I am not sure how independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders managed to follow an appearance of John McCain on a Sunday morning talk show today. Perhaps his occasional hints that he might challenge Hillary Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination had something to do with it. In general, people with political views similar to Bernie Sanders do not get within half a mile of a Sunday morning microphone.
Whatever the cause of this breakthrough, it was a welcome development. John McCain’s views on foreign policy are radical and represent a lunatic fringe. You’d never know it if all you did is watch teevee, but Sanders’ views are much more mainstream.
Who knew that the Independent Sanders would provide better cover for Obama than Obama’s former CIA Director and Secretary of Defense, Panetta, or his former SOS.
Bernie’s comments were well measured. He knows damn well the the WH agenda has been to take out Assad and that that has facilitated the rise of ISIS, but he didn’t go there in the interview. Didn’t even take the bait when Crowley pointed out that he’d opposed funding to arm the Syrian “freedom fighters.”
Unlike Lincoln’s “Team of Rivals” who gave him good advice and developed enormous respect for Lincoln, Obama’s have given him terrible advice and feel free to publicly disrespect him.
This supports my contention that Obama was a good legislator, where he got his compromise ideas which as vital to legislation, but a lousy executive with no meaningful experience at such a high level. We need Governors or (don’t scream!) Generals or Admirals with executive experience. An experienced executive would never give power back a weasel like Lieberman, they would have squashed him like a bug for appearing at a Republican convention and endorsing the opposition candidate.
You mean governors like GWB? Or Clinton that zero control of the military and Wall St. ran circles around? Or Jimmy Carter — there was a guy that knew how to get things done in DC and surround himself with first rate talent. Or Reagan — one of the worse ever? Generals like IKE that had the Dulles brothers running around and creating havoc around the world that has continued to hobble us to this day?
Couldn’t disagree more with you on this point. Politically mature (conceptually and organizationally is a late stage development — early to mid ‘fifties), psychologically and emotionally mature, honest, and with a bit of wisdom and vision is all that’s needed. Not that that isn’t a tall order, and the elites do whatever is necessary to crush such people.
Bush was only a figurehead. President Cheney had plenty of business executive experience and used it well to get his way. Never mind that his way was abhorrent. He had the power and used it.
Did Clinton have zero control? Or did he willingly let them have their head?
Jimmy. OK there was a bad executive.
Reagan and Ike were very effective. I was thinking of Ike when I mentioned Generals.
Reagan was senile — even more of a figurehead than GWB (who is an incompetent doofus, but contrary to DEM/liberal lore, he was the one making the final calls during his Presidency). (Clinton to Pentagon, I want war. Pentagon to Clinton, not so fast there yokel. GWB to Pentagon, I want war. Pentagon to GWB, yes sir Mr. President.)
FDR was a good executive. He appointed first rate people that did great work. The roster of people that Ike appointed and let run amok is cringe-worthy. His great accomplishment — more roads for more cars and truck that facilitated killing off the rail transportation. How did that work out? Endless wars for oil that is killing the planet. HST was a better executive than Ike. When MacArthur got out of line, he fired the SOB. Ike sent to the first troops to Vietnam, began the US ME serious meddling, and continued Central and South American meddling. Like most US Presidents he wasn’t a good one.
“HST was a better executive than Ike.”
I just had to laugh because my first reading of this was
“Hunter S. Thompson was a better executive than Ike.”
and I thought, why yes, he was, wasn’t he.
Well, your HST probably wouldn’t have been an better executive than Ike, but he would have been far more amusing and have nixed the Iranian coup.
Well this is yet another item on which we have to agree to disagree. Not the individual merits of the Presidents in question, but the general thesis that executive experience is desirable before being elected chief executive of an enterprise with millions of employees and a three trillion dollar budget.
Then you voted for Romney? By that criteria, you should also have been pleased with McCain’s VP pick.
TX is a “weak governor” structure; therefore, GWB didn’t run jack-shit there and it showed when he got that big promotion. And running a small backwater state such as AR demands fewer executive skills than running a medium size company. Add to that, and as Lawrence O’Donnell has pointed, governors elected POTUS arrive in DC can barely find a restroom.
No, I got swept up in the “Hope and Change” scam 1n 2008. Now I’m sadder and wiser.
But Romney having executive experience does mean that he would have been more effective than Obama. But given what they both stood for, perpetual war, perpetual outsourcing and SS cuts, I preferred the ineffective President.
Upstream a bit, you will see that I referred to Cheney’s executive experience, not Bush’s. Cheney was the Devil Incarnate, but an effective devil.
My original statement was non-ideological but you keep trying to make it about ideology. Rather like Republicans and Global Warming. It’s a theory that explains many observations. It’s not a political point.
Does anyone watch those Sunday Morning shows that is not already decided on most issues? IOW, is anyone persuaded by what’s spoken on these shows or is it all inside pool?
They’ve got to do something to fill up those empty hours when nobody watches anyway, and the Sunday morning yammerfests are cheap and easy to produce, with a shiny veneer of public service. Add that to inertia and there you go.
ABC is starting to run infomercials for the Shark vacuum cleaner on Sundays at noon. They may be more informative and certainly more entertaining.
Really? Cool! I have a Shark and it’s excellent. At last, a Sunday public interest show that’s worth watching!
I’m glad to have your unbiased endorsement. Most of these ads go in one ear and out the other.