Skip to main content

Whitehouse Blog

I thought President Obama's inaugural speech was a little disappointing when read for substance from afar, although I can imagine that it might have seemed more uplifting in person. I think the Wall Street Journal got it right in their pre-inaugural "The Opacity of Hope" editorial as they concluded:
"The complicated nature of our world means that every modern Presidency is to some extent a leap into the unknown. Mr. Obama's meteoric rise makes him a bigger leap than most. We don't know if he is a genuine man of the left, or a more traditional pragmatist. The audacity of our hope is that as President he will use his considerable talents to return his party to the policies of growth, opportunity and the vigorous defense of U.S. interests that marked it the last time the country had such great expectations for a Democratic President -- under JFK."
To me, Obama didn't start well with his first official act being this rather vague and plainly accusatory proclamation. The idea of a "National Day of Renewal and Reconciliation" suggesting that we have a "glorious burden" to take on after we reconcile ourselves to our past sins seems more than a little over the top. I'm sorry, but I don't think everything will be OK if we just say we're sorry for whatever was meant by discord and leave it to the Dem's to "remake this nation" into a welfare state while Obama provides aircover from critisim from the moral high ground of the bully pulpit of a black President.

I did like the new WhiteHouse.gov site and the new blog. Let's hope the Obama administration gets over this initial theatrical thing, and gets down to business with as transparent and fresh an approach as is exhibited here.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DouglasRoss.com

Network Solutions is having a sale on URL's. Mine (http://www.douglasross.com) doesn't do anything at the moment (I'm saving it for a rainy day) but it was coming up on ten years and I needed to renew it to protect my name. So I decided to take them up on their pay-in-advance 20 year package sale for $279.00 or $13.95 per year (about half of the regular annual fee...probably not that good a deal in hindsight.) But the kicker was, after I hit the pay button it dawned on me that I'll be over 83 years old when this thing expires. How creepy is that? If I make it I'll take it as a good sign and re-up for another 20 years. And by then maybe I'll have done something with it.
Post a Comment
Read more

Climate Change and Open Science - WSJ.com

This Wall Street Journal article Climate Change and Open Science - WSJ .com made the right basic point about liberal hypocrisy in the Climate Change debate, but disappointingly it failed to cite the best sources of real information from an unbiased scientific point of view. I believe that source is Dr. S. Fred Singer & Dr. Craig D. Idso , from the Science and Environmental Policy Project and Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, who coauthored "Climate Change Reconsidered; The Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change" published in 2009. In this book, the petition letter shown here from Dr. Frederick Seitz ( Ph . D. Physics) President Emeritus of Rockefeller University was published. Dr. Seitz circulated this letter: urging fellow academics with qualifications in the physical sciences to sign the petition at http://www.petitionproject.com/ and thereby acknowledge their agreement with this statement in the petition: Accor...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Evolving Internet: A look ahead to 2025 by Cisco and the Monitor Group's Global Business Network

My employer (Cisco) published its most recent forward looking study of the Internet today. It's called " The Evolving Internet: A look ahead to 2025 by Cisco and the Monitor Group's Global Business Network " and although I haven't studied it in detail yet, I scanned it this morning and I liked what I saw. Those who know me will not be surprised that I particularly liked the three dimensional evaluation criteria that they used to frame their analysis. Lately nearly everything I do ends up finding its way into some sort of analytical cube like this. I've been wondering whether there is something wrong with me that I can't seem to frame things simply in two dimensions. Glad to have company.
Post a Comment
Read more