr. President. Workers are getting hosed, and your policies are at fault.”

Finally, number three, the Libya deal. This is crazy. There are just two vital questions, and Romney has not asked either one: Who pulled two American security teams out of Libya in August despite the concerns of slain Ambassador Christopher Stevens? Who ordered U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice and White House spokesperson Jay Carney to mislead the world about what happened?

If the president doesn’t know, he looks incompetent. If he does know and won’t say, he looks corrupt. If he does answer the questions, Romney wins just by asking.

The problem with many politicians when they debate is that they cram so much information into their heads in anticipation of spitting it out there that they don’t actually listen to what their opponent is saying. In any debate, simple is best. State the facts clearly, and ask obvious questions about your opponent’s weaknesses.

Romney has a big advantage over Obama in the debates because Obama has to defend a record that contains some massive screw-ups. Nobody really cares about Romney’s record in Massachusetts, and he could easily pettifog any specific questioning of it.

But with the economy sluggish after almost four years, four dead Americans in Libya, and Iran still chugging along on the nuclear weapons highway, the president has a good deal of Ricky Ricardo ‘splainin’ to do. But the governor has not put him on the spot in a precise enough way.

Next Monday, Romney will have one final chance to pin the president against the rhetorical wall. The foreign policy debate opens up Libya big-time. If Romney wants to win, he’ll keep it simple and demand some answers.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bill O'Reilly, Creators Syndicate

Bill O'Reilly, Creators SyndicateVeteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of many books, including the newly released "Killing Jesus." . This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

More Posts - Website

Fed Action Warranted, but Congress Should Do More

The Federal Reserve’s decision last week to tie additional aid for the economy directly to jobs was a milestone for the central bank. It made an open-ended commitment to keep interest rates low for years if it has to. Financial markets loved it — which had the short-term benefit of pushing money into riskier investments. We think the Fed did the right thing.

But Congress should take other steps. We favor infrastructure spending, which creates jobs and improves the flow of commerce.

President Barack Obama last year proposed creation of an “infrastructure bank” as part of his jobs program. That idea, like the others in the Obama proposal, went nowhere as common sense wilted in the heat of acrimony, but it remains a good idea.

The Fed said Thursday it would buy up large quantities of mortgage bonds and emphasized that it would maintain this economic stimulus “for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens.”

In other words: We’re going to intervene in the market until more jobs are created — and we’re going to keep doing it until we’re sure the economy is humming.

The Fed had to act. Jobs remain elusive. More than 20 million Americans cannot find full-time work, and incomes remain stagnant. “The weak job market should concern every American,” Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke said.

The Fed believes its actions up to now have helped create 2 million jobs. Its decision to focus on mortgage bonds in this round of aid shows it believes there is more bang for the buck in helping to improve the housing market. We’d agree.

Fed purchases of bonds boost competition for the remaining bonds, forcing investors to accept lower rates of return. That results in lower mortgages, which, the Fed reckons, will equal more housing starts — and a hotter economy. We think it’s a bet worth making.

On the fiscal side, we have no illusions that Congress will do anything meaningful in the next 50 days. But after the presidential election, we hope cooler heads will see that there is value in infrastructure spending.

The nation needs to do this. A Government Accountability Office report in 2010 found that about a quarter of the 600,000 bridges in the United States are “structurally deficient” or otherwise not up to the demands of traffic loads. Spending on highway projects, the electric grid, transit and other projects creates jobs and improves the flow of goods.

Obama’s infrastructure bank idea was stillborn after he mentioned it in his State of the Union address earlier this year mainly because it involved spending. Contrary to the tight-lipped gospel of austerity, we think spending on the right things is good. Roads, bridges, ports — that’s the kind of government spending that not only creates jobs in the short term but also improves regional economies for years.

The infrastructure bank would work like this: The government would chip in about $10 billion in start-up money for projects in transportation, water or energy. The projects would have to have a “clear public benefit” and be worth at least $100 million. The government, through the bank, would work with private investors to finance the projects through long-term loans or loan guarantees. The government would pay for no more than half the cost and look for projects with a dedicated stream of revenue, such as toll roads or bridges, to pay off the bonds.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, testified last year before the Joint Economic Committee that lawmakers should “provide consistent support to public investment in transportation networks, the Internet backbone and the electric grid.” He said a national infrastructure bank “which could marry private capital with financial support from the government, would provide a substantial boost to this effort.”

The Fed’s move was warranted, but Congress should step up, too. Let’s rebuild the nation — and the economy at the same time.

Republished from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tragedy in Benghazi Born of Ignorance and Intolerance

Photo courtesy of Leon E. Panetta

“Men never do evil so completely and so cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.”

That famous epigram was found in the notes left by the 17th-century French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal, who was preparing a defense of the Christian faith when he died in 1662. The evils wrought by Hitler and Stalin believe it. What happened in Libya on Tuesday suggests it still holds some truth.

Angered by a scurrilous video mocking the Prophet Muhammad, apparently filmed with the support of right-wing Christians, Libyan Muslims attacked the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Among them, and perhaps inciting them, was a squad of well-armed Islamist militants. Four U.S. diplomats were killed, among them Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.

The protests quickly spread to Egypt, where the U.S. Embassy was overrun, but without casualties. On Wednesday the protests spread to Yemen, Tunisia, Iraq and Iran. The Quran, while not explicitly forbidding visual depictions of Muhammad, makes it clear that his name and image are to be honored. Some supplemental teachings are stricter, and in some Muslim sects, the faithful rise up in what they see as righteous anger.

Which is, of course, what some Christianist sects in this country do in opposition to the Muslim faith. Christians and Muslims have been killing each other in God’s name since the 7th century. Reason does not signify.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked an important question Wednesday morning in eulogizing Mr. Stevens: “Today, many Americans are asking — indeed, I asked myself — how could this happen? How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction? This question reflects just how complicated and, at times, how confounding the world can be.”

Many people don’t do well with complicated and confounding issues. The ill-educated youth of some Islamic nations prefer simple fervor. Many of the supposedly better-educated citizens in the Western world, who have less excuse, prefer simple answers, too, even if they’re wrong.

What is inexcusable, however, is that a sophisticated, well-educated man like Mitt Romney — a Mormon who has known the ugliness of religious intolerance — would to try to politicize this tragedy. His vile charge Tuesday night that the Obama administration had “sympathized” with the embassy attackers was not only untrue, but violated the cardinal rule that in times of foreign strife, politics stops at the water’s edge.

If an incident like the Benghazi attack can so befuddle him, what would he do in a larger crisis?

In days to come, President Barack Obama, who vowed Tuesday to work with the Libyan government to bring “justice” to those responsible for the deaths of Stevens and his colleagues, will have some complicated, perhaps confounding, decisions to make.

The United States long has reserved the right to levy a “proportional response” to attacks on U.S. interests. With the advent of unmanned attack planes, Obama has options that were unavailable to his 43 predecessors. He doesn’t have to send Marines to the shores of Tripoli.

When someone in Libya identifies the killers — and someone will — Obama will have to decide whether to kill them or let Libya deal with them. The first option will play better at home; the second may be better for long-term U.S. interests in the Arab world. Actions have consequences. So do elections.

Republished from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Enhanced by Zemanta

Editorial Cartoon of the Day: September 13, 2012

Bill Schorr, Cagle Cartoons

California cartoonist Bill Schorr worked for The Los Angeles Herald Examiner, The Kansas City Star and The New York Daily News, now he draws political cartoons for Cagle Cartoons. Bill also draws a syndicated comic strip, "The Grizzwells."

More Posts - Website

What’s Happening in Libya: A Guide to the Best Coverage

President Barack Obama greets State Department employees after speaking to them in a courtyard at the State Department in Washington, D.C., Sept. 12, 2012. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton stands at left. The President made the visit after Chris Stevens, U.S. Ambassador to Libya, and three others were killed at the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, yesterday. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

THE ATTACK: ITS ORIGINS AND VICTIMS

U.S. Suspects Libya Attack Was Planned, New York Times The connection between an anti-Islam film that reportedly sparked this week’s protests in the Mideast and the attack that killed the American ambassador is unclear. Unnamed U.S. officials have told the New York Times and CNN that militants behind the attack may have instigated a protest against the film as a diversion or taken advantage of it as an opportunity.

Stevens ‘was thrilled to watch the Libyan people stand up’, YouTube In a U.S. embassy video uploaded to YouTube in May, Ambassador Stevens introduced himselfto the Libyan people. He described his childhood in California and how he fell in love with North Africa as a Peace Corps volunteer, and compared the challenges facing Libya to the American Civil War.

Stevens: ‘The whole atmosphere has changed for the better’, International Herald Tribune The International Herald Tribune published a tribute to Stevens from foreign correspondent Harvey Morris, which included passages from a “catch-up email”Stevens had written to family and friends in July.

The victims: Sean Smith messaged fellow gamers in hours before attack, Wired Sean Smith, a foreign service officer stationed in Libya who was also killed, was an avid gamer whose death was first reported by his online friends. Yesterday, he wrote a message to an online gaming friend saying he hoped “we don’t die tonight.” He added, “We saw one of our ‘police’ that guard the compound taking pictures.”

Violence at demonstrations in Benghazi is not unprecedented, BBC In 2006, during the height of the protests against the publication of cartoons depicting Mohammed in a Danish newspaper, at least 10 people were killed in Benghazi during a large demonstration. The BBC reported at the time that the Italian consulate in Benghazi had been set on aflame and police had fired on demonstrators. Protesters were reportedly angry because an Italian minister had worn a t-shirt featuring the cartoons.

THE FILM

The provenance of the movie connected to this week’s protests is murky.

A trailer for The Innocence of Muslims was posted on YouTube in July on an account bearing the name “sam bacile.” Sarah Posner of Religion Dispatches first raised questions about information “Bacile” — identified as a California real estate developer — gave to the AP and the Wall Street Journal in recent phone interviews. Christian activist Steve Klein, who has been described in the media as a consultant on the film, told the Atlantic that “Sam Bacile” was a pseudonym and he did not know the person’s true identity. The AP reported that “Bacile” is an Israeli Jew living in California and that he had raised $5 million for the film from 100 Jewish donors. But Klein told the Atlantic that “Bacile” is not Israeli.

LIBYA IN TRANSITION

With Qaddafi gone, Libya is ‘boiling over’, New York Review of Books In June, Nicolas Pelham offered an overview of the state of Libya with a focus on outbreaks of tribal violence in the south of the country. The piece also profiles Benghazi, reporting that militias “rule in and around” the city amid a collapse of central authority.

Libya Captors Become the Captives, New York Times Magazine In May, the magazine profiled former prisoners of the Qaddafi regime who are now in positions of power in Libya. Reporter Robert Worth summed up the state of the government: “Libya has no army. It has no government. These things exist on paper, but in practice, Libya has yet to recover from the long maelstrom of Qaddafi’s rule.”

State Dept. Warned Americans Away from Libya, Foreign Policy Just last month, the State Department issued a travel warning against U.S. citizens visiting Libya. “The incidence of violent crime, especially carjacking and robbery, has become a serious problem,” the statement read. “In addition, political violence in the form of assassinations and vehicle bombs has increased in both Benghazi and Tripoli.”

Libya Democracy Clashes with Fervor for Jihad, New York Times A tale of two emergent political leaders in the new Libya – one, a former jihadi who has renounced violence and says he wants to promote Islamic values as a politician, and the other a militia leader who was held in Guantanamo for six years and has said he wants a Taliban-style Islamist state.

Qaddafi: King of Kings, The New Yorker Last November, New Yorker’s Jon Lee Anderson chronicled the life of Libya’s deposed dictator Muammar Qaddafi, and how his 42-year reign devastated the country’s civil and political culture, ending in “a void, a sense that his mania had left room in the country for nothing else.”

HISTORY OF U.S.-LIBYA RELATIONS

U.S.-Led Abuse and Rendition of Opponents to Gaddafi’s Libya, Human Rights Watch A new Human Rights Watch report includes interviews with 14 Libyans who had fled the country in the 1980s, most of them members of an anti-Qaddafi Islamist group. The Libyans interviewed said they were detained by the U.S., interrogated as terror suspects, and then sent back to Qaddafi’s Libya “at a time when Libya’s record on torture made clear they would face a serious risk of abuse.”  One described being waterboarded by his American captors in Afghanistan.

Files Note Close C.I.A. Ties to Qaddafi Spy Unit, New York Times Documents found in an abandoned office after Qaddafi’s fall documented what appeared to be regular communications between the CIA and Britain’s MI-6 and Libyan officials about terror suspects, and suggested that prisoners were rendered to Libya for questioning.

As U.S. Rebuilt Ties with Libya, Human Rights Concerns Took Back Seat, ProPublica The U.S. began normalizing its relations with Libya in 2004, removing the country from the list of state sponsors of terrorism in 2006. Our explainer from last year covered how oil companies were among the proponents of more engagement with the regime. Evidence also continues to emerge that the U.S. and Qaddafi cooperated on some counterterror efforts, despite the Libyan government’s often inflammatory anti-Western public rhetoric.

Obama’s defense of U.S. role in Libya, MarketWatch Last March, President Obama defended American involvement in the Libyan conflict, saying: “I firmly believe that when innocent people are being brutalized; when someone like Gadhafi threatens a bloodbath that could destabilize an entire region; and when the international community is prepared to come together to save many thousands of lives—then it’s in our national interest to act. And it’s our responsibility. This is one of those times.”

Ongoing coverage: The Guardian | The New York Times Lede Blog | CNN | The Twitter feed of Foreign Policy’s Blake Hounshell

This article was originally published in ProPublica

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Editorial Cartoon of the Day: March 30, 2011

RJ Matson, Cagle Cartoons

R.J. Matson is an editorial cartoonist syndicated by caglecartoons.com and his work appears in over 800 newpspapers and other publications. He was the editorial cartoonist at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from July 2005 through July 2012, he was the editorial cartoonist at The New York Observer from 1989 to 2010, and he has been the editorial cartoonist and staff illustrator at Roll Call since 1986. His cartoons and illustrations have appeared in many other publication, including The New YorkerThe NationMAD MagazineCity Limits, The Daily News, The Washington Post, Washington City Paper, Capital Style, Oak Ridge Now, and Rolling Stone.

Born in Chicago in 1963 , Robert John Matson was raised in Brussels, Belgium and Minneapolis, Minnesota. He received a B.A. from Columbia University in 1985 and won a National Scholastic Press Association Award for cartoons he contributed to the Columbia Daily Spectator. R.J was also a visiting student at Pembroke College, Oxford University for one year.

He moved to Washington, DC in 1985 to work as a reporter for States News Service. In 1986 he became the staff illustrator at Roll Call and the editorial cartoonist at the Montgomery County Sentinel. He was the art director of The Washington Monthly from 1986 to 1988.

R.J. returned to New York City when he became the editorial cartoonist at The New York Observer in 1989. He moved to St. Louis in 2005 to work at the Post-Dispatch. He now lives in Falmouth, Maine, with his wife Mari and their three children, Sofie, Gus and Milo.

He has won two Missouri Press Association Awards for editorial cartoons and he drew Time's Best Cartoon of the Year in 2007.

More Posts - Website

Editorial Cartoon of the Day: March 28, 2011

RJ Matson, Cagle Cartoons

R.J. Matson is an editorial cartoonist syndicated by caglecartoons.com and his work appears in over 800 newpspapers and other publications. He was the editorial cartoonist at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from July 2005 through July 2012, he was the editorial cartoonist at The New York Observer from 1989 to 2010, and he has been the editorial cartoonist and staff illustrator at Roll Call since 1986. His cartoons and illustrations have appeared in many other publication, including The New YorkerThe NationMAD MagazineCity Limits, The Daily News, The Washington Post, Washington City Paper, Capital Style, Oak Ridge Now, and Rolling Stone.

Born in Chicago in 1963 , Robert John Matson was raised in Brussels, Belgium and Minneapolis, Minnesota. He received a B.A. from Columbia University in 1985 and won a National Scholastic Press Association Award for cartoons he contributed to the Columbia Daily Spectator. R.J was also a visiting student at Pembroke College, Oxford University for one year.

He moved to Washington, DC in 1985 to work as a reporter for States News Service. In 1986 he became the staff illustrator at Roll Call and the editorial cartoonist at the Montgomery County Sentinel. He was the art director of The Washington Monthly from 1986 to 1988.

R.J. returned to New York City when he became the editorial cartoonist at The New York Observer in 1989. He moved to St. Louis in 2005 to work at the Post-Dispatch. He now lives in Falmouth, Maine, with his wife Mari and their three children, Sofie, Gus and Milo.

He has won two Missouri Press Association Awards for editorial cartoons and he drew Time's Best Cartoon of the Year in 2007.

More Posts - Website

Bill O’Reilly: The Triumph of Evil

The opposition to military action in Libya is fascinating. President Obama is taking incoming fire from both the left and the right as various agendas collide against neutralizing Moammar Gadhafi. The dissent is all over the place, so let’s try to simplify the situation.

We begin with a quote from Edmund Burke: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

That’s true. We have seen it time and again throughout history. When evil is not confronted, it can win, often with devastating results.

There is no question that Gadhafi was on the verge of slaughtering his opposition. His mercenaries and highly paid military were closing in on rebel strongholds, and amnesty would not be forthcoming, as the colonel himself publicly proclaimed.

Finally, the U.N. acted, and a no-fly zone was approved. After waffling for weeks, Obama swung into action, ordering U.S. planes and missiles into the skies. Then he went to Brazil.

Immediately, the far left erupted. Ralph Nader is calling for impeachment. Michael Moore has suggested that Obama give back the Nobel Peace Prize. Congressman Dennis Kucinich wants to cut off funding for any military action against Libya.

On the right, Pat Buchanan banged the isolationist drum: “Why is the United States, all the way across the ocean, got to go in and stop Arabs from killing Arabs? … Why are we in there?”

To prevent a massacre? I believe that’s the reason, Mr. Buchanan.

Congressman Ron Paul was equally blunt: “What are we doing? We are in this crisis, and they decide to spend all this money. It makes no sense at all.”

Here’s my question for Paul: Would you be comfortable, congressman, watching thousands of human beings being slaughtered by a terrorist dictator when you know that your country had the power to prevent it?

In fact, the no-fly zone was up and running in hours, and Gadhafi’s forces have been seriously damaged. Now the rebels have a chance to eventually overthrow the dictator, and mass murder has been avoided at least for the time being.

This is not a complicated issue. If America is indeed a noble country, it should act to save lives when it can. That doesn’t mean getting bogged down in quagmires like Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam. But when quick, decisive action can defeat evil, it should be taken.

I believe in the basic nobility of America. I also believe few other nations have the motivation and power to confront evil that this country does. If it’s all about us, if all we think about is our own sacrifice, then American exceptionalism disappears.

We did the right thing in Libya.

Veteran TV news anchor Bill O’Reilly is host of the Fox News show “The O’Reilly Factor” and author of the book “Pinheads and Patriots: Where You Stand in the Age of Obama.” To find out more about Bill O’Reilly, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bill O'Reilly, Creators Syndicate

Bill O'Reilly, Creators SyndicateVeteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of many books, including the newly released "Killing Jesus." . This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

More Posts - Website

Getting Gaddafi

President Obama is a dispassionate guy, a man who likes to analyze problems without emotion. He also likes to take his time while making important decisions. To some, this is an effective way to govern. To others, it is dithering. But one thing is certainly true: Being indecisive while people die is no virtue.

A couple of weeks ago, Libyan tyrant and terrorist Muammar Gaddafi seemed to be on the ropes. Rebels were advancing on the capital city of Tripoli, and it looked like Gaddafi would join Hosni Mubarak in the house-arrest zone. Those of us who believe Gaddafi is responsible for killing the 189 Americans who were aboard a Pan Am flight when it was blown out of the sky by a bomb on December 21,1988, were clamoring for a terror trial.

Realizing there was nowhere to hide, Gaddafi stood and fought. His largely African mercenary corps and hardened Arab military fanatics, all well paid by the dictator, have now regained momentum in the battle. Air power has made it difficult for the rebels to advance. There are few trees in Libya, and the vast open spaces make bombing easy.

Thus, there was an early call for a no-fly zone like the one imposed on Saddam Hussein in Iraq. NATO forces could easily destroy Gaddafi’s air power, allowing the rebels a fighting chance to defeat the dictator. The Arab League even endorsed a no-fly strategy, giving Obama cover should he lead the effort. But no such leadership has emerged.

On March 15, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney faced CBS News correspondent Chip Reid:

Reid: On the no-fly zone, what is the administration’s position before the (UN) Security Council?

Carney: Our position remains that we are evaluating a number of options, military options…

Reid: But a decision has to be made now.

Carney: We feel that it is important that any action like that that might be taken should be done in concert with our international partners.

In other words, we are going to fiddle while the greatest procrastinating organization in history, the United Nations, screws around. Meantime, the anti- Gaddafi forces are losing.

The central question is about leadership. What kind of leader does Obama want to be? At this point, it seems he wants to be the “talk not action” guy. When anti-government riots broke out in Iran, the president issued a statement saying the U.S. would not interfere in Iranian affairs. When American generals requested more troops in Afghanistan, the president took months to decide. And now he continues to “deliberate” about Libya while Gaddafi destroys his opposition.

Again, some believe this kind of cautious calculation serves America well. But if we are indeed a nation that values freedom and fights against worldwide terror, why are we not making life hard for Gaddafi?

I hope the president deliberates on that question forthwith.

Veteran TV news anchor Bill O’Reilly is host of the Fox News show “The O’Reilly Factor” and author of the book “Pinheads and Patriots: Where You Stand in the Age of Obama.” To find out more about Bill O’Reilly, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Bill O'Reilly, Creators Syndicate

Bill O'Reilly, Creators SyndicateVeteran TV news anchor Bill O'Reilly is host of the Fox News show "The O'Reilly Factor" and author of many books, including the newly released "Killing Jesus." . This column originates on the website www.billoreilly.com.

More Posts - Website