Thingish Things

Rudderless Ship

Written By: William F. B. O'Reilly - Feb• 16•11

I’m not looking to pick on the President.  It’s not election time yet – quite yet – and he is my President whether I supported him or not in 2008 (I did not). But a statement made by President Obama Wednesday was so excruciatingly lily-livered that not commenting on it would be a crime of omission.

When asked at a White house press conference why he did not propose reforming non-discretionary spending programs like Social Security and Medicare – as his much-hyped bi-partisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform directly challenged him to do 48 days ago – here’s what the President said:

“This is not a matter of, ‘you go first, I go first. It’s a matter of everybody having a serious conversation about where we want to go and then ultimately getting in that boat at the same time so it doesn’t tip over.”

Translation: “Are you out of your mind? I’m not touching those issues. They’re dangerous.  Let the idiots in the House and Senate take the beating.”

The President’s pusillanimous punk-out struck me extra hard because I learned of it while leaving a 100th birthday forum on President Reagan.  In a matter of 15 minutes, I went from “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall,” to a replay of that classic 1974 Hues Corporation hit:

to rock the boat, don’t rock the boat baby
rock the boat, don’t tip the boat over
rock the boat, don’t rock the boat baby
rock the boat-t-t-t-t

Catchy tune, but where is the leadership?

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


  1. Catherine Smith says:

    Couldn’t agree more. Such an excellent way to frame your opinion!

  2. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bill O'Reilly, Bill O'Reilly. Bill O'Reilly said: Obama's Rudderless Ship – via @Shareaholic […]

  3. Your Friend says:

    I’ll bite on this one. I’m willing to bet that if you were advising the President you wouldn’t take the same stance that you do in this post. You have to admit that sometimes a politician will say something for purely political reasons. Call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure that’s true. So you call this lily-livered, while I call it politically adept. I mean, for God’s sake, Social Security polls at a 90% favorable rating who in their right mind is going to come out strong against it? No one. Just like the GOP is mostly saying “changes to entitlements” instead of “gut Social Security.” They’re not being lily-livered either. There’s nothing lily-livered about self-preservation. But I can see how this brought you to you Government Anonymous post. For the record, and for the second time, the primary reform the commission suggested (no direct challenge in the entire report, just suggestions) is reforming Social Security for the wealthy, specifically eliminating their benefits. Where’s the clarion call from the GOP on that issue? Wait. Wait for it… crickets. Nothing but crickets.

  4. Bill says:

    But he had the guts to try.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.