Obama talked of the water safety in Flint, Michigan at a town hall meeting. He praised the community effort in helping each other -- citing an elementary school kid raising money, and told the audience this what this nation is great about. Very educational. I feel sorry for kids that are learning math in this country. He emphasized that it is the responsibility of the state and city that the clean water be available for all their citizens. Indeed. Private companies are great for economy, but they can not fix the water pipelines and supply clean water for people. Those people wanting small government should be aware that all services, police, firefighters, schools, and military are public institutes and that we all pay for them. He assured the people that water is safe if it is filtered and demonstrated that by ordering a glass of filtered water there. The people there should not be afraid of stigma, he said, and recommended a doctor's visit.
This is populism. He assured people of the safety, without understanding anything about science nor physiology. What of his assurance! As he told the people they have his back, I can not help thinking how Trump would be assuring people of anything. Or Hillary telling people the water is safe if filtered. People, don't worry, I will be the only one that can solve the problem! Listen, the water is safe, don't worry. What difference does it make? They say the same thing.
But again, they will talk tot he different groups of people; the former with his supporter that trust the famous TV figure that he is not lying. The latter with people that understand her language and gesture with a nod perhaps for those really matter.
This should be a show of leadership as the head of the executive branch. Obama demanded the city and the state must cooperate in solving the issue and the federal money for the state should be used for the damage and the cost of replacement of the water pipeline. Here, the attempt is -- good. That's what he should be doing. The end results? Do we have a President at all?
But again, Could this be happening, however, with Trump, or Hillary? Or, will we ever know of the problem if Trump ignore the problem entirely? What if the media hype just goes away as that the race card annoys people?
This should be leadership as the one responsible for our fiscal matters of the public office. He is telling us how our tax money is spent and what service should we expect from the government, namely, the responsibility of the state and the city. The tax money should be used for the public service indeed. Clean water is a dire necessity, no matter how poor the community is. He talked of declining revenue of the city and the state. How should our tax money be spent anyway? Not for wigs and dresses, not for foreign trips, hopefully like the $1.4B annual spending of Obama White House. What of Trump talking of spending more on nuclear weapons arsenal?
However leadership be defined, the contrast has been very clear between him and what the candidates are saying. They have not been tested, of course. Trump is still a big question mark in terms of his tactics in controlling the Congress or even of his own party. What could ever be his/her leadership? What is the consequence of electing a failed but popular President?
This is populism. He assured people of the safety, without understanding anything about science nor physiology. What of his assurance! As he told the people they have his back, I can not help thinking how Trump would be assuring people of anything. Or Hillary telling people the water is safe if filtered. People, don't worry, I will be the only one that can solve the problem! Listen, the water is safe, don't worry. What difference does it make? They say the same thing.
But again, they will talk tot he different groups of people; the former with his supporter that trust the famous TV figure that he is not lying. The latter with people that understand her language and gesture with a nod perhaps for those really matter.
This should be a show of leadership as the head of the executive branch. Obama demanded the city and the state must cooperate in solving the issue and the federal money for the state should be used for the damage and the cost of replacement of the water pipeline. Here, the attempt is -- good. That's what he should be doing. The end results? Do we have a President at all?
But again, Could this be happening, however, with Trump, or Hillary? Or, will we ever know of the problem if Trump ignore the problem entirely? What if the media hype just goes away as that the race card annoys people?
This should be leadership as the one responsible for our fiscal matters of the public office. He is telling us how our tax money is spent and what service should we expect from the government, namely, the responsibility of the state and the city. The tax money should be used for the public service indeed. Clean water is a dire necessity, no matter how poor the community is. He talked of declining revenue of the city and the state. How should our tax money be spent anyway? Not for wigs and dresses, not for foreign trips, hopefully like the $1.4B annual spending of Obama White House. What of Trump talking of spending more on nuclear weapons arsenal?
However leadership be defined, the contrast has been very clear between him and what the candidates are saying. They have not been tested, of course. Trump is still a big question mark in terms of his tactics in controlling the Congress or even of his own party. What could ever be his/her leadership? What is the consequence of electing a failed but popular President?