And this means what?
It's a pretty easy call to drop a trivial recreational activity to be with a friend whose kid has been hurt. That has nothing to do with being president.
Waiting to address the nation on volatile topic until more facts are known — especially when no serious damage was done and all the implications of the act have to be addressed — seems reasonable to me.
Equating them seems pretty superficial.
You may well be right, Charlie, that he was waiting for more facts. But all the facts he cited in his address were available on Friday night, when everyone was reporting it.
Policy from President Barack Obama has never been fast.
I don't think we will ever see anything, publicly, happen faster than 48 hours from him, not sure if that is good or bad.
Over the weekend I read an excellent analysis of how the Obama adminstration responded appropriately, not using the bully pulpit because they didn't want to over dramatize a failed airliner bombing attempt.
Now we learn that TSA has been without an administrator because Republican Senator Jim DeMint put a hold on Erroll Southers, Obama's very highly qualified nominee. DeMint's hold is over the possibility that TSA employees might be allowed to join a union. This has nothing to do with Southers' qualifications. Once again the Republican party has put politics before national security.
Are we better served when the President helps publicize attacks on this country? Or are we better served when both parties work together to make this country safer, and try to avoid unnecessarily sensationalizing every little attack?
//try to avoid unnecessarily sensationalizing every little attack?
One man's sensationalizing is another's pointing out the incompetence.. This incident, in addition to the Northwest flight that forgot to land, are tests of our security system -- a system that demanded the creation of a new bureaucracy, billions of dollars and -- some would argue -- the cancellation of some previously recognized civil rights.
That system failed and while there might be some political points to be gained because a TSA administrator wasn't in place, it more likely failed because of a series of incompetent actions at a much lower level.
//One man's sensationalizing is another's pointing out the incompetence.
Isn't that usually best done AFTER all the facts have emerged, and not in the heat of the moment?
I'm not trying to defend TSA, a worthless organization plagued by extreme managerial incompetency since day one.
No, much as I have come to hate defending Obama (a centrist who has bitterly disappointed me since taking office), I believe his administration is correct in assuming that the impact of terrorism is magnified when the President personally stops everything to make a statement every time some moron burns off his privates trying to blow up a plane.
Of course, there really wasn't anything to the statement. "I've ordered a thorough review," "we'll fight terrorism" etc. etc. etc.
Obama is speaking at 4 pm and will disclose new information about the case.
Sorry about accidentally using two different posting names, btw.