The Imperial Presidency

I was going to point out that it’s not Obama that does this. It’s the security officers. And of course the OP made the same point.

I have this memory that they managed to really tick off the English press during the Bush 43 administration, by basically bringing in a heavily-equipped military company (or maybe battalion) for a state visit. When Obama visited my area, I remember seeing not only the obvious Treasury agents, but servicemen with small military vehicles at vantage points just in case.

And I can understand it, I guess, but it bugs me, too. Granted, my part of the central US is exactly where one would expect a bunch of yahoos to try and attack Obama, if anyone were going to do so in force.

I both agree and disagree with this. The President is not supposed to be an autocrat. The office, however, is designed to be an elected constitutional monarch. Not above the law, but empowered to enforce it against those who would raise arms in rebellion.

Despite what many seem to believe, the USA is not, in fact, either geographically in Europe nor part of the European Community by most standards.

There are plenty of reasons that Obama could have for not showing up at that event, ranging from not being invited to being under the weather to having a prior family commitment. It’s really not that much of an issue.

A monarch, at least any monarch with more than symbolic power, has legislative powers. The President is an executive only, charged with enforcing the laws passed by Congress. He is closer to being a clerk than a monarch, at least legally. The reality of human nature is that humans want a leader, and since the office of the Presidency is vested in one man, he’s the leader.

And yet, they stuck him with the title, “President of the United States” instead of “the Mighty Protector” like he wanted. :confused:

It would not have been a security nighmare. That’s just complete nonsense.

He didn’t go and didn’t send anybody of prominence because he didn’t want to. It was another example of his “bad optics” or as us normal folk would say, he fucked up.

Debatable.

Well the White House seems to think they screwed up.
[Quote:]
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/us-embarrassed-by-lack-of-top-level-figure-at-paris-march/2015/01/12/9bf74b02-9a9e-11e4-96cc-e858eba91ced_story.html) “I think it’s fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday.

So what’s up with that jayjay? Are you saying the White House fucked up by saying they fucked up?

“I think it’s fair to say we should have sent someone with a higher profile” is not an admission of having “screwed up.” It’s a far lesser level of “should have done.”

Seahawks passing from the one yard line? Screw up. Obama not going to France? Matter of opinion, and by no means a “screw up.”

Boy that is some tortuous logic to arrive at the conclusion that an admission of error is not an admission of error.

I’m saying I DON’T FUCKING CARE AND NEITHER DOES ANYONE WHO ISN’T A FREAKING WINGNUT! Jesus Christ, when are you people going to seek help for your Obama Derangement Syndrome? The man can’t fucking breathe without someone in your goddamn looney bin criticizing him for it…

So the White House is occupied by FREAKING WINGNUTS?

Are you really going to try to spin something the President already admitted was a mistake?

Fuck it. Nuclear option engaged.

You got nuclear fallout in my peanut butter!