I answered the OPs question in my first post, and have asked relevant questions since. You, on the other hand, have contributed nothing. Neither has the OP, for that matter. All you’ve done is tried to pick a fight outside the Pit.
You disagree, huh? Fine, then why arent either one of you able to articulate a topic for debate?
I haven’t actually seen any “points.” I saw some rather laughable, Glenn Beck level, partisan carping, but nothing actually worthy of a response.
Racism? Referring to a black president as a black child actor from the Little Rascals? Really? Or are you saying that calling him President “Spanky” (already taken by Clinton) would have been better? How about President George Jefferson? And Mother Jefferson has moved into the White House! (yeah, yeah, it’s *her *mother… save your fingers)… But they’re moving on up!
“That’s a, I say, that’s a joke, son.”
Foghorn Leghorn
You answered it in your first post, did you? Let’s review:
This is your first post.
That’s an answer? Where does Palin even come into it? Talk about your partisan talking points… Obama is an errand boy, sent to asia by grocery clerks.
First of all, sunshine, Palin wouldn’t have been president. It would have been McCain. But don’t let that get in the way.
Second, are you able to speak for all conservatives and their views on Afghanistan? I doubt liberals would want you to speak for them on **any **topic, so save your hyperbole for your monthy Democratic County Committee meeting, where you can wag your Obama posters around the room, and call Republicans “the big meanies”.
Third, if by a few years ago you mean 7-8 years, then ok. But, I guess you were typing too fast to care if your “points” were actually, you know, accurate.
Finally, the first two posters didn’t have serious reading comprehension issues with the OP. Why did you feel the need to come into the thread, tongue wagging, to make sure your “boy” (generic, not racist) was defended? Maybe because you too know he was an embarrassment?
Good one! This is at the level of “I know you are, but what am I?” response. I see ***your ***“points” as rather laughable, Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman level partisan carping, but nothing actually worthy of a response.
People, please. What’s racist about comparing the President of the United States to a nappy-haired black pickaninny caricature with comically bad pronunciation?
Consider all that they have in common. First off, their skin color… and um… hmm. Let me think, here… look, I *know *it’s not racist…
Yes, I disagree. Whether or not it was meant to be racist I don’t know. You’d have to ask the author. But liberals are always quick to find anything they can to obfuscate the issue. Just because YOU think it’s racist doesn’t make it so.
However, I tend not to do the knee-jerk reaction that many liberals do when a “racist” statement comes their way. I also didn’t think it was racist to laugh at Eddie Murphy doing Buckwheat on SNL… O’tay?
Knee-jeak reaction again. That happens to be a quote from the movie Apocolypse Now (I added the asia part). Should the word Obama and boy never be in the same sentence now?
Sheesh. Make yourself feel better. Go outside and spit on a white guy, and give a fin to the first downtrodden black man you see. That’ll put you in good with your liberal brothers and sisters.
Just for the record, I don’t personally look for racism in every sentence, but I think it’s very telling that you do. It just helps you feel like you are on the moral high ground, when in fact, you are standing on quicksand.
And the correct term is black man, not African American man. Until you PC people start calling all white people European Americans, I’m not going to use any other term. Unless you’d like me to use Colored People, or Negro. I’d just prefer to call everyone born here an American, but it’s hard to make victims unless you can hyphenate part of the society off.
I’ve seen Bush compared to a monkey and a baboon. Will those animal references work for you if I were to use them to refer to Obama?
If you were to use them for Obama, it would have no other meaning but a racist one. “Buckwheat”," Likewise, has no other possible interpretation. If you’re comfortable being a racist, I don’t care, but it’s not much of a debating point.
Again, you are the decider of all things racist. You, of course, know how I feel about Obama personally. You, who would never hesitate to laugh and guffaw at the cleaverness of an insult to someone that you dislike, have no problem throwing stones.
Buckwheat has no other possible interpretation to you. That doesn’t, by definition, make it racist. It could have been something as innocent as (gasp) a joke. But since I didn’t actually call him Buckwheat, I don’t know what the poster meant. I also didn’t state that he had nappy hair, but that doesn’t matter to you, does it? I might as well have, since that’s a logical leap to you.
There are two sorts of Presidential trips I think.
Those that top off months to years of behind the scenes meetings with a formal announcement of a new agreement or initiative.
and those that signal diplomatic intentions and place long term investments for agreements in the future, intended to pay off a year or so later. After the diplomatic grunts more quietly follow it up and work it all out.
This one did a little in the first - for example these energy issue items snuck in under most radars.
And quite a bit in the second. But we’ll have to see how it pays off over the next year or so.
Which sort actually “accomplishes” more? I think the second. Announcing what has already been done makes for good press that fools can concretely glom on to, but it hasn’t actually been the work, it is just the show. Setting the stage for future things to be done by the grunts who actually do the lifting in the work of diplomacy - that is what a Presidential trip meaningful accomplishes. Or not.
Is there a clear metric for that? Nah. (Certainly not by whether or not one can look into the eyes of another leader and see his soul, to name one infamous past “accomplishment”.)
From what I’ve been reading on the net and in the papers, pretty much everyone agrees there was a lack of respect there as well. The Chinese were polite, but it was quite obvious that they didn’t take Obama seriously.
Nixon’s trip to China was diplomacy. Bush Sr. gathering international support for the Gulf War was diplomacy. Carter’s Camp David accords were diplomacy. I know what successful diplomacy is, thank you very much. You would appear to be the one who needs to hit the books.
ROTFLMAO!!!
I sure am, bub. I’m someone who doesn’t give a rat’s patoot about your sneering attitude and your insults, and I know the difference between arbitrary unsupported assertions and clear facts. You don’t seem to grasp that distinction.
Why don’t you throw the word “metric” around a few more times? You’re so gosh darn cute when you do that.
Now where do get you that made up bit? The Freepers?
For the record, the major Japanese daily doesn’t mention it at all. They focus on the challenges he faces and how he differs from what was
The other major daily described how well he was received. Well that and an article noting, in a bit of a bemused way, how American Conservatives are claiming that Obama bowed too deeply.
(Yes that’s the article that the Freepers cite as evidence that the Japanese had a problem with it.)
He was overwhelmingly well received and laid some groundwork for the future. Mission accomplished. Now we wait and see if his investment pays off over the next year or so. It might or might not. None of us know.
:rolleyes: I have no objection to calling American whites “European-Americans,” nor to being so called myself, and you have a right to ask to be called that if you wish; but let’s not pretend there’s any equivalence here. There isn’t. Malcolm X was right when he said, “When a white man says, ‘I’m white,’ he really means, ‘I’m boss.’” Kind of anachronistic now, of course, but by no means entirely anachronistic.
My understanding is, it is perfectly proper to bow to the Tenno, and it is more or less proper nowadays for a fellow head of state to shake his hand; but doing both at once is unheard-of. Still, the Japanese don’t seem to mind. Tempest in a cha-pot.
Hmm. You’re claiming that you’re the wise man and I’m the fool. Charming, in it’s own way, but perhaps surprisingly my main response to this is to decide that your position still deserves the responses it originally got, which focused on the most informative part of the post.