http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2009/06/23/abcs-jake-tapper-hits-obama-specifics-health-care-plan

Of course, it will still take more than Jake Tapper and Major Garrett to indicate a change in the attitude of reporters toward Obama. I think the title of this post is premature, as much as I wish it were true. Most of the articles I see in the press do everything they can to hide inconvenient facts, make the opposition look bad, and remind us just how virtuous Obama is.

Holy Smokes

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/06/023881.php

But then, I’ve followed some damned good leaders, in dangerous times, and believe I proved to be a good leader myself when the opportunity was there.
But I never saw “Hesitation” from a leader as impressive, and strove to be prepared as much as possible for my own challenges as a leader.
So we now have a “Consistently hesitant” Leader of the Free World?
Wow, I’m comforted now…………….not.

“He seemed in command.”? Are you still allowing yourself to be fooled by Obama’s obvious masquerade as a leader?

“Nothing is more deceitful than the appearance of humility. It is often only carelessness of opinion, and sometimes an indirect boast.”

Jane Austen

I wasn’t asking about consistency in his attitude. I agree he has been consistently hesitant to say anything – extremely hesitant.

As you think about it, consider these two statements by obama:

Last week, Obama said:

“We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran. Whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact there has been a robust debate hopefully will advance our ability to engage them in new ways.”

After the protests began, he said:

Well, I think first of all, it’s important to understand that although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, that the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised. Either way, we were going to be dealing with an Iranian regime that has historically been hostile to the United States, that has caused some problems in the neighborhood and is pursuing nuclear weapons.

So was there a “robust debate” or not? Did the election represent anything significant? Does Obama know that the elections are not free, since almost everyone who tries to run is disqualified?

First, he says the election was important. Then he says it wasn’t so important. For a week he was nearly silent on the Iranian protests. Now he tells the Iranian rulers that they must govern by consent, not cercion. Does he have any idea that the Iranian rulers CANNOT rule by consent and that they ONLY rule by coercion?

He wants to broker his big nuclear deal with the Iranian rulers and all these protests for liberty are getting in the way.

He’s one confused boy.