"this is the President Obama who has been developing for some time."
July 21, 2015 6:14 AM Subscribe
The black president some worried about has arrived
Obama On The Hoofbeats Of History - "As the budget deficit has receded from public view, Obama's fucks deficit has come to the forefront. After six and a half years in office, he may have a small stockpile of fucks left. But he has none left to give. "
Obama On The Hoofbeats Of History - "As the budget deficit has receded from public view, Obama's fucks deficit has come to the forefront. After six and a half years in office, he may have a small stockpile of fucks left. But he has none left to give. "
We could stretch the metaphor into a theory of Keynesian therapy, where the prescription for an emotional downturn is to stimulate the psychic economy by running a fucks deficit. But that's the opposite of Josh's argument, and in any case we'll stick to the linguistic issues.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:30 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:30 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
Obama’s Prison Visit Is an Empty Gesture
Obama can simply pardon people, including drug offenders, but so far he has not done so on a large scale. At present, the corporations operating our state prisons are bigger criminals that most of the inmates. Just pardoning wide swaths of federal criminals to reduce their profits does considerable good, irrespective of any particular inmate's situation.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:38 AM on July 21, 2015 [9 favorites]
Obama can simply pardon people, including drug offenders, but so far he has not done so on a large scale. At present, the corporations operating our state prisons are bigger criminals that most of the inmates. Just pardoning wide swaths of federal criminals to reduce their profits does considerable good, irrespective of any particular inmate's situation.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:38 AM on July 21, 2015 [9 favorites]
New Snowden Documents Reveal Obama Administration Expanded NSA Spying [Time, 6/4/15]
Jeb Bush Praises Obama's Expansion of NSA Surveillance [Intercept, 4/21/15]
Obama's War on Whistleblowers Leaves Administration Insiders Unscathed [Guardian, 3/16/15]
Democrats Assail Wall Street Ties in Obama Administration [The Hill, 11/30/14]
Obama's Drone War Shows No Signs of Ending [Newsweek, 5/23/14]
Obama Administration Has Gone To Unprecedented Lengths To Thwart Journalists, Report Finds [Huffington Post, 10/11/13]
Etc., etc., ad nauseum. None of this has changed. Liberals are twisting themselves into knots trying to salve their vague sense of cognitive dissonance with an endgame rewrite of the Obama legacy, but I doubt history will be as sloppy and fawning in its assessment.
posted by ryanshepard at 6:40 AM on July 21, 2015 [32 favorites]
Jeb Bush Praises Obama's Expansion of NSA Surveillance [Intercept, 4/21/15]
Obama's War on Whistleblowers Leaves Administration Insiders Unscathed [Guardian, 3/16/15]
Democrats Assail Wall Street Ties in Obama Administration [The Hill, 11/30/14]
Obama's Drone War Shows No Signs of Ending [Newsweek, 5/23/14]
Obama Administration Has Gone To Unprecedented Lengths To Thwart Journalists, Report Finds [Huffington Post, 10/11/13]
Etc., etc., ad nauseum. None of this has changed. Liberals are twisting themselves into knots trying to salve their vague sense of cognitive dissonance with an endgame rewrite of the Obama legacy, but I doubt history will be as sloppy and fawning in its assessment.
posted by ryanshepard at 6:40 AM on July 21, 2015 [32 favorites]
Thank you, ryanshepard, for all those excellent articles about President Obama's increased willingness to address directly the huge problem of continued and worsening institutional racism in America, which is what this thread is about. Wait. No.
posted by The Bellman at 6:46 AM on July 21, 2015 [113 favorites]
posted by The Bellman at 6:46 AM on July 21, 2015 [113 favorites]
Of the nine presidents who have served in my lifetime, Obama is easily the greatest but that has as much to do with how bad his competition is than his personal accomplishments.
posted by octothorpe at 6:46 AM on July 21, 2015 [21 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 6:46 AM on July 21, 2015 [21 favorites]
In particular, insane incarceration rates are partially due to insane sentencing guidelines, so the administration could issue new "recommendations" on sentencing. And reduce most existing sentences down to those guidelines using the pardon.
Also : Eric Holder, Wall Street Double Agent, Comes in From the Cold
posted by jeffburdges at 6:51 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Also : Eric Holder, Wall Street Double Agent, Comes in From the Cold
posted by jeffburdges at 6:51 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
There are differences between Republicans and Democrats, of course, but mostly on social issues. On the matter of raw power for the state, for banks, for big business, for the military, and for law enforcement, both parties unanimously side with entrenched interest.
posted by Beholder at 7:05 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Beholder at 7:05 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Perhaps we should wait 21 years or so for the photo of Obama's last lunch to be photographed and posted to the Blue. THEN it might be the proper time for a big thread about the historicity of his presidency.
posted by spock at 7:05 AM on July 21, 2015 [7 favorites]
posted by spock at 7:05 AM on July 21, 2015 [7 favorites]
Thank you, ryanshepard, for all those excellent articles about President Obama's increased willingness to address directly the huge problem of continued and worsening institutional racism in America, which is what this thread is about. Wait. No.
If you read the TPM link and look at the tags, this is a much wider FPP with discussion of Obama's Presidential legacy as a whole rather than any one issue. NSA is probably one area where there is a lot to be desired, I think it's fair to bring it up as long as we don't derail the thread onto that one single topic.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:08 AM on July 21, 2015 [6 favorites]
If you read the TPM link and look at the tags, this is a much wider FPP with discussion of Obama's Presidential legacy as a whole rather than any one issue. NSA is probably one area where there is a lot to be desired, I think it's fair to bring it up as long as we don't derail the thread onto that one single topic.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:08 AM on July 21, 2015 [6 favorites]
Is "some worried about" code for the post-Southern Strategy GOP? Those Rump Republicans had every opportunity to work with him on numerous issues in addition to race relations, but instead they chose recalcitrance and ressentiment at every turn. This now is the Obama who's getting. things. done .
posted by Doktor Zed at 7:11 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Doktor Zed at 7:11 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Thank you, ryanshepard, for all those excellent articles about President Obama's increased willingness to address directly the huge problem of continued and worsening institutional racism in America, which is what this thread is about. Wait. No.
Actually, that's not the main thrust of the FPP article, but let's pretend for a minute that it is:
Obama's White House hasn't played a role in single cop that has killed an unarmed black person during his administration going to prison, and are facilitating surveillance on activists that are standing up and demanding real change. We get Obama's pained speech when someone is murdered, but it's ghastly business as usual otherwise.
Poverty across the board, particularly for minorities, has continued to increase during Obama's tenure, with the bank-engineered Great Recession destroying what little generational wealth many poor and working class Americans had. The Obama DOJ declined to meaningfully prosecute anyone for that, and the post-recession recovery has almost exclusively benefited the wealthy.
Just two examples. If you can look around at the US of 2015 and say there has been any meaningful progress against structural inequality under Obama - that we aren't demonstrably moving backwards, in fact - I don't know what I can say to convince you.
posted by ryanshepard at 7:12 AM on July 21, 2015 [31 favorites]
Actually, that's not the main thrust of the FPP article, but let's pretend for a minute that it is:
Obama's White House hasn't played a role in single cop that has killed an unarmed black person during his administration going to prison, and are facilitating surveillance on activists that are standing up and demanding real change. We get Obama's pained speech when someone is murdered, but it's ghastly business as usual otherwise.
Poverty across the board, particularly for minorities, has continued to increase during Obama's tenure, with the bank-engineered Great Recession destroying what little generational wealth many poor and working class Americans had. The Obama DOJ declined to meaningfully prosecute anyone for that, and the post-recession recovery has almost exclusively benefited the wealthy.
Just two examples. If you can look around at the US of 2015 and say there has been any meaningful progress against structural inequality under Obama - that we aren't demonstrably moving backwards, in fact - I don't know what I can say to convince you.
posted by ryanshepard at 7:12 AM on July 21, 2015 [31 favorites]
Watching season 3 of Orange is the New Black, in which the prison is turned over to a private prison corporation, and of course cuts everything that could potentially help the inmates in any way, I was thinking: If Americans insist on having prisons run by private corporations, why not tie their funding to their performance (No Prisoner Left Behind!). Base funding levels on the recidivism and employment rates for inmates released from the prison. Is there a reliable way to measure violence in prison? Reduce funding if there's violence.
I realize that there's a problem when this is done in schools because it means schools that are struggling just struggle harder and it's even worse for the students, but I see two differences here: 1. The starting funding levels need to be generous enough that prisons actually COULD do this stuff well. 2. Public schools are different because they can't really just walk away. If a for-profit prison corp decides that it can't run education, employment, counselling etc., then they don't have to take prison contracts. Let them walk away from their contracts and return the prisons to the department of corrections. Fine by me.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 7:14 AM on July 21, 2015 [19 favorites]
I realize that there's a problem when this is done in schools because it means schools that are struggling just struggle harder and it's even worse for the students, but I see two differences here: 1. The starting funding levels need to be generous enough that prisons actually COULD do this stuff well. 2. Public schools are different because they can't really just walk away. If a for-profit prison corp decides that it can't run education, employment, counselling etc., then they don't have to take prison contracts. Let them walk away from their contracts and return the prisons to the department of corrections. Fine by me.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 7:14 AM on July 21, 2015 [19 favorites]
New Snowden Documents Reveal Obama Administration Expanded NSA Spying [Time, 6/4/15]
Here is the quote from the ProPublica source cited:
Without public notice or debate, the Obama administration has expanded the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance of Americans’ international Internet traffic to search for evidence of malicious computer hacking, according to classified NSA documents.
In mid-2012, Justice Department lawyers wrote two secret memos permitting the spy agency to begin hunting on Internet cables, without a warrant and on American soil, for data linked to computer intrusions originating abroad — including traffic that flows to suspicious Internet addresses or contains malware, the documents show.
Please don't, stop.
posted by Brian B. at 7:24 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
Here is the quote from the ProPublica source cited:
Without public notice or debate, the Obama administration has expanded the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance of Americans’ international Internet traffic to search for evidence of malicious computer hacking, according to classified NSA documents.
In mid-2012, Justice Department lawyers wrote two secret memos permitting the spy agency to begin hunting on Internet cables, without a warrant and on American soil, for data linked to computer intrusions originating abroad — including traffic that flows to suspicious Internet addresses or contains malware, the documents show.
Please don't, stop.
posted by Brian B. at 7:24 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm trying really hard to be optimistic about this, and I will say that the recently-pardoned 46 individuals is a start. But I'm also feeling like... well, politicians have been lamenting the rise of mass incarceration since the 90s, and pretty much the only change we have seen in the last two decades has come from the United States Sentencing Commission, a branch of the judiciary.
Like, hell yes I appreciate Obama's comments on justice reform. But, last I checked, solitary confinement is ho-hum in both state and federal prison systems, we are executing people with experimental drugs, public defenders are horrifically underfunded despite constitutional mandates that have been chipped away at and explained away since they were first announced, companies servicing prisons are subjected to very few restrictions or regulations, etc. etc. and on and on. Which is to say, I guess, I'll believe this sweeping reform when I actually see it.
posted by likeatoaster at 7:24 AM on July 21, 2015 [10 favorites]
Like, hell yes I appreciate Obama's comments on justice reform. But, last I checked, solitary confinement is ho-hum in both state and federal prison systems, we are executing people with experimental drugs, public defenders are horrifically underfunded despite constitutional mandates that have been chipped away at and explained away since they were first announced, companies servicing prisons are subjected to very few restrictions or regulations, etc. etc. and on and on. Which is to say, I guess, I'll believe this sweeping reform when I actually see it.
posted by likeatoaster at 7:24 AM on July 21, 2015 [10 favorites]
If Americans insist on having prisons run by private corporations, why not tie their funding to their performance (No Prisoner Left Behind!). Base funding levels on the recidivism and employment rates for inmates released from the prison. Is there a reliable way to measure violence in prison? Reduce funding if there's violence.
No matter how you do it, it runs into the same problem as it does with schools. Reducing funding will punish the inmates, not the administrators.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:26 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
No matter how you do it, it runs into the same problem as it does with schools. Reducing funding will punish the inmates, not the administrators.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:26 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
No matter how you do it, it runs into the same problem as it does with schools. Reducing funding will punish the inmates, not the administrators.
Well my thinking was that if they're mandated to do X, Y, Z then the loss would end up coming, at least in part, out of their profits. The fact is the administrators won't tolerate a loss. Once they're not making a profit, they'll pull out. Their options are either design programs that actually work or get out of the business.
...or now that I think about, the third option is to find a way to rig the numbers. I'm not sure how they would do that, but I'm sure there's a consultant out there who would be happy to teach them.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 7:39 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Well my thinking was that if they're mandated to do X, Y, Z then the loss would end up coming, at least in part, out of their profits. The fact is the administrators won't tolerate a loss. Once they're not making a profit, they'll pull out. Their options are either design programs that actually work or get out of the business.
...or now that I think about, the third option is to find a way to rig the numbers. I'm not sure how they would do that, but I'm sure there's a consultant out there who would be happy to teach them.
posted by If only I had a penguin... at 7:39 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm not sure how to interpret Democratic Presidential third act pardons and public statements of moral outrage. Obama has had consistently regressive policies for his whole presidency, and that is in keeping with most of what he promised when campaigning. He's been a follower not a leader in the more prominent civil rights struggles of this decade (gay marriage, police killings). I have no reason to think his personal values are especially progressive.
Why do Democratic presidents make symbolic gestures toward progressive values in their final months in office? I assume it's a hope of being remembered in this or that light, but I don't know, I don't understand what's motivating them at this stage.
posted by latkes at 7:45 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Why do Democratic presidents make symbolic gestures toward progressive values in their final months in office? I assume it's a hope of being remembered in this or that light, but I don't know, I don't understand what's motivating them at this stage.
posted by latkes at 7:45 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Obama can simply pardon people, including drug offenders, but so far he has not done so on a large scale. At present, the corporations operating our state prisons are bigger criminals that most of the inmates. Just pardoning wide swaths of federal criminals to reduce their profits does considerable good, irrespective of any particular inmate's situation.
The problem is that they have to be aware that if they pardon 500,000 nonviolent drug offenders and one of them goes on to mug someone later, it will take about eight seconds for the entire right wing to scream WILLIE HORTON WILLIE HORTON OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS CAUSED THIS THEY WANT US ALL MURDERED IN OUR BEDS BY SCARY BLACK DRUG FIENDS WHO ARE BLACK AND USE DRUGS WHILE BLACK.
There are areas in which the nation has benefited strongly during Obama's watch, and notable areas (like those noted above) in which it has regressed. One must consider that he never was particularly liberal on fiscal issues to begin with, and he's dealing with a Congress where both sides are muppets bought and paid for by corporations and interest groups, the opposition party knows its base responds to bipartisan compromise with shrieks of TREASON!, and a pretty good chunk of them are convinced Obama is a Kenyan Muslim usurper about to declare martial law.
posted by delfin at 7:47 AM on July 21, 2015 [9 favorites]
The problem is that they have to be aware that if they pardon 500,000 nonviolent drug offenders and one of them goes on to mug someone later, it will take about eight seconds for the entire right wing to scream WILLIE HORTON WILLIE HORTON OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS CAUSED THIS THEY WANT US ALL MURDERED IN OUR BEDS BY SCARY BLACK DRUG FIENDS WHO ARE BLACK AND USE DRUGS WHILE BLACK.
There are areas in which the nation has benefited strongly during Obama's watch, and notable areas (like those noted above) in which it has regressed. One must consider that he never was particularly liberal on fiscal issues to begin with, and he's dealing with a Congress where both sides are muppets bought and paid for by corporations and interest groups, the opposition party knows its base responds to bipartisan compromise with shrieks of TREASON!, and a pretty good chunk of them are convinced Obama is a Kenyan Muslim usurper about to declare martial law.
posted by delfin at 7:47 AM on July 21, 2015 [9 favorites]
Actually capitalists are pretty good at optimizing for whatever metrics keep up appearances while cutting anything costly that's actually helpful. And they hire lobbyists to fix the rules if the bill ever comes due.
We should observe that Obama was dragged along by marijuana reform and gay rights too, largely against his will or better judgement. LBJ proved much more helpful to the Civil right's movement, by comparison. Although maybe that's because the CIA warned LBJ the communists would use the Civil rights movement against the U.S. if he did not.
posted by jeffburdges at 7:47 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
We should observe that Obama was dragged along by marijuana reform and gay rights too, largely against his will or better judgement. LBJ proved much more helpful to the Civil right's movement, by comparison. Although maybe that's because the CIA warned LBJ the communists would use the Civil rights movement against the U.S. if he did not.
posted by jeffburdges at 7:47 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
Liberals are twisting themselves into knots trying to salve their vague sense of cognitive dissonance with an endgame rewrite of the Obama legacy, but I doubt history will be as sloppy and fawning in its assessment.
Given how every president before Obama has done shitty things to civil rights in the name of "security", I'm not going to hold my breath. Eventually, the misdeeds just sort of blend together, if they get mentioned in the history books at all.
It's a sick system.
(Also "liberals"? WTF is this shit?)
posted by bgal81 at 7:54 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Given how every president before Obama has done shitty things to civil rights in the name of "security", I'm not going to hold my breath. Eventually, the misdeeds just sort of blend together, if they get mentioned in the history books at all.
It's a sick system.
(Also "liberals"? WTF is this shit?)
posted by bgal81 at 7:54 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
(Also "liberals"? WTF is this shit?)
It's gotten to the point where, when I hear the word "liberals" used in that context, I can just tune out everything else, like with the phrase "politically correct" and "social justice warrior" and the word "hipster."
posted by maxsparber at 8:09 AM on July 21, 2015 [27 favorites]
It's gotten to the point where, when I hear the word "liberals" used in that context, I can just tune out everything else, like with the phrase "politically correct" and "social justice warrior" and the word "hipster."
posted by maxsparber at 8:09 AM on July 21, 2015 [27 favorites]
Ain't too hard to deflect the right-wing Willie Horton framing from the get go, especially if you're willing to call it out as racist before they get going.
We spend about $74B on 2.4M prisoners, so pardoning 1M prisoners could cost the prison-industrial complex like $31B. If you rearrange existing government services, then maybe that hit could fall disproportionately on the prison contractors, like Aramark. And they cannot simply lobby another 1M prisoners back into jail, not quickly enough for quarterly earnings reports anyways.
I strongly doubt Obama could pardon 1M because the majority are state not federal. There are however many games Obama could play with whatever beds he can free to do long term damage to the prison contractors.
posted by jeffburdges at 8:10 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
We spend about $74B on 2.4M prisoners, so pardoning 1M prisoners could cost the prison-industrial complex like $31B. If you rearrange existing government services, then maybe that hit could fall disproportionately on the prison contractors, like Aramark. And they cannot simply lobby another 1M prisoners back into jail, not quickly enough for quarterly earnings reports anyways.
I strongly doubt Obama could pardon 1M because the majority are state not federal. There are however many games Obama could play with whatever beds he can free to do long term damage to the prison contractors.
posted by jeffburdges at 8:10 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
(Also "liberals"? WTF is this shit?)
Here's Phil Ochs to explain.
posted by ryanshepard at 8:19 AM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
Here's Phil Ochs to explain.
posted by ryanshepard at 8:19 AM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
Yeah, Obama can't pardon/commute 500,000 nonviolent drug offenders because there are only 207,847 total federal inmates. There are 95,165 inmates for drug offenses, some of whom are violent criminals or high level criminals. There are 2,000,000 prisoners in state custody that he can't directly pardon even if he wanted too. There isn't really much Obama can do but act as a leader on this and commute as much as he can to try and get people to realize it's not the end of the world to do so.
Oh, and he could, you know...support legalizing and regulating just to help get the poll numbers for that even higher.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:20 AM on July 21, 2015 [8 favorites]
Oh, and he could, you know...support legalizing and regulating just to help get the poll numbers for that even higher.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:20 AM on July 21, 2015 [8 favorites]
It's gotten to the point where, when I hear the word "liberals" used in that context, I can just tune out everything else, like with the phrase "politically correct" and "social justice warrior" and the word "hipster."
i mean congrats on 'tuning out' totally valid criticisms of obama's administration i guess but he's absolutely entrenched some of the worst abuses of bush's presidency and deserves to be crucified for it imo. i would absolutely characterize your reaction as liberal, from the left.
posted by p3on at 9:01 AM on July 21, 2015 [6 favorites]
i mean congrats on 'tuning out' totally valid criticisms of obama's administration i guess but he's absolutely entrenched some of the worst abuses of bush's presidency and deserves to be crucified for it imo. i would absolutely characterize your reaction as liberal, from the left.
posted by p3on at 9:01 AM on July 21, 2015 [6 favorites]
Okay, I'll come on. Obama certainly deserves criticism, and has received his share from me. At the same time, the idea that the president can somehow unilaterally make changes is incredibly naive. We have a complicated system of governance set up, and a large and complicated population, and Obama has been making what I think are his best attempts at shifting both toward justice. His presidency has seen extraordinary changes, made all the more extraordinary by the fact that it has been done in the face of overwhelming opposition from the right, including a genuinely terrifying return of political racism.
He deserves criticism. He also deserves praise for what he has genuinely accomplished. He doesn't deserve to be crucified. Your language choice was terrible.
posted by maxsparber at 9:19 AM on July 21, 2015 [16 favorites]
He deserves criticism. He also deserves praise for what he has genuinely accomplished. He doesn't deserve to be crucified. Your language choice was terrible.
posted by maxsparber at 9:19 AM on July 21, 2015 [16 favorites]
Mod note: Several comments deleted; let's set aside the "crucified" thing, and unwind some of the short sharp sticks aspect of the conversation?
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:27 AM on July 21, 2015
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:27 AM on July 21, 2015
ryanshepard: "Just two examples. If you can look around at the US of 2015 and say there has been any meaningful progress against structural inequality under Obama - that we aren't demonstrably moving backwards, in fact - I don't know what I can say to convince you."
The fact that we acknowledge structural inequality at all is new. Let's try not to lose sight of the fact that this country didn't even admit that structural inequality was a problem until about two or three years ago. A large part of the electorate still doesn't admit that structural inequality is a problem.
In that light, any progress at all is kind of amazing.
posted by scrump at 9:50 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
The fact that we acknowledge structural inequality at all is new. Let's try not to lose sight of the fact that this country didn't even admit that structural inequality was a problem until about two or three years ago. A large part of the electorate still doesn't admit that structural inequality is a problem.
In that light, any progress at all is kind of amazing.
posted by scrump at 9:50 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Rebecca Solnit, A letter to my dismal allies on the US left
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:53 AM on July 21, 2015 [16 favorites]
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:53 AM on July 21, 2015 [16 favorites]
Aww, give Democratic party apologists a break—they'll need this sort of running start to gear up for the even more impressive feats of doublethink required to be excited for the forthcoming Clinton campaign and presidency.
posted by anarch at 9:56 AM on July 21, 2015 [8 favorites]
posted by anarch at 9:56 AM on July 21, 2015 [8 favorites]
The fact that we acknowledge structural inequality at all is new. Let's try not to lose sight of the fact that this country didn't even admit that structural inequality was a problem until about two or three years ago.
I'm confused about what these assertions even mean. First of all, numerous USese people -- at minimum, the millions of them most affected -- have been aware of all sorts of structural inequalities for many more than two or three years. Second, it's not clear what it means for a country to admit something, or for "we" to acknowledge something. Until those things are made explicit, it certainly isn't clear what answer is being given to ryanshepard's comment.
Moreover, if, on the off-chance (as evidenced by the reference to the profile of "structural inequality" being raised a few years ago), you're referring to the (extremely important) attention drawn to economic inequality a few years ago by things like Occupy, I'll remind you that the Occupy movement in the US was systematically targeted by federal law enforcement, which is part of the executive branch under the current administration. Is it your position that these actions were part of the administration's efforts to raise public awareness about "structural inequality"?
posted by busted_crayons at 10:10 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
I'm confused about what these assertions even mean. First of all, numerous USese people -- at minimum, the millions of them most affected -- have been aware of all sorts of structural inequalities for many more than two or three years. Second, it's not clear what it means for a country to admit something, or for "we" to acknowledge something. Until those things are made explicit, it certainly isn't clear what answer is being given to ryanshepard's comment.
Moreover, if, on the off-chance (as evidenced by the reference to the profile of "structural inequality" being raised a few years ago), you're referring to the (extremely important) attention drawn to economic inequality a few years ago by things like Occupy, I'll remind you that the Occupy movement in the US was systematically targeted by federal law enforcement, which is part of the executive branch under the current administration. Is it your position that these actions were part of the administration's efforts to raise public awareness about "structural inequality"?
posted by busted_crayons at 10:10 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
I have been saying since 2007 that the game Obama plays isn't chess, 11-dimensional or otherwise; it's poker, and he plays it well and he plays it as a long game. Over and over he has achieved things nobody considered possible by bluffing, feinting, getting his opponents to shoot themselves in the foot, and carefully directing his resources where they will have the most practical effect.
I believe Obama entered office with a fairly clear idea of what he thought he could meaningfully accomplish and has been working very deliberately toward this set of goals since the beginning. And this is the part of the game where he's gotten everyone all-in and he drops four aces on the table and stacks everyone.
posted by Bringer Tom at 10:16 AM on July 21, 2015 [10 favorites]
I believe Obama entered office with a fairly clear idea of what he thought he could meaningfully accomplish and has been working very deliberately toward this set of goals since the beginning. And this is the part of the game where he's gotten everyone all-in and he drops four aces on the table and stacks everyone.
posted by Bringer Tom at 10:16 AM on July 21, 2015 [10 favorites]
I have been saying since 2007 that the game Obama plays isn't chess, 11-dimensional or otherwise; it's poker, and he plays it well and he plays it as a long game.
Classic article on that here.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:21 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Classic article on that here.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:21 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Over and over he has achieved things nobody considered possible by bluffing, feinting, getting his opponents to shoot themselves in the foot, and carefully directing his resources where they will have the most practical effect.
I'm pretty sure Obama is the smartest president we've had in a long time, but I'm curious which things he's actually achieved. Health care reform is huge, and not to be downplayed however flawed and inadequate it is, but as far as I can recall seems like his only real legacy.
posted by latkes at 10:31 AM on July 21, 2015
I'm pretty sure Obama is the smartest president we've had in a long time, but I'm curious which things he's actually achieved. Health care reform is huge, and not to be downplayed however flawed and inadequate it is, but as far as I can recall seems like his only real legacy.
posted by latkes at 10:31 AM on July 21, 2015
What were President Barack Obama's accomplishments?
A list of 305 accomplishments by Obama
111 Obama accomplishments
A LONG List Of President Obama’s Accomplishments (With Citations)
posted by maxsparber at 10:34 AM on July 21, 2015 [7 favorites]
A list of 305 accomplishments by Obama
111 Obama accomplishments
A LONG List Of President Obama’s Accomplishments (With Citations)
posted by maxsparber at 10:34 AM on July 21, 2015 [7 favorites]
Rebecca Solnit, A letter to my dismal allies on the US left
Wish I could favorite this multiple times.
posted by JKevinKing at 11:01 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
Wish I could favorite this multiple times.
posted by JKevinKing at 11:01 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
I mean, a massive list of various bills Obama has signed is not really a helpful or clear statement of his accomplishments. Every president signs bills. From the point of view of us as citizens, what real changes has he made while in office? What policies did he bring about that would have been unlikely to have happened under another president? I just don't think there's much beyond Obamacare (which is a big deal!)
posted by latkes at 11:03 AM on July 21, 2015
posted by latkes at 11:03 AM on July 21, 2015
From the point of view of us as citizens, what real changes has he made while in office? What policies did he bring about that would have been unlikely to have happened under another president?
As you said, Obamacare.
The holy trinity: Obamacare, Gay Marriage, Iran nuclear deal. That's enough for a historic monumental life changing legacy.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:07 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
As you said, Obamacare.
The holy trinity: Obamacare, Gay Marriage, Iran nuclear deal. That's enough for a historic monumental life changing legacy.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:07 AM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
Don't forget opening Cuba. That's more likely to be attributed to him than gay marriage, which he more or less let the court take care of for him. But both Iran and Cuba are mostly Executive actions which involved a lot of long-term maneuvering and planning by Obama's people.
posted by Bringer Tom at 11:11 AM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by Bringer Tom at 11:11 AM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
Obamacare: The best health care the US has ever seen - still worse than any 'western democracy'
Gay Marriage: He was against it before he was for it, his position 'evolved' slower than the general public, the courts made it happen.
Iran nuclear deal: I wish him luck on this, but it ain't a done deal.
posted by el io at 11:17 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Gay Marriage: He was against it before he was for it, his position 'evolved' slower than the general public, the courts made it happen.
Iran nuclear deal: I wish him luck on this, but it ain't a done deal.
posted by el io at 11:17 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
He did little to advance gay marriage and actively opposed it for a long time. Cuba is a good one, that does make sense to me.
posted by latkes at 11:17 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by latkes at 11:17 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
Latkes:
Often over complete, bitter and utter opposition (made worse by latent racial fears stoked by demogogues) and resistance from even within his own party, his government, e.g.,
-arguably and along with the Fed, likely prevented a depression in the United States via stimulus and
-also the bailout of the auto industry,
-Obamacare
-Dodd-Frank
-Two women Supreme Court justices on the Court,
-Diversity on the Federal Bench,
-Osama bin Laden killed,
-We pulled put of Iraq (recognizing the mistakes in that area),
-Environmental Regulations after GOP blocked legialative actions,
-Opened relations with Cuba & Burma,
-TPP, and
-Nuclear arms deal with Iran (incomplete but probable).
These are some of the biggest. You might not agree with all of them. I don't, at least partially, on several. Also, I wish I didn't have to write this but I acknowledge his defects, such as deportations and privacy issues, among others. Nonetheless, the above are indisputably accomplishments. The notion that somehow the Obama Adminstration has had no accomplishments seems ludicrous to me.
Frankly, the fact that both the Left and the Right disdain Obama makes me think he must be approximately on the right course.
posted by JKevinKing at 11:25 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Often over complete, bitter and utter opposition (made worse by latent racial fears stoked by demogogues) and resistance from even within his own party, his government, e.g.,
-arguably and along with the Fed, likely prevented a depression in the United States via stimulus and
-also the bailout of the auto industry,
-Obamacare
-Dodd-Frank
-Two women Supreme Court justices on the Court,
-Diversity on the Federal Bench,
-Osama bin Laden killed,
-We pulled put of Iraq (recognizing the mistakes in that area),
-Environmental Regulations after GOP blocked legialative actions,
-Opened relations with Cuba & Burma,
-TPP, and
-Nuclear arms deal with Iran (incomplete but probable).
These are some of the biggest. You might not agree with all of them. I don't, at least partially, on several. Also, I wish I didn't have to write this but I acknowledge his defects, such as deportations and privacy issues, among others. Nonetheless, the above are indisputably accomplishments. The notion that somehow the Obama Adminstration has had no accomplishments seems ludicrous to me.
Frankly, the fact that both the Left and the Right disdain Obama makes me think he must be approximately on the right course.
posted by JKevinKing at 11:25 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Two of the members of the Supreme Court that voted on gay marriage were appointed by Obama. Had a Republican been in office, we likely would have seen the court go a different way.
We can No True Scotsman Obama's accomplishments until the end of time, but if we're going to lay the failings of the country at his feet, then he gets credit for its accomplishments, especially when he legitimately had a hand in it. And, make no mistake, he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, called for the repeal of DOMA, opposed Prop 8, condemned aversion therapy, made appointments of people who were openly gay, supported same-sex adoption, signed Executive Order 13672 (adding"gender identity" to the categories protected against discrimination in hiring in the federal civilian workforce), signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, and repealed Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He has consistently signaled support for the gay community, through words and through acts, and I think he can rightly claim gay marriage as part of his legacy.
posted by maxsparber at 11:29 AM on July 21, 2015 [14 favorites]
We can No True Scotsman Obama's accomplishments until the end of time, but if we're going to lay the failings of the country at his feet, then he gets credit for its accomplishments, especially when he legitimately had a hand in it. And, make no mistake, he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, called for the repeal of DOMA, opposed Prop 8, condemned aversion therapy, made appointments of people who were openly gay, supported same-sex adoption, signed Executive Order 13672 (adding"gender identity" to the categories protected against discrimination in hiring in the federal civilian workforce), signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, and repealed Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He has consistently signaled support for the gay community, through words and through acts, and I think he can rightly claim gay marriage as part of his legacy.
posted by maxsparber at 11:29 AM on July 21, 2015 [14 favorites]
He's the most pro-gay president ever. He helped gay marriage pass by appointing pro-gay justices to the supreme court.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:29 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:29 AM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
He ... actively opposed it for a long time. (Obama w/r/t gay marriage.)
I call B.S. He didn't publicly support it, no, until 2012, but he did not actively oppose it. You're confusing him with his enemies on the Right.
posted by JKevinKing at 11:31 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
I call B.S. He didn't publicly support it, no, until 2012, but he did not actively oppose it. You're confusing him with his enemies on the Right.
posted by JKevinKing at 11:31 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
I think James Buchanan might have been our most pro-gay president, at least privately.
posted by maxsparber at 11:32 AM on July 21, 2015
posted by maxsparber at 11:32 AM on July 21, 2015
maxsparber,
Really? James Buchanan? Do the gays want to claim him? ;)
posted by JKevinKing at 11:34 AM on July 21, 2015
Really? James Buchanan? Do the gays want to claim him? ;)
posted by JKevinKing at 11:34 AM on July 21, 2015
Two of the members of the Supreme Court that voted on gay marriage were appointed by Obama. Had a Republican been in office, we likely would have seen the court go a different way.
The court decisions this year really drove home the importance of having a Democrat in the White House for the next eight years.
posted by octothorpe at 11:38 AM on July 21, 2015 [8 favorites]
The court decisions this year really drove home the importance of having a Democrat in the White House for the next eight years.
posted by octothorpe at 11:38 AM on July 21, 2015 [8 favorites]
Really? James Buchanan? Do the gays want to claim him? ;)
I don't think they want to claim him, I think he was just gay.
posted by maxsparber at 11:39 AM on July 21, 2015
I don't think they want to claim him, I think he was just gay.
posted by maxsparber at 11:39 AM on July 21, 2015
I call B.S. He didn't publicly support it, no, until 2012, but he did not actively oppose it. You're confusing him with his enemies on the Right.
He campaigned in 2008 as a candidate who was against gay marriage. He cited at various times strategic reasons and his own religious beliefs as justification for saying marriage should only be between men and women. He was an opponent of gay marriage who promoted a bigoted, anti-gay position on the issue. Yes, he eventually fixed it, but don't go erasing history. When you listen to the Republicans this year talk about their own opposition remember that Democrats were happy to allow their candidate to voice opposition to it as well only a few very short years ago. Always push the Democrats as hard as you can to do better.
posted by Drinky Die at 11:45 AM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
He campaigned in 2008 as a candidate who was against gay marriage. He cited at various times strategic reasons and his own religious beliefs as justification for saying marriage should only be between men and women. He was an opponent of gay marriage who promoted a bigoted, anti-gay position on the issue. Yes, he eventually fixed it, but don't go erasing history. When you listen to the Republicans this year talk about their own opposition remember that Democrats were happy to allow their candidate to voice opposition to it as well only a few very short years ago. Always push the Democrats as hard as you can to do better.
posted by Drinky Die at 11:45 AM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
I don't think they want to claim him, I think he was just gay.
Wow! Ha no idea he was gay and that the public knew & accepted it! Thanks!
posted by JKevinKing at 11:46 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Wow! Ha no idea he was gay and that the public knew & accepted it! Thanks!
posted by JKevinKing at 11:46 AM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Drinky Die,
Aside from public statements, when he was opposed what actions did he take to prevent gay marriage? Did he try to get an amendment passed, or overturn state laws establishing it, or even lobby against it? I'm not denying that he opposed it but that he actively opposed it. To me, it is the difference between him and Rick Santorum, et al. And that does make a difference IMO
posted by JKevinKing at 11:56 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
Aside from public statements, when he was opposed what actions did he take to prevent gay marriage? Did he try to get an amendment passed, or overturn state laws establishing it, or even lobby against it? I'm not denying that he opposed it but that he actively opposed it. To me, it is the difference between him and Rick Santorum, et al. And that does make a difference IMO
posted by JKevinKing at 11:56 AM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
As I recall, he supported civil unions, but opposed calling them marriage. And that's on him -- it's certainly something that deserves criticism, and I was quite critical of it when he said it.
But he has also completely reversed himself, and I credit him for that.
posted by maxsparber at 12:03 PM on July 21, 2015
But he has also completely reversed himself, and I credit him for that.
posted by maxsparber at 12:03 PM on July 21, 2015
I'm not denying that he opposed it but that he actively opposed it. To me, it is the difference between him and Rick Santorum, et al. And that does make a difference IMO
That's fine, just don't criticize someone like Donald Trump too much when he opposes gay marriage either. He hasn't done anything but talk.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:04 PM on July 21, 2015
That's fine, just don't criticize someone like Donald Trump too much when he opposes gay marriage either. He hasn't done anything but talk.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:04 PM on July 21, 2015
Okey dokey. (Not that I take Trump seriously enough to bother criticizing. But if the horrible fact of his presidency became plausible, I would criticize him appropriately on all manner of issues.)
FWIW, I did and do criticize President Obama for not supporting gay marriage from the get-go.
posted by JKevinKing at 12:17 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
FWIW, I did and do criticize President Obama for not supporting gay marriage from the get-go.
posted by JKevinKing at 12:17 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
2009 wasn't that long ago. Obama took office with 2 wars in force, and a ruined economy. He got the ARRA passed, which stimulated the economy, gave people jobs, and fixed stuff, including several bridges in my area, and grants that helped me get hearing aids, and other people get job assistance. Lots of people got extended unemployment when they desperately needed it. The wars are largely ended, and the effort to scale the US military back down to pre-war size is begun, with lots of complaining from the right, what with war being so profitable.
Healthcare. It's so imperfect, but trod the fine line of what could work and what could get passed. And even though I live in Maine where our incompetent horrid governor won't accept the Medicaid funding, and I have no subsidy, it's still vastly better than it was.
With Congress controlled by the Right, it's pretty difficult to make any progress, difficult even to keep things from getting too much worse.
I look forward to Obama being Blacker; and really look forward to seeing what he gets up to after leaving the White House.
posted by theora55 at 1:21 PM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Healthcare. It's so imperfect, but trod the fine line of what could work and what could get passed. And even though I live in Maine where our incompetent horrid governor won't accept the Medicaid funding, and I have no subsidy, it's still vastly better than it was.
With Congress controlled by the Right, it's pretty difficult to make any progress, difficult even to keep things from getting too much worse.
I look forward to Obama being Blacker; and really look forward to seeing what he gets up to after leaving the White House.
posted by theora55 at 1:21 PM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Barack Obama is officially one of the most consequential presidents in American history, which I'm sure will be summarily dismissed because it's a Vox article.
posted by Caduceus at 1:29 PM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by Caduceus at 1:29 PM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
-Osama bin Laden killed
It's possibly a derail, but it's kind of disgusting -- or at least, kind of medieval -- to list this killing as a positive accomplishment. First, bin Laden was killed neither as part of a duly-declared war nor as the result of anything like due process of law. I've met very few people outside of the US (at the time, I recall discussing it with several Canadians, several Iranian nationals living in Canada, and people from a couple of different South American countries) who weren't at least a little horrified by that; the general attitude was that it would have been a major PR coup to apprehend bin Laden and try him in court. It isn't clear to me what specific goals were accomplished by killing bin Laden, what quantifiable threat he posed at the time he was killed, or how the total public menace was lessened by killing him.
The Solnit letter above criticized certain "leftists" for being more concerned with foreign than domestic US policy. Even in cases where this is true, the reason tends to be that domestic policy contains fewer instances of explicitly claiming the authority to kill large numbers of people. This administration does not appear to be as bad, in numerical terms, as the previous one, but the calculated formalization of that power (in, e.g. the careful legal justifications cooked up for targeted killing, including of US citizens) is extremely disturbing.
There's a conflict between two different approaches to trying to solve a vast array of very bad problems. One approach is to tackle to worst issues first, even if success is unlikely, while another is to tackle comparatively low-hanging fruit first. The approach some might characterize as the "liberal" approach, or the "incremental" approach, is the engineer's approach; the people Solnit characterizes as the "dismal left" seem to have adopted something more like the triage nurse's approach.
For example, from the triage nurse's point of view, the fact that the government has constructed for itself the authority to kill basically anyone it wishes, legally, and does so as a matter of routine, is a major disaster; the patient's heart has stopped, we have to fucking try to deal with this, even if CPR has a low success rate or whatever. Similarly, the fact that the administration has normalized the harsh silencing of many types of criticism and dissent is slightly less alarming -- they didn't quite disappear Chelsea Manning, and Snowden hasn't had a visit from a bunch of Navy SEALs that I'm aware of -- but very serious: the appendix is in a dire state, and if some more sinister administration takes the reins with the same powers and precedents in place, the appendix is going to burst. The interconnected abuses of the Wars on Certain Drugs and Nebulous Concepts and the rise of the (let's just be clear) modern US police state are a major disaster -- somewhere between appendicitis and cardiac arrest.
Anthropogenic climate change (the obstruction to whose mitigation is largely political, not technological) is, in this analogy, whatever condition makes the triage nurse let you cut in line in front of the person with the stopped heart.
Many of these ills are actually symptoms of an underlying systemic disease, namely the naked corporate hijacking of the (large-scale) political system. The presence of this cancer is what makes these difficult issues less amenable to treatment via the engineer's approach, if the engineers are taken to be citizens themselves. The triage nurse understands that we need to stabilize the patient and then send them upstairs to treat the cancer. Then engineer, or at least the caricature on display in various MeFi hippie-punching threads, wants to fix the patient's glasses, because, although fixing glasses is difficult, the engineer will definitely be able to get it done with enough work. It's also tremendously important, because the patient is basically blind, but the patient is going to die anyway.
Fortunately, there are a lot of us, and both approaches need to be taken, so do whatever you want. I don't see the need to bristle at valid criticisms just because the parties being criticised also have some important engineering accomplishments. Would it be preferable that serious problems were not pointed out? I also don't really see the point of keeping track of someone's engineering accomplishments for the purpose of arguing with the triage nurse.
(An engineer, especially, should be able to appreciate that it's more valuable to move on to the next problem rather than trumpeting past glories. The "presidential legacy" stuff is tiresome in that regard, and, regardless of the person involved, there is way too much personality-cult stuff involved in national politics [this is obviously not unique to the US by any stretch].)
posted by busted_crayons at 1:35 PM on July 21, 2015 [12 favorites]
It's possibly a derail, but it's kind of disgusting -- or at least, kind of medieval -- to list this killing as a positive accomplishment. First, bin Laden was killed neither as part of a duly-declared war nor as the result of anything like due process of law. I've met very few people outside of the US (at the time, I recall discussing it with several Canadians, several Iranian nationals living in Canada, and people from a couple of different South American countries) who weren't at least a little horrified by that; the general attitude was that it would have been a major PR coup to apprehend bin Laden and try him in court. It isn't clear to me what specific goals were accomplished by killing bin Laden, what quantifiable threat he posed at the time he was killed, or how the total public menace was lessened by killing him.
The Solnit letter above criticized certain "leftists" for being more concerned with foreign than domestic US policy. Even in cases where this is true, the reason tends to be that domestic policy contains fewer instances of explicitly claiming the authority to kill large numbers of people. This administration does not appear to be as bad, in numerical terms, as the previous one, but the calculated formalization of that power (in, e.g. the careful legal justifications cooked up for targeted killing, including of US citizens) is extremely disturbing.
There's a conflict between two different approaches to trying to solve a vast array of very bad problems. One approach is to tackle to worst issues first, even if success is unlikely, while another is to tackle comparatively low-hanging fruit first. The approach some might characterize as the "liberal" approach, or the "incremental" approach, is the engineer's approach; the people Solnit characterizes as the "dismal left" seem to have adopted something more like the triage nurse's approach.
For example, from the triage nurse's point of view, the fact that the government has constructed for itself the authority to kill basically anyone it wishes, legally, and does so as a matter of routine, is a major disaster; the patient's heart has stopped, we have to fucking try to deal with this, even if CPR has a low success rate or whatever. Similarly, the fact that the administration has normalized the harsh silencing of many types of criticism and dissent is slightly less alarming -- they didn't quite disappear Chelsea Manning, and Snowden hasn't had a visit from a bunch of Navy SEALs that I'm aware of -- but very serious: the appendix is in a dire state, and if some more sinister administration takes the reins with the same powers and precedents in place, the appendix is going to burst. The interconnected abuses of the Wars on Certain Drugs and Nebulous Concepts and the rise of the (let's just be clear) modern US police state are a major disaster -- somewhere between appendicitis and cardiac arrest.
Anthropogenic climate change (the obstruction to whose mitigation is largely political, not technological) is, in this analogy, whatever condition makes the triage nurse let you cut in line in front of the person with the stopped heart.
Many of these ills are actually symptoms of an underlying systemic disease, namely the naked corporate hijacking of the (large-scale) political system. The presence of this cancer is what makes these difficult issues less amenable to treatment via the engineer's approach, if the engineers are taken to be citizens themselves. The triage nurse understands that we need to stabilize the patient and then send them upstairs to treat the cancer. Then engineer, or at least the caricature on display in various MeFi hippie-punching threads, wants to fix the patient's glasses, because, although fixing glasses is difficult, the engineer will definitely be able to get it done with enough work. It's also tremendously important, because the patient is basically blind, but the patient is going to die anyway.
Fortunately, there are a lot of us, and both approaches need to be taken, so do whatever you want. I don't see the need to bristle at valid criticisms just because the parties being criticised also have some important engineering accomplishments. Would it be preferable that serious problems were not pointed out? I also don't really see the point of keeping track of someone's engineering accomplishments for the purpose of arguing with the triage nurse.
(An engineer, especially, should be able to appreciate that it's more valuable to move on to the next problem rather than trumpeting past glories. The "presidential legacy" stuff is tiresome in that regard, and, regardless of the person involved, there is way too much personality-cult stuff involved in national politics [this is obviously not unique to the US by any stretch].)
posted by busted_crayons at 1:35 PM on July 21, 2015 [12 favorites]
Vox's trollish "officially" aside, we're never going to agree on Obama's overall commendability. Basically, you have to take some crazy weighted sum of the goodness or badness of everything he's done, times the degree to which he was pivotal, times the magnitude of the effect of each thing.
For instance, leaving aside the magnitude of the effects of each policy, here is my totally off-the-cuff and in no way seriously-meant scoring for praiseworthiness of various types of actions a Democratic president may take. Note that "takes a position" is just a stand-in for any sort of action: speeches, bills, court appointments, etc. (Each action also requires a magnitude-of-effect estimate, which isn't included here.) And the scores associated with each type of action are probably on some logarithmic scale, and of course are almost entirely in jest.
Types of actions and worthiness points:
[10] Takes a commendable position different from mainstream or what any generic Democrat would do, and gets it done
[6] Takes a position different from mainstream but similar to what a generic Democrat would do, and gets it done
[3] Takes a position different from mainstream or what a generic Democrat would do, and fails to get it done but changes the discourse
[2] Takes a position different from mainstream but similar to what a generic Democrat would do, and fails to get it done but changes the discourse
[2] Takes a position similar to the mainstream and gets it done (not a given, with R's running Congress)
[1] Blocks the R's on some policy matter that might actually have passed without significant blocking effort
[0] Takes a position similar to the mainstream and doesn't get it done
[-1] Fails to take a position that a generic Democrat would take that probably wouldn't have made a difference
[-2] Fails to take a position that a generic Democrat would take that might have made a difference
[-3] Takes a position to the right of mainstream and doesn't get it done, but possibly changes the discourse rightward
[-10] Takes a position to the right of mainstream and gets it done
posted by chortly at 2:24 PM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
For instance, leaving aside the magnitude of the effects of each policy, here is my totally off-the-cuff and in no way seriously-meant scoring for praiseworthiness of various types of actions a Democratic president may take. Note that "takes a position" is just a stand-in for any sort of action: speeches, bills, court appointments, etc. (Each action also requires a magnitude-of-effect estimate, which isn't included here.) And the scores associated with each type of action are probably on some logarithmic scale, and of course are almost entirely in jest.
Types of actions and worthiness points:
[10] Takes a commendable position different from mainstream or what any generic Democrat would do, and gets it done
[6] Takes a position different from mainstream but similar to what a generic Democrat would do, and gets it done
[3] Takes a position different from mainstream or what a generic Democrat would do, and fails to get it done but changes the discourse
[2] Takes a position different from mainstream but similar to what a generic Democrat would do, and fails to get it done but changes the discourse
[2] Takes a position similar to the mainstream and gets it done (not a given, with R's running Congress)
[1] Blocks the R's on some policy matter that might actually have passed without significant blocking effort
[0] Takes a position similar to the mainstream and doesn't get it done
[-1] Fails to take a position that a generic Democrat would take that probably wouldn't have made a difference
[-2] Fails to take a position that a generic Democrat would take that might have made a difference
[-3] Takes a position to the right of mainstream and doesn't get it done, but possibly changes the discourse rightward
[-10] Takes a position to the right of mainstream and gets it done
posted by chortly at 2:24 PM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
busted crayons,
Well, first of all please note that not everything on that list is not necessarily commendable, either in whole or in part. Secondly, as it is probably a derail, I'll keep a response short: I obviously think it's arguable that killing Bin Laden the way it happened is "disgusting" or "medieval." The decision could have been wrong or unwise. I'm not sure I want to get in a extended discussion about this on this thread, though. I was responding to the post that President Obama had not accomplished anything.
posted by JKevinKing at 2:25 PM on July 21, 2015
Well, first of all please note that not everything on that list is not necessarily commendable, either in whole or in part. Secondly, as it is probably a derail, I'll keep a response short: I obviously think it's arguable that killing Bin Laden the way it happened is "disgusting" or "medieval." The decision could have been wrong or unwise. I'm not sure I want to get in a extended discussion about this on this thread, though. I was responding to the post that President Obama had not accomplished anything.
posted by JKevinKing at 2:25 PM on July 21, 2015
When Obama said "yeah, what Bill Cosby did was rape" on live TV, that is when I knew he was truly out of fucks. And it is glorious.
To anyone who thinks isn't the most successful liberal president in a generation, you are wrong. Or willfully ignoring the facts.
posted by dry white toast at 2:26 PM on July 21, 2015 [12 favorites]
To anyone who thinks isn't the most successful liberal president in a generation, you are wrong. Or willfully ignoring the facts.
posted by dry white toast at 2:26 PM on July 21, 2015 [12 favorites]
dry white toast,
I'm not sure that's quite fair, though, as one can make a good case that President Obama is the only liberal president in a generation. Low bar, there.
posted by JKevinKing at 2:31 PM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
I'm not sure that's quite fair, though, as one can make a good case that President Obama is the only liberal president in a generation. Low bar, there.
posted by JKevinKing at 2:31 PM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
And as an aside, I do think that there is an awful lot of political pressure for domestically liberal presidents to be seen as "tough" in foreign policy and national security issues. President Obama has his drone war and his issues with suveillance, etc., just like the last two unabashedly liberal presidents, Kennedy and Johnson. Such pressure can partially explain both Obama's actions, as well as Vietnam, the Bay of Pigs, the massive privacy abuses of that era, etc. I know he has very little chance of actually being president, but I really would like to see what Senator Sanders' foreign policy would actually end up being if he did win.
And if you do consider Clinton a liberal, he too felt the pressure to act tough on the international stage, but he just had a break since the Soviet Union had just broken up.
posted by JKevinKing at 2:42 PM on July 21, 2015
And if you do consider Clinton a liberal, he too felt the pressure to act tough on the international stage, but he just had a break since the Soviet Union had just broken up.
posted by JKevinKing at 2:42 PM on July 21, 2015
We can No True Scotsman Obama's accomplishments until the end of time, but if we're going to lay the failings of the country at his feet, then he gets credit for its accomplishments, especially when he legitimately had a hand in it.
Hmm... People have pointed out accomplishments and I find some of those convincing. I don't think his legacy is progressive, but I don't lay the failings of the country at his feet either. He is fairly typical of our last few presidents who range from right wing to center right. By old fashioned "liberal" standards he is a conservative and on certain measures, TPP as a recent example, he is in the vanguard of pushing a very regressive agenda. Giving him credit for recent advances in gay rights is pretty offensive to me, as he initiated nothing for us and only came around to "support" us when it became politically costly to him not to (remember, we're literally a decade behind many other countries on this issue - the writing has been on the wall on marriage for a while).
I would love to see a more radicalized, truth-telling version of Obama, especially if that truth telling comes with actual policy, but I think lefties project all kinds of left-ness on a guy whose statements and policies have consistently been center-right since the get go.
posted by latkes at 3:16 PM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
Hmm... People have pointed out accomplishments and I find some of those convincing. I don't think his legacy is progressive, but I don't lay the failings of the country at his feet either. He is fairly typical of our last few presidents who range from right wing to center right. By old fashioned "liberal" standards he is a conservative and on certain measures, TPP as a recent example, he is in the vanguard of pushing a very regressive agenda. Giving him credit for recent advances in gay rights is pretty offensive to me, as he initiated nothing for us and only came around to "support" us when it became politically costly to him not to (remember, we're literally a decade behind many other countries on this issue - the writing has been on the wall on marriage for a while).
I would love to see a more radicalized, truth-telling version of Obama, especially if that truth telling comes with actual policy, but I think lefties project all kinds of left-ness on a guy whose statements and policies have consistently been center-right since the get go.
posted by latkes at 3:16 PM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
I'm not sure that's quite fair, though, as one can make a good case that President Obama is the only liberal president in a generation. Low bar, there.
But him being Obama is endogenous to him being a liberal president. The fact that Obama is a liberal president is HUGE.
Giving him credit for recent advances in gay rights is pretty offensive to me
I don't know why you are offended. The he appointed two pro-gay justices to the Supreme Court. That was pivotal. The Supreme Court does not operate in a vacuum.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 3:19 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
But him being Obama is endogenous to him being a liberal president. The fact that Obama is a liberal president is HUGE.
Giving him credit for recent advances in gay rights is pretty offensive to me
I don't know why you are offended. The he appointed two pro-gay justices to the Supreme Court. That was pivotal. The Supreme Court does not operate in a vacuum.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 3:19 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
the general attitude was that it would have been a major PR coup to apprehend bin Laden and try him in court. It isn't clear to me what specific goals were accomplished by killing bin Laden, what quantifiable threat he posed at the time he was killed, or how the total public menace was lessened by killing him.
Well, I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I think killing Bin Laden was the best way to bury a multitude of sins that some people in the US didn't feel like revisiting. The idea that war crimes and other criminal misdeeds were committed by the previous administration exists on the margins of polite discourse as it stands, I don't think it takes much imagination to see them being thrust into the spotlight by what would surely be a long, high profile trial. Given that Obama has been steadfast in his refusal to hold anyone accountable to date, killing Bin Laden was probably the most convenient thing to do. It's not like anyone in the US was going to question the decision that hard.
posted by Maugrim at 4:37 PM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Well, I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I think killing Bin Laden was the best way to bury a multitude of sins that some people in the US didn't feel like revisiting. The idea that war crimes and other criminal misdeeds were committed by the previous administration exists on the margins of polite discourse as it stands, I don't think it takes much imagination to see them being thrust into the spotlight by what would surely be a long, high profile trial. Given that Obama has been steadfast in his refusal to hold anyone accountable to date, killing Bin Laden was probably the most convenient thing to do. It's not like anyone in the US was going to question the decision that hard.
posted by Maugrim at 4:37 PM on July 21, 2015 [3 favorites]
Giving him credit for recent advances in gay rights is pretty offensive to me, as he initiated nothing for us and only came around to "support" us when it became politically costly to him not to (remember, we're literally a decade behind many other countries on this issue - the writing has been on the wall on marriage for a while).
It's a tough spot for US politicians, though. Take the morally correct stance and lose because of it or compromise your principles and win. The shift in the attitude of the American public has taken place very quickly.
posted by Maugrim at 4:43 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
It's a tough spot for US politicians, though. Take the morally correct stance and lose because of it or compromise your principles and win. The shift in the attitude of the American public has taken place very quickly.
posted by Maugrim at 4:43 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Well, I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but I think killing Bin Laden was the best way to bury a multitude of sins that some people in the US didn't feel like revisiting. The idea that war crimes and other criminal misdeeds were committed by the previous administration exists on the margins of polite discourse
That's a very interesting point. That's also an indicative of a major defect in polite discourse; I think this defect is what's responsible for a lot of the strident criticism that polite discourse like Solnit's essay ends up calling "dismal". The type of people who tend to get called "idealists" would probably have an easier time making common cause with the people who call themselves "pragmatists" if they could more reliably get a reaction to war crimes other than reluctant apologetics.
posted by busted_crayons at 5:02 PM on July 21, 2015
That's a very interesting point. That's also an indicative of a major defect in polite discourse; I think this defect is what's responsible for a lot of the strident criticism that polite discourse like Solnit's essay ends up calling "dismal". The type of people who tend to get called "idealists" would probably have an easier time making common cause with the people who call themselves "pragmatists" if they could more reliably get a reaction to war crimes other than reluctant apologetics.
posted by busted_crayons at 5:02 PM on July 21, 2015
I don't know why you are offended. The he appointed two pro-gay justices to the Supreme Court. That was pivotal. The Supreme Court does not operate in a vacuum.
This is a pretty second-hand endorsement of his gay rights record. Most progressive judges now a days would support gay marriage, that's not why these justices were appointed. Kennedy was a Reagan appointee - do you credit Reagan for his gay rights record?
This may be problematic but I actually think it matters who is talking here: if you're queer, I am more interested in engaging on whether Obama has an OK track record on our rights, but if you're straight, I think it's kind of tiresome to argue about it. I know other queers do support him and I've seen plenty of Obama with rainbow flag stickers, but I think for a straight person to make a big case for his gay rights record is kind of problematic.
posted by latkes at 5:07 PM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
This is a pretty second-hand endorsement of his gay rights record. Most progressive judges now a days would support gay marriage, that's not why these justices were appointed. Kennedy was a Reagan appointee - do you credit Reagan for his gay rights record?
This may be problematic but I actually think it matters who is talking here: if you're queer, I am more interested in engaging on whether Obama has an OK track record on our rights, but if you're straight, I think it's kind of tiresome to argue about it. I know other queers do support him and I've seen plenty of Obama with rainbow flag stickers, but I think for a straight person to make a big case for his gay rights record is kind of problematic.
posted by latkes at 5:07 PM on July 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
Kennedy was a Reagan appointee - do you credit Reagan for his gay rights record?
Kennedy was only Reagan's nominee because the Democrats, especially Ted Kennedy, blocked Robert Bork. Kennedy was the "easy approval" nominee that followed in his wake (Bork was rejected 58-42, Kennedy was approved 97-0). Reagan's real choice was Bork, who would almost certainly not have voted the same way as Kennedy (and not just in this case.... imagine many recent decisions with Bork instead of Kennedy!).
posted by thefoxgod at 5:33 PM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
Kennedy was only Reagan's nominee because the Democrats, especially Ted Kennedy, blocked Robert Bork. Kennedy was the "easy approval" nominee that followed in his wake (Bork was rejected 58-42, Kennedy was approved 97-0). Reagan's real choice was Bork, who would almost certainly not have voted the same way as Kennedy (and not just in this case.... imagine many recent decisions with Bork instead of Kennedy!).
posted by thefoxgod at 5:33 PM on July 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
Bork gave the impression of wanting to bring back burning at the stake.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:39 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:39 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Well I'll just make my argument and you can judge it on its merits.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:11 PM on July 21, 2015
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:11 PM on July 21, 2015
The type of people who tend to get called "idealists" would probably have an easier time making common cause with the people who call themselves "pragmatists" if they could more reliably get a reaction to war crimes other than reluctant apologetics.
No doubt. But, once you start openly condemning something, you have to act or look weak or hypocritical.
To my eye, the US is already near ungovernable in a lot of ways. Actively pursuing war crimes convictions against the previous administration would blow the roof off the place, and not in a good way. That's not even considering that a lot of the people who could conceivably be charged are still in important positions under the current administration.
posted by Maugrim at 6:37 PM on July 21, 2015
No doubt. But, once you start openly condemning something, you have to act or look weak or hypocritical.
To my eye, the US is already near ungovernable in a lot of ways. Actively pursuing war crimes convictions against the previous administration would blow the roof off the place, and not in a good way. That's not even considering that a lot of the people who could conceivably be charged are still in important positions under the current administration.
posted by Maugrim at 6:37 PM on July 21, 2015
About killing Osama bin Laden, don't forget that that's a thing a lot of Bush's own people expected him to do, and it was a serious magician's feint for Bush to translate their rage at Osama for 9/11 to Iraq which ultimately had nothing to do with it. What Obama did was finish the real Bush business that Bush couldn't be bothered to conclude. Obama said, we have wanted this guy dead since 9/11, we are going to actually get him and not some random wedding in Pakisatan this time, and he got it done.
posted by Bringer Tom at 7:35 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Bringer Tom at 7:35 PM on July 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Yeah, Bork, what a sack of dicks he was. But Our Side Won that one!
posted by latkes at 8:42 PM on July 21, 2015
posted by latkes at 8:42 PM on July 21, 2015
I'm reluctant to call bin Laden's death an "accomplishment" for Obama given that it was the result of the work of so many people who never spoke a word to him...but I'll absolutely credit him with sending guys in to make sure the bastard was dead rather than, as Bringer Tom rightfully points out, randomly offing some poor dude at a wedding.
The fact that so many random people at weddings have died from drone strikes under Obama's watch is a serious problem, as is surveillance and the failure to prosecute the crimes in our financial system and on and on.
Weighing the good against the bad? There's clearly more good.
Most consequential? Most successful? At that point, we also have to take into account the amount of resistance. I look back fondly on Bill Clinton's administration, sure, but for all the right wing batshit insanity he had to face, Obama has had to deal with so much worse. He has still gotten a lot of things done, and that has to count for something.
I'm really, genuinely mad at the guy for his failures, but I'm also really proud of his successes. It's almost like being President is a super complicated job and we have a super complicated country or something. But I really think we're gonna miss him when he's not president anymore, regardless of who wins in 2016.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 11:25 PM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
The fact that so many random people at weddings have died from drone strikes under Obama's watch is a serious problem, as is surveillance and the failure to prosecute the crimes in our financial system and on and on.
Weighing the good against the bad? There's clearly more good.
Most consequential? Most successful? At that point, we also have to take into account the amount of resistance. I look back fondly on Bill Clinton's administration, sure, but for all the right wing batshit insanity he had to face, Obama has had to deal with so much worse. He has still gotten a lot of things done, and that has to count for something.
I'm really, genuinely mad at the guy for his failures, but I'm also really proud of his successes. It's almost like being President is a super complicated job and we have a super complicated country or something. But I really think we're gonna miss him when he's not president anymore, regardless of who wins in 2016.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 11:25 PM on July 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
gravity is stronger here on Earth than on the Moon because molten nickel is denser than cheese.
And what else is denser than cheese?
posted by flabdablet at 10:24 AM on July 22, 2015
And what else is denser than cheese?
posted by flabdablet at 10:24 AM on July 22, 2015
Welp Obama just restored access to federal Pell grants for prisoners (I'd link you, but I'm roaming from Canada, just google it), so I take it back, this is great, yay
posted by likeatoaster at 8:17 PM on July 27, 2015
posted by likeatoaster at 8:17 PM on July 27, 2015
> they didn't quite disappear Chelsea Manning
As Chelsea Manning Speaks Out on Trans and Prison Issues, Authorities Threaten Her with Solitary
posted by homunculus at 11:56 AM on August 18, 2015
As Chelsea Manning Speaks Out on Trans and Prison Issues, Authorities Threaten Her with Solitary
posted by homunculus at 11:56 AM on August 18, 2015
« Older *excited horse noises* | The destruction of Penn Station Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:28 AM on July 21, 2015 [22 favorites]