March 27, 2009 7:58 AM
Obama - the campaign that never ends
From Family Research Council:
Obama Returns to Old Stumping Grounds
President Obama settled on a transition team--but so far, very little transition. In his first 65 days in office, relatively nothing about the President's operating style has changed. The Oval Office acts more as an extension of Obama's political headquarters than the working space of America's chief executive. As he did pre-November 4, the campaigner-in-chief has gone full throttle with hands-on community organizing and his team's winning email marketing scheme. He still schedules online townhall meetings at the White House and reaches out to Americans through the late-night talk show circuit.
When Washington seems unreceptive to his agenda, this President, as he did Tuesday night at his second primetime press conference, takes to a familiar posture--stumping for his controversial proposals. He drifted in and out of grassroots rally mode, straying only occasionally from his prepared remarks. When he did veer off script for questioning, the result was noticeably different. At one point, when he was asked about his decision to fund embryonic stem cell experimentation, President Obama seemed to miss the teleprompter's help. For a brief moment, it looked like he was grappling for the right words to describe "life at conception" and instead settled on "human life science."
Jon Ward of the Washington Times, who posed the question (the only social topic of the night), asked how much the President struggled with the morality of funding this kind of research, especially given the success of adult stem cells. Obama responded that he did wrestle with it, just as he "wrestles with... abortion." He said, "I am glad to see progress is being made in adult stem cells... [M]y hope is that we can find a mechanism ultimately to cure diseases in a way that gains a hundred percent consensus."
The President's statement suggests that he is either ignorant of the sweeping success of ethical alternatives or (more likely) he is committed to pursuing his misguided agenda no matter what the scientific results.
In one of the more surprising revelations of the night, the President was unapologetic about his plan to clamp down on tax deductions for charitable giving, an idea unpopular with almost everyone. "I think it's the right thing to do," he said of stripping close to $7 billion a year from charities and redirecting it to the federal government. As Martin Feldstein writes in today's Washington Post, the new tax rule would make an already bad environment worse for charities. The President, on the other hand, sees it differently. "If we're going to tackle the serious problems we've got, then...those who are more fortunate are going to have to pay a little bit more." The biggest difference between candidate Obama and President Obama may be that he now has the power to make these plans possible.
Posted in Obama Nation | Permalink
Comments
Give more? Does he not understand that his plan is going to cause people to give LESS?? How many people are only able to give as much as they do because of the tax break? How many people (unfortunately) only care to give because of it?
Posted by: Michelle Potter | March 27, 2009 3:17 PM
"If we're going to tackle the serious problems we've got, then...those who are more fortunate are going to have to pay a little bit more."
But if you remove incentives to give to charity, won't that force those who are less fortunate to pay more as well?
Posted by: Peony Moss | March 27, 2009 4:13 PM
Not to mention that most of those the left calls "fortunate" are not really FORTUNATE (lucky) at all; they have worked hard for what they have and have been good stewards of their wealth. How does that entitle the government to their wealth?
Posted by: Marisa | March 27, 2009 9:25 PM
