Friday, February 6, 2009

Foxes vs. hedgehogs

What do liberal presidents have in common with Chassidim? They are always late.

Obama has been routinely late to events and news conferences, including the ones at which he reversed Bush's orders. This has led to an already familiar refrain from the Obama camp: "He's running late."

The president was nearly 30 minutes late Wednesday for the ceremony at which he signed a bill to expand children's health care. He was 10 minutes late Thursday to a memo signing at the Energy Department.

Even before the inauguration, Obama wasn't a punctual sort; he arrived late to a Jan. 8 news conference on the economy that was aired live by broadcast and cable networks.

When it comes to following the clock, Obama closely resembles Bill Clinton, who was famously late to events when he was president. By contrast, Bush despised being late and punctual to a fault. He set the tone early in his presidency -- he arrived at the Capitol five minutes early for his inauguration.

"To me, being tardy, it's got to be one of two things," said presidential historian Doug Wead, who advised both Bush and his father, George H.W. Bush. "Bad organization that can be corrected, or it's arrogance. It sounds to me like this is arrogance."

9 comments:

Tuvia said...

He also has been receiving a lot of slack from people because of his hours. Bush reported to work everyday at 6am and Obama reports between 8-9.

Not sure why people care that much though because the president work 24/7 basically, so who cares?

Crawling Axe said...

I say, the less effective he is at his job, the better.

Tuvia said...

I am not the bigest Obama fan by any stretch, but why would you want him to be less effective?

Even if you don't agree with his tax plans or other stances, what good would him failing as a president be on the already horrible economy?

Crawling Axe said...

When doctors take the oath of Hypocrites, they say: “First, do no harm.” When a doctor is using treatment I don’t is the most effective, I still want him to succeed — after all, the patient will get at least some treatment. But if the doctor is using a procedure that will hurt a patient, I want him to fail — in the process of doing harm.

Anything Obama will attempt to do will only hurt the country. Therefore, I want him to fail at what he is trying to do. I mean, what good would be him succeeding in his plans? “As a president” is too broad a term. He is failing as a president currently.

Crawling Axe said...

I already wrote before that it’s a big mistake to think that in order to help the economy, somebody (namely the government) “should dó something” (said in a raised tone, accompanied with hand wringing motion).

Nobody should “do” anything. What people need to do is get their hands away from regulating the market, and the economy will restore itself.

Tuvia said...

I think its a very tough call. If the car industry did lay off another 20,000 employees then how would the economy turn around? There have been powerful nations in the past that have collapsed, one would hope that the government can help prevent that.

Now some of the stuff in the 350 billion dollar stimulous project makes no sense to me, but some stuff does. Its a very tough call.

Wouldn't you say though that unemployement is the government trying to help the market. They do a lot of stuff that if they didn't do where would we be? If it wasn't for unemployment I dont know what I would have done a couple years ago when I was fired. How would I have survived 2 months with no income.

Crawling Axe said...

It’s a complicated topic. When you are a worker of the company that stopped making profit, of course you want the company to be bailed out. And you don’t care that for every one worker of the company helped, ten other people in the country will get hurt.

Plus there is the moral aspect of it. People are being robbed to have their money thrown away or given to other people.

Regarding unemployment — the idea of charity is nothing unique to the state. Private charity is not only as feasible but better. Of course, not when people have money taken away from them.

The economy today is like a heroin addict. It depends on certain things, which are hurting it at the same time. So, when a heroin addict asks you what he should do, the answer is: ease off drugs slowly, get into rehab, whatever else — but not continue giving heroin, increasing the dose.

Just listen to the audio lecture I linked to a few posts ago. New Deal–type policies will not cure unemployment. They will exacerbate it.

Crawling Axe said...

They do a lot of stuff that if they didn't do where would we be?

Every single thing that the government does would be done better privately.

shmulie said...

This is fun: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ah9W24oMIRc