Nope. Not saying that at all, BA. No President gets any "true" vacation time. They might go away from the Oval Office, but the work always follows them. Along with staffers and Special Service agents.
What I am concerned with is what he chooses to spend his time on when he IS supposedly at work. Or at the very least be savvy enough to understand that even if his NCAA brackets only took up 5 minutes out of an otherwise busy day, the image is what matters to people. They want to feel confident that the "Leader of the Free World" is taking things seriously. And this does NOT look serious at all. Being a leader means being aware of how to treat symbols as well as the minutiae. Presidents Bush and Reagan both made a point of never taking off their suit jackets when they were in the Oval Office. True, they could have in semi-private moments. But the point is that it set a standard for the staffers. It showed a respect and a seriousness that I think Obama lacks. The President of this country is supposed to represent us to the world. And what does the world see? Obama teeing off for a bloody golf game while one of our top allies and trading partners suffers the worst disaster in decades if not centuries.
As for Rob's point about the aid that America is sending Japan. It would go there regardless. Obama may have signed off on it. But he hasn't done anything else. Perhaps he could put off a few golf tees and NCAA Bracket sessions to schedule a visit to our stricken ally in person? Maybe sign off on some really major aid while he's there? You might argue that it doesn't do any practical good for him to be there as opposed to in Washington. But again - symbols matter. It would matter a great deal to the Japanese people to see the American President visit personally to offer aid and condolences.
I am pointing out the obvious double-standard. If you get mad for people like me criticizing Obama for stuff like this, just remember that the press hounded Bush relentlessly for taking "vacations" etc. Of course, W was a bit indulgent in moving the operational White House out to Texas for weeks every year. It was an unnecessary provocation of the WH press and a free, mostly-bogus, issue for Democrats to gin up. Even though it's true that Bush spent more time in Crawford by this point than Obama has spent on his "vacations", there is no comparison. Crawford was a 'southern' White House and his home. He hosted meetings with many of our Allies and Heads of State there.
Remember Katrina? I damn sure do. Remember how Bush was criticized endlessly for not being on the ball? I DAMN SURE DO. Since people came down on Bush as hard and as relentlessly as they did for that, then Obama should get the same treatment for dithering over the Libya and Japan situations.
But he won't of course. That's the double standard in action.
Libya is, arguably where the ball was REALLY dropped. The Japan situation is horrible. But I think the Japanese could weather it without our help. Don't get me wrong, I WANT to help them, and it would be terribly wrong of us not to help. But I'm just saying that they'd be capable of doing it themselves, it would just take longer. In the long term perhaps it is not as important what Obama does or does not do personally in his role as Chief Executive for Japan. But he's certainly making himself irrelevant right now.
But the situation in Libya is... excuse me... WAS... the perfect opportunity to show some real foreign policy savvy. Obama completely and utterly dropped the ball on that one. And I doubt anything he does now is going to help matters. Even if the UN and NATO decide for themselves that they'll police a no-fly zone, which is what it's looking might happen, I think what the world is seeing right now is a taste of what things will look like without American power.
Maybe you might see that as a good thing. I don't.
What I am concerned with is what he chooses to spend his time on when he IS supposedly at work. Or at the very least be savvy enough to understand that even if his NCAA brackets only took up 5 minutes out of an otherwise busy day, the image is what matters to people. They want to feel confident that the "Leader of the Free World" is taking things seriously. And this does NOT look serious at all. Being a leader means being aware of how to treat symbols as well as the minutiae. Presidents Bush and Reagan both made a point of never taking off their suit jackets when they were in the Oval Office. True, they could have in semi-private moments. But the point is that it set a standard for the staffers. It showed a respect and a seriousness that I think Obama lacks. The President of this country is supposed to represent us to the world. And what does the world see? Obama teeing off for a bloody golf game while one of our top allies and trading partners suffers the worst disaster in decades if not centuries.
As for Rob's point about the aid that America is sending Japan. It would go there regardless. Obama may have signed off on it. But he hasn't done anything else. Perhaps he could put off a few golf tees and NCAA Bracket sessions to schedule a visit to our stricken ally in person? Maybe sign off on some really major aid while he's there? You might argue that it doesn't do any practical good for him to be there as opposed to in Washington. But again - symbols matter. It would matter a great deal to the Japanese people to see the American President visit personally to offer aid and condolences.
I am pointing out the obvious double-standard. If you get mad for people like me criticizing Obama for stuff like this, just remember that the press hounded Bush relentlessly for taking "vacations" etc. Of course, W was a bit indulgent in moving the operational White House out to Texas for weeks every year. It was an unnecessary provocation of the WH press and a free, mostly-bogus, issue for Democrats to gin up. Even though it's true that Bush spent more time in Crawford by this point than Obama has spent on his "vacations", there is no comparison. Crawford was a 'southern' White House and his home. He hosted meetings with many of our Allies and Heads of State there.
Remember Katrina? I damn sure do. Remember how Bush was criticized endlessly for not being on the ball? I DAMN SURE DO. Since people came down on Bush as hard and as relentlessly as they did for that, then Obama should get the same treatment for dithering over the Libya and Japan situations.
But he won't of course. That's the double standard in action.
Libya is, arguably where the ball was REALLY dropped. The Japan situation is horrible. But I think the Japanese could weather it without our help. Don't get me wrong, I WANT to help them, and it would be terribly wrong of us not to help. But I'm just saying that they'd be capable of doing it themselves, it would just take longer. In the long term perhaps it is not as important what Obama does or does not do personally in his role as Chief Executive for Japan. But he's certainly making himself irrelevant right now.
But the situation in Libya is... excuse me... WAS... the perfect opportunity to show some real foreign policy savvy. Obama completely and utterly dropped the ball on that one. And I doubt anything he does now is going to help matters. Even if the UN and NATO decide for themselves that they'll police a no-fly zone, which is what it's looking might happen, I think what the world is seeing right now is a taste of what things will look like without American power.
Maybe you might see that as a good thing. I don't.