Will Barack Obama go down as one of the greats?
Defining "greats" really strictly -- no less than the top eight presidents of all time.
I really think he is shaping up to be a transformational figure. The dude is making history all over the fucking place.
I think he will be regarded as one of the greatest U.S. presidents in history.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||12/09/2014|
Obama and the Clintons will be remembered as three of the best presidents in the era - the era when responsible (if flawed) leaders were challenged by the rising know-nothing, radicalized, fundamentalist Christian right. It will be Hillary who will be seen as the truly transformative figure, because she's the one who will finally kick the legs out from under the Right's agenda, M.O. and chain of support.
Obama will be seen as a practical but visionary leader who held to personal commitment to ethics and always had the long view - the historical perspective - for his times and actions. His carefulness, detachment and, ultimately, wisdom will be considered almost Lincolnesque. Unfortunately he was not in a position to do more than he has done - wage constant battle with the near-treasonous faction against him, while always aware that they are within their rights and are not to be dismissed merely as fools. He is the one person in D.C. who has refused to see things in black and white.
Hillary, however, once she beats Jeb Bush, who will make a play for the moderate South - meaning Florida and North Carolina - and the West through his Hispanic base (as he sees it, parading the family and speaking in Spanish often) - will dazzle the world with a new, emerging coalition of pragmatic politicians who dare to push for real change. She'll be seen as the person who really led the country fully into the 21st century, and what the century will be known for. After all, we don't remember the 20th century for what happened in its first two decades.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||12/07/2012|
I can get behind everything in your post, R1. I am also incredibly hopeful about the promise of a second Clinton era.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||12/07/2012|
I was trying to capture the top 20% and eight was better, more even sounding number than 9, frankly.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||12/07/2012|
Actually, I don't think so--but I did vote for him. For me, he's batting clean-up on the promises and projects of other visionary leaders, namely the Clintons.
I think he's this era's Wilson.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||12/07/2012|
If he's succeeded where the Clinton's have failed I don't see why he doesn't deserve the lion's share of the credit, R7.
What promises and projects are referring to precisely, in any case?
|by Anonymous||reply 8||12/07/2012|
Get back to me when Obama or any Dem gives a speech like this. There will never again be such a lion for the poor and working poor.
RIP Teddy. You and your brother Bobby are two of my heroes.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||12/07/2012|
I think the Obama team has not done a good job at playing up all his accomplishments. Just Healthcare alone is something that nobody in decades of trying could do even if some of the bests parts didn't make it through. Somehow the message of the Tea Party turned a republican idea into a commie government takeover.
Nancy P and the house got a huge amount of great bills passed in the house and if the Senate hadn't become a 60 votes needed fillabuster machine he would have accomplished so much more.
The stimulus bill, although tax cut heavy, was actually one of the best implemented pieces of legislation under Biden's watch where there was very little that went wasted and helped divert a depression. We needed more a couple years later but for some reason stimulus became a dirty word.
For all the bluster of Obama being a ideologue he's really a pragmatist who is very smart about follow through and seeing the big picture. All those agencies that were headed by unqualified buddies during the GW admin were filled with competent people again ( EPA, FEMA...)
Where he fell short was in hiring all Wall Street guys leaving us vulnerable for future shenanigans and not doing enough for the underwater homes. He also kept many of the powers GW created during his power grab.
Watch this Rachel Maddow recap of everything he accomplished during the first term and it makes me proud that I voted for him, it also makes me scratch my head wondering why his team didn't remind people of much of it during the election. Imagine doing all this with unprecedented obstruction. Skip to about 2 min mark for the start of the list.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||12/07/2012|
Possibly. It's too early to say for sure.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||12/07/2012|
Love the video, R11.
I agree that another round of stimulus would have put us is a great position much sooner than we will otherwise get there. The race driven tea party was able to frame their cause as anti-spending (and thus anti-stimulus) and it really sucks because as far as I'm concerned, at least half of their agenda was tied to race based animus. Period. Fuck anyone who says we can't talk about it.
I also wish he would ease up on the drones and do something about the Patriot Act (like let it expire). I can see him setting the stage for the latter towards the end of his term, though.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||12/07/2012|
as of now....no....but he has 4 years left.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||12/08/2012|
At this point, he's very far from being considered a great president. Even if you just consider post-World War II presidents, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Reagan would have a stronger case amongst political scientists and historians.
I hope that changes with his second term. Obama came to the presidency with little experience, especially compared to LBJ and, to some extent, Eisenhower. So Obama had a major learning curve. He is also facing the most hostile Congress since Kennedy. Obama has also essentially followed George W. Bush in asserting more war powers in the White House after 9/11/01.
But, the president has won a second term, and is more free to be the person we all thought he was when elected in 2008.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||12/08/2012|
If Obama's eight years were up today, no.
In four years, hopefully.
Unless they economy starts rolling, Obama will never go down as 'great.' That's all Americans care about.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||12/08/2012|
If we're talking greatest mistake ever made by the American people . . . definitely.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||12/08/2012|
r16, ronnie reegin was an abject failure he wasn't smart enough to know what the fuck was going on anyway, he just said his lines--see the recent thread on the reasons why he is not. Kennedy, while he usually meant well enough (even with the Bay of Pigs, which was a completely misguided mess), wasn't in office long enough to prove himself out; Johnson managed to enact Medicare, Medicaid, Public Television and Head Start among other notable social programs all of which had their germination in the Kennedy administration as a kind of completion of the Roosevelt New Deal. Obama was the one who finally got some kind of universal health care law passes which originally was supposed to have been a "companion" piece of legislation alongside Social Security. Obama's greatest achievement thus far, and he should be ranked among the "greats" for this alone, is having pulled the economy back from the brink due to the neglect, bungling and damage done by 8 years of the presidency being in the hands of thieves. For his even mentioning publically that Gore did not lose in 2000 is great enough in my book. Don't ever rank any 20th century republican president among anything to be regarded as "great" and the only republican of the 21st century had no legitimate claim to the presidency so he doesn't count. Eisenhower MAYBE is an exception, and Franklin Roosevelt admitted that he only voted republican once in his life and that was for his cousin Theodore Roosevelt, not because they were cousins but because he said he would have made a better Democrat.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||12/08/2012|
After all he accomplished in his first term, I say YES.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||12/08/2012|
He's in the top ten. But his love affair with Wall Street and his bowing down to Monsanto and Big Agra while reinforcing the Patriot Act and pushing the NDAA means he will never be the greatest. EVER.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||12/08/2012|
When all is said and done, I'm confident he will be considered among the greats. Hopefully history doesn't forget the reactionary, white supremacist movement that branded itself the "Tea Party," and opposed his strives for progress at every step of the way.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||12/08/2012|
R1 Of course, "His carefulness, detachment and, ultimately, wisdom" could also be seen as fear, cluelessness and being stoned a lot of the time.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||12/08/2012|
r23, I hope alot of the republicans in Congress will be voted out in 2014 so that the last 2 years can be the start of something truly progressive in this country, the likes of which haven't been seen since the 1960s let alone the 1930s. The main problem is that republicans will steal what they want. I think many of the Democrats on the Supreme Court who are old and infirm need to retire so that Obama can put a young, progressive Democrat in their place. Otherwise if we end up with another republican regime after Obama and somebody like Ruth Bader Ginzberg dies in office they will get to appoint some reactionary retard in her place.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||12/08/2012|
Are you fucking kidding me?
Who the hell posted this, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee?
|by Anonymous||reply 26||12/08/2012|
R25, I think RBG will surely retire before 2016, and hopefully Breyer will follow suit. We don't need to risk it again. Poor Thurgood Marshall tried his best to outlive the first Bush Administration, but couldn't make it.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||12/08/2012|
r10's video made me cry as I type, so fuck you r10!
Where are today's champions for a society that protects its weakest members and strives to build them up?
There used to be Wellstone, Moynihan, Kennedys, Mitchell, Pell, Roosevelt.
We had John Edwards talk about it for like five seconds in 2008, and now it's political poison to even point out the problems of 25% of the population.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||12/08/2012|
I voted for President Obama, but The Clintons leave me cold. Am I the only one that remembers the Clinton health care debacle, the Foster suicide, the triangulation, Dick effin Morris, Betty Curie practically trampled? I could go on...
|by Anonymous||reply 30||12/08/2012|
With Bill Clinton, r30, one should be careful to discern the truth from republican disinformation. republicans are supposedly sooo careful with taxpayer's money, especially RICH "taxpayers", yet they wasted over 50 million dollars with investigating a blowjob and Whitewater both of which came to nothing. republicans get away with murder in this country and I mean that literally (John Heinz--one of their own???, I guess he must have been consorting with Democrats and Democratic ideas too much, maybe a little like Governor Cristie in New Jersey today?). There was a time when republicans were a regular, if almost always wrong, political party in the US noted mainly for being conservative with money and representing big business--Nelson Rockefeller, Dwight Eisenhower and even Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater were some of the last relatively sane standard bearers. It has become, since ronnie fuckhead reegin's time a freakish collection of misfits, religious zealot loonie tunes, military minds bordering on the Hitlerian and out and out thieves. They are why Obama and the Democrats have been thwarted because they have just enough votes in Congress to obstruct necessary items like making the rich pay their fair share of taxes. The sooner people realize that and get them out of Congress instead of swallowing the idea that it's "just bi-partisan bickering" the better. The difference to me, as someone on the eve of retirement, is that the Democrats want to save Social Security and Medicare and the republicans want to destroy it, it's just that simple.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||12/08/2012|
Thank Bill Clinton for NAFTA and GATT. Thank Bill Clinton for destroying the Glass/Steagall Act. Thank him for helping jobs move out of this country and for Fox news.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||12/08/2012|
Well, r33, Clinton must have been doing something right for the republicans to heap such scorn and hatred on him. I recall it as a time of full employment, a surplus instead of a deficit (which the thieves who stole the White House after Clinton immediately squandered on war and tax favors to the rich instead of doing something useful such as fixing Medicare and Social Security which has been heaped on Obama's plate),lots of money floating around for the middle class and no fucking war. They hated Hilary Clinton as well for some mysterious reason--I guess she didn't fit in with how they thought women should "act".
|by Anonymous||reply 35||12/08/2012|
Reading this post's title, I couldn't help but think of our First Lady's beautiful smile.
Oh, you bet he goes down.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||12/08/2012|
Bill Clinton's over the top admiration for Obama is a joke . . . who can forget Bill's admonishment of the press in 2008 for buying the "fairytale" that was the Obama campaign?
In the book "Game Change", Clinton angered Ted Kennedy on the phone when he called to get him to endorse Hillary by saying "A few years ago, this guy would be getting us coffee.".
|by Anonymous||reply 37||12/08/2012|
President Obama has not only asserted, but aggressively exercised, the power to target for execution anyone he wants, including US citizens, anywhere in the world.
He has vigorously resisted not only legal limits on this assassination power, but even efforts to bring some minimal transparency to the execution orders he issues.
This claimed power has resulted in four straight years of air bombings in multiple Muslim countries in which no war has been declared – using drones, cruise missiles and cluster bombs – ending the lives of more than 2,500 people, almost always far away from any actual battlefield. A substantial portion of those whom he has killed – at the very least – have been civilians, including dozens of children.
Obama officials have also ensured that these powers have no physical limits, as they unequivocally embraced what was once the core and highly controversial precept of Bush/Cheney radicalism: that the US is fighting a "global war" in which the "whole world is a battlefield", which means there are no geographical constraints to the president's war powers.
President Obama has wielded what is literally the most extreme and tyrannical power a government can claim – to execute anyone the leader wants, even his own citizens, in total secrecy and without a whiff of due process – and who has resisted all efforts to impose a framework of limits or even transparency.
How very Republican of President Obama.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||12/08/2012|
R19: Some of the legislation you mentioned, including civil rights, did originate in the Kennedy Administration, but Lyndon Johnson was the one who successfully used his experience in Congress, especially as Senate Majority Leader, to get all those bills (and many more) passed into law.
I used my memory of a survey of historians and political scientists, published in 2009 as the basis for my comments. The survey ranked Johnson #2 in ability to deal with Congress, behind only FDR. LBJ was also #2 in civil rights, behind only Lincoln.
I was too tired last night to look for the survey on line, but will do so today...and provide a link. (This is fresh in my mind because I just completely a course at Penn on the presidency.)
|by Anonymous||reply 40||12/08/2012|
R29, yeah, I said fuck me too when I watched it again because it made me cry too and it made me feel hopeless because we'll never see that kind of passion to help the least among us again. The closest we got is Bernie Sanders and sadly few listen to him. Today the most vulnerable really have no one on their side. Obama, Pelosi, very few will ever even say the words poor or poverty.
Last year NY Sen. Gillibrand tried to get a bill passed in the Senate to keep them from cutting almost 5 billion dollars to Food Stamps. All of the Rethugs voted against her bill but sadly and frighteningly so did most of the Dems in the Senate, include Al Franken.
I doubt we will ever see the likes of Kennedy, FDR or those you mentioned again. They were born rich but from the get go taught to care about those not so lucky, unlike W, Romney, etc. But even Obama, who did have some hardship in his life has turned his back on the poor. He and Pelosi and other Dems will say "Middle class" 50 times in every speech but never a word for the poor. Today the only War on Poverty is a war against the poor.
Ah, fuck me again cause I just made myself cry again thinking about this.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||12/08/2012|
No doubt Barack Obama have a better reputation than Warren G. Harding. Michelle Obama will be listed far above Florence Harding as a great First Lady.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||12/08/2012|
R16 -- Reagan will NOT go down as a great president, or even a good one. Too much corruption, the rise of the religious right, terrible appointees, bad court choices, and the great growth in the divide between rich and poor. All in all, he's one of the worst presidents of all time.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||12/08/2012|
Eisenhower's Republican party is not today's. He would probably be a Democrat today.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||12/08/2012|
8 years is a "fairy tale"? Huh!!
|by Anonymous||reply 47||12/08/2012|
I voted too early to tell but I am optimistic that he will go down as a very important and successful president.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||12/08/2012|
Ya gotta be kidding me.
Drone strikes with no policy of governance? Continuing the Bush assaults on the 4th and 5th amendments? Retaliation against whistleblowers?
Then there's the continued war on drugs, the Wall Street coziness, the attempts to gut Social Security and Medicare (see his offers to the Republicans in the Grand Bargain last term).
He's going down as one of the worst, along with W, Reagan, and Harding. If he were white this conversation would not be happening.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||12/08/2012|
"He's proven to be a liar, coward and an empty suit. Dream on, OP."
Said of every American president. See Lincoln and you will see how this is nothing new.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||12/08/2012|
Obama being the first US President to publicly support gay equality will, alone, give him a place in history.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||12/08/2012|
He's set Affirmative Action back a few decades by being the schwarmy cooperator so often seen in the type.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||12/08/2012|
The first black president? Of course. Revisionist history will see to it.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||12/08/2012|
I voted for them but they are all conservative and in the pockets of the military corporations...so how great can they be with that baggage?
|by Anonymous||reply 57||12/08/2012|
Anyone who doesn't agree that he is the greatest is a racist, period.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||12/08/2012|
Reagan was the worst president in my lifetime...even worse than the moron, Bush.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||12/08/2012|
Yes, and I think there will be a place for him on Mt. Rushmore.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||12/08/2012|
I agree with R22. I know every president has to give in order to get but Monsanto needs to be taken over by the government and their CEOs should all go to prison. What for? They've poisoned the world.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||12/08/2012|
r52, Reagan and the Iran-Contra Affair will always be his baggage.
Reaganomics fucked us up to. He was awful, but a good orator.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||12/08/2012|
R52, that is a joke. Reagan will go down as the guy who started the destruction of America's middle class.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||12/08/2012|
"Anyone who doesn't agree that he is the greatest is a racist, period."
And racism is why the kids in the ghettos underperform, too.
You can't solve your problems until you know what they really are.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||12/08/2012|
R58 is an idiot. Period The idea that you can't criticize a black politicians policies because of his skin color, is laughable.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||12/08/2012|
And it will be remembered as the Dark Ages of the Republican Party.
|by Anonymous||reply 69||12/08/2012|
You mean the *Dying Ages* of the Republican Party.
And not a moment too soon.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||12/08/2012|
[quote]You mean the *Dying Ages* of the Republican Party.
They would have been dead four years ago if Bongo hadn't bent over and spread for "bipartisanship."
|by Anonymous||reply 71||12/08/2012|
[quote]He's proven to be a liar, coward and an empty suit. Dream on, OP.
Well if YOU say so, R6.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||12/08/2012|
I AGREE with all of you who call Reagan one of the worst. But I also face the fact that the memory of the Reagan presidency, even by those not born when he was pres, has evolved into myth.
The Kennedy presidency evolved into something that wasn't too -- but I credit his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis and preventing WW3 as making him a great president. The speech defining racial discrimination a "moral issue" was pretty great too.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||12/08/2012|
You're another near death, R71. You can go down with the rest.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||12/08/2012|
[r1] you seem to forget a couple of Presidents in the first two decades o the 20th Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Oh, and there was that little matter of World War I.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||12/08/2012|
The middle class loved Reagan and all the time he was stabbing them in the back...most of them still don't understand what happened.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||12/08/2012|
Very few two-term presidents have accomplished more in the second term. Even Truman and T. Roosevelt who both had nearly two terms (both were vice presidents when a president died) were less successful after being elected to full terms.
The one except to this observation is FDR, but F. Roosevelt is an except to almost every observation.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||12/08/2012|
Teddy Roosevelt was not a great president. His foreign policy was to stomp all over the yellow people because it was the white man's right.
He wanted the US to follow in Europe's footsteps with imperialism, which I think is an evil policy and led to countries wanting to destroy us.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||12/08/2012|
R67, hey Reagan lover, he expanded the gap between the haves and the have nots. Trickle down economics does not work. He created the yuppies if you want to give him some credit.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||12/08/2012|
Presidents are not regarded as great because they succeeded politically. They are considered great because of what they accomplished. It's hard to be a great President with an obstructionist Congress.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||12/08/2012|
[quote]Presidents are not regarded as great because they succeeded politically. They are considered great because of what they accomplished.
I agree. I think BO will be historically significant for three things: being the first black President, being the first post 9/11 President, and how well his administration dealt with the Recession. That is it. And will a lot of years before we get the results for that last one.
American's in general rate Presidents on how well the country prospers during their particular administration, or how well they set the stage for the next. Not all the other particulars.
And he gives the best close up of any President.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||12/08/2012|
O is not gay -- he's just a gelding.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||12/08/2012|
[quote]O is not gay
You never really know for sure.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||12/08/2012|
"A man is not either stupid or intelligent, he is either free or not free."--written on a wall of the Faculte de Medecine, Paris, May 1968
|by Anonymous||reply 87||12/08/2012|
Yes, OP. His Nobel Peace Prize cinched it.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||12/08/2012|
r39 and r81 should go out on a dinner date.
And bring home leftovers wrapped in hat-shaped tin foil.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||12/08/2012|
[r78] I didn't say Teddy was a great President. He is a figure from the First two decades o the 20th along with Wilson who are remembered and define those decades more so than Coolidge and Hoover on the next two.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||12/08/2012|
R82--curious that you omit Obamacare and DADT. Surely, these will be remembered.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||12/08/2012|
Yeah, probably. He and Clinton.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||12/08/2012|
R85 = woefully ignorant.
Back on topic, Obama is a cautious centrist. Such men usually don't go down as great. He's done a decent job in most areas but he's lacked the bold policies and successes that would give him the "great" designation.
Personally, I think he'll be remembered as someone who did pretty well despite unprecedented opposition from Republicans.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||12/08/2012|
He doesn't deserve to. He is a Democrat who is not progressive, is hostile towards liberals (who he couldn't have won either time without), and does not work well with the House Democrats. His constantly caving in to the Republicans is one of the reasons why 2010 was such a disaster for Democrats. It was only last spring, when out of the blue he seemed to become aware of and actually right for women's issues, that he began to be seen as feasible that he would be reelected.
To recap: When he acts like a DEMOCRAT, he is successful. When he acts like a REPUBLICAN, he isn't. His current "negotiations" with Boehner indicate that, with EVERYTHING going for him, he will cave yet again.
You do the math.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||12/08/2012|
What does being the first post-9/11 president have to do with anything, especially when he is essentially carrying out the same discredited Bush policies that were implemented after 9/11?
|by Anonymous||reply 97||12/08/2012|
I think Obama is a smart man, but it took him a good year to figure out how to be POTUS (maybe that would not have happened to a truly smart man). He seems to be more comfortable as POTUS these days, but he is no Bill Clinton when it comes to being in the public eye.
He has about two years to achieve one significant goal that will mark his presidency before EVERYONE'S attention turns to 2016.
I think people will remember his first two years in the office the most. It was incredibly frustrating to watch him stumble, over and over again.
No one will ever believe another candidate if they start selling the "change/hope" shit. Obama killed that for generations to come.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||12/08/2012|
[quote]to achieve one significant goal
Ending a manufactured war
Saving the economy from an outright depression
Bailing out the car industry
Capturing and killing the guy responsible for 9/11
The first black president
You don't think any of these are just even a little bit significant? I mean the last one alone (the least relevant in this day and age) will assure him a spot in all history texts. He will at least be a fifth grade American History test question.
And Believe me, Taft and those guys aren't.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||12/08/2012|
I meant, from now on, R99.
Obviously, those are all big goals. However, most of them were compromised, one way or another.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||12/08/2012|
Obama lied and didn't pull out the troops right after becoming President in '09 like he promised and ran on. His moronic fanbase didn't care.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||12/08/2012|
You hit a nerve, OP. The wrinkly old freeper queens are out in force.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||12/08/2012|
You are an idiot r102. Being the first black president has nothing to do with ties to American slaves. But I'm glad you enjoyed your little highly biased denial routine. If you think my statements were a bit sweeping, your counterpoints were egregious.
r98, I see your point then and completely agree (just not in the stupid way r102 paints it).
|by Anonymous||reply 105||12/08/2012|
Actually, R104, I kinda suspect that some of these are PUMAs rather than freepers.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||12/08/2012|
[quote]r99, forgetting DADT repeal, which I'm sure r102 will find something wrong with
Better late than 2009.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||12/08/2012|
[quote]Better late than 2009.
Feeble ass-backward attempt at word play by someone with a low IQ or poor creative writing skills.
I'm going with the former, since he seems to think that the son of a "temporary immigrant"who grows up in the US is less American than his own immigrant-descendant ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||12/08/2012|
What an embarrassing post, R102.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||12/08/2012|
Refusing to close Guantanamo shows that human rights don't matter much to him.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||12/08/2012|
Why are you asking us? Ask Michelle.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||12/08/2012|
r46, the Cuban Revolution under Castro didn't establish itself as fully in power until 1959 toward the end of Eisenhower's second term. Kennedy took the advice to invade Cuba mainly from Eisenhower advisors, albeit CIA people as well. Joseph Kennedy also urged his son to make the move against Cuba, but it was Kennedy's decision mainly and one he regretted which in turn led to the missile crisis which he managed to squirm out of after he promised Khushchev to withdraw American missiles from Turkey and never to attempt invasion of Cuba again. You need to read further rather than "read into" this particular time in history. You know what they say happens when you ASS-U-ME, I hope.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||12/08/2012|
It's too soon to tell. We have to see how everything pans out, especially Obamacare.
|by Anonymous||reply 114||12/08/2012|
r40, I thought I touched on the fact that Johnson did get these items passed. I'm not disputing you at all so I'm a little baffled about why you have "called me out" about my post.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||12/08/2012|
[quote]Our president is not only for sale, but for fucking cheap. – R52
|by Anonymous||reply 118||12/08/2012|
[quote]Obama, being the barking dog that finally caught the car, finds himself, teeth clenched firmly on the bumper, utterly clueless as to what to do next.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||12/08/2012|
I have to confess that I am deeply despondent about politics today, in a way I don’t remember feeling, even during the ugliest days of George W. Caligula. It was awful then, but those actions and ethics were only a natural extension of what had already been going on within the GOP for twenty years. Each successive wave of thuggish animals was uglier than the last (as continues to be the case today), from Reagan to Gingrich to Bush. The Obama presidency, on the other hand, has been crushing to the spirit, and more so because even disappointed liberals still don’t get it, thinking he’s a wimp or a lousy poker player, when in fact he is – like Clinton before him – just another kleptocrat, come to sell out not just the country, but also the ideology of liberalism and the political party which once embodied those principles. That’s quite a trifecta, really. Most horror story politicians would be satisfied just to wreck their country in the name of personal narcissism. Obama is additionally destroying a set of crucial and hard-won ideas along with a political party in the bargain.
He is the anti-FDR in every meaning of that term. FDR saved the country. Obama is burying it. FDR created the Democratic Party as we (used to) know it, once probably the most formidable political machine in American history. Obama is dragging it curbside. FDR gave America its social contract. Obama is dismantling it. FDR reveled in the hatred of the greedy thuggish scum who despised him. Obama keeps hoping they’ll like him and invite him over for a beer if only he lets them pass his limp body around the jail cell one more time. FDR was America’s greatest president. Obama is undoubtedly one of its worst.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||12/09/2012|
If there is a small ray of hope out there, it is that more people are beginning to catch on. There has been a large spate of articles in the media lately with the theme of Obama’s complete ineptitude and insignificance as a serious political force. Liberals are by and large finally, amazingly, beginning to understand that he is not a liberal champion by any stretch of the imagination. That’s progress, at least, over reading for the last two years that Obama is a liberal or socialist or has a far-left agenda. What sickening, Orwellian, bullshit that is. Sadly, however, while commentators and the voting public are starting to recognize that Obama is not one of us, they have not yet realized the full truth, which is that he is one of them. As if somebody else picked Larry Summers and Tim Geithner and Bob Gates to serve in his cabinet. As if someone else decided to bail-out Wall Street while doing nothing about jobs or mortgages. As if there was another guy in the White House who tripled American forces in Afghanistan, or maintained Guantánamo in its fully operational state. This is what is, ultimately, so sickening about our current political condition. As a country, we don’t even know what it is.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||12/09/2012|
Also, I like to rape 90 year old women with colostomy bags!
|by Anonymous||reply 123||12/09/2012|
All of the Kennedy bills were blocked in Congress by committee chairmen, and the feeling was that the system was broken. That feeling changed almost immediately when LBJ became president. He sucessfully pushed JFK's proposed programs through Congress and enacted many of his own as well.
To write that Johnson 'managed' to get bills passed is true, but understates greatly his legilative skills, especialy as compared to JFK.
I lived through that period, and remember my growing and complete frustration with Kennedy's inability to deal with Congress.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||12/09/2012|
R123 likes to feel mighty by pretending his little pee-pee can make posts about feces.
He still can't understand why blond men won't date him.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||12/09/2012|
America had a chance to elect a good & gracious president, but ended up with Obama instead. To bad for America as we are a nation in decline and nothing can stop it now!
|by Anonymous||reply 126||12/09/2012|
I do so love drivel like R126's. Classic trollbait.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||12/09/2012|
I'm black assholes. This isn't about race.
|by Anonymous||reply 130||12/09/2012|
Well, do tell us what it's about, then, R126/R130. We are all simply agog.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||12/09/2012|
We won't know for about ten years but I doubt it. Too much debt. A terrible economy. Divisive attitude.
|by Anonymous||reply 132||12/09/2012|
I agree that we will not know about Obama for many years. Truman and Eisenhower are both considered better presidents today than when they left office. Truman lived to see it.
It may happen for Obama as well, but right now I am shocked that so many of the people who posted initially rank him as a great president.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||12/09/2012|
2 years to the date and the answer is still yes.
|by Anonymous||reply 134||12/08/2014|
R134: No, more than 50% is something other than "yes."
|by Anonymous||reply 135||12/08/2014|
Right now, the Middle East thinks he is a clown.
|by Anonymous||reply 136||12/08/2014|
Probably yes, because he seems (like Clinton) to be the type who will continue to do high profile world-impacting things after his presidency. The opposite of Bush II who slinked away to his fake ranch and made bad paintings.
|by Anonymous||reply 137||12/08/2014|
I think he's great, but he's not a great communicator. He will be known as one of the greatest of the era, just what we needed to fix the mess left by W. And I agree with OP, that Hillary is what we need next. Obama to fix the mess, Hillary to use that as a platform to advance the country forward!
|by Anonymous||reply 138||12/08/2014|
R10 nailed it. With Bobby long gone and now with Teddy gone the poor have no lion no champion no one, certainly not Obama CERTAINLY not Hillary.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||12/08/2014|
Obama will definitely go down as of the great incompetents.
And, if his lips are moving, his ugly skinny little ass is lying.
|by Anonymous||reply 141||12/08/2014|
Obama lost the House in 2010
The Senate in 2014
And his shitty 8 yrs will cost us the White House in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||12/09/2014|