Should Michelle Obama be
the president?

0
Have your say

From: Nigel Boddy, Fife Road, Darlington.

BARACK Obama’s first term as President of the United States has been characterised by opposition from Congress almost before he started. No matter what President Obama has proposed the Republicans have opposed him.

As he enters a second term as President, these self-same Republicans will oppose him even more. They will try to characterise him as a lame duck President who cannot now run again. An amendment to the American Constitution prevents any President running for a third term. If Michelle Obama now began her own bid for the White House then this would do more to silence Mr Obama’s opponents in Congress than anything else.

The prospect of Mrs Obama continuing her husband’s agenda past 2016 would make the Republicans see they have waited in vain. Their obstruction to any and all ideas the White House proposes will therefore be seen for what it is, a ridiculous sham motivated by personal animosity to a black man.

A Draft Michelle campaign alone would do more to silence Barack Obama’s critics and get them to think of the country, than anything else. She would not even have to win the Democratic Party nomination for President. The fact she was running alone would bring forth compromise and conciliation from the Republicans in Congress.

If they don’t they will cease to have any relevance to the voters. I hope the Republicans start thinking of the big picture. They have been highly irresponsible. The future of the world is at stake. Compromise is necessary as a part of politics. Congress must remember that.

Hypocrisy over fire cuts

From: John Cole, Oakroyd Terrace, Baildon.

I HAVE been a paid-up Liberal Democrat since the 1980s and had always expected my party to carry a torch for honesty, decency and truth.

However, I am profoundly disappointed by their literature headlined “Labour’s fire station shame” which centres round the West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service’s plans to close 11 fire stations (while opening a number of replacements).

This rationalisation has been forced on the Fire Service by the significant reductions (present and anticipated) in funding which the service receives from central government.

If Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs at Westminster take a budget decision to reduce funding to the West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority, then they are in no position to come back to the county and bitch about particular fire station closures in their own constituencies. They need to live with the consequences of their national decisions and maintain a degree of consistency.

Officers at Fire Service HQ Birkenshaw, have bust their gut to provide the best service possible within the reduced means which Eric Pickles makes available. It is sheer hypocrisy for those same coalition MPs and councillors to “shroud wave”, quoting longer attendance times when this is the outcome of a worse national funding settlement.

The general public should be reassured that most of the increases in response times are marginal and, on balance, despite funding reductions, West Yorkshire is set to become a safer place.

Where do we go from here?

From: David W. Wright, Uppleby, Easingwold, North Yorkshire.

JOHN Watson (Yorkshire Post, October 30) has clearly stated the ills of the UK in his excellent letter and poses the question of how and when do we return to normality and common sense.

In addition to the ills that he has highlighted are examples of even more “cultures” that are bringing the UK to its knees such as blame, human rights, political correctness, endless legislation and regulation from the EU, our obsession with global warming and the desecration of our countryside with inefficient and ugly wind turbines.

And who will change this situation? Not our current bunch of politicians. So where do we go from here?

Give Richard proper burial

From: GA Smith, High Street, Boston Spa, Wetherby.

further to the archaeological dig that has found what may be the remains of Richard III (Yorkshire Post, October 30), suddenly MPs are on the bandwagon – claiming the bones for their constituencies, no doubt with a view to tourism. How tawdry is that?

At the time of his death Richard had no choice as to the place of his burial and Leicester’s enthusiasm for possession of the bones makes me wonder why they didn’t dig up the car park years ago.

Here we may have the remains of a good king who was so liked 
in York that the council spoke well of him after his death, braving the wrath of the usurper Henry VII. Richard himself is on record as wanting to be buried in York. Surely in common decency that is what should happen.

How can it be within the power of here today, gone tomorrow politicians to dictate the burial place of an English king?

Back to the top of the page