I think Carter has kefuffled once or twice, at most. Didn’t he express an opinion about Israel/Egypt/Palestine, or something? Big whoop.
I suppose arguably, Taft had the most significant post-presidential career. I can’t offhand think of an ex-president who was a significant embarrassment, at least in the modern era. LBJ’s post-administration haircut was a tad funky, I guess.
I think its a tradition wrt your immediate successor. And you criticise the policy, never the man. Dubya did not do it, neither did Clinton or Bush senior, although as it turned out, each was holding back for their brother, wife and son respectively. Obama might not.
Carter has also done good work on diseases. But it shouldn’t shock you that there is some controversy without even requiring hyperpartisanship. He is spoke out against the first Gulf war and his current views on Palestine aren’t completely noncontroversial. He actually just did an OpEd piece for the NYT calling on Obama to recognize Palestine.
So what’s more disruptive, recognizing Palestine or recognizing Taiwan?
Thomas Jefferson didn’t directly succeed George Washington–John Adams had one term in between. From Mount Vernon:
There was quite a bit of bad blood between TJ & Adams, as well. They lived long enough to make up & create a correspondence to burnish their reputations as noble statesmen. In his dotage, TJ even wrote some good things about Washington.
President Obama will probably take the high road–at least initially. But I doubt he’ll let any invented “tradition” keep him from speaking up if he finds it necessary. Neither do I see Michelle ignoring obvious outrages–should they occur.
I doubt the Israelis would have to think about that question very hard. But you obviously missed the point of my post, which was to explain why Carter might not be universally beloved by people of all political stripes. I bet most Americans don’t even realize Taiwan isn’t really a country but plenty of them have an opinion on Israeli-Palestine.
I didn’t miss your point. I found a more interesting point.
And what was it? “Trump is teh dumb”?
That’s not interesting. Bored now.
No. I wasn’t thinking specifically of Trump, just that Taiwan was in the news lately. Recognition of Palestine or Taiwan doesn’t automatically strike me as dumb, regardless of who calls for it, but I see that either would be disruptive and I was musing on which would be more so.
You do realize that none of those guys were the ex-President, right? Now, if Bush II had done all that you’d have a point. But he didn’t. I don’t see Obama breaking the trend either, though honestly I wish he would.
As for the OP:
I thought that they changed the rules on secret service for ex-Presidents as of Bush II?? I don’t think they get a ‘Secret Service Bubble’ anymore.
Also, what you are proposing here would be illegal, so I don’t see Obama taking this route. If he wants to protest what’s going on here he’d be much better off doing it other (legal) ways…not only would this be more effective but it would also be more in character of the man.
Assuming he was so stupid as to do this I guess he’d get hit by rubber bullets, water cannon or pepper spray, though his private security most likely wouldn’t let him do anything like this either.
But it is really a country. Everybody just keeps up the technical pretense that it isn’t to avoid Chinese intransigence.
The next time I’m at a computer instead of just pecking at a smartphone, I’ll start a “Palestine v. Taiwan” thread, since I find the comparison interesting but beyond the scope of this discussion.
It’s not for the rest of their life, anymore…but they do get protection for some time.
Actually, I looked it up and I guess Obama signed a law that would restore the life time protection. I must have missed that. I thought former presidents since 1997 had to make their own arrangements (which I think is stupid…I’m all for them getting secret service protection for life as they are huge targets).
Are they? After leaving office, don’t the crazies gravitate to the replacement (i.e. John Hinckley was seen at some Carter events, shifted his focus to Reagan after the 1980 election).
I don’t offhand know of any president who was assaulted (let alone murdered) after his term, even ones without protection. Harry Truman, for example, just moved back to Missouri, and there were probably any number of pro-MacArthur fanatics who’d’ve loved to see him dead.
Amusingly, while in office, Truman wrote a nasty and threatening letter to a music critic who’d panned a performance by Truman’s daughter Margaret. Had he cut it down to under 140 characters and added a “SAD”, it coulda been Trumpian.
I definitely missed that. Guess he didn’t want to hear about Dubya getting kidnapped for a show-trial.
Or, worse, a real trial.
The only example I’ve ever heard of is Saddam Hussein wanting to kill Bush 41. I myself am not sure why anyone would care to kill an ex-President unless they had a grudge, as Saddam did.
Former President Teddy Roosevelt was shot while campaigning to regain the presidency after a term out of office.
On October 14, 1912, an unemployed saloonkeeper shot former president and Progressive Party candidate Theodore Roosevelt outside a Milwaukee hotel. Rather than being rushed to the hospital, Roosevelt insisted on delivering his scheduled 90-minute speech. By slowing the bullet, those lengthy prepared remarks may actually have saved his life.