Obama worthy of other titles
For some reason, many people fawn over what they say are the amazing things the Obama Administration has done. This, of course, disregards the Benghazi fiasco, the IRS scandal, the Fast and Furious gun deal, the lack of VA oversight or punishment for VA miscreants, the illegal immigration hemorrhage, the false promises regarding our health providers or premiums under ObamaCare, and other underwhelming “achievements.”
I think it only fitting we offer him more titles. How about “The Great Panderer,” who gives bread-and-circus handouts to the masses? (Approximately 52 percent of us pay taxes; close to Mitt Romney's 47 percent who don't.)
Or maybe “Fundraiser-in-Chief,“ who conducts political junkets while Ukraine and the Middle East are in turmoil? (He's done twice as many fundraisers as Bush.)
Maybe we should just call him “Nerobama,” combining him with the other leader who fiddled while the country burned.
Our European allies are lukewarm, we're alienating Israel, we have knee-jerk reactions to every crisis instead of being proactive, and foreign thugs — from Russian President Vladimir Putin to the ISIS terrorists — realize this administration is a paper tiger.
If this is the best that we can get, then I'll stay in the “Party of No” and the Democrat Kool-Aid drinkers can keep The Party of 0 (or is that, “zer-O?”)
The writer is a former Leechburg resident.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.