I thought the thread for satire was down the hall and to the left?
That’s abuse, you toffee-nosed, malodorous…
This is true, but only of those who are truly outraged (not merely “outraged”), and they are vanishingly few.
I don’t think anyone is outraged. Just a lot of facepalming, actually.
The ones who are outraged at the facepalming are the real nutters. Along with those who defended the President when they had to know he was going to leave them hanging out to dry. No worries though, liberal Dopers are shameless. They’ll stick to their guns even after the President has sided with the critics.
When you can’t seem to stop smacking yourself in the face, and even appear to enjoy it, it ceases to be “facepalming” and becomes something far more disconcerting.
Apparently you still haven’t read the OP.
You forgot vacuous, you pervert.
You say “pervert” like its a bad thing…
Seems French Jews heard.
[del]Feather, whole chicken[/del]“Six of one, half dozen of the other”?
Wait…I thought the Left wanted to get rid of all the guns.
The President often has to say things for political reasons that don’t comport with fact. I am not under those limitations. I can recognize a political apology when I see one and understand that it’s an apology for something that wasn’t an actual offense (as demonstrated by the fact that the French didn’t give a flying fuck if he was there or not).
Why, exactly, did Obama need to apologize “for political reasons”?
Want to keep your pants from falling down? Suspenders, or a belt. Want to be sure? Suspenders and a belt.
If the French weren’t slighted, there is no need for an apology. Remember, the “outrage” on the right is that Obama did not attend, but the apology was about not sending a higher ranking official. Obama never apologized for not attending himself.
Unless you can come up with a really good reason to do otherwise, I would take the WH at its word on this. I can’t come up with a good reason not to do so.
Because they think their statement is the best political move. I don’t know if this is the case in this instance, but “the statement made by a politician was made for political reasons” has a pretty good track record.
You can’t think of why it’s the best political move, but you’re sure that it is. That makes a lot of sense.
So, 14?
Or you can just not be a retard and buy pants that fit.
Where did I say I’m sure?
As to why it’s the best political move (if it is, or if they think it is), perhaps they think by apologizing they are ‘ending’ the story more quickly. Perhaps there’s another reason. Perhaps it’s not based on politics at all.
John, may we take it that you never considered a career in diplomacy? A grateful nation thanks you.