Shutdown showed lack of leadership by president

Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Text Size: A | A

Shutdown showed lack of leadership by president

At last, after a standoff lasting nearly two-and-a-half weeks, Congress got its act together. The government shutdown has ended, and hundreds of thousands of federal workers are making money and again contributing to the economy.

Thank you, Congress, for doing what we elected you to do.

The fact that the government shutdown happened, it turned into a bitter battle over Obamacare, and the United States almost defaulted on our debt is an extreme embarrassment to both the Republican and the Democratic Party.

I place the majority of the blame for these embarrassing developments on President Obama. When the initial debate over the government shutdown began, President Obama said, in his own words, “I will not negotiate.”

Negotiating is a characteristic, and a requirement, for leadership. A man or woman, regardless of race, political views or sexual preference, should be ready to negotiate when they are in a position of leadership. When they don’t, then it should be obvious: Vote the person out.

I do applaud the Republicans who took a stand against the implementation of Obamacare. Annually, it will draw $741 billion from Medicare, a service depended upon by millions that has been quite effective in assisting the poor with health care coverage.

Does America really want to replace an effective and successful system with a potentially disastrous one? The government should not be able to force its people to pay for the medical care of others under a government-mandated health system. That is leading the country on the path to socialized medicine, a path the United States of America does not want to take.

In the Declaration of Independence, it says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Notice, among these rights, government-mandated public health care is not among them.

Ian Randall


Review too critical of ‘Mornings at Seven’

Re Oct. 20 article, “Cast can’t save outdated ‘Morning’ ”: Amy Durant saw no redeeming social or artistic value in the Civic Player’s current production “Mornings at Seven.” She also, albeit “with regret,” advises potential patrons to give it a pass. I disagree with that

It is the kind of play that could be a charming period piece if it had a more focused theme and a stronger plot, and yes, it is “talky” and long. But I did not hear complaints except those called for by the script on stage.

The sets are wonderful, the costumes are perfect and the actors overcome the essential faults in the script — which much as Ms. Durant would like to chop is not a tradition in legitimate theater.

Everyone sees someone they know in the all-too-human characters. Today as then, many extended, mixed and blended “families” live in close proximity, just as do these four sisters in those “hard times.” Likewise, many contemporary folk find themselves in of the same annoyances, dependencies and misunderstandings that create both noteworthy kindnesses along with small-minded meanness. Intimacy can do that.

Although Ms. Durant moans that “what would seem shocking in 1939 barely fazes audiences now,” there is something very contemporary in the dilemma in which the incipient young couple find themselves!

The young woman who hopes for marriage and a home is more than a giggling, simpering newcomer. The Lane character manifests the cunning of a tightrope artist as she navigates this weird, yet strangely familiar “family.”

I hope people will find that this production is worth the price of a ticket and the time to evaluate for themselves.

Betty Pieper


Share story: print print email email facebook facebook reddit reddit


October 30, 2013
6:26 a.m.
wmarincic says...

The most divisive President in history. Cutting our military, supporting terrorists in Lybia and Egypt. Destroying relations with our allies. Now this transfer of money being forced into a medical plan. I believe it was his plan all along to destroy America from within. He said he would fundamentally change America, and he is, he is changing us from a free society to a socialist society. Read how Hugo Chaves did the same thing in only a few years in Venenzualla.

October 30, 2013
8:42 p.m.
ChuckD says...

Mr. Randall seems to conveniently forget the historical (if not hysterical) record Republicans set in filibustering this president when he blames him for 'not negotiating'.
He also conveniently forgets the 43 (or is it 44?) Republican attempts to kill the ACA knowing full well they could not succeed. And he complains about wasting of money? And he "applauds them for taking a stand"? (see: Little Bighorn)
He also apparently feels a health care system that leaves tens of millions out in the cold with no healthcare but the emergency room, in the greatest county on earth, can be called "effective and successful".
Mr. Randall makes noise like a mindless mouthpiece of the mindless rightwing media (who doesn't earn the right to call themselves Conservative).

October 31, 2013
2:40 p.m.
wmarincic says...

ChuckD, well it seems like the Tea Party were the smart ones. Lets have that Senate vote today. I guess the 20 million that are losing their current insurance and the 60 million that will pay up to 400% of what they are currently paying is OK with you too. You continue to make noise like the liberal socialist you are. All hail King Obama...

October 31, 2013
5:53 p.m.
ChuckD says...

...and only the Gadsden flag wavers think so.
Again with numbers pulled out of your...hat. Have many received cancellations? It would appear so. Has this president lied? I, who tends to give people the benefit of the doubt, say he totally botched the selling of this, and it's not the first time. I'm not going to engage in your Whack-a-Mole numbers stuff except to say that I believe many will be entitled a better policy and more cheaply. That may sound like talking points but it's also an important part of the story.
Also I would note that the left wing talking machines are pulling no punches over this. Sadly the right takes much longer to be so introspective, otherwise you might find we have a lot in common.

November 1, 2013
4:41 p.m.
wmarincic says...

So ChuckD, you don't believe that allowing people to buy across state lines is a better alternative? Put a percentage of premiums in a pool so that those without insurance can have insurance? Obama knew he was lying, don't think for a second that he didn't. His leftist mouthpieces continue to say that we can keep our insurance and our doctors. Well, as long as not one single part of our insurance ever changes and if that happens we are out. Puuuleeeese.

Log-in to post a comment.

columnists & blogs

Log into

Forgot Password?