Executive Incompetence

by Sal on July 22, 2009

in Politics

Besides being the head of state and responsible for driving the policy agenda of the Congress, the President’s primary responsibility is to be the chief executive of the government, essentially the Federal Government’s CEO.  Anyone who has worked in business or done any sort of management, whether it be of projects or of people, knows that an executive or manager is responsible for setting forth the agenda to be carried out, and then ensure that the agenda is executed on time and within budget.  Now, the government is (unfortunately) not run like a business, and the executive has little ability to control costs and budget, as that is set by the congress and must be spent, according to a decision by the Supreme Court that occed during the Reagan administration.

However, the President does have control on completing things on-time.  In the past week, three “projects” and deadlines set forth by President Obama have announced significant delays to their completion.  In the first case, Obama had set a deadline for the cabinet departments to find a paltry $100 million in cuts, because the information, according to Press Secretary Gibbs, “is still being compiled.“  In the second case, a plan on what to do with the Gitmo detainees in preparation for closing Gitmo has been delayed for six months until right before the scheduled closing — presumably because Obama doesn’t want to make a politically unpupolar decision during the current health care debate.

This is executive incompetence.  Any good manager should assure that major deadlines are met.  Sure, there is the occasional slip, but for the most part, deadlines in such a visible role such as this should not be delayed by six months.  Obama, who has never run anything in his life, is not able to handle the basic duties of executive government.  Add to the fact that he has been described as not engaged in the policy details of legislation, one has to wonder exactly what Obama is doing over there at the White House?

H/T: Amy Proctor

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Amy Proctor July 24, 2009 at 2:21 am

Well said, SAL.

This is another example of why we tried to warn people about Obama’s lack of governing experience. Sarah Palin had more executive experience, but people scoffed, yet she ran a military, had diplomatic relationships with dozens of foreign nations…..

A senator should never be president. Even John McCain, and I like him very much personally and he is an increbile American hero, wasn’t as qualified as a governor to be president. And Obama, who never authored a bill, only had 18 months experience of pontificating, which is essentially what senators do when they aren’t looking at themselves in the mirror thinking what wonderful president’s they would make.

Reply

Amy Proctor July 24, 2009 at 2:23 am

By the way, my husband’s just finishing up Liberty and Tyranny and I’m reading it next. It’s supposed to be phenominal. Can’t wait…

Reply

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: