# My heart is broken... (about Obama) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2009, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144 "2009-10-26T05:19:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/41 "2009-10-27T17:08:56Z")
Sometiems psting when drunk is illadvised. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/42 "2009-10-27T17:20:48Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Obama doesn’t have the power to prosecute anyone. His attorney general may do this, but we’ll see. I’d like to see it happen. Wow…so the President has no role in driving such a thing forward (or stopping it)? I am almost sure you know better than this. The attorney general is independent but it is ignorant to think the President cannot seriously sway what the AG does on this (heck, the President can provide or withhold evidence the AG could use and do so legally either way). > [@](#): > > Again, why did you think there would be? Did Obama say people would be thrown in jail? I don’t remember him every saying anything like that. I believe Obama campaigned to stop “business as usual” in Washington. One way to stop that is to hold people accountable when they, for example, collapse our financial system. Perhaps not to explicitly have people arrested but to take a microscope to the crisis and see where the problems were. If some people were shown to be playing the system illegally so be it…get them. > [@](#): > > Not to this point. I don’t think he’s going to shake any system to its foundations. Shake it to its foundations? Are you a person who thinks any regulation defaults to shaking the system to its foundations? Clearly the system is in need of reform. As noted Obama seems content to leave the foxes in charge of the hen house and no meaningful reform proposals are even on the horizon. > [@](#): > > That depends. Are you in favor of health care reform because you hate the insurance industry, or because you want more people to have health insurance? 😉 The proposals right now are very watered down and I’m not sure how many people are really going to get help. But it’s not worse than nothing. Both. The health insurance industry is palpably bad for the people and the country. It is only good for itself. I want their business corrected in order to gain affordable health care for everyone. Watered down is not the point. The point here is what Obama is willing to do to get useful reform passed. To date I have not seen him throw the weight of his office behind any reform…talked about it a bit but not really twisted any arms. The trigger option is plain bad yet that is what the White House wants presumably because they see it as the only route to reform passing. But any old reform is not necessarily better than no reform. The trigger would be a boon to insurance companies and not address systemic problems or control costs. _If_ the trigger is pulled you might see the reform kick in around 2017 or so. Plenty of time for the trigger to be defused when (almost certainly) Republicans get back some seats in Congress and perhaps a republican president back in the White House. Plenty of time for insurance companies to make even more money than they already are as new people are forced into their insurance. > [@](#): > > Obama has not fulfilled several of his promises, but he also never campaigned as a revolutionary. People who expected one have themselves to blame. Fine. But he has embraced many Bush era policies. Please answer to those and tell me why it is “revolutionary” to stop illegal wiretaps among many other issues (please read the NYT Op/Ed I linked upthread first). ---
**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:** [October 27, 2009, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/43 "2009-10-27T17:30:21Z")
That one is certainly inexcusable. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/44 "2009-10-27T17:43:24Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Wow…so the President has no role in driving such a thing forward (or stopping it)? I am almost sure you know better than this. The attorney general is independent but it is ignorant to think the President cannot seriously sway what the AG does on this (heck, the President can provide or withhold evidence the AG could use and do so legally either way). Do you remember the debates on this a few months ago? Obama had been saying he was opposed to investigating who believed they were following approved practices, and Holder’s response was (in so many words), “excuse me, but the president does not get to decide what the AG’s office does and does not investigate. I’ll do my own job, thank you very much.” I don’t know where it has gone since then. > [@](#): > > I believe Obama campaigned to stop “business as usual” in Washington. One way to stop that is to hold people accountable when they, for example, collapse our financial system. Perhaps not to explicitly have people arrested but to take a microscope to the crisis and see where the problems were. If some people were shown to be playing the system illegally so be it…get them. I don’t really disagree with you about any of this. Wall Street moves faster than Washington does and the government doesn’t have a handle on what happens in the world of finance. Obama’s started talking about major reforms but not much has happened and I am not expecting a lot. I am only saying that you’re expecting something that he didn’t promise. > [@](#): > > Shake it to its foundations? Are you a person who thinks any regulation defaults to shaking the system to its foundations? No, I’m not. I’m just comparing what you are expecting, or what you would like to see, with what Obama has said. > [@](#): > > Watered down is not the point. The point here is what Obama is willing to do to get useful reform passed. To date I have not seen him throw the weight of his office behind any reform…talked about it a bit but not really twisted any arms. I don’t know what is happening behind the scenes. Ultimately Obama has chosen to go the opposite route from what the Clinton White House tried (and failed) to do in the early '90s: the Clintons proposed a health care package and tried to get Congress to approve it, which did not work because Congress does not work for the President. Obama instead has given some general goals and let Congress work out the details. It’s been a mess to watch and this approach also has its faults, but he’s made a lot more progress than Clinton did. > [@](#): > > Fine. But he has embraced many Bush era policies. Please answer to those and tell me why it is “revolutionary” to stop illegal wiretaps among many other issues (please read the NYT Op/Ed I linked upthread first). I didn’t say it would be revolutionary to stop those policies. It would be the right thing to do, but I’ve said in the past that presidents almost never give up any powers. It sucks, but it’s the way of things. I don’t want to defend policies I am opposed to, since I’m against most of the things we’re discussing. My point is this: I think you and a lot of other people mistook the kind of person Obama is. He’s a politician, and he’s willing to compromise on almost anything. That was always pretty clear if you listened to him speak and read what he wrote. Willingness to compromise was one of the attributes he campaigned on. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/45 "2009-10-27T17:57:12Z")
Obama’s problem is simply that he’s not very good at his job. He’s been unable to move Congress, he’s getting rolled by political operators and by other world leaders. Of course, many of us were pointing out before the election that he had less experience in government than did Sarah Palin, and no executive experience whatsoever, but we were shouted down. But these things matter. Even from a progressive perspective, or maybe even especially from a progressive perspective. If you want to pass progressive policies in a country that isn’t particularly progressive, you need someone who knew how and when to twist arms and when to kiss butt. You need someone who knows how the Washington game is played, and who knows how to manage a large staff and keep it moving in the same direction without people going off the reservation. Obama had no demonstrable ability along these lines, but you elected him anyway. You reap what you sow. For example, Obama has unnecessarily angered Republicans by off-the-cuff comments that served no purpose but which hampered him politically. He doesn’t seem to know that even though he’s speaking at a Democratic fund-raiser, video will get out. He should have never weighed in about the police incident with the black professor. He should never have said that, while Democrats are original thinkers Republicans just do what they are told. He’s just igniting the opposition with no political gain for him. Another unforced error: the poor vetting of people like Van Jones. In the grand scheme of things, a ‘green jobs czar’ isn’t that important. There’s no way he should ever have allowed a firebrand like Jones to sit in a position like that to act as a lightning rod for the opposition. It was just a stupid decision. Especially since Jones had no special qualifications in the first place. That’s just another example of the cost of putting someone in the White House who just doesn’t have the Washington experience or executive experience necessary. The next class of errors, however, is of a different nature. And that would be his flip-flops on rendition, transparency, wiretapping, Guantanamo, etc. That speaks to the character of Obama - once in the White House, he just didn’t want to give up the power. In almost every way that he has flip-flopped on positions he promised to both conservatives and progressives, the change was in the direction of giving him more personal power. Again, there were people warning before the election that Obama was arrogant, and that he showed a proclivity for throwing friends under the bus when expedient and of being very non-transparent about many things. The media completely failed to vet him, choosing to ignore the many warning flags that were there for everyone to see. But the final class of ‘errors’ really aren’t. And that’s his inability to pass extremely progressive policies (although I’d argue that the stimulus was a pretty big one). In this case, Obama is being smart. Sure, you could probably railroad through the public option, card check, new regulations on business, and other lefty policies - you have total control of the house and Senate. You can even use tricks like reconciliation to do it without 60 votes. But then what? Then there will be a huge backlash, Congress will be turned over to the Republicans, and they will undo everything you did or at least make Obama a lame duck for the next two to six years. Clinton made that mistake in 1992. He came swinging out of the gate with a whole list of progressive plans, and appointed progressives to major government positions, and tried to steamroll everything through congress. The result was a Republican blowout in 1994, and from that day on Clinton was forced to govern as a center-right moderate. From my perspective that was a good thing, but from yours, not so much. You far-left types have to learn what the far-right has just been schooled about - Just because you control government doesn’t mean you can govern far to the left or right of where the American people are. Try it, and it’s your ticket out of power. Like it or not, you live in a center-right country, and you aren’t going to be able to turn it into a European social democracy just because you temporarily have the driver’s seat. If you want to make change, and make it stick, and remain in power, you need to nibble at the margins, not make sweeping change. Obama generally has pretty good political instincts. He was backing away from the ‘opt-out’ public option and towards a ‘trigger’ option, because he understands the politics of it, and how much easier the ‘trigger’ would be to sell. And he probably also knows that it doesn’t matter, because once the ‘trigger’ is in place he can use the amendment process to strengthen it to turn it into a de-facto public option anyway. But you progressives have howled too loud, and now Congress is likely to try to push the ‘opt-out’ option, and that’s going to give the right even more to yell about. It probably also means that the Democrats will lose the fig leaf of any Republican support at all, which means every time there’s any glitch in the new health plan, they’ll take all the blame. That’s a stupid decision. You’re giving up a lot of political capital for very little gain. ---
**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:** [October 27, 2009, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/46 "2009-10-27T18:06:14Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Fine. But he has embraced many Bush era policies. Please answer to those and tell me why it is “revolutionary” to stop illegal wiretaps among many other issues (please read the NYT Op/Ed I linked upthread first). Factual question here: I read the op/ed linked to earlier in the thread. It basically said that the Obama Administration opposes lawsuits pertaining to the warrantless wiretapping, because it would entail that details of the classified program would have to be divulged during the consideration of the lawsuit. (IHMO, I can see a certain logic to that, because if details of how the NSA listens to phone calls or reads emails or whatever get leaked, then everyone, from suspected terrorists to other countries, could probably do things to protect their communications.) But I have not seen anything that discusses whether Obama has actually continued the program. Does anyone actually know if there have been any statements or news stories that indicate that the warrantless wiretapping program is still going on? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/47 "2009-10-27T18:17:47Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > My point is this: I think you and a lot of other people mistook the kind of person Obama is. He’s a politician, and he’s willing to compromise on almost anything. That was always pretty clear if you listened to him speak and read what he wrote. Willingness to compromise was one of the attributes he campaigned on. I did listen to him. I heard: > [@](#): > > But [Obama] repeatedly returned to what has been the central theme of his campaign: The federal government is broken, and he can fix it. > > “We’ve got to send a message to Washington that says, ‘enough is enough,’ ” Obama said. > > The Illinois senator, just 46 years old, said he is running for president because of “the fierce urgency of now” – a line from Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have A Dream” speech. > > And he declared his independence from “special interests” and lobbyists, saying they are “part of what’s wrong with Washington.” > > SOURCE: [http://www.tribune-democrat.com/multimedia/local\_story\_089234938.html](http://www.tribune-democrat.com/multimedia/local_story_089234938.html) Silly me to miss the parts where he said he’d put the foxes in control of our financial hen house. Where his promises of transparency were really so much bullshit. Where compromise would be taken to the point of compromising with a party wholly unwilling to compromise on anything and will oppose you at every turn merely because it is Obama and regardless of the merits or cost to the country. Where compromise on something like a robust public option is anathema to the very thing they hope to achieve. Where Obama would largely ignore the wants of the constituency who were his biggest backers and largest donors to the tune of record breaking numbers. Guess I should have been paying attention. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/48 "2009-10-27T18:29:11Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > But I have not seen anything that discusses whether Obama has actually continued the program. Does anyone actually know if there have been any statements or news stories that indicate that the warrantless wiretapping program is still going on? Well, it’s “secret” so not sure. That said the Obama administration not only defended the practice under the same principles that Bush did, they _extended_ the argument even further. > [@](#): > > But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government’s first response to EFF’s lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush’s NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the “state secrets” privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new “sovereign immunity” claim of breathtaking scope – never before advanced even by the Bush administration – that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is “willful disclosure” of the illegally intercepted communications. > > In other words, beyond even the outrageously broad “state secrets” privilege invented by the Bush administration and now embraced fully by the Obama administration, the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and – even if what they’re doing is blatantly illegal and they know it’s illegal – you are barred from suing them unless they “willfully disclose” to the public what they have learned. > > SOURCE: [http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/06/obama/index.html](http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/06/obama/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/49 "2009-10-27T18:30:42Z")
Get a set of bongos and read the op out loud while playing said bongos. It turns it inot one of the best OPs ever. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/50 "2009-10-27T18:32:40Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Silly me to miss the parts where he said he’d put the foxes in control of our financial hen house. That’s how it was before, and that’s how a lot of government regulation works. Fucked up, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/51 "2009-10-27T18:38:14Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > That’s how it was before, and that’s how a lot of government regulation works. Fucked up, isn’t it? Aye but Obama campaigned to stop business as usual in Washington. While I fully understand his ability to actually make sweeping changes in this regard are severely limited I am peeved he is actively and happily embracing business as usual. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/52 "2009-10-27T18:46:47Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > You need someone who knows how the Washington game is played, and who knows how to manage a large staff and keep it moving in the same direction without people going off the reservation. Obama had no demonstrable ability along these lines, but you elected him anyway. He ran a national presidential campaign that is the envy of every politician everywhere regardless of political stripe and will be studied closely for years to come. He was the dark horse candidate and came from behind to surprise everyone. He had a large staff and kept them moving in the same direction with practically no one going off the reservation. He fund raised beyond any politician’s wildest dreams to this point. Can you say the same about the long time, presumably more savvy and experienced politicians in McCain and Clinton? Didn’t think so. ---
**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:** [October 27, 2009, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/53 "2009-10-27T18:51:42Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Well, it’s “secret” so not sure. That said the Obama administration not only defended the practice under the same principles that Bush did, they _extended_ the argument even further. Thanks. I’ll read further. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/54 "2009-10-27T18:51:51Z")
``` "My Administration is committed to creating **an unprecedented level of openness in Government**" -- [Barack Obama, January 28, 2009](http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/) ``` > [@](#): > > In a closely watched case involving rendition and torture, a lawyer for the Obama administration seemed to surprise a panel of federal appeals judges on Monday by pressing ahead with an argument for preserving state secrets originally developed by the Bush administration… > > During the campaign, Mr. Obama harshly criticized the Bush administration’s treatment of detainees, and he has broken with that administration on questions like whether to keep open the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. But a government lawyer, Douglas N. Letter, made the same state-secrets argument on Monday, startling several judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. > > NYT > February 9, 2009 > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has lost its argument that a potential threat to national security should stop a lawsuit challenging the government’s warrantless wiretapping program. > A federal appeals court in San Francisco on Friday rejected the Justice Department’s request for an emergency stay in a case involving a defunct Islamic charity. > Yet government lawyers signaled they would continue fighting to keep the information secret, setting up a new showdown between the courts and the White House over national security. > The Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, claimed national security would be compromised if a lawsuit brought by the Oregon chapter of the charity, Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, was allowed to proceed. > Huffington Post > February 27, 2009 > [@](#): > > Promising “a new era of openness in our country,” President Obama [said]: “ **Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency** ” – [CNN, January 21, 2009](http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/21/obama.business/index.html) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, siding with former President George W. Bush, is trying to kill a lawsuit that seeks to recover what could be millions of missing White House e-mails. > Two advocacy groups suing the Executive Office of the President say that large amounts of White House e-mail documenting Bush’s eight years in office may still be missing, and that the government must undertake an extensive recovery effort. They expressed disappointment that Obama’s Justice Department is continuing the Bush administration’s bid to get the lawsuits dismissed… > > Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, noted that President Barack Obama on his first full day in office called for greater transparency in government. > The Justice Department “apparently never got the message” from Obama, Blanton said. > > [ > > Huffington Post > February 21, 2009 [URL=“[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/21/obama-administration-tryi\_n\_168843.html](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/21/obama-administration-tryi_n_168843.html)”]]([http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/21/obama-administration-tryi\_n\_168843.html](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/21/obama-administration-tryi_n_168843.html)) > [@](#): > > ``` > "A democracy requires accountability, and **accountability requires transparency**. As Justice Louis Brandeis wrote, 'sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.' In our democracy, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which encourages accountability through transparency, is the most prominent expression of a profound national commitment to ensuring an open Government. At the heart of that commitment is the idea that accountability is in the interest of the Government and the citizenry alike. . . . > All agencies should adopt a presumption in favor of disclosure, in order to renew their commitment to the principles embodied in FOIA, and **to usher in a new era of open Government**" -- [Barack Obama, January 21, 2009](http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Freedom_of_Information_Act/) > > ``` > [@](#): > > The Obama administration says it may curtail Anglo-American intelligence sharing if the British High Court discloses new details of the treatment of a former Guantanamo detainee. > A court filing from the British Foreign Office released recently includes a letter from the U.S. government, identified as the “Obama administration’s communication.” Other information identifying the U.S. agency and author of the letter appears to have been redacted. > The letter says: > “If it is determined that [her majesty’s government] is unable to protect information we provide to it, even if that inability is caused by your judicial system, we will necessarily have to review with the greatest care the sensitivity of information we can provide in the future.” > > Washington Times > May 12, 2009 > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON - The Obama administration has decided to keep secret the locations of nearly four dozen coal ash storage sites that pose a threat to people living nearby.The Environmental Protection Agency classified the 44 sites as potential hazards to communities while investigating storage of coal ash waste after a spill at a Tennessee power plant in December. The classification means the waste sites could cause death and significant property damage if an event such as a storm, a terrorist attack or a structural failure caused them to spill into surrounding communities. > AP > June 12, 2009 > [@](#): > > The Obama administration objected yesterday to the release of certain Bush-era documents that detail the videotaped interrogations of CIA detainees at secret prisons, arguing to a federal judge that doing so would endanger national security and benefit al-Qaeda’s recruitment efforts. > > Washington Post > June 9, 2009 > [@](#): > > A federal judge on Friday threatened to severely sanction the Obama Administration for withholding a top secret document he ordered given to lawyers suing the government over its warrantless wiretapping program. > AP > May 22, 2009 > [@](#): > > As a candidate for president, Barack Obama wooed environmentalists with a promise to “support and defend” pristine national forest land from road building and other development that had been pushed by the Bush administration. > But five months into Obama’s presidency, the new administration is actively opposing those protections on some 60 million acres of federal woodlands in a case being considered by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. > LA Times > June 21, 2009 > [@](#): > > After being briefed today on [**President Obama’s firing last week of Gerald Walpin**](http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/president-obama-fires-controversial-inspector-general-.html), Inspector General of the Corporation for National and Community Service, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said the president did not abide by the same law that he co-sponsored – and she wrote – about firing Inspectors General. > “The White House has failed to follow the proper procedure in notifying Congress as to the removal of the Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service,” McCaskill said. “The legislation which was passed last year requires that the president give a reason for the removal.” > McCaskill, a key Obama ally, said that the president’s stated reason for the termination, “Loss of confidence’ is not a sufficient reason.” > ABC News > June 16, 2009 > > [URL=“[http://www.whitehouse.gov/the\_press\_office/Freedom\_of\_Information\_Act/](http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Freedom_of_Information_Act/)”] ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/55 "2009-10-27T19:03:05Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Aye but Obama campaigned to stop business as usual in Washington. > > While I fully understand his ability to actually make sweeping changes in this regard are severely limited I am peeved he is actively and happily embracing business as usual. I don’t like it either. Unfortunately it’s a testimony to Washington’s limited ability to understand and stay on top of financial dealings. **Sam Stone** , Obama’s problem has not been a failure to keep his staff “on the reservation.” He’s continued to do very well at that, and while he’s had a gaffe or two, they’ve been minor and overwith in a few days. Those are not his problem. His problem has been working with Congress. Congress has different interests than Obama and they’re more afraid than he is of getting stuck with the blame for the recession, for deficits (in the moments the public cares about them), and the downsides to health care reform. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/56 "2009-10-27T19:07:47Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t like it either. Unfortunately it’s a testimony to Washington’s limited ability to understand and stay on top of financial dealings. As **Dick Dastardly’s** post above shows and other issues I brought up attest to the “business as usual” extends to every corner of his presidency and not just financial issues. At least I cannot think of a place where he has lived up to his repeated promises on this count. I could forgive a gap here and there if an overall attempt was being made. That is not the case though and it is a bitch slap to everyone who voted for him. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/57 "2009-10-27T19:22:46Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > He ran a national presidential campaign that is the envy of every politician everywhere regardless of political stripe and will be studied closely for years to come. He was the dark horse candidate and came from behind to surprise everyone. He had a large staff and kept them moving in the same direction with practically no one going off the reservation. He fund raised beyond any politician’s wildest dreams to this point. > > Can you say the same about the long time, presumably more savvy and experienced politicians in McCain and Clinton? > > Didn’t think so. Maybe running for office is not the same thing as serving in office. Maybe it requires a different skill set. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/58 "2009-10-27T19:36:17Z")
Congress and the senate move very slowly. Health care is huge. There is movement toward a public option. If it gets passed with a public option that will be a giant step for America. It just isn’t done by decree. Much of what has been accomplished has been in private, beyond our sight. But it is being accomplished. DADT is facing resistance from the military. It will require a lot of cooperation. Bush and Cheney were friends of the military. Obama not so much. The brass will make it hard for him. If they came out after Obamas speech and agreed it is about time to end discrimination against gays, it would have been done. The military is being taken over by the religious right anyway. They will be hard to move unless he has the guts to replace them. The regulation of banks is on the todo list. There is movement on it. It is just not ready yet. But I hate Geithner, Summers and other Goldman people allowed near the banking institutions. They were big players in what happened and should be ostracized for there previous lives. Obama should have been out of Iraq by now. Gitmo should have been closed. Afghanistan should be scaled back. it can not be won and is a waste of treasury and lives. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/59 "2009-10-27T19:40:12Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Maybe running for office is not the same thing as serving in office. Maybe it requires a different skill set. Well, Sam said, “…knows how to manage a large staff and keep it moving in the same direction without people going off the reservation.” I showed he did exactly that in perhaps the best run presidential campaign in history. It had its hiccups but is still one for the books and will doubtless be scrutinized closely by future candidates. As for prior experience in Washington: - Lincoln had no prior executive experience. He was in the Illinois legislature for eight years and in the US House for two years. Obama was in the Illinois Senate for eight years (check) and in the US Senate for three years (check). Indeed Obama has more experience than Lincoln did. ---
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2009, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144/60 "2009-10-27T19:41:28Z")
I am kind of confused about **Sam Stone** ’s argument. In other threads he has complained that Obama has taken a hard-left turn and pursued disastrous policies which will bring ruin to the republic. Now he is saying he is an ineffective lightweight who can’t get anything done. Which is it? I can’t see how both can be true though of course it’s possible that neither is true. In any event Obama won a huge victory early in his presidency by getting the stimulus passed. This was far from a done deal and it was his very public entry into the debate which helped push the bill when it looked like it was floundering. He did the same with healthcare and it looks as of now that there will be a bill with most of what he wanted. This will be a massive achievement and perhaps the most important piece of domestic legislation since LBJ. Also Obama is working in a more complex and fast-moving media environment than any President in history. Blogs, youtube, twitter and so on are now an integral part of the media cycle. Minor issues like the Gates comment will get blown out of proportion and get obsessed over for days. It’s impossible to avoid mistakes in this environment but Obama has proved very skilled at defusing them like he did with the Gates incident. Obama also knows how to prioritize. This means picking the fights that are most important relative to the political costs. In particular he doesn’t want to pick unnecessary fights with the national security establishment. He has shelved several of the Bush policies on national security (hence the furious assaults by Dick Cheney) but has decided to punt on controversial issues like Guantanomo and DADT. In return for this he will obtain greater freedom on the big policy issues that really matter like avoiding a major escalation in Afghanistan and pursuing a more intelligent policy towards Iran. In general he has been very canny about co-opting national security types like Bob Gates and Jim Jones. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-heart-is-broken-about-obama/515144.md?page=4)