One of the key items that every American president has had to keep in mind is the potential to establish -- or buck -- precedent.

The behaviors and practices that a President displays while in office can set the rule-of-thumb behavior for all successive leaders, and those precedents are often hard to ignore or change...sometimes, these can be good for the political party holding the White House but not necessarily good for the nation, and other times they can be bad for the party in office but necessary for the just governance of the nation (to say nothing of how important such precedent may become to the actual pursuit of justice itself). The Republican Party tried to get Clinton to buck some and establish other precedents as part of the whole witch hunt they subjected him to, and inadvertently set the stage for the potential ensnarement of Bush with any of the myriad of corruption and unconstitutional acts his Administration colluded upon with Congressional Republicans.

Now, the GOP has really stepped in it: they invited President Obama to address their annual House Retreat, he accepted ... and it was televised.

That's precedent, baby. Not with the same force as some practices or with regard to legal or Constitutional issues, of course, but it is a precedent for behavior regarding the annual retreat...much to the chagrin of the Republican leadership and advisors, who now -- belatedly -- realize that letting this President bring in cameras to televise the event just pretty much sunk their hopes of using out-of-context sound bytes for political gain. Now, they're on video -- all of 'em -- and they're going to have to engage in the process of government or risk even more substantial damage in the eyes of the citizenry as a whole.

Here's to the Law of Unexpected Consequences.

This is an Open Thread.

Below is the video from the White House website on President Barack Obama's question and answer session with House Republicans. President Obama accepted an invitation from the GOP to speak and participate at their annual retreat. GOP pundits and advisors later said that having cameras broadcast the session was a bad idea, admitting that their hope to embarass the President and further their agenda of opposition took a major body blow by the event.

Let's watch (85 minutes):

And the GOP reaction, via Think Progress?

Hat-tip LordRag of DelphiForums for pointing out the link to this.

Fun, eh?

Self-bumped and promoted. Originally posted 2009-12-10 15:40:12 -0500. Also available in orange. -- GH

Because of a thread that hit the flame folder here where the original poster was demonstrably uninterested in reality, I'm posting this -- feel free to add, amend, correct, elucidate, qualify or quantify.

• DADT: Obama hasn't demonstrated any overt leadership on this, and appears to be dragging his heels. But he also has reaffirmed that he will get it repealed/replaced, and other promising signs of culture-shifts that recognize the importance of full equality and non-discrimination are emerging.

• EFCA: (Employee Free Choice Act) Obama was an original co-sponsor of this while he was still in the Senate, and pledged to sign it into law upon becoming President. The qualifier, of course, was that Congress had to pass the legislation so it would appear on his desk for him to sign -- as it is with any law. The Obama WH had reiterated support for the legislation, but it has so far been stalled by the GOP and a group of wayward Democrats.

• Economy, Wall Street and the Banks: This is a mess that Obama inherited from his predecessor -- a stinking, seething pile of sh!t festering throughout the economic and social infrastructure of the nation, with vast ties to the world economy. Made ever-more complicated by the expansive reduction in regulatory controls that the GOP's unfettered majorities of the preceding 12 years made possible, this is one of the biggest messes to clean up. Obama has made several unpopular decisions, some of which appear to be strategically necessary and others which appear unfathomable betrayals...yet, behind the scenes, other steps have been taken that have garnered less attention and move us further toward unraveling the twisted knots of red tape. (See House Committee votes to let regulators break up Too Big to Fail Banks, for example.)

• Healthcare: Under Obama's initiative, a healthcare reform bill was taken up -- and subsequently ding'd repeatedly as Dems caved and capitulated to the GOP (and other screwheads) -- and yet, a better-we-have-had-to-date bill looks to be on the verge of passing. Behind the scenes, other actions are helping to lay and set a foundation for improvements that will also make further future reforms easier while reducing overhead cost and bureaucracy. One of the little-recognized big changes that looks like it may stay in the current form of the bill is the push to keep 90% of premium money focused on health care, not administrative costs. Wile this may result in hiked premiums (there's little regulatory strength to help ensure affordable premiums are raised beyond a fair limit), it does stand to significantly impact the insurer's bottom lines and fat margins.

  See CTMan's earlier front-page post for some in-depth perspective and more information.

So, yeah -- Obama's been making progress, not always in a popular way, but against insane opposition, increasing security threats and a huge mess.^{1, 2, 3} If you're having issues with his performance given the size and heft of the sh!t sandwich he was handed, and upon which the GOP, the teabaggers and recalcitrant politico Dems keep dolluping more crap, then grab a mop.

Remember when the YouTube video of Sarah Palin pardoning a turkey, as more turkeys were processed right behind her, made a big splash? Today, President Barack Obama pardoned his first turkey -- "Courage" -- and sent the bird to Disneyland as grand marshall of the Thanksgiving Day Parade.

Here's a side-by-side comparison, Obama's pardon vs. Palin's pardon.

For those who will be with family and friends tomorrow, have a great day. For those who, for some reason or other, will be unable to share the day or a meal with loved ones, may your days apart from those you care about be few and your days together be plentiful.

Above all, keep this in mind: This is an Open Thread.

I've spent a good part of the last week re-reading Neil Sheehan's book, A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam. Partly, this is just happenstance; I found a nicely annotated hardback copy in a local used book store. But it's also because I wanted to look again at the 1962-64 period of the Vietnam War to see how much it resembles our current situation in Afghanistan. I don't have good news to report.

Starting in earnest in 1962, the U.S. began arming the Viet Cong inadvertently through the strategic hamlet and strategic outpost programs. The communist side in the South was not relying on Chinese or Soviet supplies, except for heavy weapons that could not easily be captured. They got all the guns and ammo they needed simply by taking them from the people the U.S. handed them out to. The strategic hamlet program turned the peasants against the Saigon regime for good. Indiscriminate bombing of villages turned the rural populace into mortal foes of the United States. The cities were lost because the Catholic regime was brutal, corrupt, and attempted to crush the power of the Buddhist leadership.

The parallels to Afghanistan are not perfect, but the situations have enough commonality to give serious pause. The most worrisome feature is the corruption and illegitimacy of the Karzai Regime. If this was 1963, our ambassador would be plotting a coup to make sure Karzai and his opium-selling brother were assassinated and replaced by a (hopefully) more competent and popular successor. But, with hindsight, we know that that gambit didn't save South Vietnam and it probably wouldn't save Afghanistan either.

Hat-tip to SusanG of DailyKos, who also posted the video as well as a brief rundown of comments regarding the President's speech, providing a quick glimpse of initial reactions to it. Check it out.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Obama nailed the GOP pretty solidly here:

It's good advice: Grab a mop, GOP.

Hat-tip to blackwaterdog of DailyKos for pointing this out.

Nicely done, Rachel.

For additional perspective, check out Hello Dolly Llama's recent post too.

From the inset called "Other Voices" in the CBC.ca article Obama's Nobel win draws mixed reaction, a small subset of the comments:

__________

"A bold statement of international support for his vision and commitment."
    — Jimmy Carter, 2002 Peace Prize laureate

"We trust that this award will strengthen his commitment, as the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, to continue promoting peace and the eradication of poverty."
    — Nelson Mandela, 1993 Peace Prize laureate

"In these hard times people who are capable of taking responsibility, who have a vision, commitment and political will, should be supported."
    — Mikhail Gorbachev, 1990 Peace Prize laureate

"It is an award that speaks to the promise of President Obama's message of hope."
    — Archbishop Desmond Tutu, 1984 Peace Prize laureate

[...snip...]

"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians.' "
    — Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid

[...snip...]

"I do hope that Obama will make efforts to work for peace and he will try to scrap the policies of Bush who put the world peace in danger."
    — Pakistan Islamic leader Hanif Jalandhri

__________

Mmm...notice how you could take this statement:

__________

"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians.' "
    — Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid

__________

And, with the following substitution, make it into what you're likely to hear from Reich-wing pundits today, like so:

__________

"The Nobel prize for peace? Obama should have won the 'Nobel Prize for escalating violence and killing civilians.' "
    — Radio personality Rush Limbaugh

__________

Try substituting "Congressman John Boehner" or "FOX News correspondent Sean Hannity" too.

It's sad, the way the lipstick washes off and the "true colors" of these self-inflated domestic terrorists runs off their backs...but at least once they've stepped up to show themselves for what they are, we'll be able call them what they are and they'll be unable to hide from their own flatulent bloviance.

Now that I've had a minute to cogitate on this --

Hello Dolly Llama's blog |  4 comments |  Tags: Democrats, Nobel Peace Prize, Oslo, President Barack Obama