Obama may have bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, but when they entered rooms together who was the last one to enter the room? That’s what’s relevant.
For at least the third time, no, the bow is not the point. I’ve said that clearly, but some people don’t want to read that part, or something. Let’s not have partisan kool-aid drinkers; they’re not attractive on either side of the aisle.
Entering the room? Is that serious? Is that a part of Arabian culture I don’t appreciate? I don’t get it.
You’re mistaken - Obama and the king both were at the G-20 summit in London - it wasn’t home turf for either of them.
What is the point? That an anonymous White House aide supposedly tried to put spin on the situation?
I find it hard to believe that you don’t understand the discussion above.
The point is that someone has taken it upon himself to speak for the White House and therefore the president, and it’s widely being derided, and is clearly false. In the interest of transparency and future believability, I would greatly recommend that Obama take the two minutes to say something like one of the quotes in the OP, but more to the point, distance himself from the obvious fiction this staffer has spun.
If he did that, the conservatives would have a field day broadcasting rumors right and left, watching him waste time trying to dispel them.
I’m so tired of conservatives being lumped in with Limbaugh and his ilk. Are you a Sharpton groupie? You’re left of me, you must be!
:smack: My bad.
Still, I’m more irked by the lie than the bow.
My preference is that Obama not give this the time of day. Obama didn’t lie about it. Obama didn’t say anything at all about it. Some anonymous staffer did. Any attention he gives to it is more than it deserves.
If he must do anything, my preference is that he privately find out who that anonymous staffer is and tell them that they need to be honest with the press or else shut the hell up.
I adore Obama. He’s my hero. I didn’t pay the slighest attention to anything about this, because I don’t care if he bowed.
But I read this thread and looked it up on Youtube. I don’t know what it was he did, it was weird in terms of timing and speed and angle BUT…what was crystal clear was that he did NOT do what Gibb said, his other hand is clearly visible and dangling at his side. Which means Gibb lied, which means someone said he ought to, which is a bummer.
I’m sad. Not the end of the world, he’s still all that, and the lie did not fall from his own lips, but it’s sad.
On the other hand, the overall attitude from the OP is a bit much.
And someone said “I liked him for the first 30 days, since then not so much” Good god.
Robert Gibb said it in the press room on video, unfortunately. Still doesn’t make it Obama’s lie, but not a happy thing.
Ah. If the press secretary said it, and not some anonymous flunkie as mentioned earlier in the thread, then I change what I said: it’s still total trivia, but now it’s official, and Obama needs to fix it. Dammit, as if we have nothing else important to focus on.
Honestly I think that a President has more important things to deal with than confirming or denying trivialities or responding to things stated by staffers. Hell, even whether or not the new puppy will indeed be called “Bo” is more meaningful. And of more interest to more people.
That stuff like this is what the Right Wing blogosphere is reduced to trying to attack Obama with is telling. This is what passes for red meat nowadays? The Far Right needs a new butcher.
No the country and the world does not give a shit about whether or not he bowed or whether or not a staffer actually said he did or did not. We do care about what will happen next with North Korea. And oh maybe a few thousand other issues in just foreign policy alone.
This is even below giving a shit about whether or not Palin returned her clothes and what kind of sex Bristol had.
Get a life.
He could just keep trying to fix the mess left by the last admin or playing with the kids’ new puppy - either is a better use of his time.
Look, I have said precious little about this mess - it certainly isn’t a big deal to me. But page after page was posted on this board about Bush and his diplomatic blunders abroad, and many of our more liberal members seemed to assume that Obama would naturally handle matters better.
Well, frankly, he’s off to a rough start, with the Gordon Brown incident, the Queen of England incident, and the King of Saudi Arabia incident. And while none of these are big deals, as I have pointed out, the Angela Merkel incident wasn’t the end of the world either, was it?
The finer points of this are not easy, clearly. And if we are inclined to give Obama a pass, perhaps we ought to wonder whether some of us were too hard on Bush at certain times. It is certainly possible to oppose him politically without flying off the handle over a minor incident with the German prime minister, right? Certainly I can oppose many Obama measures without being overly bothered by these things.
Obama will get better at this. I wonder whether we will. I doubt it.
Well, we had Reeder for that. The degree of ridicule he received seems indicative to me that the board wasn’t populated by reflexive Bush-haters jumping on every petty incident he’d start a Pit thread over.
Of course not all conservatives would do such. I am not defending Obama, not having seen the supposed bow nor the recantations of such, but to mention this any more would most certainly keep the right wing chatterbox active for a long time.
After all, tomorrow they’re going to enjoy teabagging for no reason at all, think of what the right wing crap-dredgers would do given some actual words they can twist.
The previous guy held hands and kissed the king. Did you complain then. I did not care then and do not care now.
Was Bush pitted over the Merkel incident? (Serious question.)