You guessed it—there's  video—from O'Reilly's own show. Ouch!
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the
Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 31
Amazing trip through memory lane, William!
(Yes, that's the way baseless rumors get started..)
Yes. Laws. Those things Congress passes and the President either vetoes or not.
As you well know, there are far too many federal laws for the Administration of any President to even attempt to enforce all of them. Therefore, every Administration must "cherry pick" which laws to focus on and which to "let slide." This is one of the valid ways we have to judge a President and an Administration. Of course, big money trumps most of his decisions. :-(
Some specifics such as closing the detention center in Cuba and releasing or trying in a court of law with full due process the inmates. But mostly, a willingness to consider unorthodox solutions to our problems. It seems to me, from his publicized actions and his selections of advisers and major appointments that he is wedded to the orthodox. His motive for this matters not to me. The end result is that there will be no solutions since the orthodox has always failed in the past and the orthodox is what has brought us to our current set of major problems.
I would also point out that I see socialism and capitalism as being equally orthodox and equally inadequate to our situation. I see communism as a failed dream practical only in very small groups. The state is not the solution nor is an appeal to "return" to the Constitution which has never protected us in the past.
Been there, done that, have the t-shirt. In both cases you cite, the impediment was the fear of the people, not the will of the president. This will be the focus of one of my next posts. No one wants to take responsibility for the way things are. It is always someone else's fault. I can't subscribe to that way of thinking. It seems fairly clear to me that Obama tries hard to govern from consensus, when he can find it—tempered by a long-term vision. This is what I saw on the campaign trail and what I've seen mostly as president.
Since I am opposed to governing, you would have to say I was opposed to governing from consensus. I would also be opposed to unilateral governing by anyone, including me. Just because there is a broad consensus (by even 80% of the population) does not mean that what they want done is the right thing to do.
I don't care what a President's motives are. I care what he actually does. Any President that bases his decisions on consensus is asking for failure and trouble. "Conventional wisdom" is frequently wrong.
Now trying to get people to go along with the President's decisions is just fine. But those decisions should be made without allowing what the general public thinks to determine anything.
Taken another way, though, it is a good thing to get ideas from where ever they might be found. The general public can be a very fruitful source of "outside the box" concepts. (Most are downright silly but they do give different points of view and that's very important in finding solutions and some are brilliant.)
Such lack of confidence is not only political but has many economic feedbacks as well.
Some Marines have risk their lives and because there was no other witnesses than themselves, people deny their ability to succeed, just because of paranoia instated by former government.
Some are already stating that DNA is not even a proof as if DNA was not personal even if related to a group.
Obama had done the one thing that Bush, despite his bluster and tough talk, could not do— take out America’s Public Enemy Number One, the world’s preeminent symbol of terror. In one fell, and spectacular, swoop, Obama has rudely shattered the myth that’s been a key weapon in the GOP arsenal for decades: that a Democratic president was incapable of waging a tough and effective war on terrorism. Go Obama!
This thing that Obama has some purpose and serious work as President, and it shows once again the foolishness of Bill O'Reilly.
Vicente
Nice work if you can get it. Not highly productive usually, but there are exceptions. Rachel Maddow being one.
Yes, they are my heroes :
Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz, Mike Papantonio, Chris Matthews. And some others.
Vicente