http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/03/opinion/03brooks.html?_r=1
At point in the article, I couldn't hold back a grin when it said that Obama had apparently put up signs throughout the Whitehouse that said, "No Quick Fixes". I thought:
'Imagine... You're going to an important meeting where you'll be talking to the head of the FBI about the need for immediate changes in gun protocol for agents, and suddenly you see a sign on the door that you're about to open. It says, No Quick Fixes. You think, 'Am I in the right place?' and then hesitatingly open the door, wondering what awaits you on the other side, and hoping he doesn't yell at you when you give him the paper in your hand.'
Anyway, I digress.
I have to admit, I like Obama's idea that we can't solve our economy with "quick-fixes" (such as bailouts for companies that are going belly up). He sees that we need to have something long-term that will help us for future generations, ensuring that our children don't have to go through the same thing that we did.
However, I have to question a couple of things that he's doing. He had the choice between health care and energy reform...and he chose energy first? I mean, seriously. People can survive on candles and boiling water if they have to, but they can't survive without healthcare that they can't afford. I think his plans are good, but his priorities are just slightly confused.
OR
No comments:
Post a Comment