Incongruent leadership

Obama’s going to have to be a little more careful walking the talk he’s spouting. Just a couple of days ago we were hearing:

So today, I am asking you to roll up your sleeves and join in the work of remaking this nation. I pledge to you that government will do its part to open up more opportunities for citizens to participate. And in return, I ask you to play your part – to not just pitch in today, but to make an ongoing commitment that lasts far beyond one day, or even one presidency.

And then we were seeing:

But for years the Obama’s have pinched pennies when it came to supporting any charity at all – even his favorite church. Remember this?

Walk and talk. Will they ever align?


  1. Tinkerbell says:

    I concur.

  2. Nope. Not bitter at all.

    Tell me: Can we get a sweat equity Excel chart? Nope? Darn.

    “Walk and talk”? G.W.: National Guard. “Didn’t show up.” Cheney: Vietnam, “Other priorities.”
    Chickenhawks all.

    That’s all from here. Continue undermining.

  3. Umm he is talking about service, not donations. For example when he worked on the south side of Chicago, or their work with Public Allies to name a couple.

    He’s talking about giving of your time and effort not just writing a check.

  4. Tinkerbell says:

    Most people think of the charity triumvirate of time, talent, treasure, according to what one has to offer.

    But Ok, I see your point. They can be looked at individually.

  5. You know, I saw it as “do as I say, not as I do” unless of course, there is a photo op.

    I do believe in a mix of the three – time, talent, and treasure. Is it all there or is it just words?

  6. Randy in Richmond says:

    I know it won’t change but I find it interesting that you on the left hardly ever defend your man but go by the liberal playbook to change the subject and bash someone else. This does nothing to change the facts given above.

    When he worked on the south side of Chicago it was just that–a paid position. As you say ‘their’ work with Public Allies I assume you refer to Michelle Obama. She was Executive Director of the Chicago Chapter of Public Allies–a paid position.
    Using the Public Allies to support a position for the Obamas is akin to me bragging about my days with the Clan.

  7. Randy, everyone knows that nonprofit work doesn’t make you riches, it is enough to survive. But judge as you will.

  8. Want to go down a strange road like “walk and talk” in light of the outgoing administration’s behavior? Then it’s unavoidable to mention the irony.

    “Bash”? I believe the word you mean is “cite.”

    “…you on the left hardly ever defend your man.”

    That statement alone says enough about your oppositional worldview to reveal that your ideology has hardened to dogma; you and I will not engage.

  9. Randy in Richmond says:

    No, you do not cite Bush–you cite the MSM.
    But alas, we do not engage.

  10. When a fact becomes inconvenient, tag it “MSM.”

    Correct – you have not engaged.

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    I’m being criticized because I have an oppositional worldview. I’m so proud. Don’t let it go to my head.

  12. John, where was that citation you described?

  13. “Cite,” as in report a fact, as opposed to “bash,” which is merely rhetorical mischief.

    I can do citations as well (though I can’t believe there is any news here). I’ll pick one for each from the bushels available, knowing full well that anything I cite is merely tainted MSM. 🙂 (I’ve been down this road with you before; “Well, you can’t prove it… ENOUGH.”) Hit the Google (and the bookstore/library) and you’ll see that none of this is “supposition.”

    Cheney’s vigorous avoidance of draft (5 deferments):

    Quote: He [Cheney] told the Washington Post that he had sought his deferments because “I had other priorities in the 60’s than military service.”

    Bush falling short of lowball National Guard commitment:

    (This is the issue that was MASTERFULLY defused by hyping the Dan Rather affair; the provenance of a scrap of paper overshadowed the fact that Bush did indeed fall woefully short of his itty-bitty National Guard commitment.)


    But Bush never signed up with a Boston-area unit. In 1999, Bush spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush finished his six-year commitment at a Boston area Air Force Reserve unit after he left Houston. Not so, Bartlett now concedes. ”I must have misspoke,” Bartlett, who is now the White House communications director, said in a recent interview.

    And early in his Guard service, on May 27, 1968, Bush signed a ”statement of understanding” pledging to achieve ”satisfactory participation” that included attendance at 24 days of annual weekend duty — usually involving two weekend days each month — and 15 days of annual active duty. ”I understand that I may be ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 months for unsatisfactory participation,” the statement reads.

    Yet Bush, a fighter-interceptor pilot, performed no service for one six-month period in 1972 and for another period of almost three months in 1973, the records show.


    So, “walk and talk” is an odd road to go down.

  14. I don’t get your point, John. Neither Bush nor Cheney went on the record telling young American men that they had to serve in the military. There’s not the incongruity you are desperate to prove. Bush SERVED, though the record keeping isn’t to your liking. Cheney was DEFERRED, he didn’t do anything illegal, and like I said, he didn’t demand service of others.

    You’re welcome to share your service record as you’d like.

    So will I get to continue bashing Obama a day after he leaves office?

    John, it’s time for you to find a new hobby.

  15. I am satisfied to leave it at that. Your comment speaks volumes.

  16. Randy in Richmond says:

    Yes, Cheney did have other priorities in the 60’s, as did I. The deferments he received were legal and proper in order to attend college, as mine were.. Millions were issued and it was required to apply and get one each year. The other legal and proper deferment he received was because he was married and his wife was pregnant. If you know how one could receive an improper or illegal deferment, please advise.
    As to President Bush’s Air National Guard service. You describe his commitment as ‘itty-bitty’ and ‘lowball’. This shows your idiocy of this issue because a six year stint was the most one could sign for and the amout served by the great majority of those serving. Very few re-upped. And the only fact that matters now or ever in this unproven story is that on October 1, 1973, George Bush was honorably discharged from the Texas Air Guard. On November 21, 1974 he was discharged from the Air Force Reserve (6 1/2 years after enlisting) . Any question or beef beyond that –take it up with the Guard.
    The specifics of this non story are from 35 year old records, some of which have been lost or destroyed, and 35 year old memories on all sides of the issue that are anything but non-partisan.

  17. For disclosure – I’m pretty sure I was Dad’s deferment. And when it became necessary, I think my brother was another.

    Does it mean the original post hit too close to home that someone worked so hard to move the original subject aside?

  18. I edited this comment – I don’t know what your comment means, Cindy.

  19. Okay Cindy, since everyone else is too ‘scared’ to say it, this does disappoint me.

  20. Something must be missing in the comment thread because now I have no idea to what The Lorax refers.

  21. Nope, I was referring to their lack of charitable giving.

  22. Well, Lorax, you are being exposed to but one metric of charitable giving.