Pundit class completely wrong on Obama's Foreign Policy: Punditry vs the Presidency

[blm]

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/punditry-presidency-article-1.1921882

>>>>>
But for Obama or any American President, doing so effectively means utilizing and properly leveraging the tools at his disposal, being realistic about what U.S. power can achieve, and perhaps above all, avoiding the sort of bold, ostentatious move that pundits love to recommend but rarely do much good.

Despite missteps along the way - in particular, the dreadful 2009 decision to surge 30,000 American troops in Afghanistan - Obama's foreign policy stewardship has increasingly become a model of deliberation and restraint. That approach often produces outcomes that are less than satisfying - but it doesn't mean the underlying policy is unwise.

Ironically, ignoring the chorus of critics persistently calling for the Obama administration to "do something" - and do it quickly - is evidence of the resoluteness that the President is so often accused of lacking.
>>>>

[Jackpine Radical]

1. At least since the days of supposedly "liberal" Walter Lippman

and HL Mencken, the role of pundits has always been to force the views of the Owner Class upon the public.

[underpants]

2. Excellent read

Rec'ing

[blm]

3. It IS a must read, so, of course, it will sink. ; )

Idiocracy dominates the narrative these days.

[underpants]

4. Agreed