And that's a lot better gig than giving speeches . . .

He deserve a rest.

But Sanders could... and SHOULD consider appointing Obama to SCOTUS.

He's infinitely beter suited to THAT post than any other.

FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll (without Gore)

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/062807_release_web.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_2008_presidential_candidates

Just discussing eggs and chickens, counted pre-hatch is all.

need it, it will swing to O'Malley. Bank on it!

he leaves office. I'm sure that whatever he chooses to do, it will be in service of his fellow man.

someone who will protect the US Constitution from the kind of abuses it is currently being subjected to.

come true.

Spend time with Sasha and Malia, write his memoirs, play some golf.

Too many people have acted like they own him, that he's supposed to do what they say all the time. They have wanted him out of office so bad, they have tried to pretend he wasn't president.

And they haven't see what he has. It's like the scenes when the Ysildi were escaping ISIS - that story has not been totally put out there, it's only coming out in bits and pieces how horrible it was - and still is. I saw the images from teh situation room - he saw all of that happening LIVE. The camera angle did not show what he saw.

He always had to be cognizant of the fear or murderous tendencies such sights would create in the public. With the advantage of satellites that can see a fly on the wall, you know he saw plenty of what was going on when called them murderers and a cult of death.

He knew what Quadaffi did; he saw the Seals go after Bin Laden. I've posted some of the images from the White House situation room where the walls are full of screens and he looked like he was ready to throw up seeing what was going on -and so was Hillary - which is the reaction a person with empathy has.

A president sees things that no one else is cleared to know. And some can't handle that fact, even if they agree or disagree. As I've said before, we didn't vote for the Prince of Peace. The seal of the presidency has an eagle with two full claws - one with an olive branch, the other with arrows. That is war and peace. People should not be naive.

And a federal job is a step down. The world doesn't want Obama sequestered in a room of judges. He is needed on the world stage. America had a chance to move forward. The USA chose to go backwards... Not all of it, but enough to give us hell.

Not all the world is doing that. The best thing to do is to make a difference in the world, and the world wants him. He's a lot more important than any job in our government. Time for him to move on and do greater things, if that is what he chooses.

I have missing him since he was re-elected. We have just shared a brief moment in time.

As FDR said: "It is fun to be in the same decade with you."

I'm glad I lived this long.

a break, and I'll bet Michelle agrees with you.

Last edited Tue Jun 23, 2015, 01:58 PM - Edit history (1)

Though I'm thrilled beyond belief that he's running for Senate again and I don't want to lose him again. I'd live with it for SCOTUS, though.

should appoint is wayyyyy to premature.

HRC, Bernie, O'Malley -- whomever. If the next President of the US is (as we all desperately hope) the Democratic nominee, he or she isn't appointing Obama to anything except maybe a ceremonial position, if that.

SCOTUS? Not happening. While you don't have to be a judge or even a lawyer, there hasn't been a Justice confirmed who didn't have prior judicial experience in over 30 years and there hasn't been an former elected official confirmed in over 60 years and no former President has ever been appointed. And that isn't changing. Plus, while it would be a big ugly fight, there is no way the repubs would allow Obama to be confirmed. They have a mantra that he has disregarded the Constitution and while they're afraid to try to impeach him, they wouldn't hesitate to block his nomination to the SCOTUS. And whomever is President doesn't need that fight and won't seek it out.

President of the UN General Assembly? Not happening either. For one thing, the President of the US doesn't get to appoint the President of the UN General Assembly. For another thing, it's kind of a nothing burger position. And third thing: while not a rule, it is longstanding custom than the President does not come from any of the five permanent members of the Security Council, including the US. There's never been a President of the UN General Assembly from the US and there isn't going to be one in the future.

He was defeated for reelection by Woodrow Wilson in 1912, appointed 10th Chief Justice by Warren Harding in 1921 and served until 1930

get on the circuit.

The title is Secretary General, and it's a five year term and the incumbent often does two terms.

It's supposed to keep a semblance of fairness in the proceedings. For awhile there, there were some people who wanted Bill Clinton to get the gig, because he is charismatic and can get people to talk to one another, but he's from the wrong country. There is no hard/fast rule against having someone from a security council country as the top dog in the general assembly, but it has devolved to custom and tradition to NOT have that happen: