4 ms·

> irrespective of what he might /want/ to do, he doesn't actually have sufficient power to do anything, assuming he's actually being accurately briefed on the m

by acqq 11y ago

> irrespective of what he might /want/ to do, he doesn't actually have sufficient power to do anything, assuming he's actually being accurately briefed on the matter. He definitely had enough power, but as steve19 points, he could have estimated that such actions would have probably lowered his chances for reelection.

deadfish 11y ago
Why definitely? If it was truly hidden from him... then who is to say he has the power to stop it?
- acqq 11y ago
  Note: "assuming he's actually being accurately briefed" so here nobody discussed the "truly hidden" variant.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
I disagree. In theory he has enough power, but if you look at how the whole system works, you don't get to become a president if you aren't a) owing a lot of people favours, and b) a kind of person that would be disruptive. If you're the uncontrollable type that would pose the risk to the status quo, you won't be allowed to rise high enough to become a president.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- cubancigar11 11y ago
  That is a very absurd argument, one I have heard several times in liberal circles. President of United States of America is the most powerful man in the world. He doesn't owe anyone anything. We elect him thinking he will do what he promised and the only retribution for him is that he will either be impeached or not get re-elected. That's it. That is democracy. Unless he had 'an offer he could not refuse', he is guilty of a lot of betrayal (apart from crimes he can commit from a presidential position). He is not there to do physics, he has been given power to explicitly do what cannot be done without power. Apologetic my ass.
  - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
    This is pretty much verbatim the "Green Lantern" theory of the presidency, fwiw. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/30/why-the-green-lantern-theory-of-presidential-power-persists/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/30...
    - cubancigar11 11y ago
      Green Lantern theory says president should have sway over Congress. That is not the issue here.
      - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
        No, the Green Lantern theory is basically that the public believes the President can do anything and everything he wants, and therefore can follow up on all of their campaign promises.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    > We elect him Out of how many candidates were you selecting? 300 million? Or just a few, with long political careers? You don't get to the point of being an actually electable candidate if you could stir up a real mess within the establishment.
    - irixusr 11y ago
      The entire political process is a vetting system to weed out the unreliables and the ones who won't play by the rules. Also, I have an inkling that the system is a sociopath pass filter; at any level of government the candidate who is slightly more immoral has improved chances. After a few iterations we have power lusting vampires in charge (the Cheneys, Clintons, ect.)
  - bwindels 11y ago
    > He doesn't owe anyone anything Candidates can and almost all do take an unlimited amount of money from private donors to fund their campaigns, likely in exchange for favourable legislation. Obama gathered $1072.6m like this in 2012. Obama owes his donors big time I would say.
- cmdkeen 11y ago
  Except this is Obama at the peak of his hope and change moment, he'd just been comprehensively elected as an alternative to the Bush years. This was the perfect opportunity to essentially blame even more things on Bush and even cement his position, this was an opportunity to bury the GOP if he had broken this news. Ironically he was in a position to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize if he had taken action against this, Guantanamo and the CIA torture programme.
  - icegreentea 11y ago
    Obama didn't have infinite political capital. We was dealing with some pretty heavy things in the aftermath of the stock market crash - stuff that was potentially alienating his own base, while also trying to push through his own legacy change (Obamacare). All of this through his peak popularity. If he had tried to squash the wiretapping then, it likely would have overextended him and saw his health care reforms squashed.
    - cryoshon 11y ago
      I guess maybe this is an unreasonable comment I'm going to make, but: Yeah, Obama was low on political capital because he shot most of his wad at Obamacare, which didn't get as far as he wanted it, meaning that he loses political capital for losing relative to his goals. In this weak position, the thing to do is rally more political capital from the base... which he never did.
  - ikeboy 11y ago
    Didn't he stop the torture program?
    - cmdkeen 11y ago
      But that's as far as he went. He's hardly been shouting from the rafters about how America should not be a country which tortures, and especially in the light of the Congressional findings re the CIA's activities I'm amazed there haven't been prosecutions. Honestly McCain, on this particular issue, would have been a better president.
dagw 11y ago
He definitely had enough power Assuming he could get his party behind him.

by acqq 11y ago

deadfish 11y ago

Why definitely? If it was truly hidden from him... then who is to say he has the power to stop it?

acqq 11y ago
Note: "assuming he's actually being accurately briefed" so here nobody discussed the "truly hidden" variant.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

I disagree. In theory he has enough power, but if you look at how the whole system works, you don't get to become a president if you aren't a) owing a lot of people favours, and b) a kind of person that would be disruptive. If you're the uncontrollable type that would pose the risk to the status quo, you won't be allowed to rise high enough to become a president.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
cubancigar11 11y ago
That is a very absurd argument, one I have heard several times in liberal circles. President of United States of America is the most powerful man in the world. He doesn't owe anyone anything. We elect him thinking he will do what he promised and the only retribution for him is that he will either be impeached or not get re-elected. That's it. That is democracy. Unless he had 'an offer he could not refuse', he is guilty of a lot of betrayal (apart from crimes he can commit from a presidential position). He is not there to do physics, he has been given power to explicitly do what cannot be done without power. Apologetic my ass.
- knowaveragejoe 11y ago
  This is pretty much verbatim the "Green Lantern" theory of the presidency, fwiw. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/30/why-the-green-lantern-theory-of-presidential-power-persists/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/30...
  - cubancigar11 11y ago
    Green Lantern theory says president should have sway over Congress. That is not the issue here.
    - knowaveragejoe 11y ago
      No, the Green Lantern theory is basically that the public believes the President can do anything and everything he wants, and therefore can follow up on all of their campaign promises.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  > We elect him Out of how many candidates were you selecting? 300 million? Or just a few, with long political careers? You don't get to the point of being an actually electable candidate if you could stir up a real mess within the establishment.
  - irixusr 11y ago
    The entire political process is a vetting system to weed out the unreliables and the ones who won't play by the rules. Also, I have an inkling that the system is a sociopath pass filter; at any level of government the candidate who is slightly more immoral has improved chances. After a few iterations we have power lusting vampires in charge (the Cheneys, Clintons, ect.)
- bwindels 11y ago
  > He doesn't owe anyone anything Candidates can and almost all do take an unlimited amount of money from private donors to fund their campaigns, likely in exchange for favourable legislation. Obama gathered $1072.6m like this in 2012. Obama owes his donors big time I would say.
cmdkeen 11y ago
Except this is Obama at the peak of his hope and change moment, he'd just been comprehensively elected as an alternative to the Bush years. This was the perfect opportunity to essentially blame even more things on Bush and even cement his position, this was an opportunity to bury the GOP if he had broken this news. Ironically he was in a position to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize if he had taken action against this, Guantanamo and the CIA torture programme.
- icegreentea 11y ago
  Obama didn't have infinite political capital. We was dealing with some pretty heavy things in the aftermath of the stock market crash - stuff that was potentially alienating his own base, while also trying to push through his own legacy change (Obamacare). All of this through his peak popularity. If he had tried to squash the wiretapping then, it likely would have overextended him and saw his health care reforms squashed.
  - cryoshon 11y ago
    I guess maybe this is an unreasonable comment I'm going to make, but: Yeah, Obama was low on political capital because he shot most of his wad at Obamacare, which didn't get as far as he wanted it, meaning that he loses political capital for losing relative to his goals. In this weak position, the thing to do is rally more political capital from the base... which he never did.
- ikeboy 11y ago
  Didn't he stop the torture program?
  - cmdkeen 11y ago
    But that's as far as he went. He's hardly been shouting from the rafters about how America should not be a country which tortures, and especially in the light of the Congressional findings re the CIA's activities I'm amazed there haven't been prosecutions. Honestly McCain, on this particular issue, would have been a better president.

dagw 11y ago

He definitely had enough power Assuming he could get his party behind him.