# Do you think it's okay if Obama does it? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 14, 2009, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408 "2009-05-14T14:40:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim_r.mortiss/32/142_2.png) [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_R.Mortiss)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/21 "2009-05-14T16:01:53Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > I think this is the issue for me. He’s proven that he’s thought in a sophisticated way about this tuff and that his conclusions on things I can judge are often the right ones, while Bush proved that he was not only reckless but always wrong. So of course my views of their policies in the absence of full information is going to be different. In other words, “Obama is right because he is always right. And Bush was wrong because he was always wrong.” Reminds me of a lot of fundamental Christians I know. “The Bible is the ultimate truth because the The Bible says so!” ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/22 "2009-05-14T16:06:12Z")
IOKIADDI. And indefinite detention isn’t even the best example. We have a recession because Bush spent too much and racked up the deficit. So Obama is the bee’s knees because he spends hugely more and racks up the deficit. At least with Bush’s bailout, they are [paying some of it back already.](http://community.investopedia.com/news/IA/2009/The-TARP-Big-Boys-Start-The-Payback-USB-BBT-COF0513.aspx) Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/23 "2009-05-14T16:11:17Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > However, it is time to go past this generalization and specifically observe that behaviors that would earn President Bush immediate GD and Pit threads are being ignored by our board members that support President Obama - namely, most of them. Call it unwanted advice if you like, but threads like this usually don’t work because they’re more about calling other people hypocrites than debating any particular point. > [@](#): > > Now, frankly, a person could fairly conclude that Obama partisans are giving their man a pass for behavior they strongly condemned in the past, or at least giving him the benefit of the doubt. I think there’s no question he’s getting the benefit of the doubt. In the case of the Abu Ghraib photos, that’s unfortunate. I understand his argument but I think these things need to be made public. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/24 "2009-05-14T16:13:22Z")
My view is that, right now, Obama is cleaning up a lot of Bush’s disasters and has to choose between many bad options. To use the interrogation pictures as an example, releasing them may create more bad feelings about the USA and put our troops at risk, and not releasing them hides the problem and the accountability that goes with it. The root problem, in my mind, is that the US engaged in torture at all. Obama shouldn’t have to struggle with whether to release interrogation pictures because _the US should never have engaged in torture to begin with._ Given a host of bad options, he’s choosing what he considers to be least bad. I disagree with his determination, but I don’t think it’s all that relevant to this thread. So, are Obama supporters giving him a pass for having to choose the least bad option among a host of bad options as he tries to clean up the last administration’s mess? Maybe. Maybe that’s justified. At least he seems thoughtful, and he’s not saying things like “Well, I’ve decided not to release the photos and if you disagree with me, you’re supporting the terrorists, and I’m not going to justify my actions, and I’ll never revisit my decision.” Now, when he starts creating situations and making decisions for problems of his own making, I do not expect to give him a pass for bad decisions or behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/25 "2009-05-14T16:13:54Z")
I think the OP may have a point that Obama supporters are not running out and starting Pit threads for every White House decision that they might not agree with. I think Bush supporters did not run out and start Pit threads early in the Bush presidency when he proposed new spending on, say, the Medicare drug benefit. Were many Republicans chagrined by that major new entitlement? Yes! Is there something unusual in them not starting new threads or taking to the streets? Eh. The other side of this coin is that conservatives seem to be complaining about liberals not complaining about decisions that conservatives pretty much agree with. For example, Obama announced a withdrawal plan for Iraq that wasn’t exactly what he promised in the campaign. The plan was greeted with Republican support. But if I am reading the OP right, conservatives are so anxious to criticize Obama for decisions that they agree with, they feel compelled to try to outsource their non-existent complaint to liberals. That’s weirder than Obama supporters cutting Obama some slack because humans have the tendency not to get outraged at people they generally like. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/26 "2009-05-14T16:15:13Z")
> [@IdahoMauleMan](#): > > Someone made the comment in another thread that if the facts don’t fit the narrative, one usually tends to discard the facts. That’s pretty much the republican mantra, isn’t it? > [@](#): > > While I didn’t agree with his specific point, I thought that was a good comment in general and a good self-test for all of us from time-to-time. > > Obama came into office with an over-the-top outpouring of enthusiasm for a New Kind of President, given his rags-to-riches story and the once unthinkable notion of electing a black man as leader of the free world. > > A lot of what he’s done since is good old fashioned rough-and-tumble machine politics, combined with his excellent communication skills drowning out the substance of his policies. > > The two that immediately come to my mind are > > 1. The almost complete quid-pro-quo for organized labor. The re-jiggering of rights in the GM and Chrysler deals in favor of the unions on a big scale. The attempt (still ongoing) to kill the D.C. school voucher program as a sop to the teacher’s unions on a smaller scale, despite endless promises of the White House supporting ‘whatever works’. Vouchers don’t work. They help a few and leave the rest to self destruct. Fixing public schools is the answer, not helping a few who can afford to change districts. > [@](#): > > 1. The brazen proposals to run up trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see to atone for the supposed Fiscal Irresponsibility of the Bush administration (who’s deficits were far smaller). Their deficits were smaller because they didin’t count the war and they didn’t have the economic meltdown to deal with. If you don’t agree that a stimulus package was necessary, fine. But you’re far in the minority. > [@](#): > > To make a permanent step change in government spending from the historical 18-20% of GDP to a new plateau of 25-27% of GDP. Forecasted growth of 3.5% in GDP by the end of this year, which causes most serious folk to roll their eyes and groan. Most serious folk? > [@](#): > > Promises of earmark reform, which have been followed up with absolutely nothing in terms of any White House resistance to earmarks. If you’re referring to the omnibus spending bill that was created under the previous administration and would have ground congress to a stop and bogged down healthcare reform. > [@](#): > > This is an incredible shift in the scope of government spending and involvement and I’m still surprised at the absence of debate and discussion - as in, front page news day after day after day - regarding this. Even as the White House touts the budget with leaders like ‘A Era of New Responsibility’ and so forth. The incredible shift is the direct result of fixing the problems that morons who thought we didn’t need government regulation caused. Greenspan himself admitted that he assumed that people would police themselves. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Driver8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5a626/32.png) [@Driver8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Driver8)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/27 "2009-05-14T16:19:18Z")
> [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](#): > > In other words, “Obama is right because he is always right. And Bush was wrong because he was always wrong.” > > Reminds me of a lot of fundamental Christians I know. “The Bible is the ultimate truth because the The Bible says so!” Well, I’m not committing either way specifically regarding Obama, but what you’ve just described is a reasonable point of view: if someone has a history of doing things badly and someone else has a history of doing things well, it does reasonably set expectations. If I have to chose between company X and company Y to trim my yard, and company X has always done half a job, scratched my car and set my dog on fire, and company Y always does a professional, competent job, would you say that I remind you of a fundamental Christian if I have glowing praise for company Y? Of course, I suspect that you’d disagree that there is historic evidence that Bush is less competent than Obama. But if you didn’t disagree with that, and it is clear that this is the point of view from what you quoted, why is it unreasonable to have higher expectations of Obama? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/28 "2009-05-14T16:27:29Z")
I’ll just say that Obama’s _justifications_ have more credibility in that he has nothing he’s trying to conceal about his OWN actions. Bush was trying to cover his own ass. Obama has no personal culpability in any of these prisoner abuses, Bush does. So, while I might be disappointed by Obama’s decision, it does not have the self-preserving stench that the Bush White House always had, and it’s really not ultimately very important anymore. The criminals are already out of power. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/29 "2009-05-14T16:38:19Z")
I think Obama is punting on the detainees, and I can’t honestly blame him. Its a nearly hopeless situation. We know that at least some of them must be guilty, actually are sworn enemies of our people. ('Struth, I don’t know that, but assume it must be so because a) there are so many and b) the prospect that _none_ of them are guilty is too horrendous to contemplate…). But to try such people brings in questions of evidence and proof. We already know that many of the detainees were slammed up on little or no solid evidence, which is why they were quietly released with a Certificate of Ooopsy-Daisy! So I’m guessing there is an unknown quotient of detainees who are in fact guilty of hating us, but we cannot prove it in any court of law worthy of the name. And then there’s those who didn’t actually hate our collective guts when they were picked up, but after years of our humane and reasonable treatment, are _now_ our enemies, people who are likely _going_ to be guilty, first chance they get! Naturally, we want to release the innocent, but if we do, we take the risk that those who were innocent are no longer so inclined. So sure as shootin’, one of them is going to do something nasty, and Obama’s political enemies will scream their heads off! (Well, only those with no sense of honor and decency, those who will seize any issue to disgrace their partisan opponents…just those few, actually…) If Obama takes the guilty to court, and adheres to any respectable standard of law, some guilty will go free, and make mischief. Even if, by some miracle, he could release only the innocent, some of _them_ hate our guts, and will rush to find some means to extract vengeance. Hell, who can blame them? You grab me off the street, whisk me away to some godforsaken hole, mistreat me for six-seven years, damn _straight_ you’ve made an enemy! There are no good choices. He has made the least loathesome choice of a menu of poisons, a menu handed to him by men who have slipped away from center stage. I am not happy with the choices he must make, but I am at least heartened to know that the man making these dreadful choices is a vastly better person than the ones who thrust us into this turd-infested fever swamp. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/30 "2009-05-14T16:44:51Z")
Yes, absolutely, 100%. If Obama came to my house and personally killed my cat, I would bear him no ill will, because I am certain he would have had a good reason. Because he’s Obama, ya know. BTW, you probably should have thought longer and harder before posting this ridiculous thread. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/31 "2009-05-14T16:53:39Z")
re: detainee treatment. In another thread I was talking about the DTA and how it denied the writ of habeas corpus to detainees at Guantanamo. It appears (b/c it’s confusing to navigate Legislative voting) [Obama voted “Yea” for that amendment.](http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=8823) ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/32 "2009-05-14T16:56:52Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > My view is that, right now, Obama is cleaning up a lot of Bush’s disasters and has to choose between many bad options. To use the interrogation pictures as an example, releasing them may create more bad feelings about the USA and put our troops at risk, and not releasing them hides the problem and the accountability that goes with it. The root problem, in my mind, is that the US engaged in torture at all. Obama shouldn’t have to struggle with whether to release interrogation pictures because _the US should never have engaged in torture to begin with._ > > Given a host of bad options, he’s choosing what he considers to be least bad. I disagree with his determination, but I don’t think it’s all that relevant to this thread. > > So, are Obama supporters giving him a pass for having to choose the least bad option among a host of bad options as he tries to clean up the last administration’s mess? Maybe. Maybe that’s justified. At least he seems thoughtful, and he’s not saying things like “Well, I’ve decided not to release the photos and if you disagree with me, you’re supporting the terrorists, and I’m not going to justify my actions, and I’ll never revisit my decision.” > > Now, when he starts creating situations and making decisions for problems of his own making, I do not expect to give him a pass for bad decisions or behavior. Well put. I like Andrew Sullivan’s [take no this today](http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/thinking-again-about-those-photos.html#more): > [@](#): > > My immediate shock that Obama would be willing to suppress evidence of prisoner abuse, torture and even murder - stunningly widespread in the Bush-led military - somewhat distracted me from the politics of this. That is often a mistake with Obama who both takes his own responsibilities as commander-in-chief seriously and always appears to be playing a longer game than his opponents. > > But this is a blog, written in real time, so allow me some secondary thoughts after a night to sleep on it. In the cold light of morning, it doesn’t seem quite so offensive. In fact, the rope-a-dope this time might be on us… > > The point of the photos is not to demonstrate more gore; it is to have a fresh opening to explain to Americans just how widespread this was, and also to remind them that this led to the deaths of scores. But against this important public interest, the president has another duty - to his soldiers in the line of fire. These soldiers deserve a chance to do their astonishingly difficult job without inflaming those who might be inspired to kill and attack them. I see no reason to suspect that Obama is not genuine about this question, and it’s a fair factor to consider. More importantly, he has not said that suppressing the photos at this time means suppressing them for ever, and has not indicated that he will prevent justice being done. In fact, his statement said the opposite. > > The pro-torture right will say this call is obvious. It isn’t. It’s very hard. When you have inherited a policy of war crimes, and you are still fighting a war, balancing accountability with responsibility is tough. I think, having made our point, we should cut the man some slack on this. What matters is holding those who destroyed America’s moral standing responsible. That is a struggle for patriots to engage, a Truth Commission to study, and the attorney-general to pursue, while allowing the president to do his job as commander-in-chief. > > I will note this too about the politics. If Obama wants to get the truth out, and does not want to be slimed as a partisan avenger (the propaganda line from the Rovians), it helps him to have symbolic spats with those of us who believe we have no choice but to confront the war crimes of the last administration. This has long been his mojo: give symbolic gifts to your opponents while retaining the core issue. These gestures - Rick Warren dinner with Bill Kristol, summits with Cantor - help insulate him from being drawn into them kind of partisan fight the Rove right likes to fight. In this rope, in other words, the anti-torture movement is the current dope. > > Fine. Rope-A-Dope us. But let us not let the responsible parties get away with torture, abuse and murder. And let us play a smart and relentless long game as well. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/33 "2009-05-14T16:58:02Z")
As to the WSJ report that Obama is considering “indefinite detention,” pending the construction of some sort of appropriate tribunal system I think it needs to be pointed out that this report has not been corroborated by the White House itself, and the WSJ has lost considerable credibility since it was taken over by Rupert Murdoch. It’ coverage of the Franken-Coleman fight, for instance, has been so wildly inaccurate and tendentious (and so obviously fed completely by Coleman’s lawyers) that I no longer trust a word it says. Beyond that, even the WSJ does not say that any decision has been reached, only that one possibility is being “considered.” Of course it’s being considered. That’s what a President is supposed to do – consider things. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/34 "2009-05-14T17:02:52Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > How silly of me: > > William F. Buckley, November 2005. > > [Link.](http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200511041359.asp) The problem is that William F. Buckley is dead and even then conservatives were turning on people like him, if not him because of his stature. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/35 "2009-05-14T17:03:28Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Yesterday some big news items included the bombshell that [Obama was now opposing the release of detainee abuse photos](http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE54C54Y20090513) - which led to a contentious White House press briefing. Likewise the news that [indefinite detention for some terror suspects](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124223286506515765.html) was being considered by the Administration. I absolutely oppose the indefinite detention and suspension of habeas corpus regardless of who does it. I’m not wholly opposed to the decision not to release the detainee abuse photos given that at least some of them are likely to be used in legal actions. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/36 "2009-05-14T17:03:59Z")
I wouldn’t suck Obama’s dick or anything, but I’d eat mud that was scraped off his feet. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/37 "2009-05-14T17:08:15Z")
Well, thanks for sharing that… ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/38 "2009-05-14T17:09:16Z")
> [@IdahoMauleMan](#): > > 1. The almost complete quid-pro-quo for organized labor. The re-jiggering of rights in the GM and Chrysler deals in favor of the unions on a big scale. The attempt (still ongoing) to kill the D.C. school voucher program as a sop to the teacher’s unions on a smaller scale, despite endless promises of the White House supporting ‘whatever works’. If you want to talk about the DC voucher program, a comprehensive study conducted by the Bush Administration found that there was no statistically significant difference between test scores of those who got the vouchers and those who didn’t. In fact, the study found that the most significant impact of the voucher experiment was that the program made parents feeeeeeeeeel better! (It seems that the children didn’t feeeeeel any better, however.) I thought conservatives frowned on government programs that only produced nice feelings, but no results. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim_r.mortiss/32/142_2.png) [@Tim\_R.Mortiss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_R.Mortiss)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/39 "2009-05-14T17:09:35Z")
So it’s okay for Obama to do the same stuff that Bush did, because Obama _inherited_ the problems, while Bush _caused_ the problems. To believe that requires one to believe that Bush engineered the entire 9/11 situation and the global recession. Which likewise requires one to believe that he is both a bumbling dunderhead _and_ an evil mastermind. I’m afraid I just don’t have the mental gymnastic skills to embrace all those contradictions…TRM ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2009, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408/40 "2009-05-14T17:11:28Z")
It is always wise to cogniscent of one’s limitations. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-its-okay-if-obama-does-it/496408.md?page=3)