Not about the bow but I liked this bit about a conservative guest telling Hannity not to find fault with everyfreakinthing Obama does.
He notes that the conservatives objected when that happened to Bush. Of course that was after two wars had been started.
Yeah, that’s pretty damning.
What is the Queen of England incident? Is that referring to Michelle Obama returning her embrace?
I think it’s about giving her an iPod (that she ASKED for and was an upgrade to her current one), which, besides that, contained footage of her last state visit and a bundle of showtunes (which the Queen and Prince Consort apparently enjoy very much). AND he also gave her a Richard-Rogers-autographed songbook of The King And I, which is apparently her favorite show.
In other words, the Queen incident is hot air, just like pretty much everything the rightwing radio people have been bloviating about for years.
How can it be a “rough start” while by your own words “none of these are big deals”?
The Angela Merkel incident wasn’t the end of the world. But it was so gauche that it made people with good sense cringe. It just isn’t done.
First off, most of us posting here didn’t care about or comment on Bush’s unwanted neck rub of Merkel in the midst of a high profile meeting. (Although that clip is quite funny for Merkel’s total freak-out reaction, you can’t help but feel for her) - we were hard on Bush for other things mostly and if not for those other … um … issues … would have tolerated foot in mouth, and hands on shoulders, gladly. And let it be noted: as much as Bush was bashed for his unwanted high profile massage attempt, no one was demanding a public explanation of “Massage-gate” and none was offered.
I’m a keen observer of people, its a crucial part of treachery. Seems to me its pretty common for a taller person to dip towards a shorter person upon cordial meeting, as if to draw nearer to hear what another is saying, or to murmur quiet greetings.
To have any significance as a formal gesture, it would need to be a formal bow, no? With one’s hands to one’s side, a gesture of obeisance. Besides, whats he supposed to do if he meets the Japanese Prime Minister, high-five?
I almost couldn’t disagree more, and not because I hate him, but because I’d like to like him.
When someone tries to speak for you but is a wackjob, it is incumbent upon you, should you wish to save your respectability, to repudiate that statement. This is what I hope he does, so I can not move down the path to just assigning him a place with the other disreputable politicians (almost all of them).
You could not be more wrong. This is LITERALLY a two minute fix on BO’s part: “You know, I did bow there, and I’m very sorry that the story got spread that I didn’t. [I got caught up in the moment / I’m sensitive to other cultures / I didn’t realize what it looked like], but I don’t want to look like I’m lying to you. On the other hand, it’s about the same importance as the next time you find me using the wrong fork a state dinner. I’m sure some of you are looking forward to that as well.”
This would totally kill the issue.
I’m totally convinced that there are Obama acolytes here just the same as there were W polishers. Neither is a healthy thing.
I suppose I didn’t ask for one because even as someone who has never voted Democrat, I honestly didn’t expect as much from W. He’s a hick who bought his way to the presidency, and has about as much sense and consideration as a fence post. Screw him and the money he rode in on.
All I’m asking, for about once in my lifetime, is a president who has some sense about what he’s doing (I think I’m looking at you, Carter) and some serious integrity (I’m looking at you, Nixon, maybe a tiny bit Ford, a decent bit Reagan, don’t really think of something either way with GHWB, and God help us again post-Nixon: Clinton).
This is actually a very possible situation. But to let his press secretary spread a palpable lie and then an evasion, is more than I expected from Obama.
And I even voted against him.
sorry.
Too familiar with the Queen of England, too much deference to the King of Saudi Arabia; on average, sounds like he’s got it about right.
Really? You expect better adherence to protocol from the son of an African immigrant than from the son of a president?
I would love for the office of the president to be absolutely, utterly, scrupulously honest; every detail triple-checked and released, from the highest-level summit negotiations to the thread-count in the state-dinner linens. But I just can’t get very worked up over this. We’re already agog over the president’s dog; just how much time are we supposed to spend on trivialities? I hope lying doesn’t become a habit or a reflex. But if the president has an extra few minutes in his schedule, I’d rather he find a million dollars to cut out of the budget than chastise his press secretary.
Is it common to ‘dip’ so deeply that one’s head is at the level of the shorter person’s chest? Another four or five inches and Obama would have been bent 90 degrees.
Still, while I don’t approve of American presidents bowing to other nations’ leaders, it’s the lie which Obama is allowing to stand that is most discouraging to me.
So far, I’m only convinced that you’re convinced that he’s lying. I don’t give two shits about whether he bowed or not, and I’m not going out looking for, or looking at footage to prove it one way or another, because it’s fucking trivial.
We are spending billions on two stupid wars, trillions on stupid bankers, in the middle of a recession, and … bowing? What the FUCK?
No, I don’t care about the bowing. So I don’t give a shit one way or another whether he’s telling the truth about it or not. The word “blowjob” comes to mind, because I didn’t care about that either. What are we gonna do, impeach Obama for lying about bowing to somebody? Jesus.
If this is all people have to be worried about, then they’re obviously following too much right-wing media.
Shouldn’t you be up in arms about Puppygate instead of something trivial like this?
Maybe when the press asks him about it he could say,
“As part of the change I want to bring to Washington, and in trying to refocus our attention on things that really matter, I’m not going to address every trivial item that is mistakenly called news. I’d like to discuss any and all relevant issues and focus on those. Let’s not spend too much time being distracted by irrelevant details.”
Maybe he could appoint a minister of trivial bullshit who specifically answered that type of question. Of course when you were the reporter who asked such a question that required the minister of trivial bullshit to answer just his stepping to the podium would be message enough. They’d have to appoint someone really sarcastic is an intelligent way.
“Thanks for asking that question Bob. Last night after discussing poverty, health care, the economic crisis, and both wars, we discovered we didn’t have 2 seconds left to worry about that so I’m a little unprepared this morning. It may be that inquiring minds want to know, so would you mind repeating the question?”
I love the idea of the Press Scretary for Trivial Bullshit. My suggestion would be that he’d hold a press conference before the one with Gibbs, and people could get their trivial bullshit out of the way then; if someone then asks a trivial bullshit question during the regular press conference, Gibbs could just smile apologetically and tell them they’d need to wait until the next bullshit conference to ask that one.
I didn’t think for a moment that you’d complain now.
Wow. Now we are back to Clinton and blowjobs! Raw nerve meet Fish. Fish, nerve.
As I stated previously, I voted for the guy and hope he succeeds. I don’t give a rat’s butt who he bows to. He raised expectations during the campaign. I just hope he (mostly) lives up to them. First impressions last a long time. I was hoping that he’d keep to his vision a tad longer. This just seems like a dumb think to try and hold serve on.
John Stewart.
'Nuff said.
I’m pretty sure that’s what the OP wants. Tell the truth or say nothing at all, it doesn’t matter as long as they don’t lie.