And therefore is there anything any one single person could have done morally better given Truman's, Obama's or Washington's circumstances? I argue no.

By not dropping the bomb an invasion of Japan would have taken countless more lives.

By not droning Yemen Middle East outright war would taken countless more lives.

It is a trade off of shitty end game scenarios and any sensible person calculates the least shitty one and takes responsibility for the consequences.

How does one add all that up and conclude Obama was "bad" is beyond my comprehension. At most you might conclude that the presidency is "bad". That is not something I agree with but at least it's a line of thinking I can follow. But, regardless, it is a separate argument and certainly not what the article is arguing. The article is saying "we need to elect Jesus, anything less is fascism". That's profoundly immature and unimaginative.

Could you ask for a more perfect bookend to Obama’s blood-soaked neocon abortion of a presidency

Oh get off your high horse, wouldya? Could you ask for a more idealistic naiveté about how the world works?

If you think Obama was a "blood-soaked necon" boy, do I have some bad news for you about presidents past and present.

Remember "We Like Ike" Eisenhower? Korean War.

How about FDR aka Saint Roosevelt of Our Church of The New Deal? Developed the A-bomb.

How about Truman The Trustworthy? He dropped 2 of them.

Going all the way back to Gen. Washington (The Perfect) who quelled the Whiskey Rebellion by riding at the head of an army with 13,000 militiamen. Over enforcing a tax. Nobody died because the insurgents all went home before the arrival of the army but had they not they would have probably been forced to fight and (given their numbers) died.

There is simply no way to explain damned if you do/damned if you don't choices POTUS has to confront to anybody still living cushioned Berkley sophomore life. Out in the world of geopolitics on 7 billion people scale, decisions lead to deaths. Always. The only question is how many and for how long.

Let me see if I'm understanding this: Google just accused Uber of doing business? Well color me outraged.

Those profiteering snakes. Stealing Google's top secret idea for monopolizing a market... that everyone and their uncle knows about. The rest is this Lewandowski guy taking his knowledge to the highest bidder.

I'm sorry but my heart does not bleed for Google. They conspired with Apple and Microsoft to suppress engineer salaries for decades with their no-poaching gentlemen's agreement. Now they are all up in arms because there is no honor among thieves?

Get off your high horse, Google. If he was that important to you why didn't you approach this Lewandowski guy with a quarter of a billion offer? He might have stayed with you. But you didn't so now it's a federal case? Boo-hoo. Too bad, so sad. You're lucky Uber is down so you can kick them but this is not punching up in anyone's book

Yes, he also sells supplements he recommends. The last 20 or so minutes of his infomercial is a string of claims about how supplies are running low, and it’s important that you act immediately

Oh no... it's Andrew Wakefield's anti-vaccine BS all over again. Semi-qualified leach does just enough "research" to demonstrate fear mongering and plausible deniability then profits in the aftermath of hysteria by selling "alternative" remedies (which, in all likelihood, is what motivated the "research" to being with)

http://www.vaccineswork.org/great-cartoon-by-maki-naro-explains-how-vaccines/

It's downright sociopathy and this type of behavior needs to be criminalized. Kicking these for-profit-misinformation quacks out of medical practice is too lenient. The mass effect spread is far too deadly to society as a whole to be ignored. They need to be prosecuted and serve jail-time as examples to others thinking about fueling their youtube infomercial, basement-made product sales with fear mongering.