Prefacing by saying I wasn’t a naysayer, but repeating that I think he didn’t go because he was afraid. Both of offending someone and for his own safety, but the second fear follows from the first.
White House responding to the criticism of its non-presence at the rally (from CNN)
“I think it’s fair to say that we should have sent someone with a higher profile to be there,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday afternoon.
Hey, we don’t even insist that people in the Parent Cafe be parents. 
The issue of executive orders is hardly political. That is the point. All presidents use them. And all presidents make judgments about where they need to be after domestic or international incidents or natural disasters. Remember who was in charge during Katrina? Apparently that was not disaster enough to cut a vacation short, call for national unity, or do anything else to support our own citizens who were dying or devastated.
Sally, your posts are political. Trust me.
I am afraid that you are a tad confused about MY post. There is no need to explain to me what the Parent Café is and that is not all about college. Actually, the history of it is rather simple as it was created to exactly open the door to matters that are not entirely germane to college or education.
There is also no need to explain (to me at least) what the degree of “politics” in this thread was and what occasional political discussion resists the filter of “permission” on CC. When the political forum got the punt (it amply deserved) a couple of exceptions were shared by the Big Sachem, namely that political discussions that directly related to college (or education) were allowed in most cases. All others would be not be. See http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe-election-politics/1033265-rip-election-and-politics-forum.html#latest for unbiased quotations! I believe that over time, the liberalization of the restrictions have yielded threads about Big events and important matters such as the impact of Obamacare (or ACA if you prefer.)
To summarize all this (unneeded) blah blah, my take was that discussing the Paris events and the participation of Obama (or lack thereof) was fine. After all, I made such comment. On the other hand, delving into the REST of Obama current reign and “stuff” such as discussing his EO (versus perhaps his predecessor) would be a sure call for this thread to be axed. If others fueled the fire a bit with remarks from the other side, it makes no difference as it is the content and the nature of the remarks that triggers the hatchet.
So … I think Paris and the WH have received some mercy; Move it further into a partisan debate (as we used to have) and this thread might end up on the chopping block. And rest assured I could not care less about what is being exchanged in terms of partisan politicking. Been there, done that, and it made no difference then or today!
If this thread was truly intended to be apolitical–which one might assume, based on the title–it would be discussing a topic something like “my daughter is about to leave for her study-abroad trip to France–should I be worried?” or “has anyone taken any college classes that shed light on the rise of extremism in European cities?”
Let’s not be disingenuous here. We are (mostly) smarter than that.
Post #39:
No, but there is diplomatic protocol for responding to national tragedies. The US made a major diplomatic blunder yesterday, and the White House admits it. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/12/top-obama-administration-officials-criticized-for-not-appearing-at-paris-march/?hpid=z2 Criticism is coming from US Allies on the other side of the Atlantic, not just critics of the current administration.
The US should have sent the Vice President and a senior Republican leader such as McCain or McConnell. Bipartisan representation would have sent a clear message of US support in the face of a national tragedy.
I’m sorry, I just have to say that I first read this as “We don’t even insist that people in the Parent Cafe be people”
and instantly thought of @saintfan
To the topic: as with almost all things, O and his administration are damned if they do, damned if they don’t. If he had gone, grumblers would’ve found something else to grumble about.
^that doesn’t prevent you from having an opinion. No one cares whether there are people who will always disagree with him; that is a given. It’s so annoying that “you people” keep saying that.
What some are missing here is that this is being roundly criticized by virtually everyone and even the WH has acknowledged it was a an unfortunate misstep. There’s really no point in continuing to defend it when even they can’t and have chosen not to try. There is no such thing as a politician without opposition, though. It’s an odd argument. But, carry on.
The White House offered an apology. Great. Apology accepted. Let’s move on.
There are still terrorists on the loose. Terror cells have apparently been activated. There was a major data breach in the U.S. government website today.
In other news, Boko Haram just killed 2,000 people in a single village, and 200,000 people are still living in tents five years after the earthquake in Haiti.
Well, there is lots of other news. What is your point ? I’m just curious.
“No, but there is diplomatic protocol for responding to national tragedies.”
So, like I said, there is no diplomatic protocol for attending marches.
Yes, they should have sent someone higher up, but that they didn’t is still not a reason to turn it into a cause célèbre.
And like every other thing that has had the Right frothing at the mouth, this too will peter out. But, not to worry, they’ll be something else he does to get all you collectively poutraged over to take it’s place.
I think the point was crystal clear, Marie, that there are actually much more serious and important issues than who did or did not attend an event in France.
Thank-you. That could be said about virtually any discussion thread on this forum I suppose but that doesn’t usually happen.
Well, nevermind that you didn’t get into school A. People in Haiti are living in tents. Okay. Moving on.
It’s funny–the French themselves are not criticizing the absence of American leaders. In fact, they said Obama and the U.S. government have been “very present.” Shouldn’t we mostly care what they think right now? Or does everything always have to be “all about us.”
Well… been gone for a day and return to find a most interesting thread. Gonna go back and reread the forum rules to see if there have been some changes…
JMO, but even if you concede that this was a major misstep, there really are many more important issues here. Surely we don’t think every thing revolves around us.
So… that means it should not be addressed?
This thread reminds me of the ebola thread: “You are a million (or whatever) times more likely to die of the flu!”
So??? That means talking about ebola is irrelevant?? So weird. But then again it isn’t, because it is really just an attempt to shut up the opposing side.
Did you really just say this? Just wow.