3 ms·
> Trying to discredit someone by saying at one point they were part of a majority that still dislikes the idea is like saying water is wet. I think I give suff
by lend000 10y ago
> Trying to discredit someone by saying at one point they were part of a majority that still dislikes the idea is like saying water is wet.
I think I give sufficient credit where it's due here, but it wasn't like he was an LGBT hero like many make him out to be. But I'll throw out all of the other good things I know about Obama, too: eased US-Cuba relations, commuted over a thousand sentences of nonviolent drug offenders + Chelsea Manning, shifted some land from the poorly managed BLM to the Forests Service, made it easier to get insurance with pre-existing conditions.. These are good things, but even in the case of the last three, there are huge strings attached. Like the fact that the commutations were only symbolic, because his administration prosecuted hundreds of thousands for the same 'crimes' and did nothing to fix the system. And the fact that the BLM still owns a third of the country west of the Mississippi. And the fact that ACA was terribly implemented and is an administrative nightmare.
And then there are the more 'pure' bad things. Foreign policy + surveillance (as discussed), executive overreach, killing US citizens without warrants, 0% interest rates + QE, trillion dollar deficits and no plan to address entitlements.
I was optimistic about some of Obama's rhetoric at one point, but quite frankly he is just arrogant and I don't fall for the self-righteous "great dad" persona. His pros come with strings attached and his cons are historically terrible, placing him amongst the worst Presidents of the last century history alongside Bush Jr., Bush Sr., Woodrow Wilson, Hoover, and FDR. Trying to restrain myself from putting half the presidents on this list. The point is that the average president is bad, and Obama was below average.
This debate probably won't get anywhere because we clearly place different emphases on the various points listed above, but I think it's fair to say this is a pretty comprehensive list of his main pros and cons.
- KirinDave 10y agoI just don't think a president with an opposition congress can be expected to do much. I don't fully understand why Obama was such a proponent of a surveillance state, as well. It is disappointing, but to me it's only somewhat of a problem. I think a surveillance society is 100% inevitable. It is not possible to prevent it, nor is it necessarily the end of all freedom so long as we take care as we're shaping it to make it so that surveillance is uniform and everyone has access to a reasonable portion of the data. That's the best we can do to create a reasonable series of norms around it.
- lend000 10y ago> I just don't think a president with an opposition congress can be expected to do much. Perhaps not through legislation, but all of the 'pure bad' things I mentioned -- with the exception of the deficit and lack of entitlement reform -- can be blamed primarily on Obama. Even interest rates/QE, as he appointed a Fed chairwoman who maintained the same policies and met with Obama quite frequently. > I think a surveillance society is 100% inevitable. I agree, but I don't think it's a good thing or that it makes the politicians who enable it any less bad -- it's just inevitable that the kind of people who run governments will like it.