Obama calls GOP criticism of Iran deal 'ridiculous' 'sad'

[Pinot]

That comparison with Chamberlain is offensive to that English gentleman.

It is offensive for the right to believe and assert that only it has learned from the lesson of Chamberlain in his time, place, circumstance.

The catastrophic consequences of appeasement at any time are on the historical record.

The nuclear Agreement with Iran is comprehensive so it does not remotely resemble Chamberlains' flapping piece of paper.

Putin meanwhile is lieing low in the Ukraine and the CCP in Beijing has been arrested in the South China Sea, neither of which developments have concluded yet, but neither has war broken out.

Iran and the United States have begun talking for the first time in 35 years so unfurl the main sail and stay the course. Don't trust and do verify.

That's beyond funny and well into the surreal. The only thing comprehensive about the deal is the degree of capitulation and erasing of red lines, as for don't trust and do verify, that's after 24 days, no military sites and verification of soil samples from Parchin supplied by the Iranians. Can we expect some heavily flocked wallpaper to cover this up?

You're on a roll, Steely. Wow.

Chamberlain, Shmaberlin...it's so weird you guys went there.

Sorry, but we're not going to turn the place to glass quite yet. I know how disappointing that is to hear.

[up-country_sinclair]

Does he have anything to lose? He has another 15 months then he is out. He wants so much to be remembered in History, even if it is negative! He has behaved like a dictator over this issue, If he wasn't going to get his way he was going to set US foreign policy on it's head for future governments. Which will have some convincing to do with some of it's allies.

I also think if the democrats support this treaty as it is then they are committing political suicide Just to support Obama. So maybe he is also making sure HRC won't have a chance of winning.

IMO.

For a malignant narcissist being worshipped or hated are regarded as equally desirable situations, whereas to be ignored is their deepest primal fear.

Thank you for your diagnosis, Dr.

Just out of curiosity, do you hold a PhD in psychology or are you an MD of psychiatry?

[chuckd]

That comparison with Chamberlain is offensive to that English gentleman.

It is offensive for the right to believe and assert that only it has learned from the lesson of Chamberlain in his time, place, circumstance.

The catastrophic consequences of appeasement at any time are on the historical record.

The nuclear Agreement with Iran is comprehensive so it does not remotely resemble Chamberlains' flapping piece of paper.

Putin meanwhile is lieing low in the Ukraine and the CCP in Beijing has been arrested in the South China Sea, neither of which developments have concluded yet, but neither has war broken out.

Iran and the United States have begun talking for the first time in 35 years so unfurl the main sail and stay the course. Don't trust and do verify.

That's beyond funny and well into the surreal. The only thing comprehensive about the deal is the degree of capitulation and erasing of red lines, as for don't trust and do verify, that's after 24 days, no military sites and verification of soil samples from Parchin supplied by the Iranians. Can we expect some heavily flocked wallpaper to cover this up?

You forgot to add none of the inspectors will be either Canadian or US types.

These two nationalities have been banned from playing Inspector because the Iranian negotiators didn't want them.

Apparently the Obama/Kerry vaudeville team didn't seem to care one way or the other.

[geriatrickid]

Incorrect. Republican presidents have to clean up the mess left by their Democratic predecessors. Domestically, internationally and financially.

I can only assume you are some kind of comedian.

Because that's pretty funny.

Not if you were one of the US veterans of the Iraq or Afghanistan adventures, who left comrades and/or body parts behind.

[ggold]

Notice sdanielmcev that on this topic thread some believe volume of posting leftist talking points and propaganda to the point of wallpapering is a substitute for logic. Throw out pages and pages to defend. It doesn't matter who speaks out against this Iran Scam - Obama and Kerry's smoke and mirrors campaign - including prominent people who are not known to be Republicans or even Americans. Plus there are Congressional Democrats who oppose elements of 'The Iran Deal' ... The response by the rabid Obama defenders is to never ever concede a single point... You see to the devoted cult members Obama is omniscient and cannot be wrong - he is perfect without possibility of failure. But the more rational critics many of stature in the U.S. and around the world - do see the obvious flaws. But there cannot be any give and take discourse with cult members as it is blasphemy to speak against 'The One'... Notice how inelastic and unyielding the argumentative style is for the Leftist who defend Obama actions. It is strikingly similar to the argumentative style of those who defend radical Islam.

Notice that the right sector talking about Neville Chamberlain makes the rightwingers believe only they know history and that only the far out extremist right have learned the lessons of history.

The fallacy of the right sector is to believe in the absolute that avoiding war or an armed conflict now inevitably and necessarily means war and conflict shall occur later. That was in fact Chamberlain's experience and all of us have learned from that.

The right is however wrong to believe the opposite, i.e., that it is better to initiate war or armed conflict now than to necessarily and inevitably postpone it to later (when presumably each side would be better armed).

This Agreement reveals that the right are as wrong in their own thinking, which is the opposite of Chamberlain's approach, as Chamberlain was in his own disastrous beliefs.

The right has blinders on to think the lesson of Chamberlain is their own and for them only.

How you missed the point completely, The lesson was that Chamberlain was naive to think he could make peace with Hitler. Obama did not learn that lesson He repeated it with the Iranians! Is Obama on the Right or Left?

Put another way if Chamberlain was responsible for the second world war, then Obama will have achieved the same only he won't be President, Just like Chamberlain wasn't PM. But Chamberlain was a statesman, Obama is not.

And surely you attack your enemies when they are weak not when they are strong. This isn't about Left and Right. It should be about common sense.

The post exposes my point exactly and precisely, which is that the right believes only it knows or understands the historical lesson of Chamberlain and negotiation, appeasement, keeping the peace or the timing or circumstance of war.

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

[Linky]

Notice sdanielmcev that on this topic thread some believe volume of posting leftist talking points and propaganda to the point of wallpapering is a substitute for logic. Throw out pages and pages to defend. It doesn't matter who speaks out against this Iran Scam - Obama and Kerry's smoke and mirrors campaign - including prominent people who are not known to be Republicans or even Americans. Plus there are Congressional Democrats who oppose elements of 'The Iran Deal' ... The response by the rabid Obama defenders is to never ever concede a single point... You see to the devoted cult members Obama is omniscient and cannot be wrong - he is perfect without possibility of failure. But the more rational critics many of stature in the U.S. and around the world - do see the obvious flaws. But there cannot be any give and take discourse with cult members as it is blasphemy to speak against 'The One'... Notice how inelastic and unyielding the argumentative style is for the Leftist who defend Obama actions. It is strikingly similar to the argumentative style of those who defend radical Islam.

Notice that the right sector talking about Neville Chamberlain makes the rightwingers believe only they know history and that only the far out extremist right have learned the lessons of history.

The fallacy of the right sector is to believe in the absolute that avoiding war or an armed conflict now inevitably and necessarily means war and conflict shall occur later. That was in fact Chamberlain's experience and all of us have learned from that.

The right is however wrong to believe the opposite, i.e., that it is better to initiate war or armed conflict now than to necessarily and inevitably postpone it to later (when presumably each side would be better armed).

This Agreement reveals that the right are as wrong in their own thinking, which is the opposite of Chamberlain's approach, as Chamberlain was in his own disastrous beliefs.

The right has blinders on to think the lesson of Chamberlain is their own and for them only.

How you missed the point completely, The lesson was that Chamberlain was naive to think he could make peace with Hitler. Obama did not learn that lesson He repeated it with the Iranians! Is Obama on the Right or Left?

Put another way if Chamberlain was responsible for the second world war, then Obama will have achieved the same only he won't be President, Just like Chamberlain wasn't PM. But Chamberlain was a statesman, Obama is not.


And surely you attack your enemies when they are weak not when they are strong. This isn't about Left and Right. It should be about common sense.

The post exposes my point exactly and precisely, which is that the right believes only it knows or understands the historical lesson of Chamberlain and negotiation, appeasement, keeping the peace or the timing or circumstance of war.

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

It wasnt Obama's deal, there are other countries involved. It was a joint effort.

Well done on the deal to all involved.

[Jingthing]

The true Iran plan to eliminate Israel:

Khamenei describes Israel as “a cancerous tumor” whose elimination would mean that “the West’s hegemony and threats will be discredited” in the Middle East. In its place, he boasts, “the hegemony of Iran will be promoted.”

http://nypost.com/2015/08/01/iran-publishes-book-on-how-to-outwit-us-and-destroy-israel/

[Publicus]

Notice that the right sector talking about Neville Chamberlain makes the rightwingers believe only they know history and that only the far out extremist right have learned the lessons of history.

The fallacy of the right sector is to believe in the absolute that avoiding war or an armed conflict now inevitably and necessarily means war and conflict shall occur later. That was in fact Chamberlain's experience and all of us have learned from that.

The right is however wrong to believe the opposite, i.e., that it is better to initiate war or armed conflict now than to necessarily and inevitably postpone it to later (when presumably each side would be better armed).

This Agreement reveals that the right are as wrong in their own thinking, which is the opposite of Chamberlain's approach, as Chamberlain was in his own disastrous beliefs.

The right has blinders on to think the lesson of Chamberlain is their own and for them only.

How you missed the point completely, The lesson was that Chamberlain was naive to think he could make peace with Hitler. Obama did not learn that lesson He repeated it with the Iranians! Is Obama on the Right or Left?

Put another way if Chamberlain was responsible for the second world war, then Obama will have achieved the same only he won't be President, Just like Chamberlain wasn't PM. But Chamberlain was a statesman, Obama is not.

And surely you attack your enemies when they are weak not when they are strong. This isn't about Left and Right. It should be about common sense.

The post exposes my point exactly and precisely, which is that the right believes only it knows or understands the historical lesson of Chamberlain and negotiation, appeasement, keeping the peace or the timing or circumstance of war.

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

You and I are talking past one another. I'll give it one more try but that will be all.

My posts say the rightwing thinks only it knows or understands the lesson of Chamberlain, Hitler, Munich. The wrongheaded and skewed thinking of the right is in a serious error.

So I correct your absurd statements in the specific post immediately above, as follows.....

So Obama never learned the lesson either!

One hundred percent wrong on both Prez Obama and myself. My posts concerning Chamberlain say entirely the opposite.

The second statement in the post is also completely wrong in respect of what I posted. I suggested no such thing about Chamberlain or Britain in WW2. You are assigning your own thinking over there on the fringe right to me, which is a major intellectual and cultural error.

Everyone in the world knows the lesson of Chamberlain, to include the ayatollahs in Iran, so kindly stop assigning to me the rudimentary thoughts you think I have. Ridiculous thoughts at that.

[lifeincnx]

His pathetic deal is "ridiculous and sad". He has endangered the whole world to satisfy his own ego.

Meanwhile, back in reality Iran plans to buy 80-90 Boeing/Airbus planes per year to update their aging fleet. They need roughly 400 in total.

OK, tell us they plan to use them to deliver nuclear bombs.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/02/iran-planes-idUSL5N10D04I20150802

[lifeincnx]

Incorrect. Republican presidents have to clean up the mess left by their Democratic predecessors. Domestically, internationally and financially.

I can only assume you are some kind of comedian.

Because that's pretty funny.

Not if you were one of the US veterans of the Iraq or Afghanistan adventures, who left comrades and/or body parts behind.

Then how would you explain Ronald Reagan's HUGE Benghazi moment? 1983 - Beirut, Lebanon: two hundred and forty-one servicemen killed by a suicide bomber. U.S. response: zip. And, we are still cleaning up his cut-and-run mess as they were Hezbollah.

[CMNightRider]

What is ridiculously sad isn't "GOP criticism of the Iran deal," but is the fact Obama is woefully lacking the attrubites necessary to be a world leader. Even after two terms of on-the-job-training, Obama is way over his head. This guy will go down in history as the worst of the worst to ever occupy the White House.

[Publicus]

What is ridiculously sad isn't "GOP criticism of the Iran deal," but is the fact Obama is woefully lacking the attrubites necessary to be a world leader. Even after two terms of on-the-job-training, Obama is way over his head. This guy will go down in history as the worst of the worst to ever occupy the White House.

The right lunar fringe should be at the least somewhat fair in pronouncing Barack Obama the "worst of the worst to ever occupy the White House."

I mean really...before the right can recognisably be its usual hairy extreme the US will need at least one woman president and two more black presidents. Imagine an Oprah Winfrey style POTUS.

Edited to add: a couple of Hispanic presidents to include a woman Latina, and an Asian-American elected POTUS named Porn.

Statespeople all and coming sooner or later..

Edited August 3, 2015 by Publicus

[sdanielmcev]

Incorrect. Republican presidents have to clean up the mess left by their Democratic predecessors. Domestically, internationally and financially.

I can only assume you are some kind of comedian.

Because that's pretty funny.

Not if you were one of the US veterans of the Iraq or Afghanistan adventures, who left comrades and/or body parts behind.

Then how would you explain Ronald Reagan's HUGE Benghazi moment? 1983 - Beirut, Lebanon: two hundred and forty-one servicemen killed by a suicide bomber. U.S. response: zip. And, we are still cleaning up his cut-and-run mess as they were Hezbollah.

What's the matter? Can't blame Bush for Cintons' reaction, excuse me lack of it, for Benghazi? Gotta go back to Reagan? How about T.E. Lawrence? How about Moses for bring in the Jews?

Reagan didn't lie about it. That's the difference.

And, please, show the rest of the world Hezbollah's involvement in the 1983 embassy attack. We'd like to know where you got that. I don't like Hezbollah, but that is no reason to make up stories.

[sdanielmcev]

What is ridiculously sad isn't "GOP criticism of the Iran deal," but is the fact Obama is woefully lacking the attrubites necessary to be a world leader. Even after two terms of on-the-job-training, Obama is way over his head. This guy will go down in history as the worst of the worst to ever occupy the White House.

The right lunar fringe should be at the least somewhat fair in pronouncing Barack Obama the "worst of the worst to ever occupy the White House."

I mean really...before the right can recognisably be its usual hairy extreme the US will need at least one woman president and two more black presidents. Imagine an Oprah Winfrey style POTUS.

Edited to add: a couple of Hispanic presidents to include a woman Latina, and an Asian-American elected POTUS named Porn.

Statespeople all and coming sooner or later..

About as racist a post as I've ever seen.

Edited August 3, 2015 by sdanielmcev

[Chicog]

His pathetic deal is "ridiculous and sad". He has endangered the whole world to satisfy his own ego.

Meanwhile, back in reality Iran plans to buy 80-90 Boeing/Airbus planes per year to update their aging fleet. They need roughly 400 in total.

OK, tell us they plan to use them to deliver nuclear bombs.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/02/iran-planes-idUSL5N10D04I20150802

If they are going to use them for civilian air transport, they need to paint them bright green or something, so that gung ho Americans know not to shoot them down.

[Chicog]

Reagan didn't lie about it. That's the difference.

Too busy lying about Iran Contra.

[ggold]

How you missed the point completely, The lesson was that Chamberlain was naive to think he could make peace with Hitler. Obama did not learn that lesson He repeated it with the Iranians! Is Obama on the Right or Left?

Put another way if Chamberlain was responsible for the second world war, then Obama will have achieved the same only he won't be President, Just like Chamberlain wasn't PM. But Chamberlain was a statesman, Obama is not.

And surely you attack your enemies when they are weak not when they are strong. This isn't about Left and Right. It should be about common sense.

The post exposes my point exactly and precisely, which is that the right believes only it knows or understands the historical lesson of Chamberlain and negotiation, appeasement, keeping the peace or the timing or circumstance of war.

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

It wasnt Obama's deal, there are other countries involved. It was a joint effort.

Well done on the deal to all involved.

I didn't see Putin push for this deal, It was Only Obama, his Euro poodles following his lead. Russia is Happy because they get to build more nuclear reactors.

Yes Well done on the deal to all involved, You Just made the world that little bit more dangerous.

Edited August 3, 2015 by ggold

[ggold]

How you missed the point completely, The lesson was that Chamberlain was naive to think he could make peace with Hitler. Obama did not learn that lesson He repeated it with the Iranians! Is Obama on the Right or Left?

Put another way if Chamberlain was responsible for the second world war, then Obama will have achieved the same only he won't be President, Just like Chamberlain wasn't PM. But Chamberlain was a statesman, Obama is not.

And surely you attack your enemies when they are weak not when they are strong. This isn't about Left and Right. It should be about common sense.

The post exposes my point exactly and precisely, which is that the right believes only it knows or understands the historical lesson of Chamberlain and negotiation, appeasement, keeping the peace or the timing or circumstance of war.

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

You and I are talking past one another. I'll give it one more try but that will be all.

My posts say the rightwing thinks only it knows or understands the lesson of Chamberlain, Hitler, Munich. The wrongheaded and skewed thinking of the right is in a serious error.

So I correct your absurd statements in the specific post immediately above, as follows.....

So Obama never learned the lesson either!

One hundred percent wrong on both Prez Obama and myself. My posts concerning Chamberlain say entirely the opposite.

The second statement in the post is also completely wrong in respect of what I posted. I suggested no such thing about Chamberlain or Britain in WW2. You are assigning your own thinking over there on the fringe right to me, which is a major intellectual and cultural error.

Everyone in the world knows the lesson of Chamberlain, to include the ayatollahs in Iran, so kindly stop assigning to me the rudimentary thoughts you think I have. Ridiculous thoughts at that.

All I see is contradictions in your statements. Obama is wrong, I am quite happy to wait and allow time to prove the point.

[TooPoopedToPop]

It wasnt Obama's deal, there are other countries involved. It was a joint effort.

Well done on the deal to all involved.

I didn't see Putin push for this deal, It was Only Obama, his Euro poodles following his lead. Russia is Happy because they get to build more nuclear reactors.

Yes Well done on the deal to all involved, You Just made the world that little bit more dangerous.

What fundamentally worries the Israelis is that Iran will rejoin the community of nations as a diplomatic and trading partner.

The radical Zionists of the Likud Party - who pretty much run the show - see a powerful Iran as a threat to the status quo. Not just militarily, but in the growing movement to end Israeli land grabs and aggression by means of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions.

[Chicog]

How you missed the point completely, The lesson was that Chamberlain was naive to think he could make peace with Hitler. Obama did not learn that lesson He repeated it with the Iranians! Is Obama on the Right or Left?

Put another way if Chamberlain was responsible for the second world war, then Obama will have achieved the same only he won't be President, Just like Chamberlain wasn't PM. But Chamberlain was a statesman, Obama is not.


And surely you attack your enemies when they are weak not when they are strong. This isn't about Left and Right. It should be about common sense.

The post exposes my point exactly and precisely, which is that the right believes only it knows or understands the historical lesson of Chamberlain and negotiation, appeasement, keeping the peace or the timing or circumstance of war.

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

It wasnt Obama's deal, there are other countries involved. It was a joint effort.

Well done on the deal to all involved.

I didn't see Putin push for this deal, It was Only Obama, his Euro poodles following his lead. Russia is Happy because they get to build more nuclear reactors.


Yes Well done on the deal to all involved, You Just made the world that little bit more dangerous.

Putin doesn't have to 'push' for anything. He is a dictator in all but name.

[Steely Dan]

His pathetic deal is "ridiculous and sad". He has endangered the whole world to satisfy his own ego.

Meanwhile, back in reality Iran plans to buy 80-90 Boeing/Airbus planes per year to update their aging fleet. They need roughly 400 in total.

OK, tell us they plan to use them to deliver nuclear bombs.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/02/iran-planes-idUSL5N10D04I20150802

Do try to keep up, why use an Airbus when a long range ICBM will do the trick? Yes, you've guessed it the eight year ban on ICBM's for Iran didn't even last eight weeks let alone the eight years it was supposed to.

http://app.debka.com/p/article/24782/Iran-plans-missile-tests-to-flaunt-defiance-of-Vienna-deal-and-UNSC-resolution

The announcement was of course made to coincide with Lurch pressing the flesh in Qatar trying to convince yet more Sunni Arabs of the magnificence of his master's creation. It makes him out to be an even bigger imbecile than before, and the bar is already set very low.

[ggold]

So Obama never learned the lesson either! Because if he did he would not have negotiated with Iran, or he would have made sure he got a far better deal than the one that is going to unravel.

Yes Chamberlain tried for appeasement, And if Hitler kept to his word it might have worked. But to suggest he was timing as and when Britain would go to war, that is nonsense. Even when war was declared Britain wasn't ready.

It wasnt Obama's deal, there are other countries involved. It was a joint effort.

Well done on the deal to all involved.

I didn't see Putin push for this deal, It was Only Obama, his Euro poodles following his lead. Russia is Happy because they get to build more nuclear reactors.

Yes Well done on the deal to all involved, You Just made the world that little bit more dangerous.

Putin doesn't have to 'push' for anything. He is a dictator in all but name.

Obama must be copying him, he also has behaved like a dictator, not allowing Congress to see the details before going to the UN. Promising to veto a negative vote, he doesn't respect the democratic process.

Edited August 3, 2015 by ggold

[thaibeachlovers]

Reagan didn't lie about it. That's the difference.

Too busy lying about Iran Contra.

Didn't he spend a lot of meetings catching up with sleep .

[ggold]

Reagan didn't lie about it. That's the difference.

Too busy lying about Iran Contra.

Didn't he spend a lot of meetings catching up with sleep .

When ever he opened his mouth, it sounded like he had either just woken up or was about to fall asleep.

[Scott]

Off-topic inflammatory posts removed. Stay on topic and stop with the inflammatory trolling, including the use of the term chomboy.

[Chicog]

Reagan didn't lie about it. That's the difference.

Too busy lying about Iran Contra.

Didn't he spend a lot of meetings catching up with sleep .

When ever he opened his mouth, it sounded like he had either just woken up or was about to fall asleep.

I can't find the video, but there was a famous incident when Ronnie just looked dumbfounded at a question and Nancy quietly muttered to him "Tell them we're doing everything we can" at which point a little light bulb came on and he said "We're doing everything we can".

President in name only at the end.

[beechguy]

"President in name only at the end", yes, this time, it started at the beginning.

[up-country_sinclair]

This thread isn't about President Reagan. But if it were, I'd say he was an excellent president for his first 6 years, but age got the better of him in the end.

[ggold]

Too busy lying about Iran Contra.

Didn't he spend a lot of meetings catching up with sleep .

When ever he opened his mouth, it sounded like he had either just woken up or was about to fall asleep.

I can't find the video, but there was a famous incident when Ronnie just looked dumbfounded at a question and Nancy quietly muttered to him "Tell them we're doing everything we can" at which point a little light bulb came on and he said "We're doing everything we can".

President in name only at the end.

I think there was more than one who was President in name only, for all the good they did. Maybe it would be better if it was just an honorary position, with out any real authority! They wouldn't be such a danger to the world that way.

[thaibeachlovers]

When ever he opened his mouth, it sounded like he had either just woken up or was about to fall asleep.

I can't find the video, but there was a famous incident when Ronnie just looked dumbfounded at a question and Nancy quietly muttered to him "Tell them we're doing everything we can" at which point a little light bulb came on and he said "We're doing everything we can".

President in name only at the end.

I think there was more than one who was President in name only, for all the good they did. Maybe it would be better if it was just an honorary position, with out any real authority! They wouldn't be such a danger to the world that way.

Like the Irish President- yes it would be good, but they'd have to change the constitution.