Skip to main content

Agree or disagree?

Yep, that's what someone said to me. To which I could only reply:

One of the worst Presidents ever? Compared to who? Bush? Reagan? Nixon? Worse than the series of pro-slavery Presidents in the run up to the Civil War? Worse than Jackson who forcibly deported the south eastern tribal peoples from their lands? Worse than Wilson, Truman and Eisenhower who oversaw the repressions of the first and second Red Scares? Worse than the plutocrats that held the office during the gilded age and bloodily suppressed the Labor movement?

What standard of measurement are you using?

Criticize the President all you want but no one is obliged to accept your opinions as gospel. It's your obligation to make a convincing case, something difficult to do if you engage in statements that are long on hyperbole and short on substance.

Poll

How would you rate President Obama?

26%260 votes
20%198 votes
14%145 votes
14%142 votes
18%181 votes
4%46 votes

| 972 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I'd ask anyone stating that to me... (14+ / 0-)

    ..."Who would you replace him with?"

    Seriously, would that person who said that to you have wanted any of the clods the Republicans put up?

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 03:35:23 PM PDT

  •  Nixon: (4+ / 0-)

    Created the EPA
    Signed clean Water
    Signed Clean Air
    Negotiated SALT
    Funded social security
    Funded the VA
    Eased relations with USSR, decreasing the chance of nuclear war
    Opened up relations with China, decreasing the chance of nuclear war
    Predicted and anticipated  the Patriot Act and warrantless domestic surveillance
    Created enemies lists (so does today's CIA, except now they use drones)
    Talked to democratic leaders and included them in negotiations (something Obama could have done in his first term)
    Loved dogs
    Was re-elected by a huge majority

    What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

    by agnostic on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 03:49:29 PM PDT

    •  Nixon's enemy list would have worked, if (6+ / 0-)

      ..he had limited the list to his one single worst enemy: Richard Milhous Nixon.

      Side note: On other lists, I've seen him rated as by far the smartest GOP President since... I think it was the advent of electronic recordings ... so say since post-WW one.

    •  You forgot (18+ / 0-)

      Responsible for every death caused by his prolonging of the Vietnam War.

      Direct responsibility for undermining Constitutional Government in the US through his criminal actions while in office. A wound we still haven't recovered from.

      Nothing human is alien to me.

      by WB Reeves on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 03:55:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  True. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Quicklund, WB Reeves, alain2112

        I still blame the French.

        What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

        by agnostic on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:14:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You forgot (0+ / 0-)

        Obama refused to end the Iraq Invasion until BUSH'S benchmark had been cleared. He could have ordered them all home on his first day. How many died for HIS dithering?

        And...Afghanistan?

        Responsible for every death caused by his prolonging the Iraq Invasion. I guess it doesn't count. It's the opposite of IOKIYAR.

        "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

        by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:00:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  If you want to play numbers games (0+ / 0-)

          President Obama's body count is far lower than Nixon's by several orders of magnitude.

          Of course even if he'd ordered a withdrawal on his first day, it would still have taken months to have gotten out. Whether that would have produced fewer deaths than the policy he actually followed is open to question.

          In any event, he didn't prolong the war for four years as Nixon did. Nor did he invade neighboring countries as Nixon did Laos and Cambodia.

          As far as I'm concerned, the fact that the President is a Democrat is irrelevant to assessing his record vis a vis Iraq and Afghanistan.

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:54:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Nixon operated kind of like the Mafia... (6+ / 0-)

      ...give a little here, take a little there, break a few bones, protect the neighborhood, firebomb the competition.

    •  Yes, I liked some of Nixon's policies. (19+ / 0-)

      He also:

      1) Started his career by smearing Helen Gahagan Douglas as
      a commie;
      2)Kept the Vietnam War going to gain an advantage over Lyndon Johnson;
      3)Was blatantly anti-semitic;
      4)Was about as Machiavellian and politically underhanded a figure as we ever produced.

      Compared to him, Mitch McConnell looks like a transparent bungler.

      "They come, they come To build a wall between us We know they won't win."--Crowded House, "Don't Dream It's Over."

      by Wildthumb on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:00:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let's not forget Amtrak ... (4+ / 0-)

      ... although to be fair to Nixon's horrible reputation, he only did so because he thought it would ultimately kill long-distance train travel.

      I vote we run Rick Scott out of Florida on a high-speed rail.

      by ObamOcala on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:10:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  yeah (10+ / 0-)

      he signed some good democratic legislation. he was able to go to china because he didn't have to worry about nixon red-baiting him. scuttled lbj's peace efforts, christmas bombings, bombed cambodia and laos, overthrew allende and helped create pinochet, used the fbi, the cia, and the irs to attack his political opponents, routinely used the n word in the oval office. great president.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:41:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  the point about nixon is that he was capable (10+ / 0-)

        and competent. he was also a nasty, miserable son of a bitch. as a politician, he was slightly less evil than dick cheney, but as a chief executive his crimes are about par for the course, and in the meantime he went along with congress to get a lot of important things done.

        contrast that with W, who was incapable and incompetent, a nasty, miserable son of a bitch, as a politician approximately as evil as nixon, while as chief executive, let's just say the box was filled with extra crunchy crime berries.

        it is, in fact, a testament to W's horribleness that in contrast nixon seems like a bad dream, instead of the nightmare he once was.

        To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

        by UntimelyRippd on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 05:01:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And East Timor too... plus the Khmer Rouge (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Laurence Lewis, Ahianne, WB Reeves

        owed their success to the bombing in Cambodia...
        and that success led directly to the genocide there...

        And of course a lot of the death and destruction was co-owned morally and signed off on or due to advice given by Kissinger...

        Kissinger sat with Suharto and the Prime minister of Australia signed away the people East Timor... the deaths and sterilization of a huge number of women there, colonization from Indonesia... just a mostly forgotten footnote in the long catalogue of "Realpolitik" damage inflicted on the globe by Nixon,  Kissinger and Co.

        Could it be argued that the positive successes they had were only possible because they made deals with the devil opening up counter balancing destruction and death? Sure but that would be an exercise in explaining and excusing... most of the evil they did was avoidable... but they were just too stupid or blind in certain key ways or just too indifferent due to that liberating high of power-induced psychopathy?... the ends... as defined by them justifying just about anything that they could get away with?

        Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

        by IreGyre on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:02:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  This list is misleading (11+ / 0-)

      Good stuff happened under Nixon, but much of it came at the insistence of the Democratic Congress, not the White House. Take the Clean Water Act, which he vetoed. The veto had to be overridden by Congress for the bill to be passed.

      Republicans are far more socialist than Democrats. Just because they want to redistribute the wealth upwards does not make it any better.

      by MrAnon on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:58:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Began PRIVATIZATION with healthcare. (0+ / 0-)
    •  Please tell me you are not seriously (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nocynicism

      comparing Nixon's use of the machinery of federal government to target Americans considered to be his political opponents with the CIA's targeting of foreign terrorists.

      •  About one year ago, the state police stopped (0+ / 0-)

        A station wagon on an Illinois tollway.

        Now, you must understand that our tollway is forgiving. If you miss a toll, you can get online a week later, pay it, and suffer no penalty.

         The vehicle had 150 lbs of high grade pot. The reason they stopped it? The one they gave us peepholes?  Failure to pay a toll.

        To which I say bullshit. They followed, tracked, and stalked that vehicle, possibly from the beginning of the trip (LA) to Chicago.

        Today's CIA, FBI, NSA, DIA, ATF, and others track you and me far more closely than anything Nixon did or tried to do.

        What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

        by agnostic on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 07:51:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You aren't actually suggesting that sociopath (0+ / 0-)

      was something other than a narcissic criminal are you?

      Perhaps you've forgotten that his opponents were relative giants in almost any conceivable way.

      Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes. - PJ Crowley

      by nsfbr on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 06:23:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, I simply framed a meme (0+ / 0-)

        As today's toady GOPers do.

        What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

        by agnostic on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 07:42:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  He WAS something other than a narcissistic (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ahianne

        ...criminal. He was human, not inhuman.

        You sound like a Teabagger, trying to de-humanize a member of our species. You can't do that. Nixon was a man. He did good AND bad shit.

        I remember trying to keep count of all the acts, quotes, etc of George W. Bush that I actually approved of. The list was about five or six--in eight long insufferable years. But even HE did shit I approved of.

        Don't make someone into a demon who is a member of the human race. That's what Teabaggers and Republicans do, by instinct. It's a huge mistake, even in a silly posting forum.

        "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

        by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:43:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  so you baked a bunch of pies? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo, blueoasis

    I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

    by jbou on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 03:54:23 PM PDT

  •  Stupid, stupid question (20+ / 0-)

    It's awesome to have "the first black president"; we 'hoped for change' and definitely got some... but talk about coming aboard when the country was powerfucked by Reaganomics and 8 years of Bush-Cheney.

    But the short answer is "one of the best since WWII.

    Bush - Worst President Ever.

    Reagan - Didn't die until he was assured of 2nd worst ever.

    HW Bush - wimpiest president ever, though he was a spy as well.

    Ford - fair example of "Cheif Executive" in that I have been told he did a lot of actual paperwork AND he signed the Wilderness act of 1975. A plus.

    Nixon: Was the standard for a bad president until Reagan was allowed into office. Nixon Hated Reagan , which is 1 redeeming point.

    Carter - not the debacle were supposed to believe. Good guy - as much as a president of thie capitalist, warmongering country can be.

    Don't remember Johnson or Kennedy. - Flame away.

    •  Good list. (9+ / 0-)

      I think Obama is pretty good. I get bashed pretty well in a liberal chatroom for supporting him. Sure, there are things I don't like but no president is ever 100%. Imagine just this morning I asked people if they were saying that Obama had done nothing good; the answer I got was that he hadn't and I was asked to name something.

      Everyone projects what they want onto a president and people on the left have ODS just as bad as those on the right at times.

      The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. - Elbert Hubbard -9.62/-8.15

      by GustavMahler on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:04:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think he came in to office with a strategy (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dance you monster, DaddyO, gffish

        and refused to budge when it was clear that the GOP would rather hang him from a tree than cooperate.

        he's INSISTED on being Mr. Rogers, forever singing "Wont you be my neighbor" to the Klan.

        He has yet to attack Wall Street like they should be, he keeps liberals under th bus as he strives to be so damned centerist.

        Maybe that is what presidents are supposed to do: maintain the capitalist status quo.

        In other observations, we know that a lot of a president's job is bush clearing and I don't feel like he's cleared nearly enough Bush.

        Our DICK was crooked but Obama insisted we look forward, not at the crooked dicks.

        •  I promise you (0+ / 0-)

          There are far more Americans who voted for Obama who are simply dissatisfied with the job he's done. As I already stated...if he'd accomplished more with strong-arming and non-stop speechifiying, as George W. Bush did, Americans would approve of him by a ratio of 3 to 1.

          We want RESULTS. They are the only thing that counts in politics. And that is why George W. Bush's job approvals dove to the TWENTIES. He did NOTHING for anyone except the 0.01%, by allowing the plutocrats to plunder at will.

          They're still doing it. Obama has done nothing. N-O-T-H-I-N-G. Consumer Protection Bureau? Don't make me laugh...

          "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

          by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:08:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  buchanan and pierce (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xxdr zombiexx, Quicklund, pashber, Ahianne

      makes any short list.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:43:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here we go ... (4+ / 0-)

    The thing about quotes on the internet is you cannot confirm their validity. ~Abraham Lincoln

    by raboof on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 03:55:48 PM PDT

  •  I was hoping for a Biden/Obama administration (9+ / 0-)

    Until the 2008 NH primary at least. In retrospect that might have been better. The GOP obstruction would probably have failed sooner, and we'd have Barak Obama groomed to win in 2016 and 2020.

    But spilt milk and all that. IMO the guy we elected has done a pretty good job,

  •  simple response: Vice-President Palin /nt (5+ / 0-)

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:05:31 PM PDT

  •  I'd say so-so. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dance you monster

    I'd rank him somewhere with George HW Bush, Ford, etc.

  •  Not one of the worst. (7+ / 0-)

    He just came along when we desperately needed one of the best, and he didn't want to move that far from his bipartisan-y comfort zone.

    My guess is history will see him as mediocre.  I'd hoped he'd be better.  I've hoped all would be better.

    Didn't see this answer in your poll.

    •  I'd say (4+ / 0-)

      "The best we could do." covers mediocre. Of course it lacks the personal sting of the latter.

      Nothing human is alien to me.

      by WB Reeves on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:15:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So too does "Better than his four predecessors" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        WB Reeves

        Pretty much.

        •  Yep (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Quicklund

          I guess it just doesn't register high enough on the nastiness scale.

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:35:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, the problem with both answers... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Quicklund, WB Reeves, corvo

            ...is I don't think he's the best we could have done, just the best the party and the figures behind the scenes let us do.  I don't think it's wise to concede that they should always have their way.  Though it's difficult to prevent it.  Still, hold out that hope.  So that answer doesn't work for me.

            As for better than the four predecessors, I'm not sure he'll be better than Clinton, . . . and I really didn't like Clinton and still don't.  I see practically no light between Obama and the Clintons in terms of aims or performance.  Dems have been disappointing me for many years.

            I'll stick with the answer I gave above.

            •  Fair enough (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              dance you monster, Quicklund

              Obviously my crack about nastiness was misplaced.

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 05:11:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Define 'could have done'. Sure, there are people (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WB Reeves

              who would have been better Presidents. But did any of them have any chance of getting elected?

              •  Define, shit (0+ / 0-)

                Most Americans are very disappointed in Obama's job competence. They like his speeches. They like HIM. But even African Americans give him a MEDIOCRE job approval percentage, probably lower than everyone else, because they know better than anyone else if the economy has improved or not.

                And it hasn't. Because Obama's strategy has been, for four long years-plus, to wait and hope.

                I'm tired of people defending Obama. I don't want him impeached or removed from office...I want RESULTS.

                If more Democrats and Americans actually wanted these results, there'd be more pressure on him. But too many Americans are giving him a complete pass, waiting for 2017...

                "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

                by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:21:07 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Present theory of American politics (0+ / 0-)

              Good Cop, Bad Cop. Democrats get you a 7-up from the soda machine while the Republicans beat the shit out of you with a rubber hose.

              But to both Parties, the American citizen is a permanent SUSPECT.

              "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

              by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:17:43 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Well (0+ / 0-)

            "mediocre" isn't really nasty. But I think he's done better than that, considering the conditions he faced on Jan '09.

            Then again I voted for "better than his 4 predecessors", and I think he deserves better than mediocre. So clearly I am all over the map.

            Well as they say, historians need the perspective of time before judgement can be made. That's why I took the easier to justify "better than the previous four".

        •  we'll see (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dance you monster, Quicklund

          history may rate clinton above him. they're very similar on many issues.

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:48:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I might live long enough to hear the early results (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            FG, gffish, Ahianne

            Today I'm inclined to put GHW Bush ahead of WJ Clinton. GHWB's diplomacy during the Gulf War was masterful. People forget he had the USSR (still in business then) OK a war against one of the USSR's key client states.

            Plus he knew far better than his son not to go on to Baghdad.

            Later he oversaw the fall of the Berlin Wall and the USSR itself. But those were peaceful events that transpired more smoothly than anyone would have dared hope just a few years before?

            Exactly.

            Plus the GOP did read his lips, and they threw him oout for raising taxes. In 2013, I gotta give a GOP POTUS nod of appreciation for that.

            President Clinton?

            Well he had the post Cold War boom and a nice economy during which he... oversaw a lot of half-measures.  I'm sure others can fill in the blanks but as for me I am drawing them.

            Gotta love him for destroying Gingrich though, when it was Gingrich who set out to destroy Clinton.

            •  i'm no fan of the gulf war (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Quicklund, Ahianne

              and he still left clinton with a struggling economy and record deficits. everyone said his successor would be a one-termer, because of the economy he'd inherit. he was also up to his ears in iran-contra, then pardoned the criminals. he had nothing to do with the fall of iron curtain, and in fact his people acted as if it wasn't happening.

              The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

              by Laurence Lewis on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 05:29:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  GHWB Did not start the Gulf War (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Laurence Lewis, FG

                I don't think there are many "fans" of war. But when a war must be fought it makes a bit of sense to fight it well. And that GHWB did do well. He had world opinion behind that effort, not some mealy "Coalition of the Willing".

                It is naive to suggest the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth had no influence in how the Iron Curtain fell. As I said... no drama is the way to do it. Even if the lack of blood-filled gutters made it look easy, it warn't easy.

                Yes, he was involved in Iran-Contra. He weasled his way out of it but we all know better. But we are not rating Vice-Presidencies. We are comparing POTUS 41 and 42. I doubt a POTUS Bush would have been bamboozled into I-C by his staff the way a senile POTUS  Reagan was... but that's going down a tangential path.

                41 left 42 with record deficits at the time, deficits we'd trade for today in a nanosecond. So what did 42 do about it? Did PWJC lead the charge to pay down that deficit with the "Peace Dividend"? No, the debate at the time was "what do we spend it on?!" So no points for or against PWJC there.

                Note most of the conversation is about GHWB, not so much over JWC.  That sort of points to mediocre. Which one rates ahead of the other? Ask again in 20-30 years. But don't be surprised if the answer comes back GHWB.

                •  even if you think the war needed to be fought (0+ / 0-)

                  he missed a golden opportunity to use it to begin a national conversation about energy policy. but his energy policies were no better than his son's. and don't forget that after the war, he encouraged uprisings against saddam, fooling the opposition into thinking he'd at least protect them, then allowed them to be massacred.

                  keep in mind that bush handed clinton the balkan crisis, about which he did nothing, and the somalia crisis. he reassured deng after tiananmen. and he did nothing about the fall of the iron curtain- there was nothing he could have done, one way or the other. and the iran-contra pardons weren't about his past, they were to prevent his being implicated in the then still ongoing investigations.

                  and there was good reason for the clinton campaign's famous internal theme about the economy.

                  what historians say in 20-30 years will depend on who is writing the history. we know what they've done for reagan.

                  The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

                  by Laurence Lewis on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 07:50:16 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Masterful diplomacy? (5+ / 0-)

              Uh, are you forgetting about April Glaspie giving Saddam Hussein the green light to invade Kuwait in the first place?

              Doesn't sound like masterful diplomacy to me.

              •  well, it was, actually, in that (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                gffish

                GHW Bush probably wanted Saddam to attack Kuwait.  Which gave him an easy opportunity to become a War President . . . an opportunity he botched, just as he botched most everything else.

                You remember the old joke, don't you?

                Q. Why is Babs always on top when Poppy and Babs have sex?
                A. Because Poppy can only f*** up.

                Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                by corvo on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 06:15:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes because everything evil is a USA conspiracy (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  FG, sebastianguy99

                  F-sharp yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

                  •  Nice to see you sticking up for Poppy. :-) (0+ / 0-)

                    btw F-sharp is a nice key.  Just ask Haydn, or Miaskovsky.

                    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                    by corvo on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 06:26:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I know it is a key (0+ / 0-)

                      But I bow to your knowledge of who is known for writing in it.

                      I've heard most all of Jethro Tull music is in the key of G. With that, I am out of key ammo.

                      •  Well, there's Mahler too, (0+ / 0-)

                        but I'm no longer a precocious adolescent, so: meh.

                        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                        by corvo on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 06:53:10 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  As with the key of F-sharp (0+ / 0-)

                          I know Maher's music exists, but that's about all.

                          I do like a spot of Ludwig von when I'm at the milk bar though I could not tell you the key.

                          •  Any droogie can tell you (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            WB Reeves

                            it's Ludwig VAN.

                            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                            by corvo on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 07:39:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  Sounds like the Ambassador fucked up to me (0+ / 0-)

                Show me the first fuckup-free national leadership. Any nation, and year. Now ...How how did the reaction to that error go?

                In closing, I am not suggesting GHWB be rated ahead of Adam in his pre-apple tasting days. I am suggesting POTUS 41 might well be rated ahead of POTUS 42 when teh historians are in position to start making that call.

              •  Juan Cole on April Glaspie (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FG

                My thought is Amb Glaspie did a bad job in carring out her instuctions.  Juan Cole goes a step further and opinies that Amb Glaspie did not commit the act you accuse her of doing.

                In a bit of irony, he bases that statement on a cable released by Wikileaks. (The link in the Cole essay is disabled though.)

                Bottom line: Yes, masterful diplomacy.

                Global support including dozens of nations contributing troops (including Syria) vs "Coalition of the Willing" w/US, British, and about 400 Australians.

                No contest.

          •  May? MAY? (0+ / 0-)

            If Obama doesn't start working HARD on the issues he was elected to work on...he'll be lucky to make 50%.

            Like he has been stuck on for YEARS NOW. And how many of the Americans in that 50% are knee-jerk approvers who refuse to see the lack of results? Millions. If only you folks were willing to put a little pressure on him...especially last summer.

            But Obama was going to win no matter what. Every Democrat will win the Presidency for the time being, as long as the Teabaggers haven't died off. Americans know from crazy.

            What we need, what we've always needed, is more and BETTER DEMOCRATS. It's time for THAT to be the anthem, the rallying cry of our Party, not polishing the knobs of the likes of corporate suits like Obama.

            "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

            by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:25:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, we can't have THAT (0+ / 0-)

        When I remember the slings and arrows we slung at the Worst President Ever, for his myriad and endless crimes, I recall a LOT of persona sting being involved.

        But not OUR guy. Not the first African American President. It just isn't done on 'liberal' blogs. Can't have that.

        Fuck that noise. dance you monster has hit the nail on the head and driven it home with a single shot: "He just came along when we desperately needed one of the best..."

        And he failed us all miserably. But...he's sure having a good time. And so are his supporters who refuse to see reality.

        Sequester, anyone? Unemployment? Stimulus? "It's the economy, stupid"? If there were a Republican moderate or even liberal, he'd have my vote in a heartbeat over this jackass.

        And, yes, I VOTED FOR HIM TWICE, which gives me every right to critique his Presidency. You can't polish a turd. Bush tried.

        "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

        by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:16:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, that's a common criticism I read around (4+ / 0-)

      here: Obama's way too bipartisan!

      So far, no one has offered an explanation about how he is supposed to get legislation through a divided Congress without trying to get some Republican votes.

  •  I'll withhold my final opinion (5+ / 0-)

    Until he's finished his time in office.

    A lot can happen in 3 years.

    Still, it will be a monumental task to unseat the current "champion of epic failure," George Bush.

    The trajectory isn't heading in the right direction, though, for me, on a couple of issues.




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

    by DeadHead on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:47:48 PM PDT

  •  Yes, he's the worst ever (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hooper

    except for all the others that have been tried.

    Chechnya: Russia's North Carolina.

    by NE2 on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:51:39 PM PDT

  •  Worst was JFK. (0+ / 0-)

    For giving us the nuclear arms race.

    Second worst -- Reagan?

    GOP: Bankers, billionaires, suckers, and dupes.

    by gzodik on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:53:54 PM PDT

    •  That started way before JFK. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gffish

      And when he started trying to end it, kablam.

      A hell of a lesson for those who followed.

    •  I blame the arms race on Truman (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr Robert, WB Reeves, gffish

      Truman is a generally overrated president, IMO. Domestically, he seemed to favor a militarization of public life which I find creepy, at best. In terms of foreign policy, he was handed a delicate situation with regards to the post-war world which would have been difficult for anyone. But even with that in mind, Truman didn't do a very impressive job, adopting an aggressive approach when a gentler touch was called for, and vice versa.

      JFK was more of a mixed bag. His domestic policies were generally good, but his foreign policy was a mixed bag: he handled the Cuban missile crisis adroitly, but his larger policy towards Cuba was a disaster. And he escalated the situation in Vietnam from the cautious, limited intervention begun under Eisenhower to what would eventually become a full-scale war.

      Personally, I still consider Andrew Jackson our worst president. The forced deportations were bad enough, but what really upsets me about him was his snubbing his nose at the SCOTUS when they tried to stop it. The entire concept of the imperial presidency can be traced back to that. Woodrow Wilson was another disaster of a president, IMO. Reagan's in the running, too, as is Bush II.

      •  I forgot to add... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gffish

        I actually don't consider Truman a truly awful president. He was the wrong man at the wrong time, but he did accomplish some great things (like integrating the military). I'd probably rank him as more bad than good, but, on the whole, he's somewhere in the middle.

  •  most african-american president ever. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Quicklund, JeffW, corvo

    other than that, i dunno.

    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

    by UntimelyRippd on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 04:54:43 PM PDT

  •  Obama will be a polarizing figure (6+ / 0-)

    For decades to come, similar to Reagan and Johnson. Although progressives have their disagreements with him, I believe Democrats will come to view him in a similar light to the New Deal and Great Society era Presidents. Like the Roosevelt-Truman and Kennedy-Johnson administrations, he has had policies unpopular with liberals (for Obama this would probably be the NSA that is most remembered). At the same time, his accomplishments through Health Care Reform, Immigration Reform, and the Recovery Act will have a very long lasting effect on our country.

    At the same time, I believe he will continue to despised by the right, to a degree perhaps not seen towards any President in a long time. Look at the right wing's response to his recent speech on race as an example. In many ways, Obama, through no fault of his own, has brought much of the worst of America into the spotlight.

    Republicans are far more socialist than Democrats. Just because they want to redistribute the wealth upwards does not make it any better.

    by MrAnon on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 05:05:40 PM PDT

  •  See my sig line since 2009. n/t (6+ / 0-)

    Best. President. Ever.

    by Little Lulu on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 05:05:55 PM PDT

  •  Certainly neither the worst nor one of the worst. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WB Reeves, FG, Ahianne

    Probably better than his four predecessors.
    Possibly the best we could do at present - this is the trickiest issue, for while undoubtedly McCain and Romney would have been worse, whether Hillary would have been worse is very much a toss up.

    Certainly though, in the light of the truly over-the-top expectations of 2008 (Hope and Change and all that), one of the most disappointing presidents ever.

    We're shocked by a naked nipple, but not by naked aggression.

    by Lepanto on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 05:53:46 PM PDT

  •  Nah, I'd just say "mediocre." (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DaddyO

    Too beholden to the 1% at a time when, for the sake of the planet, we need radical change.

    Of course, given our nation's power structures, he'd never be able to effect radical change, but he could at least be raising holy hell for the next guy (or gal, as long as it isn't Hillary, who's even worse).

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 06:11:55 PM PDT

    •  You give up too easily (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gffish

      Remember how easy it was for Bush to sell the Illegal Iraq Invasion? Remember how he harnessed nearly everyone in his administration to give nonstop speeches, interviews, etc?

      Remember?

      Why can't we get that kind of effort from Obama for...well, for ANYTHING? I must conclude: Because he ain't interested. He is a corporate suit playing for time. Yes, a lot can happen in 3-plus years, and a lot of nothing can happen, too. We can only go by the past. I see a few feints in the direction of direct activism, like just today. This has happened, oh, every month or so since his re-Inauguration...but that's it.

      Everybody loves him. But you can do serious damage to any company by sticking with the person in charge just because you LOVE THEM.

      "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

      by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:31:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  rating president is difficult (0+ / 0-)

    because in politics, as in ponds, it isn't the cream that rises to the top.  

    To say that Obama is better than the last three or four of his predecessors is, to put it mildly, faint praise . . . assuming it's even correct.

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 06:32:32 PM PDT

  •  What about George Bush? (0+ / 0-)

    President Obama, January 9, 2012: "Change is hard, but it is possible. I've Seen it. I've Lived it."

    by Drdemocrat on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 07:08:36 PM PDT

  •  Why even bring up such a batshit opinion? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG
  •  obama and w (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, Ahianne

    I think Obama will be seen in an extremely positive light in history books 50 years from now. I see him as significantly better than Clinton, who I think history books will say positive things about, but consider a relatively unimportant President who was in power during a pleasant, boring time. While Obama has managed the deficit with equal aplomb to Clinton (like Clinton, gross spending was basically the same adjusted for inflation; like Clinton, he reduced an inherited deficit), he has also passed landmark legislation while doing that and advocated for social issues that will put him on the right side of history. On the other hand, Clinton capitulated on DOMA and failed to pass health care reform. Obama will be seen as the President who put America on the path to universal health care, which will be finalized within the next generation. He handled the bailouts well and they were largely paid back. Bernanke has been stellar and continually saves our ass to this day. Obama will of course get points for being the first minority President and the next two will likely be other minorities (Hillary and then a Hispanic person). The next President, likely Hillary, will inherit a roaring economy. Even Obama's policies on civil liberties apropos the war on terror, which we don't like, are still an improvement from Bush. All fighting age men are counted as terrorists in drone strikes? Under Bush it was everyone, etc. Though he has been curt with the media sometimes and they don't like some of his "lack of transparency," he still made recovery.gov at great political risk to provide said transparency in gov't finances. Finally he did all this at a very important time in history. Some Presidents were great managers, but did not assume power at the right time to be called the greatest. Some would view Clinton in this vein.

    Bush, meanwhile, continues to look worse by the day, and the only thing that improves his personal reputation is the degree to which he was a puppet. He will be seen as one of the worst Presidents ever because not only did his policies hurt, they came at the worst time unlike, say, a Reagan who had a relatively boring historical period to manage by comparison. Compared to the other Republican Presidents of modern times, Bush looks atrocious. Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and his father all had more positive points, and only Nixon rivals him in negatives.

  •  I dunno if he's the worst President ever. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Robert, DaddyO

    But he has "biggest disappointment" locked up.

  •  None of us will be alive to see what his legacy (0+ / 0-)

    ...is eventually deemed to be. Only those that are not of the time can write an objective evaluation of any past POTUS. Given that none of us have a crystal ball, we cannot known which decision he, or any of his immediate predecessors has made that will turn out to be the most/least significant.

    I'd say that at least a century must pass in order to assign rank to any POTUS.

    The politicians may be bought, and the system corrupt, but it is our duty to fix these things.

    by sebastianguy99 on Sun Jul 21, 2013 at 10:29:52 PM PDT

    •  You stole that idea from George W. Bush (0+ / 0-)

      And I don't mean that as a compliment.

      History is NOW. He is being judged as we speak. Legitimately. Who else but his contemporaries are in a better spot to judge the job he's doing as President?

      Oy. So many words, pixels, bandwidth...so little understanding.

      "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

      by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 07:34:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh please (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99

        Contemporary judgements are notorious for being off the mark.

        When the US purchased Alaska from Russia it was ridiculed as "Seward's Folly". No one laughs at Seward anymore. Lincoln was considered incompetent, devious and malicious by many of his contemporaries. Hardly the present day assessment.

        I've no idea how the President will be judged by future generations, but I know that judgement will be based on the long term impact of his policies on them, not on the political passions of today.

        Nothing human is alien to me.

        by WB Reeves on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  No, I "stole it" from the history books I've read. (0+ / 0-)

        I also understand that regardless of what I think about any of the presidents, those who come after me will surely use their own judgment, not mine. Perhaps you should go into the fortune telling business? Always lots of people ready to believe the claims of those who say they know for certain the future.

        Geez. So much stupidity, pixels, bandwidth...so little common sense.

        The politicians may be bought, and the system corrupt, but it is our duty to fix these things.

        by sebastianguy99 on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 11:02:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Worst DEMOCRATIC President of my lifetime (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish

    After careful, objective observation of decades of political activity. I am 56 years old.

    There is no doubt whatsoever. Millions of Americans who remember the other Democratic Presidents I reference agree. Just not in here.

    Why else are his approval ratings stuck at 50%? If we had a public option in 2010, focus on the economy in 2009, and a President who spit in Bill O'Reilly's eye instead of cowering at what he might say, his approval ratings would rival Clinton's.

    "I feel a lot safer already."--Emil Sitka

    by DaddyO on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 06:57:28 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site