The Obama Presidency - 2008 & 2012

[DaddyTorgo]

ALRIGHT JON - SETTLE THIS!!!!

WHO'S YOUR MOUNT RUSHMORE OF WORST PRESIDENTS

[Butter]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

ALRIGHT JON - SETTLE THIS!!!!

WHO'S YOUR MOUTH RUSHMORE OF WORST PRESIDENTS

What the hell is Mouth Rushmore?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

What the hell is Mouth Rushmore?

well played. Fixed.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I'd be curious who your worst president in history is. EDIT: My guess would be Carter but I'm not certain it'd be right

Spot on.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Although it's probably fair to say that I'm judging him on the context of his entire body of work, including the post-Presidency phase.

[JonInMiddleGA]

And for the double dolla ... the whole Lincoln vs FDR for 3rd & 4th place. Yikes.
That's the sort of question that might keep me awake at nights trying to decide.

My instinct is to lean toward Lincoln 3rd since, without him, FDR's damage might not have even been possible.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And for the double dolla ... the whole Lincoln vs FDR for 3rd & 4th place. Yikes.
That's the sort of question that might keep me awake at nights trying to decide.

My instinct is to lean toward Lincoln 3rd since, without him, FDR's damage might not have even been possible.

If I were to put an aggressively active and "successful" Lincoln and FDR among the worst, I would find it hard to put, by comparison, a passive and ineffective Obama and Carter above them.

I tend to think any president can, and should, be on a worst list. Just for the fact that we know pretty much everything they did and thought everyday of their presidency, there's bound to be some awful stuff they did and believed.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

If I were to put an aggressively active and "successful" Lincoln and FDR among the worst, I would find it hard to put, by comparison, a passive and ineffective Obama and Carter above them.

I tend to think any president can, and should, be on a worst list. Just for the fact that we know pretty much everything they did and thought everyday of their presidency, there's bound to be some awful stuff they did and believed.

Looking at my rank order I really wondered whether I was being unduly influenced by recency. I tentatively settled on "probably, but with at least some reasoning behind it".

The longer a nation endures, the larger it's net worth (for lack of a better phrase on a tired & sleepy Friday afternoon). There's more at risk to be damaged in other words.

Yeah, this unexpected sidebar has me totally wondering if I should revise my rankings (even my logic behind Lincoln "ahead" of FDR would seem to support a revision).

Harumph. Assholes, the lot of you

I'm too tired & in too bad of a mood today to contemplate this as much as it deserves.

[molson]

I googled "mouth rushmore". Found many people making a spelling error, and absolutely zero president-themed porn. Bummer.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by molson

I googled "mouth rushmore". Found many people making a spelling error, and absolutely zero president-themed porn. Bummer.

Wow. Epic fail by the internet.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Wow. Epic fail by the internet.

I'm kind of stunned, to be honest. So much for rule 36.

[Edward64]

I guess its about to become Gulf War 3 sometime soon.

It would be nice if we get a lot of credit and goodwill in squashing ISIS and the Iraqi Sunni's (it is predominantly the Sunni's I think) but that never seems to work out in the Muslim world.

If Obama can pull this off, form a coalitions where we support the Iraqi's and Kurd's to fight the ground war and successfully degrades ISIS, I think it'll be a good precedence.

BBC News - Islamic State crisis: Australia to send 600 troops to UAE

Australia says it is sending 600 troops to the Middle East ahead of possible combat operations against Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott said the deployment, initially to the United Arab Emirates, was in response to a specific US request.

Nearly 40 countries, including 10 Arab states, have signed up to a US-led plan to tackle the extremist group.

France is hosting a regional security summit on Monday.

US Secretary of State John Kerry arrived in Paris late on Saturday after a four-day tour of the Middle East trying to drum up support for action against IS.

Last week, US President Barack Obama presented a strategy to fight the group in both Iraq and Syria.

Speaking on Sunday, Prime Minister Abbott said Iraq had made it clear that it would "very much welcome" a military contribution to restore security.
:
He said the force, which will also include up to eight Super Hornet fighter jets, was part of "an international coalition" not simply an "American-Australian operation".

Mr Abbott said no decision had yet been taken to commit the forces, which will begin deploying next week, to combat action.

The announcement comes two days after Australia raised its terrorism threat level from medium to high.
:
One country not attending is Iran, which voiced its unhappiness at not being on the "selective guest list" by dismissing the talks as "just for show".

"What would interest Iran is a real fight against terrorism in the region and around the world, not this selective one," deputy foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian told state television.

On Friday, Mr Kerry said the US would not be seeking the involvement of Iran in its coalition because of its "engagement in Syria and elsewhere".

Iran has backed the government of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria, while the US and several European and Gulf countries have supported the rebel factions fighting to overthrow him.
:
The US has already carried out more than 150 air strikes in northern Iraq. It has also sent hundreds of military advisers to assist Iraqi government and Kurdish forces, but has ruled out sending ground troops.

[Dutch]

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of a team
Everything is awesome, when we're living our dream

Blue skies, bouncy springs
We just named you awesome things
A nobel prize, a piece of string
You know what's awesome, EVERYTHING

[JPhillips]

Who's in for the mine detecting dolphins? There's no coalition without mine detecting dolphins.

[Edward64]

I'm okay with this. This is pretty clear cut to me that the US is only one of a few countries that can make a real difference. I hope its really a plan and execution vs just money. Definitely a humanitarian crisis but national security seems to overplay it (unless it goes airborne I guess).

Obama to dispatch millions of dollars to fight Ebola | MSNBC

President Barack Obama is expected on Tuesday to increase U.S. aid to combat Ebola by sending thousands of personnel and millions of dollars to West Africa.

The president could dispatch as many as 3,000 military personnel to assist in training new health care workers and building treatment clinics in the countries affected by the deadly virus. The U.S. Department of Defense will allocate $500 million for the effort. Some of the funds will be used to construct 17 new treatment centers, each with 100 beds, and 10,000 sets of protective equipment and supplies to help 400,000 families protect themselves from the epidemic that continues to spread.

The U.S. government previously asked Congress for $88 million, after first promising or spending $175 million in fighting the virus in the African countries of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone. Officials aren’t taking the funds from an established budget, but Congress can divert the money from emergency legislation.
:
“I support these efforts to contain the Ebola epidemic, and know that we will monitor this humanitarian crisis in the weeks ahead,” McConnell said in a statement.
:
The epidemic is a “top national security priority for the United States,” White House officials said in a statement. More than 2,400 people have died recently from the outbreak, and nearly 5,000 other people have been infected with the disease, according to the most recent figures from WHO. As many as 20,000 additional individuals could be infected within a few months.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I think the "national security" part is overdoing it. The thing that draws me up short most here though is putting 3,000 military personnel at increased risk for minimal U.S. interests.

[PilotMan]

The thing that cracks me up is how there has been a discussion about fast tracking the experimental medication for Ebola and bypassing some of the FDC hurdles to get it approved. Sounds just like Phalanx in WW-Z.

[Blackadar]

Let's see...uninsured rate drops to the lowest level since they started doing this version of the survey back in 1997:

Uninsured Rate Drops To Lowest Level Since The '90s

[CraigSca]

Interesting blog posting by Phil Birnbaum on income equality and its rate of change: Sabermetric Research

[JonInMiddleGA]

As good a thread for this as any I guess:

re: Biden's "shylocks" gaffe

I don't know that I ever consciously thought of that word -- in modern usage (which seems kinda rare to begin with) -- as being particularly/specifically about a race. More about a behavior, at least that's how I react to it.

Am I way off here?

[Fidatelo]

Without clicking on the link, I have no idea what a shylock is nor do I ever recall hearing the word.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Just in case anybody wants the refrence

Shylock refers to the villainous Jewish moneylender in Shakespeare's "The Merchant of Venice," who demands a pound of flesh from a debtor.

[cuervo72]

I think Jews typically don't appreciate references to that character.

[JPhillips]

Shylock is portrayed in a very anti-Semitic manner as was the typical attitude in Elizabethan England. It's hard to even produce Merchant because of how offensive the character is. It's now generally done as either a statement on the dangers of antisemitism or as a history piece of long abandoned attitudes.

In short, it's very offensive, basically the same as calling a black man Buckwheat.

edit: I'm also willing to believe Biden didn't mean to offend and didn't understand the context of the word. He should have, but lots of people don't.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

edit: I'm also willing to believe Biden didn't mean to offend and didn't understand the context of the word. He should have, but lots of people don't.

I'm not sure that excuse went over too well for Julianne Hough and blackface...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

edit: I'm also willing to believe Biden didn't mean to offend and didn't understand the context of the word. He should have, but lots of people don't.

I think where I am is "knowing the origins ... but no longer making the ethnic association with it"

I might be in the minority about that, that's pretty much why I posed the question.

[nol]

Originally Posted by panerd

Yes it's fucking disgusting. Don't tell me that the speech just happened to fall in the eve of 9-11 either. Sadly we are far outnumbered by the "kill all Muslums" voting block in both parties.

Originally Posted by Hunter S. Thompson, September 12, 2001

The towers are gone now, reduced to bloody rubble, along with all hopes for Peace in Our Time, in the United States or any other country. Make no mistake about it: We are At War now -- with somebody -- and we will stay At War with that mysterious Enemy for the rest of our lives.
It will be a Religious War, a sort of Christian Jihad, fueled by religious hatred and led by merciless fanatics on both sides. It will be guerilla warfare on a global scale, with no front lines and no identifiable enemy.

That was quite some insight to have the day after the fact, when everybody was still scrambling to nail down the most basic facts about the attack.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I think where I am is "knowing the origins ... but no longer making the ethnic association with it"

That's where I am too. I don't think Biden is anti-semitic. But when you're VPOTUS you really need to take better care of the language you use.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

That's where I am too. I don't think Biden is anti-semitic. But when you're VPOTUS you really need to take better care of the language you use.

That goes for everybody actually.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I'm not sure that excuse went over too well for Julianne Hough and blackface...

I think there's a degree of obviousness that you're missing. Shylock is a fairly uncommon word and therefore it's reasonably plausible that he didn't know or think about the connotations about using the word. Hell, I had a number of southern colleagues say they didn't realize that "Jew you down" was a negative connotation (more likely they just didn't think hard about their own ignorance or bigotry).

However, it's very difficult to think that in this day and age that someone dressing in blackface wouldn't know it's offensive. That's like calling someone a "chink" or "kike" and then claiming that they didn't know those terms were offensive. It's possible...but quite unlikely. That's one that she could/should have known.

By the way, this doesn't entirely excuse Biden, but intent does matter here.

[Edward64]

A little surprised at how willing they are as France's border is more vulnerable. I wonder what type of quid pro quo was arranged.

France Strikes Islamic State Group In Iraq

PARIS (AP) — Joining U.S. forces acting in Iraqi skies, French fighter jets struck Friday against the militant Islamic State group, destroying a logistics depot, Iraqi and French officials said.

That attack made France the first foreign country to publicly add military muscle to United States airstrikes against the group, which has drawn criticism around the world and in a unanimous U.N. Security Council resolution for its barbarity.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Edward64

A little surprised at how willing they are as France's border is more vulnerable. I wonder what type of quid pro quo was arranged.

Eh? France's border is more vulnerable to what?

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

I think there's a degree of obviousness that you're missing. Shylock is a fairly uncommon word and therefore it's reasonably plausible that he didn't know or think about the connotations about using the word. Hell, I had a number of southern colleagues say they didn't realize that "Jew you down" was a negative connotation (more likely they just didn't think hard about their own ignorance or bigotry).

However, it's very difficult to think that in this day and age that someone dressing in blackface wouldn't know it's offensive. That's like calling someone a "chink" or "kike" and then claiming that they didn't know those terms were offensive. It's possible...but quite unlikely. That's one that she could/should have known.

By the way, this doesn't entirely excuse Biden, but intent does matter here.

I'm not so sure. I mean...how many times do you recall seeing blackface in the past 10 years? 20? 30? It's been out of practice for long enough that if not specifically educated on it, you might not know it's a thing.*

As for Shylock...well, Joe knew enough to know that it was a cultural reference as someone who is cheap, which is more than probably 95% of the population. But no, I don't necessarily expect him to know the exact derivation of the term - but everyone these days seems to expect that of other insensitive references.


* There are things that fall out of the cultural lexicon. A couple of weeks ago, someone on FB ranted against the educational system because his kid didn't know who Robin Hood was. Which was silly, because RH is not historical, and he's not really literary either. It's a legend that lived on verbally and then through movies. If you weren't aware of those movies, you wouldn't have known about the character. I think the same can be argued for blackface. If it's not taught as part of a history class - and there are many, many things that are not and I don't doubt that this would be one - you picked it up from where, a weekend airing of The Jazz Singer? Oh, Ted Danson and the Whoopi thing? How many 20-somethings know they went out? Heck, how many even know who Ted Danson is?

[DaddyTorgo]

I admit I knew the cultural reference of shylock, but not the ethic reference within it.

Color me surprised.

[cuervo72]

Vice President Joseph Biden 'Shylock' Gaffe: Shakespeare to Slur

In short, “shylock” has long been considered offensive — but that didn’t stop its casual use in conversation and print at least into the 1970s.

If it "fell out of casual use in conversation and print" in the 70s, yes - I can see how our generation and beyond may not understand the connotation (now, Biden is considerably older than we are...).

[ISiddiqui]

The character of Shylock is interesting in the Merchant of Venice, because while he is this loathsome Jewish moneylender who demands a pound of flesh from his debtor (which is where that idiom comes from), he also has the quite touching "If you prick us, do we not bleed" soliloquy.

However, in the end, the crafty Jew is outsmarted and part of his penalty is to convert to Christianity.... You can see how that may be offensive...

The Nazi's apparently used Shylock in their propaganda.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

I think there's a degree of obviousness that you're missing. Shylock is a fairly uncommon word and therefore it's reasonably plausible that he didn't know or think about the connotations about using the word. Hell, I had a number of southern colleagues say they didn't realize that "Jew you down" was a negative connotation (more likely they just didn't think hard about their own ignorance or bigotry).

However, it's very difficult to think that in this day and age that someone dressing in blackface wouldn't know it's offensive. That's like calling someone a "chink" or "kike" and then claiming that they didn't know those terms were offensive. It's possible...but quite unlikely. That's one that she could/should have known.

By the way, this doesn't entirely excuse Biden, but intent does matter here.

Isn't that often the case was older people make race- or sexual orientation based gaffes? That those people are ignorant and out of touch? it doesn't often shield them for criticism.

I agree that intent should matter when we're judging people, but it does seem to matter a lot less depending on who the speaker is and what they're being ignorant about. If this was some old dope saying something racially ignorant, the voices of criticism would be a lot louder and more widespread.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by cartman

Eh? France's border is more vulnerable to what?

To extremists slipping in?

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Edward64

To extremists slipping in?

How is that different than the other EU members that are part of the coalition? Why is France special in that regard?

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by cartman

How is that different than the other EU members that are part of the coalition? Why is France special in that regard?

They attacked first so I think it probable that ISIS would respond to that first.

[ISiddiqui]

You know, Biden just needs to take a break:

Joe Biden Praises Bob Packwood At Women's Event - Business Insider

In the middle of a Friday morning speech championing women's issues, Vice President Joe Biden offered warm words for a senator who resigned amid a sexual harassment scandal.

According to attendees, Biden singled out former Sen. Bob Packwood of Oregon as the sort of Republican who used to be reasonable on issues like expanding voter access. Packwood was reportedly accused by 10 women of unwanted sexual harassment and ultimately resigned in 1995.

"It was Republicans that were involved," Biden said in a speech at a DNC Women’s Leadership Forum breakfast. "Guys like [former Maryland Sen.] Mac Mathias and Packwood and so many others. It wasn't Democrats alone. Republicans were the sponsors of the raises of the minimum wage. I could go on and on. I'm not joking: This is not your father's Republican Party, or your mother's Republican Party."

[Edward64]

Lots of talking heads criticizing Obama's plan. I think Afghanistan and Bosnia have shown that special forces, unrelenting air strikes and indigenous forces on the ground (e.g. Kurds) can turn the tide so I'm good with it.

But never thought the "no boots on the ground" excluded special forces on the ground but the article seems to indicate other wise. If that's the case, I can see where air strikes could be less effective.

All in all, I don't think its uncommon for military generals to disagree (esp retired ones) with a president (regardless of administration).

Rift widens between Obama, U.S. military over strategy to fight Islamic State - The Washington Post

Flashes of disagreement over how to fight the Islamic State are mounting between President Obama and U.S. military leaders, the latest sign of strain in what often has been an awkward and uneasy relationship.

Even as the administration has received congressional backing for its strategy, with the Senate voting Thursday to approve a plan to arm and train Syrian rebels, a series of military leaders have criticized the president’s approach against the Islamic State militant group.

Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, who served under Obama until last year, became the latest high-profile skeptic on Thursday, telling the House Intelligence Committee that a blanket prohibition on ground combat was tying the military’s hands. “Half-hearted or tentative efforts, or airstrikes alone, can backfire on us and actually strengthen our foes’ credibility,” he said. “We may not wish to reassure our enemies in advance that they will not see American boots on the ground.”
:
Obama’s strategy received a boost with the Senate’s passage of his plan to train and arm about 5,000 Syrian rebels to help fight the Islamic State, a jihadist movement that controls large parts of Iraq and Syria and has threatened to destabilize much of the region.

The 78-22 vote in the Senate came just a day after the House approved its own measure.

[Edward64]

I wonder what % really believes this. If its truly the majority, we might as well pack it up and just watch from the Kurdish sidelines.

Log In - The New York Times

BAGHDAD — The United States has conducted an escalating campaign of deadly airstrikes against the extremists of the Islamic State for more than a month. But that appears to have done little to tamp down the conspiracy theories still circulating from the streets of Baghdad to the highest levels of Iraqi government that the C.I.A. is secretly behind the same extremists that it is now attacking.

“We know about who made Daesh,” said Bahaa al-Araji, a deputy prime minister, using an Arabic shorthand for the Islamic State on Saturday at a demonstration called by the Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr to warn against the possible deployment of American ground troops. Mr. Sadr publicly blamed the C.I.A. for creating the Islamic State in a speech last week, and interviews suggested that most of the few thousand people at the demonstration, including dozens of members of Parliament, subscribed to the same theory. (Mr. Sadr is considered close to Iran, and the theory is popular there as well.)
:
Haidar al-Assadi, 40, agreed. “The Islamic State is a clear creation of the United States, and the United States is trying to intervene again using the excuse of the Islamic State,” he said.
:
But the Islamic State was a different story, Mr. Jabouri said. “It is obvious to everyone that the Islamic State is a creation of the United States and Israel.”

[flere-imsaho]

Well, it would follow the CIA's typical modus operandi, unless one feels they've changed their tactics in the 21st century.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I wonder what % really believes this. If its truly the majority, we might as well pack it up and just watch from the Kurdish sidelines.

Log In - The New York Times

I've heard far crazier notions, it's what I've suspected -- at least to some extent -- from the first big media push about ISIS, just tbh.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I've heard far crazier notions, it's what I've suspected -- at least to some extent -- from the first big media push about ISIS, just tbh.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

Sigh.

Did you even read flere's post that illustrates some possible logic for such a notion.

Or did you just jump straight to trolling me ?

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sigh.

Did you even read flere's post that illustrates some possible logic for such a notion.

Or did you just jump straight to trolling me ?

Of course I read it. I didn't read the NYT article so I'm not sure what sort of "evidence" they put forth, but to say "it's what I've suspected" is pretty conspiracy-theory nutty I think.

[Solecismic]

The article doesn't give us anything new. Hard not to understand the perspective in Iraq. When an outsider takes sides, even if it's not a side you prefer, the balance of power shifts.

While the US didn't directly create ISIS, the Bush invasion created a power vacuum, and the Obama withdrawal created an opportunity. It's likely that because we've taken sides in past conflicts - usually against the more secular dictator-type - that we've armed and aided pieces of what ISIS is today.

I don't think it's conspiracy nut time to say that ISIS wouldn't exist if not for US interference. It would be to say that this was our goal from the beginning.

Stupidity led to this situation. Our practice of anointing leaders based on 30-second sound bytes and a win-at-all-costs two-party system rather than intelligence, understanding and experience.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

While the US didn't directly create ISIS, the Bush invasion created a power vacuum, and the Obama withdrawal created an opportunity. It's likely that because we've taken sides in past conflicts - usually against the more secular dictator-type - that we've armed and aided pieces of what ISIS is today.

I don't think it's conspiracy nut time to say that ISIS wouldn't exist if not for US interference. It would be to say that this was our goal from the beginning.

That's all fair enough. I completely agree with that - it's common sense.

I don't agree with some "wag the dog" style conspiracy type thing, which I presumed is what the article (and Jon) were getting at.