Sorry, why is whether Obama bowed to the Saudi King an issue again?

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Monday, May 22, 2017 08:37
VIEWED: 24967
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

AURAPTOR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 12:29 AM

White House: No bow to Saudi

Ummm...yeah, he did bow.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0409/White_House_No_bow_to_Saud
i.html

HERO

Thursday, April 9, 2009 1:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
White House: No bow to Saudi

Ummm...yeah, he did bow.

I think somebody said his fly was open and he was...you know...checking.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

RIPWASH

Thursday, April 9, 2009 1:31 AM

Or maybe they installed the teleprompter in the floor so it wouldn't be so obvious.

Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas

ANTHONYT

Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:33 AM

Hello,

It appears to me as if he did bow.

That being the case, I am not disturbed.

I sometimes find myself bowing to people. Just the other day I held a restaurant door open for an elderly couple, and when they hesitated to precede me, I gave a gentle bow and sweep of my arm to indicate that they should go ahead.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

AURAPTOR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 9:15 AM

That's nice, Anthony, but you're not a head of state. There are rules for such situations, and I don't believe that any U.S. President has bowed to another head of state before.

WHODIED

Thursday, April 9, 2009 2:44 PM

That rat bastard was paying obeisance to his Muslim overlords!!!

Fealty!!!

He was indicating that all is ready for the overthrow of the U. S. oy Vey!!!

Did he scrape? I think I saw him scrape!!! Bowing and scraping!!!

Aah!!! Traitor!!! Mongrel!!! Slightly awkward and graceless black man!!!

Capitalism died for your sins!!!

Your dog kissed me, Charlie Brown!!!

*Good grief...*

--WhoDied

_______________________

Yeah, we're mostly just giving each
other significant glances and
laughing incessantly.

JONGSSTRAW

Thursday, April 9, 2009 3:41 PM

Jeeeesh! Give our President a break will ya? He was not bowing to the Arab King. What happened was his State Dept.-issued "Islam Is A Religion Of Peace" policy reminder card fell out of his top pocket, and he was merely retrieving it off the floor. You people and your political attacks are just not being fair.

WULFENSTAR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 3:50 PM

Just curious, but whats the official procedure for the President when dealing with the Japanese head of state?

Do they both bow at the equal level and at the same time, or do they not bow at all?

JONGSSTRAW

Thursday, April 9, 2009 4:17 PM

I believe the procedure in Japan is that they both shake hands, then they look up into the sky for a wayward North Korean nuclear warhead missile buzzing overhead. Then they duck and cover together, and whisper secret plans to obtain defense attorneys for captured Somali pirates.

RIPWASH

Thursday, April 9, 2009 4:19 PM

I think in Japan it's the culture that everyone bows to each other. The bow is their handshake. But those who are inferior bow lower than those higher than themselves. So when an employee and boss bow to each other the employee would bow so his head is slightly below his boss's head. Heads of State, I imagine, would bow at equal heights.

Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas

RUE

Thursday, April 9, 2009 4:21 PM

"Do they both bow at the equal level and at the same time, or do they not bow at all?"

What I remember is that they shake hands then bow at the same time. I don't think USers have the depth and timing of bow calibrated quite as well as the Japanese do. So I personally don't put too much stock in small differences between them.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

RIVERDANCER

Thursday, April 9, 2009 5:14 PM

Apparently, there's no protocol dictating that a President should bow at all. Clinton nearly slipped up and bowed to the Emperor of Japan, once. What a tragedy that would have been, right? Showing the courtesy of the culture to one of their highest personages is certainly a mistake. It's probably fine if their diplomats want to bow to US statemen, but they should never bow to them, because America makes all the rules.
I'm just wondering why Obama hasn't been attacked for his courtesy before, when he gave a bow to Her Majesty the Queen of England. After he had reached her and properly shaken her hand, even. No reaching forward to shake hands and bending forward in the process, there, just a nice little bob as he thanked her. What a fool.

KWICKO

Thursday, April 9, 2009 5:27 PM

Yeah, the nerve of somebody thinking that America should ever show any kind of respect to the culture of other nations! How DARE he!

I'm sure this gesture will go down in history as the point at which America fell, and its takeover by the Saudi royal family was completed.

RUE

Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:11 PM

Actually ... there is a photo of Dubya definitely bowing to Pope Benedict.

And then there is this photo:

Don't know what protocol says about this ...

... or this (he does look drugged, though).

Though I'm sure this is far, FAR worse, because it's an OBAMA doing it ! (The queen will have to answer for herself.)

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

KWICKO

Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:26 PM

Rue, I think the Righties aren't so much offended that someone touched the Queen, but rather that A BLACK PERSON TOUCHED THE QUEEN!!

Somehow, the First Lady of the U.S. isn't good enough to touch the Queen of England, but the President is TOO good to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia.

At least, that's the read I get out of it from the reaction of those on the right.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

RIVERDANCER

Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:39 PM

Her Majesty seems to be copping a feel, perhaps she appreciated the opportunity

SIGNYM

Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:41 PM

Rue, those photos are pricless!

Bowing is definitely FORBIDDEN!

But holding hands and skipping... that's OK.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

RUE

Thursday, April 9, 2009 6:44 PM

Every time I look at the hand-holding photos, I wonder - where have Prince Abdullah's fingers gone off to ? Anyone here know the ins and outs (so to speak) of his attire ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

SIGNYM

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:01 PM

I dunno... his hand is suspiciously placed... but really, I think he's just clenching some prayer beads or something.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

JONGSSTRAW

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Every time I look at the hand-holding photos, I wonder

Every time?...hmmm. You have quite the exciting life I see. Good strategy for you Libs though; Obama fucks up, Hillary fucks up, Geithner fucks up, Barney Frank, Chris Doodd etc etc etc, and you propagandists go back to the Bush-hate trough once again, a place you're oh so comfortable. How sad. I'm throwing my shoes at you right now in case you didnt know.

CITIZEN

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Rue, I think the Righties aren't so much offended that someone touched the Queen, but rather that A BLACK PERSON TOUCHED THE QUEEN!!

Naw, the issue is that one of you diseased Yankee types touched her madge!

Isn't bigdamnnobody supposed to pop up and talk about how "at least the right-wingers are picking stuff more substantial to go after Obama about". You have to say that a bow to some foreign dignitary is certainly more substantial than an illegal wiretrap...

I'm enjoying being proven right...

SIGNYM

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:10 PM

Quote:
you propagandists go back to the Bush-hate trough once again

Not that we hate Bush, JS, but fair-minded people should point out the irony of rapo castigating Obama for something that Bush himself has done.

Wouldn't you agree?

*bats eyelashes*

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

RUE

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:30 PM

JS

I tried to find the MOST equivalent pictures I could. I think I succeeded.

I'm just pointing out Rap's hypocrisy. That's all.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

JONGSSTRAW

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
JS

I tried to find the MOST equivalent pictures I could. I think I succeeded.

I'm just pointing out Rap's hypocrisy. That's all.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

Well Rue and Signy, I have to say that you win this round. It's a silly attack on Obama. There's nothing wrong, honestly, with Obama bowing, or shaking hands, or whatever. None of that really matters to me at all. It's a very weak argument against Obama. My ilk should have plenty of other things to be far more concerned about. I take some jabs at the guy in jest, but I have not yet sunk to the hate-Obama level as many on my side have. We'll see how it goes.

SIGNYM

Thursday, April 9, 2009 7:55 PM

Oh, I can think of LOTS of cosequential things to be pissed at Obama for. Funny thing is, they're mostly being pointed out by the left.
www.alternet.org

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

RIPWASH

Thursday, April 9, 2009 8:12 PM

In response to Rue's photo's

The first one . . . bowing . . . kinda to a religious leader . . . not so bad.

Second one . . . obviously being presented a medal of some kind and he's looking down at it . . . that's okay.

Third one . . . I think I heard somewhere it's a custom in the Middle East for men to hold hands . . . don't know why . . . still iffy . . . looks odd . . . but okay . . . kinda.

Fourth one . . . a simple game of "Duck, Duck, Goose" and the lady was obviously upset that he chose her as the goose. Don't you guys see that?

Fifth one . . . I got nothin'.

Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas

WHOZIT

Thursday, April 9, 2009 8:47 PM

Barry was'nt bowing, he saw Barney Frank coming up behind him and bent over......reflex I guess.

CHRISISALL

Thursday, April 9, 2009 8:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Oh, I can think of LOTS of cosequential things to be pissed at Obama for. Funny thing is, they're mostly being pointed out by the left.
www.alternet.org

Signy, we are supposed to do what the far-right peeps do & back our guy no matter how he f***s up....

The laughing Chrisisall

KWICKO

Thursday, April 9, 2009 9:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
you propagandists go back to the Bush-hate trough once again
Not that we hate Bush, JS, but fair-minded people should point out the irony of rapo castigating Obama for something that Bush himself has done.

Wouldn't you agree?

*bats eyelashes*

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

Yeah, but you have to remember that Rappo and his li'l crew of sockpuppets around here never REALLY liked Bush in the first place! They only called him the greatest American President in history to be nice; they never really meant it.

By the way, Jongsy... isn't it about time for you to whip out the old "But...but...but CLINTON! But CARTER! But FDR!!!" card yet again? Seems your hate knows no bounds, either. Nor does your love for Bush. Are you just jealous that he wasn't holding YOUR hand, kissing YOUR lips?

Wow - those two should get a room!

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

CHRISISALL

Thursday, April 9, 2009 9:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
but I have not yet sunk to the hate-Obama level

Of course not- he hasn't started a needless war & gotten Americans killed...yet.

The laughing Chrisisall

BYTEMITE

Thursday, April 9, 2009 9:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Jeeeesh! Give our President a break will ya? He was not bowing to the Arab King. What happened was his State Dept.-issued "Islam Is A Religion Of Peace" policy reminder card fell out of his top pocket, and he was merely retrieving it off the floor. You people and your political attacks are just not being fair.

Hey. I have a friend who's Muslim. She's the nicest person I know. And she's been really worried about her family back in Baghdad all through this war.

She doesn't want death to Isreal or to convert Americans by force of arms or any of that, she just wants the goddamn fighting that exiled her parents a couple decades back to STOP.

My impression is, most of the Muslim world is actually that way. Sunni, Shiite, Suufi (who are a PARTICULARLY pacifistic group, which is why few people have heard of them)... It's only the extremists going around trying to kill people. There's a lot of innocent families over there.

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, April 9, 2009 10:03 PM

Nothin wrong with showin a little respect for folks we're tryin to get along with on this little ball of muddy water out in some back corner of the verse.

Shrub tended to hook up some local threads on occasion, himself, and frankly I thought it was pretty cool of him.

That oughta look dapper, but goddamn Putin makes it look badass... but then, that's Putin, seriously even Emperor Palpatine kinda pales in comparison.

Protocol for meetin Putin is checking to see if your balls haven't dropped off and fled in terror.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

WHOZIT

Thursday, April 9, 2009 10:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Nothin wrong with showin a little respect for folks we're tryin to get along with on this little ball of muddy water out in some back corner of the verse.

Shrub tended to hook up some local threads on occasion, himself, and frankly I thought it was pretty cool of him.

That oughta look dapper, but goddamn Putin makes it look badass... but then, that's Putin, seriously even Emperor Palpatine kinda pales in comparison.

No Mr Bond, I want you to die.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

WHOZIT

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Nothin wrong with showin a little respect for folks we're tryin to get along with on this little ball of muddy water out in some back corner of the verse.

Shrub tended to hook up some local threads on occasion, himself, and frankly I thought it was pretty cool of him.

That oughta look dapper, but goddamn Putin makes it look badass... but then, that's Putin, seriously even Emperor Palpatine kinda pales in comparison.

Want to see me make a pencil disapear?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Isn't bigdamnnobody supposed to pop up and talk about how "at least the right-wingers are picking stuff more substantial to go after Obama about". You have to say that a bow to some foreign dignitary is certainly more substantial than an illegal wiretrap...

I'm enjoying being proven right...

Hold it right there, nothing's been proven yet.

I believe the thread in question where I made that claim was more substantive than the numerous Bush said 'whatever' threads. I believe this thread does raise some interesting questions regarding protocols when meeting foreign dignitaries. Far more interesting, IMHO, than a thread bashing a President for grammatical errors. Did not say anything about threads regarding illegal wiretaps, that's your strawman.

I did say it would be interesting to see the roles of certain Poster's reversed now that a democrat is in office. I could be mistaken, but I believe Rue was hinting that if Bush did it, so can Obama.
But, but Clinton... has now been replaced with but, but Bush... I find that not humorous or hypocritical at all.

But Citizen, I digress. What was it you were saying about being proven right?

WHOZIT

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Nothin wrong with showin a little respect for folks we're tryin to get along with on this little ball of muddy water out in some back corner of the verse.

Shrub tended to hook up some local threads on occasion, himself, and frankly I thought it was pretty cool of him.

That oughta look dapper, but goddamn Putin makes it look badass... but then, that's Putin, seriously even Emperor Palpatine kinda pales in comparison.

I once killed a man in Reno just to watch him die.....that's where I got this tie.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

AURAPTOR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Just curious, but whats the official procedure for the President when dealing with the Japanese head of state?

Do they both bow at the equal level and at the same time, or do they not bow at all?

Good question. I would think that if both bowed, as equals, and as is the custom for the Japanese, I see no problem. But to bow to the Saudi King, UNILATERALLY, then that's just right out.

AURAPTOR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:28 PM

rue-

Bowing one's head, and a full frontal bow are two separate acts. Bush simply acknowledges the authority of the Pope, as liaison to the big guy upstairs. Bowing to a head of state, ala the King of S.A., where both are at least seen as equals, is a big no no.

But for the White House to say there WAS no bow, at all, now that's just flat out bizarre.

AURAPTOR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Rue, I think the Righties aren't so much offended that someone touched the Queen, but rather that A BLACK PERSON TOUCHED THE QUEEN!!

Somehow, the First Lady of the U.S. isn't good enough to touch the Queen of England, but the President is TOO good to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia.

At least, that's the read I get out of it from the reaction of those on the right.

Mike

So, basically what you're saying is, a black person can do anything they want, and not be criticized ? Because they're black?

Makes sense to me.

KWICKO

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Rue, I think the Righties aren't so much offended that someone touched the Queen, but rather that A BLACK PERSON TOUCHED THE QUEEN!!

Somehow, the First Lady of the U.S. isn't good enough to touch the Queen of England, but the President is TOO good to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia.

At least, that's the read I get out of it from the reaction of those on the right.

Mike

So, basically what you're saying is, a black person can do anything they want, and not be criticized ? Because they're black?

Makes sense to me.

So basically what you're saying is that a black person can't do anything right, simply because they're black?

Seems about your speed.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

KWICKO

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
rue-

Bowing one's head, and a full frontal bow are two separate acts. Bush simply acknowledges the authority of the Pope, as liaison to the big guy upstairs. Bowing to a head of state, ala the King of S.A., where both are at least seen as equals, is a big no no.

Spin, boy, SPIN!

AURAPTOR

Thursday, April 9, 2009 11:40 PM

Quote:

So basically what you're saying is that a black person can't do anything right, simply because they're black?

Seems about your speed.

Mean Joe Green did right when he offered that little kid his jersey after gulping down that coke.

That was awesome!

CITIZEN

Friday, April 10, 2009 8:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Hold it right there, nothing's been proven yet.
...
But Citizen, I digress. What was it you were saying about being proven right?

I was talking about something completely unrelated to you here, but nevertheless on what I was talking about, I keep being proven right again and again and again.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I believe the thread in question where I made that claim was more substantive than the numerous Bush said 'whatever' threads. I believe this thread does raise some interesting questions regarding protocols when meeting foreign dignitaries. Far more interesting, IMHO, than a thread bashing a President for grammatical errors. Did not say anything about threads regarding illegal wiretaps, that's your strawman.

Hmm, what I remember you saying was that all the threads critiquing Bush were less substantial. I remember a much broader brush, but paint it your way. I'm sure that you were equally outraged over Bush's sex pest approaches of the German Chancellor Angela Merkel

.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I did say it would be interesting to see the roles of certain Poster's reversed now that a democrat is in office.

As did I, and look how I've been proven right. Auraptor, who couldn't stand any sort of criticism of George Bush Junior, is now posting threads almost daily about how Obama is a big stupid head and has a smelly butt.

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
I could be mistaken, but I believe Rue was hinting that if Bush did it, so can Obama.
But, but Clinton... has now been replaced with but, but Bush... I find that not humorous or hypocritical at all.

I'm not doing such a thing, and I don't think Rue is either to be fair. I think Rue is doing what Rue said Rue was doing, that is highlighting the hypocrisy of those that defended Bush for everything, and attack Obama for everything.

I was merely pointing out that those that say "at least the criticism of Obama is more substantial than that of Bush" are missing one big fact:
It really isn't.

Besides Bush ate Kittens, I have proof:

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 2:41 PM

Did Barry bow, out of respect, to the Queen of England? She's 5'4".

The answer is no.

He and the W.H. Are lying. The question is " why "?

Think before you answer.

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 3:04 PM

So, Rap

What you're saying is Bush can bow to anyone, can hold hands with men, even kiss them on the lips, and grope a female head of state at a meeting - and it's ALL OK ! with you.

Think before you answer.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Friday, April 10, 2009 3:06 PM

But, but Bush...

CITIZEN

Friday, April 10, 2009 3:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
But, but Bush...

But but pointing out hypocrisy...

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 4:20 PM

No one on the 'left' (which is actually slightly right of middle) made any case against Bush for holding hands, kissing, bowing, or groping.

So, the situations aren't quite the same.

I just find the level of hypocrisy to be quite high, and worth pointing out.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

SIGNYM

Friday, April 10, 2009 4:30 PM

Well, Bush bowed to the POPE for god's sake! So CLEARLY our Army is now part of the Vatican Guard!

Quote:
He and the W.H. Are lying. The question is " why "?

To drive you even more nuts than you already are?

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

PIRATENEWS

Friday, April 10, 2009 7:15 PM

The Obama Bow, plus CNN censoring Nazi King Phillip's insult to Obama's stupidity:

The US president is subservient to his international bankster overloads, as are all non-royal heads of state.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, April 10, 2009 9:06 PM

Quote:
The US president is subservient to his international bankster overloads, as are all non-royal heads of state.

You know it's bad when PN is the author of one of the more sensible comments in the thread.

-F

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 9:13 PM

Hey, if he could kiss Hu Jintao's butt and make a difference in Chinese support of the US dollar and economy, he probably would.

I think right now he's trying to placate anyone with US dollars, US debt, and vital resources.

Sadly, that includes the bankers.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 10:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
So, Rap

What you're saying is Bush can bow to anyone, can hold hands with men, even kiss them on the lips, and grope a female head of state at a meeting - and it's ALL OK ! with you.

Think before you answer.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

Rue, per usual, you're avoiding the question, refusing to answer, and trying to turn it into something completely unrelated.

This thread isn't about Bush. He's no longer in office, and he didn't bow to the King of a Muslim country.

Obama did.

To bow is to show subservience towards another. Save for Japan, where bowing is a cultural necessity, no other society expects other heads of state to bow to their leaders. Even Muslims only bow to Allah, and no other.

No one bows to the King, and yet Obama did.

Why do you think he did, and why is the W.H. lying that it was NOT a bow.

It clearly was.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 10:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, Bush bowed to the POPE for god's sake! So CLEARLY our Army is now part of the Vatican Guard!
Quote:
He and the W.H. Are lying. The question is " why "?
To drive you even more nuts than you already are?

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

Quite possibly, that's their thinking. If so,it shows Obama has less respect for the office than even Clinton. Which is saying a lot.

Sure, he digs being in power, but respect the office ? Not so much.

SIGNYM

Friday, April 10, 2009 10:34 PM

Quote:
Quite possibly, that's their thinking.

So Obama bowed to the Saudi King just to drive you crazy? Isn't that just a mite self-centered?

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 10:45 PM

"Rue, per usual, you're avoiding the question, refusing to answer, and trying to turn it into something completely unrelated."

What's unrelated ? According to you it's ALL about behaving well as president - right ? Then, shouldn't EVERY president be held to the same standard ? Because, that's what it's about - PRESIDENTS behaving well, no matter what their name or party.

Did Bush's bowing to the Pope not suffice ? The Pope is a head of state btw, and an adherent of a religion different from mainstream America. How about Bush's groping of Merkel ? When that happened, did you hold Bush to a high standard ? If not, why do you hold Obama to a higher standard than Bush ?

Now, to be clear, where I'm going is this: if you don't hold each president to the same standard, then why should we not assume all you are doing is a partisan attack ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 10:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Quite possibly, that's their thinking.
So Obama bowed to the Saudi King just to drive you crazy? Isn't that just a mite self-centered?

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

That he bowed isn't in question. Why they're saying he didn't is , you MUST admit, quite odd. The 'driving the right crazy' is every bit as plausible as any other excuse.

After all the talk that he was a Muslim during the campaign, maybe this was his way of poking his detractors. Sadly, it's going a great way to show us up. If so, he didn't take into consideration how it would look to the rest of the world. Which would fall in line w/ my view that he simply doesn't respect the office, at all.

But who knows ? No one really knows who this guy really is. Obama is the least vetted man for the office of President in U.S. history. No one knows what HIS " core beliefs " really are. Even U.S. journalist have said as such.

KWICKO

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:23 PM

Quote:
Even U.S. journalist have said as such.

Which one?

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:28 PM

"That he bowed isn't in question."

Actually, he was 'bowing' in a different direction than Saudi King Abdullah. Obama was deflected off to his left, and Saudi King Abdullah was deflected off to his right (he actually turned to face the third person when Obama leaned in a different direction), both toward a third person who was off to the side. If it was a bow, it was a strange one, as normally one would bow in the direction of the person one is bowing to.

What I find so perplexing is WHY YOU CARE so much about what Obama does. What is it about Obama doing something you can't stomach that you find so acceptable when Bush did it ?

Can you answer that ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

KWICKO

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:32 PM

Quote:

Why do you think he did, and why is the W.H. lying that it was NOT a bow.

It clearly was.

Maybe they were lying because Iraq was an "imminent threat" that wasn't really very urgent, except when it was.

Or maybe you can't PROVE that they knew if it was a bow or not, so therefore they aren't technically lying.

Or are they not allowed to use RapLogic™?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Even U.S. journalist have said as such.

Which one?

Ye of little faith.....( sigh )

Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:36 PM

Rue, now you're as insincere as the White House when you say he wasn't bowing toward the king. He had his hand in his own hand, and was standing right in front of him.

Presidents don't bow. Especially to Muslim Kings.

Unless you're Barry. Who " use to be " a Muslim.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:38 PM

kwickie

Hey, if you want to say the Emperor is wearing clothes, have at it. I'll not be a part of your delusional game.

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:46 PM

"Rue, now you're as insincere as the White House when you say he wasn't bowing toward the king."

No. At first it seemed like an awkward bow. In order to try and see what caught my eye, why did it look so awkward, I looked at it closely, frame by frame. Obama clearly heads to the left and the king turns to face the same direction Obama is facing. They both face towards a third person who is nearly hidden from view.

But I still wonder WHY YOU CARE about whatever Obama does, when everything Bush did that was so egregious got a pass.

If I told you that at Bush's WH parties there was much mutual group public groping between Condi and others, would you care ? Does it matter that Bush kissed Prince Abdullah (now king) on the lips and held his hand like a schoolgirl ? Does it matter that at the time, while Abdullah was still Muslim, he was only a prince ?

What's with the double standard, dude ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:56 PM

No double standard here, you're trying to change the subject. EVERYONE saw him bow. Even Muslim journalist said the exact same thing. He bowed! Stop trying make excuses and first admit that he bowed.

Do that, and then I can go on about ancient history.

RUE

Friday, April 10, 2009 11:58 PM

Not gonna say what I'm not sure is true.

But, go look for yourself. Don't take ANYONE'S word for it - not even Rush's. Check it out - frame by frame. Then tell us what YOU think.

***************************************************************

I double-dog dare ya' !

AURAPTOR

Saturday, April 11, 2009 12:04 AM

i saw the video, i saw the still pics, HE BOWED! There's absolutely no other possible explanation. He was shaking the Kings hand w/ 1 hand, and bowing to him.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 12:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Even U.S. journalist have said as such.

Which one?

Ye of little faith.....( sigh )

Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose

Oh, then in that case, you meant journalists, not "journalist". You meant the plural, but typed the singular.

Just sayin'.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, April 11, 2009 12:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, then in that case, you meant journalists, not "journalist". You meant the plural, but typed the singular.

Just sayin'.

[Kwicko]
I can't believe I called you on something and you proved me wrong. Uh, guess it's time to go on another grammatical attack to try to deflect.
[/Kwicko]

SIGNYM

Saturday, April 11, 2009 12:58 AM

For the record: I think it was a bow, and I think it was a simple protocol gaffe. Like Bush bowing to the Pope... unless maybe Bush was really saying "DOOOOD! Check out that Papal RING!" And the WH would of course deny it bc they don't like to admit mistakes.

Really, don't you have anything ELSE to complain about? Why don't you complain about Obama shoveling money at the rich? Or claiming "State Secrets" on Bush's wiretapping? You're making a rather large issue out of nothing, and dreaming up all sorts of conspiracies about something that doesn't friggn' matter.
---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, then in that case, you meant journalists, not "journalist". You meant the plural, but typed the singular.

Just sayin'.

[Kwicko]
I can't believe I called you on something and you proved me wrong. Uh, guess it's time to go on another grammatical attack to try to deflect.
[/Kwicko]

Wow, you ARE a bit slow on the uptake.

'Rappy posted that "even U.S. journalist have said as much", so being the smart-ass linguistics honk that I am, I had to ask "which one?" in an attempt at gently poking fun of 'Rap's inability to properly pluralize words ending in "-ist". See, if you say "journalist", you're implying ONE; if you say "journalists", you're implying more than one. 'Rap implied that there was only one, so I asked which one.

I do the same thing when he goes on and on about the "terrorist who want to kill us all", because it just sounds silly to imply that one lone terrorist is what all the worry and hub-bub are about. So I ask, "Which one?", in the hopes that it may nudge him into using the proper form of the word next time. So far, it hasn't. I guess 'Rap doesn't go for that newfangled left-wing politically correct grammar.

I don't for a second doubt that there ARE journalists who've said Obama bowed. There are probably some who said he DIDN'T bow, too - does that make them right, because they're "journalists"?

Where's the bar here? Are "journalists" always right? Are they always wrong? Are they only right when they say things that 'Rap agrees with? Are they only wrong when they say things he disagrees with?

And, more to the point...

Are they even "journalists" in the first place? Or are they "commentators" and "entertainers"?

Now, if you'd like me to be less subtle when pointing out the glaring errors, I can surely oblige you. I think Finn can attest to that.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:04 AM

Quote:

For the record: I think it was a bow, and I think it was a simple protocol gaffe. Like Bush bowing to the Pope... unless maybe Bush was really saying "DOOOOD! Check out that Papal RING!" And the WH would of course deny it bc they don't like to admit mistakes.

I'm inclined to agree. But as you know, Presidents NEVER bow. So when Bush bowed to the Pope, he wasn't bowing. 'Cause he'd never bow. He couldn't. It's just not in him. He doesn't have the capacity to show respect or humility to ANYONE!

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:16 AM

This is what caught my eye - he was leaning somewhere between the two men. In fact, the king had to turn to his right (an action completed in this picture - originally the king was facing at right angles to Obama's 'greeting'.). It looks awkward to me - not like it was directed at the king at all.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

AURAPTOR

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:34 AM

Quote:
Really, don't you have anything ELSE to complain about? Why don't you complain about Obama shoveling money at the rich? Or claiming "State Secrets" on Bush's wiretapping? You're making a rather large issue out of nothing, and dreaming up all sorts of conspiracies about something that doesn't friggn' matter.

There's been plenty to complain about. I'm not making a big deal about it, the W.H. made a big deal out of it, for no damn reason.

For 8 yrs, all we heard about was what a joke we were to the rest of the world, and now suddenly, when Barry's in office, it's " Oh, give it a rest already, move on, what does it matter ? " .

Returning the bust of Winston Churchill, a GIFT , back to England.

Giving the PM of England crappy gifts from Freakin' Wal-Mart, that don't even WORK over there.

Wondering how something is said in " Austrian ". There is no ' Austrian' language. Had Bush said that, he'd been lampooned all over the late night talk show circuit for a damn WEEK!

Michelle hugging the Queen. ( Granted, I kinda enjoyed that one, as it's about time the Brits lighten the hell up. Props to Michelle there. )

Sounding like a candy ass in telling N.Korea not to launch its missile/rocket, or else it'll get a stern finger wagging from the "International community". N. Korea launches its rocket anyways.

Not even commenting on the 'criminal' activity that's occurring on the high seas. 200 yrs ago, we knew how to deal w/ such thugs, as pirates were regarded as 'Enemies to all humanity'. Now ? Just run of the mill, ho hum , garden variety criminals. Barry won't even TALK about them, he's so unconcerned.

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:46 AM

***************************************************************

We were not amused.

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:50 AM

Really Rap - Obama would have to go a lot lower to limbo under Bush's bar.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Really, don't you have anything ELSE to complain about? Why don't you complain about Obama shoveling money at the rich? Or claiming "State Secrets" on Bush's wiretapping? You're making a rather large issue out of nothing, and dreaming up all sorts of conspiracies about something that doesn't friggn' matter.

There's been plenty to complain about. I'm not making a big deal about it, the W.H. made a big deal out of it, for no damn reason.

Really, you're the only one making a big deal out of it.

Quote:

For 8 yrs, all we heard about was what a joke we were to the rest of the world, and now suddenly, when Barry's in office, it's " Oh, give it a rest already, move on, what does it matter ? " .

For eight years, we were a joke to the rest of the world, and all we heard when that idiot cowboy was in office was "Oh, give it a rest already, move on, what does it matter? He never lied, they had WMD, they were an imminent threat, it wasn't that urgent that we invade, except for when it WAS that urgent..."

Quote:

Returning the bust of Winston Churchill, a GIFT , back to England.

Yes, I suppose he should have bowed to the bust of Churchill. Oh, wait... no, then you'd have been crying about that, too. And if you're not crying about it, why do you keep bringing it up? It obviously means a great deal to you.

Quote:
Giving the PM of England crappy gifts from Freakin' Wal-Mart, that don't even WORK over there.

Yup, should've given him a bust of Churchill! Now THAT would be a gift he'd appreciate! And we would have had an extra one just lying around, if only they hadn't sent it back... Oh crap - now I've given you something ELSE to whine about! "Why'd they give it back?! They could have re-gifted it!"

Quote:

Wondering how something is said in " Austrian ". There is no ' Austrian' language. Had Bush said that, he'd been lampooned all over the late night talk show circuit for a damn WEEK!

THAT is damned funny. Hadn't heard that one. Maybe it was part of Obama's "strategery" to make a funny. :)

Quote:

Michelle hugging the Queen. ( Granted, I kinda enjoyed that one, as it's about time the Brits lighten the hell up. Props to Michelle there. )

Agreed.

Quote:

Sounding like a candy ass in telling N.Korea not to launch its missile/rocket, or else it'll get a stern finger wagging from the "International community". N. Korea launches its rocket anyways.

Goddamned right! No way in hell would they have DARED to launch any of their missiles while Bush was in office. And there's no WAY they'd have ever developed and tested a nuclear device while BUSH was in office! Hell no, they wouldn't. We wouldn't have stood for it, not for a moment. We - Oh... Never mind.

Quote:

Not even commenting on the 'criminal' activity that's occurring on the high seas. 200 yrs ago, we knew how to deal w/ such thugs, as pirates were regarded as 'Enemies to all humanity'. Now ? Just run of the mill, ho hum , garden variety criminals. Barry won't even TALK about them, he's so unconcerned.

There's no way he can win with you. If he doesn't talk about it, WHY DIDN'T HE EVEN TALK ABOUT IT?! If he DOES talk about it, WHY IS HE ACKNOWLEDGING THEM AND GIVING THEM A PLATFORM FOR THEIR VIEWS?! You're of the opinion that we should speak softly and carry a big stick, until someone actually speaks softly. Would you rather he TALK about doing something, or actually DO something? Because just above, you ranted about how all he wanted to do was TALK about North Korea, but now you're mad because he ISN'T talking about a handful of criminals.

Which is it? Make up your mind! You're all over the map, boy!

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 2:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:

This is what caught my eye - he was leaning somewhere between the two men. In fact, the king had to turn to his right (an action completed in this picture - originally the king was facing at right angles to Obama's 'greeting'.). It looks awkward to me - not like it was directed at the king at all.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

Oh, Jesus-tap-dancing-Christ, Rue, now you've given 'Rap something ELSE to get his panties in a wad about.

"Lookit! Just lookit! He won't even bow straight at the damn King of Araby! He don't even show him enough respect to bow to his face!"

Danged if'n ya do, danged if'n ya don't, y'all.

ETA: Okay, that was a bit over the top. But it was fun.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:00 AM

As for pirates:

"Since 2005, though, pirates have threatened and seized many ships. A list of ships attacked by Somali pirates since that time is catalogued." WIKI

Now, maybe it's just me, but I remember Bush being president in 2005, 2006, 2007 AND 2008.

And what did he say about Somali pirates ? Well, in December 2008, just as he was about to leave office (and four years after it became a problem), the administration issued a 14 page blueprint.

Now, THAT is a man of action !

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123931064271506281.html?mod=googlenews
_wsj

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:05 AM

Tell you what Rap -

Why don't you look up Bush's failings ? And only post something about Obama's if his are unique, more frequent, or worse than whatever Bush has done.

Otherwise we'll quite naturally ask - why didn't you complain when Bush did it ?

It'll save us all a lot of time.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

YINYANG

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
For eight years, we were a joke to the rest of the world, and all we heard when that retarded cowboy[...]

::sighs::

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:07 AM

"Oh, Jesus-tap-dancing-Christ, Rue, now you've given 'Rap something ELSE to get his panties in a wad about."

Oh, I did ? Well, I can't take all the credit. I thought the photo was pretty illustrative of what I meant.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Why don't you look up Bush's failings ? And only post something about Obama's if his are unique, more frequent, or worse than whatever Bush has done.

Otherwise we'll quite naturally ask - why didn't you complain when Bush did it ?

It'll save us all a lot of time.

But, but Clinton...

RUE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:27 AM

But Clinton had consensual sex with an of-age women not his wife !

It's the crime of the century.

***************************************************************

Remember when you used to be up-front about being a troll ? Ahhhh, those were the days ! Weren't they ?

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
For eight years, we were a joke to the rest of the world, and all we heard when that idiot cowboy[...]

::sighs::

Sorry 'bout that, YY. I screwed up!

Fixed, with apologies and thanks for calling me on it.

M

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Why don't you look up Bush's failings ? And only post something about Obama's if his are unique, more frequent, or worse than whatever Bush has done.

Otherwise we'll quite naturally ask - why didn't you complain when Bush did it ?

It'll save us all a lot of time.

But, but Clinton...

Oh, you're going to look up Clinton's failings? Cool!

I'll give you a freebie: He didn't get Bin Laden.

'Course, that doesn't really count, because he's far from unique in that regard. So far, NO President has gotten Bin Laden, so it's hard to lay that one at Clinton's feet as a failing.

What else ya got?

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
But Clinton had consensual sex with an of-age women not his wife !

It's the crime of the century.

***************************************************************

Remember when you used to be up-front about being a troll ? Ahhhh, those were the days ! Weren't they ?

But what about her proud daddy? How will proud daddies the world over react to the realization that women have sex?

AURAPTOR

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:55 AM

rue,

WTF is this, the Zapruder film for you idiots ? You're seeing the scene from an angle. Obama is SHAKING THE HAND OF THE KING, and no one else.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 4:12 AM

Yeah, instead of bowing, he should've kissed him full on the lips. Maybe even slipped him a little tongue. Or rubbed his shoulders.

'Cause all that would have been acceptable!

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

KWICKO

Saturday, April 11, 2009 4:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
As for pirates:

"Since 2005, though, pirates have threatened and seized many ships. A list of ships attacked by Somali pirates since that time is catalogued." WIKI

Now, maybe it's just me, but I remember Bush being president in 2005, 2006, 2007 AND 2008.

And what did he say about Somali pirates ? Well, in December 2008, just as he was about to leave office (and four years after it became a problem), the administration issued a 14 page blueprint.

Now, THAT is a man of action !

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123931064271506281.html?mod=googlenews
_wsj

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

My bet is that Barney Frank and Chris Dodd wouldn't let him do anything about the pirates...

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

PHOENIXROSE

Saturday, April 11, 2009 7:27 AM

It almost looked to me like he overextended and stumbled a bit. If it was a bow, it was rushed and clumsy, but that's just my perception. Maybe the denials are a case of not wanting to say something like "The President had a temporary lapse in depth perception and grace."
Gosh, just think if he'd actually fallen and bowled over the King. That could've been really bad.

[/sig]

ANTHONYT

Saturday, April 11, 2009 1:31 PM

"Tell you what Rap -

Why don't you look up Bush's failings ? And only post something about Obama's if his are unique, more frequent, or worse than whatever Bush has done."

Hello,

I see this a lot on RWED. An incident is not judged solely on its own merits, but rather compared to someone else's incidents. In the case of establishing precedent, this can be valuable.

However, this is often NOT done for establishing precedent "Is it common for US Presidents to bow to foreign leaders?" as it is earlier in the thread by Rue.

Rather, it is MUCH more frequently done to illustrate comparative guilt, which is a concept I'm not sure I enjoy. If you'll forgive me some religious allegory, every sin should be judged on its own merits.

One does not get sent to judgment for gluttony, and then stand up and point to King Henry VIII and say, "His sins were much deeper, hence I should be forgiven!" This is behavior we ought not to encourage in our society.

(I must admit to making an exception based on personal, and not borrowed, experience. I can not stand judgment over someone who commits the same crimes that I do.)

If it were to be learned, for instance, that Reagan sodomized an intern, the defense should not be to point to Clinton. It should be to evaluate the action on its own merits and give a response. Clinton has little to do with the facts. This is not a 'let the multi-million member political party who is without sin cast the first stone' situation. No 3rd party sinners have anything to do with it.

It is a simple matter of, "Well, that's sorely disappointing, he should not have done that" or "Well, that's between him, his wife, and the intern. If they don't mind, I don't mind."

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

SIGNYM

Saturday, April 11, 2009 1:35 PM

Anthony, I really don't think Rue is interested in comparative guilt. At issue are the peeps who keep pecking one party to death, but give the other a free ride. Their relentless partisanship is morally bankrupt. AND, it's just plain stupid.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
I really don't think Rue is interested in comparative guilt. At issue are the peeps who keep pecking one party to death, but give the other a free ride. Their relentless partisanship is morally bankrupt. AND, it's just plain stupid.

Do as I say, not as I do.

Tell me if this sounds familiar (think of the past 8 years).
Poster #1: Did you hear Bush is gonna do....
Poster #2: But Clinton did the same thing...
Poster #1: That is irrelevant, past is past, you cannot excuse Bush just because Clinton...

Now, in the above mentioned scenario, swap out Bush for Obama and Clinton for Bush. I don't understand the disconnect here. Why can we see the perceived faults in other's but not ourselves?

CITIZEN

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Yup, should've given him a bust of Churchill! Now THAT would be a gift he'd appreciate! And we would have had an extra one just lying around, if only they hadn't sent it back... Oh crap - now I've given you something ELSE to whine about! "Why'd they give it back?! They could have re-gifted it!"

Why does he care anyway? What does Rapo care what the British think? Most of the time when I say something he disagrees with, he's quite vocal about his deep seated dislike for my country, our way of life, and the British people, and he's exceedingly vocal about where he thinks we can all put our opinions.

So why does he care about what we Brits think of this one single issue, I wonder?

SIGNYM

Saturday, April 11, 2009 3:35 PM

BDN-
I've criticized Clinton for a lot of things (Monica was not one of them). They tend to be the same things I criticized Bush and Obama for: money to the rich (NAFTA on Clinton's watch, tax cuts on Bush's, and the big dollar giveaway on Bush's AND Obama's) loss of industrial capacity (Clinton, Bush), failure to address the health care crisis (Clinton and Bush so far, too early to tell with Obama).

But Bush stepped in some big shit that Clinton avoided. The Kosovo war came to a successful resolution, but not Iraq and Afghanistan. Clinton balanced the budget, Bush broke it. Massive deregulation which made all of the financial institutions shaky and then packed them together like dominoes.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

RUE

Monday, April 13, 2009 7:24 AM

"It almost looked to me like he overextended and stumbled a bit."

It looked to me like he leaned forward and lost his balance.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

RUE

Monday, April 13, 2009 7:39 AM

AnthonyT,

I (and the 'liberal' media as well) never criticized Bush for any of these:

I personally DID criticize Bush ONCE for this

That was extremely public and extremely abnormal - it went way beyond a protocol mistake and into the range of the bizarre. (And I still think his slack-faced look makes him look like he is deeply drugged.)

So, no, I never made a big deal about Bush doing those kinds of things, nor do I think Obama doing anything like that is noteworthy, either.

I am keeping the same standard all around, unlike some people here. And all am I doing, as I mentioned earlier, is pointing out that some people have a severe case of hypocrisy.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

RUE

Monday, April 13, 2009 8:07 AM

"Poster #1: Did you hear Bush is gonna do....
Poster #2: But Clinton did the same thing...
Poster #1: That is irrelevant, past is past, you cannot excuse Bush just because Clinton..."

Got any specifics ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

ANTHONYT

Monday, April 13, 2009 1:15 PM

Hello,

What is the providence of the kissy-face photo? I've not seen it before. I'm amazed that the hand-holding got more press coverage.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE