A chilling thought, but one that has passed through my mind as well:
Via the Tatler:
This picture from today’s Wall Street Journal reminded me that this is what you don’t get, when you have regular elections with honest results — and a resulting government which responds to the people’s wishes.
And then I thought back to the President’s State of the Union address last week and went: Uh-oh.
Obama has called on Egypt to create a "government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people".
Obama also said, in regards to the revolt underway in Egypt, "Governments have an obligation to respond to their citizens.”
Would be that the president would put those words into action in America, where clear majorities are opposed to ObamaCare, cap and trade, and spending themselves and their children into bankruptcy.
If Obama does not fulfill what even he sees as the basic obligation of government - to respond to the wishes of the citizenry - are we too justified in taking to the streets to remove his regime?
UPDATE 5:00 PM: Related, over at The Corner:
Does anyone else see the irony of the president last night calling on a country in the middle of a political crisis to allow for open access to information and a free media … and then today holding a stills-only event in the Oval Office for a bill signing? A bill signing?! And for a treaty that they called a major signature foreign-policy achievement? C’mon...
Jake Tapper notes the hypocrisy:
The White House Correspondents Association protested the White House’s decision to refuse to permit reporters access to the event, in addition to the dearth of press briefings since the crisis in Egypt began to unfold, a crisis in which President Obama continues to celebrate the great freedoms and openness enjoyed in this country...
Oh, Jake. You've worked with this guy long enough; can't you see the disconnect he has between saying something, and doing something?