orielly catch 22 on President

So, recent­ly Bill Oriel­ly, berat­ed the pres­i­dent for not tak­ing action quick­ly enough when the threat of Isis, began to become clear to the media, which is some­thing of an odd­i­ty because usu­al­ly the media are spot on in most sit­u­a­tions, right?

There are some indi­ca­tions or rumors depend­ing on where you stand polit­i­cal­ly, that action should have been tak­en months ago, so there is some­thing to the idea that action should have been tak­en ear­li­er, but what was inter­est­ing was that after two or more weeks of calls for action from every­one.

It final­ly hap­pened, at least more action than what has occurred to date. 

The fun­ny thing is that after wash­ing­ton did take some action Bill, again berat­ed the pres­i­dent for tak­ing too long to take action, which some peo­ple found a lit­tle dis­heart­en­ing.

The catch 22 thing, but was there some­thing to it?

Could be, if you were giv­en a two week notice that hey were going to take some action soon and you moved your resources around then by the time the action hap­pened you might be some­where total­ly dif­fer­ent.

Now that could be dis­turb­ing and it is like­ly exact­ly what may have hap­pened in this case.

The ele­ment of sur­prise can­not be dis­count­ed.

In any action there is the ele­ment of sur­prise and it is the most lucra­tive ele­ment in many cas­es.

Tak­ing action and mak­ing deci­sions must be a quick process and when you fail to do that in a time­ly man­ner some­times it can back­fire and pro­duce lots of stink­ing clouds but not much else.

Per­haps Bill is right, but the prospect of an inde­ci­sive leader is some­thing far more dis­turb­ing.