In 2008 candidate Barack Obama stated that he would go after Osama bin Laden even if he was found in Pakistan. Mitt Romney, among others said that they did not think it was a good idea to go into Pakistan to get bin Laden. In 2011 Mitt Romney has stated multiple times that he would go after Bid Bird and cut his funding. It seems that Big Bird needs to relocate to Pakistan if Romney becomes President. What a contrast.
Maybe Romney thinks that singling out a beloved children’s character like Big Bird is an example of how he can make tough choices even if it sounds harsh. Romney’s calculation is based upon this notion that government support for effort like children’s television programming, education or the arts is a waste of money because there is no profit in it for his supporters. Obama targeted Osama bin Laden because he was the head of an organization that carried out the largest terrorist attack ever in the United States.
Defunding PBS would just be a blip in the national budget and would be mostly a move to pleas certain elements on the right. Expending government funds on children’s and art programming does not generate billions business in government contracts for defense contractors even if some of the weapons are not wanted by the military.
You see there is something more fundamental at work in the Big Bird versus bin Laden point of view and that is the degree of seriousness that each candidate is taking in relation to the job at hand. Fast talk, showmanship and throwing out red meat to a political base makes for great theater, but the rubber meets the road on what each man considers to be the most important issues for the country. Saving the automobile industry or allowing it to go bankrupt when there was no private equity to be found is another distinction
The bottom line is that Osama bin Laden was in trouble when Barack Obama became President, but now Big Bird had better watch his back if Mitt Romney moves into the oval office.
Maybe Romney thinks that singling out a beloved children’s character like Big Bird is an example of how he can make tough choices even if it sounds harsh. Romney’s calculation is based upon this notion that government support for effort like children’s television programming, education or the arts is a waste of money because there is no profit in it for his supporters. Obama targeted Osama bin Laden because he was the head of an organization that carried out the largest terrorist attack ever in the United States.
Defunding PBS would just be a blip in the national budget and would be mostly a move to pleas certain elements on the right. Expending government funds on children’s and art programming does not generate billions business in government contracts for defense contractors even if some of the weapons are not wanted by the military.
You see there is something more fundamental at work in the Big Bird versus bin Laden point of view and that is the degree of seriousness that each candidate is taking in relation to the job at hand. Fast talk, showmanship and throwing out red meat to a political base makes for great theater, but the rubber meets the road on what each man considers to be the most important issues for the country. Saving the automobile industry or allowing it to go bankrupt when there was no private equity to be found is another distinction
The bottom line is that Osama bin Laden was in trouble when Barack Obama became President, but now Big Bird had better watch his back if Mitt Romney moves into the oval office.
No comments:
Post a Comment