Obama Bows to Japanese Emperor
Does the man even know his history? Who he is bowing to?
Idiot.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1720 hrs
In all seriousness, can someone explain why showing respect is bad? I honestly don’t get why so many are taken aback by this.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1751 hrs
This is a much better approach to being presidential.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_8DgDi8xML5g/SejuLSihL6I/AAAAAAAAAMM/j_yQNrMwJHw/s320/George_W_Bush_Prince_Abdullah_kiss_hold_hands.jpgPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1802 hrs
Oh, and let’s not forget that bowing to Saudi Kings is good too.
http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/obama-bow.jpgPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1805 hrs
Hugs are good.
http://criticalstew.org/wp-content/uploads/manmohan_bush_hug.jpgPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1814 hrs
Read your history.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1818 hrs
C’mon folks, it’s really no different (for the Japanese, at least), than shaking the man’s hand. It’s a common courtesy.
And if we’re basing how we should treat foreign leaders on previous wars, should we even ever be sitting in the same room with any British officials?
There’s more than enough to criticize the guy for. Let’s not get sidetracked on this sort of thing.
Posted by David Casper on November 14, 2009 at 1840 hrs
Allow me to amend that:
I realize there’s some significance in the fact that the Emperor traditionally bows for nobody, and that when Cheney met him, he didn’t bow. But this is something I chalk up more to the very frequent question I have of “who’s advising this guy?” (particularly in matters of protocol) than I would to his once again representing America as subservient to another nation. I think nobody bothered checking what the proper protocol was and, probably, based on what they’ve seen in movies they figured “when you meet a Japanese person, you bow.”
In the end, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it. Like I said, Obama gives us more than enough to criticize that this is just a non-event.
Posted by David Casper on November 14, 2009 at 1854 hrs
Surprised he didn’t kiss the Saudi King’s ring. Maybe the Emperor wasn’t wearing a ring for him to kiss too.
What a poor example of leader.
The one who bows first is the inferior in the meeting!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 1909 hrs
I love how some people think it’s the end of the world if a Democrat shows some respect for another nation’s culture. Because we fought a war with Japan three generations ago? Because conservatives believe that their twisted version of American exceptionalism has to translate into arrogance abroad?
As Pat noted above, GWB hugged and kissed it out with Saudi royalty. Now you tell me, who’s the bigger PITA for the United States right now - a 76-year-old emperor of a country that’s become a great friend of America, or the Saudi royal family? Guess Obama learned it by watching Bush.
Molehill——-> Mountain. Nobody cares but the minority of wacko conservatives that nobody cares about. And shouldn’t they be busying themselves figuring out, after NY-23, which seats they want to give the Democrats next?
Posted by Recess Supervisor on November 14, 2009 at 2022 hrs
RS,
You and those that can not understand why this is important are the problem. Obama did not bow to the Japanese emperor. America bowed to Japan. The man represents the country; not himself. America bowing to any other nation; friend or foe is unacceptable and important. This man better learn quickly that peace does not come from being nice to everyone. Peace comes when everyone is afraid of you. Pax Americana.
Tad
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 2124 hrs
YOU ALL REALLY GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO CRITICIZE THIS GUY AT ANY OPPORTUNITY. “DISGUSTING”???!??!? WAS IT AS REPULSIVE WHEN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT BOWS TO EMPORERS, OR THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND, OR SHAKES HANDS WITH GERMAN CHANCELLORS? THEY ALL DID.
FUCKING MORONS
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 2141 hrs
You guys do realize that in Japan people bow when greeting not shake hands. It has nothing to do with the fact that it was the emperor.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 2240 hrs
I don’t think that the president of the USA should treat any royalty like we are their subjects. That goes for the Queen of England, a Saudi Prince, or some tinpot from Africa. Other than JFK, who was Catholic, does any US president kiss the Pope’s ring? However, that is considered proper protocol for people having an audience with the Pope. I didn’t like it when GWB acceded to roral protocol with the Saudi prince when the prince visited GWB’s ranch. The foreigner was in our country where he should be aware of, and accede to our cultural customs. But above all, the bow was a sign of subservience and quite a dis of our cultural norms. He shouldn’t have done it. But since BHO wants to diminish our standing in the world, I can see why he did it. He’s an idiot and this will come back to bite him some day.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 2256 hrs
Jim the Fireman, as soon as BHO starts an illegal war against a country that poses no threat against us and kills over 90,000 women and children please then talk about the diminishing of our standing in the world. It’s already been done.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 14, 2009 at 2309 hrs
I love how some people think it’s the end of the world if a Democrat shows some respect for another nation’s culture.
I love how a Democrat who thinks he’s paying respect to another culture never bothers to actually pay respect by learning enough about the culture to figure out what’s the right thing to do.
In Japan you bow when you meet someone (unless you’re the Emperor). It’s considered an acceptable alternative when meeting a Westerner for the bow to be replaced by a handshake.
What’s crazy is what Obama did and doing both. That’s never done.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0051 hrs
The Japanese only put up with that handshake stuff because it’s our custom. Obama bowing is no different than Akihito shaking hands.
Maybe Obama should’ve asked him to do the Hokey Pokey. Perhaps that could become the universal greeting that appeases the teabaggers and freepers.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on November 15, 2009 at 0327 hrs
People in Japan don’t shake hands. They bow. It’s a greeting. Period. Is there symbolism in it? Sure. There’s also symbolism in a handshake—i.e. look, my hands are empty; I am a friend. But that doesn’t mean we avoid shaking hands to show some kind of petulant and arrogant superiority.
It seems to Owen and many commenters that Obama should have just stood there like an idiot. Or stuck out his hand and shown cultural ignorance.
Oh, and nerdbert? Wrong. I lived in Japan for years. Sometimes when you’ve got people from different cultures you’ll show respect for both by including both a bow and a handshake. It’s a way of showing that both customs and cultures have value.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0758 hrs
Non-issue for me… I’m thinking “Big Whooopity Doo” while twirling my finger in the air.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0813 hrs
I saw a whole listing of pics of leaders from around the world who have not bowed to the Japanese emperor. Our dullard of a president has apparently seen fit to break this protocol. Barry is such an embarrassment.
To the nationas of the world: Please forgive us for the nitwit that we’ve elected. We don’t know what we were thinking.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0849 hrs
Bush bows to Pope, apparently meaning that all of America is subservient to the Catholic church: http://media.photobucket.com/image/george bush bow emperor/DutchPhil/bush_bow.jpg
Bush delivers unrequested backrub to German chancellor, meaning that all of America can just walk up to a world leader and place their hands on them:
http://wilsonsalmanac.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/bush_backrub-760554.jpgBush hobnobbing with the Dali Lama, meaning America now supports dissidents.
All you people here are insane.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0913 hrs
Did I miss something? Is GWB still the president? Seems like the libs are in some sort of time warp here.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0920 hrs
And since we are no better than any other country, why don’t their leaders bow to the emperor of Japan?
http://hotairpundit.blogspot.com/2009/11/president-obama-vs-rest-of-world.htmlPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0923 hrs
“Did I miss something? Is GWB still the president? Seems like the libs are in some sort of time warp here. “
Jim the Fireman, so I’m assuming you were also critical of GWB when he was president for the same reasons you’re critical of BHO??
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0935 hrs
Maybe U.S. presidents should just “1,000 mile stare” at foreign leaders bowing or extending a hand, then they should slightly lift one leg, and let rip a tremendous trouser snort , and then they should close the greeting by waving the fumes of U.S. cultural superiority (perhaps a 1/2 digested Whopper combo) in the direction of the foreign leader?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 0939 hrs
OB has no problem trotting around the globe kissing butt and if a real problem arrives when he should speak out he sends Hillary to do the dirty work and blaze a trail. While his agenda is all about him and the world to view him as a swell guy, who is home solving domestic issues, we have many that need full time attention.
He is vain its all about popularity screw the issues, we just cant have a drop in the ratings.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 1514 hrs
Owen is now Emily Post and Miss Manners all rolled in to one.
Cool.
Posted by Swamp Gas on November 15, 2009 at 2049 hrs
I see why this is important, America bowing in a way to Japan that shows inferiority, but arent there more important things to critize him on, health care and givernment spending for example. Im not a fan of him bowing to anyone, but he needs to learn from his past mistakes (Saudi Arabia) and realized that people get pissed if you do something wrong once, much less twice, if your the president of the United States. And on a side bar, since the Constitution specifically bans the use of titles of nobility, i will never refer to him as “President Barack Obama” but only as the president or Barack Obama or Mr. Obama.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 2252 hrs
Oh, and nerdbert? Wrong. I lived in Japan for years.
You’ve got me beat there. I only have visited 20+ times and turned down an offer to live there. That and I deal with engineers, so we’re more on the practical level, not the diplomatic one (nobody accuses engineers of diplomacy!).
But it seems that ABC’s Jack Tapper also says Obama did it wrong.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 15, 2009 at 2350 hrs
Okay, I did not care one whit until I watched the video. (I read all the comments first) Even if he gets his protocol from the movies, he has to know that there is a difference between bowing and bobbing your head like a chicken. In the movies, only the sleazy little lackey bows multiple times like that, or even that deeply. Then at the end, he totally goes against his non-verbal cues by gesturing them inside. Their culture, they lead.
NYTexan, nerdbert is more correct than you in higher circles. In lower circles the bow has little more meaning than a handshake and is thus considered an acceptable alternative and to do both is a lower class acceptable gesture. It is just like drinking tea versus a tea ceremony in Japan. All tea is not drunk in a ceremony, but when it is, there are rules to follow.
It seems few people are actually taught manners today in the US and if you use the wrong fork in a fancy restaurant, no one even notices. However, when etiquette rules are in force it is important to know and follow them. Japanese are still taught that manners and non-verbal gestures have serious meaning. I don’t believe Obama knowingly means to be subservient to these foreign leaders, but if he does not, he should learn the gestures appropriate to his meaning.
It is the worst form of arrogance to not learn the rules in the first place. If he does not mean to appear subservient it means he does not really care how he should act. If he does mean to be subservient, conservatives have a beef worth reporting and commenting on.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 16, 2009 at 1213 hrs
I admit it, Obama and his advisors, for all their alleged Chicago sophistication, are Midwest rubes.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 16, 2009 at 1610 hrs
The New York Times takes President Clinton to task for his bow to the emperor in 1994.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 16, 2009 at 1619 hrs
I wonder how Sarah Palin would have handled this situation.
Actually, no I don’t. The Republicans lost the election. No sour grapes.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 16, 2009 at 2119 hrs
The only bowing that should bother most of us is in the direction of Olympia Snow over health care reform.
Hey fireman, did you notice that the depiction’s on this guy’s blogs were still photos. Who the hell knows what happened before or after the photos? Do you? No, that question never entered your skull did it.
The reek of pettiness here ascends to high heaven. So what if Obama did the courtesy of bowing? He took it as a form of respect towards of a figurehead of a country that is now our long time friendly country. But of course respect on this blog and in whacko rightwing world is usually in short supply.
The hatred emitted by you guys is pathological and moronic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 16, 2009 at 2339 hrs
Nerdbert, what part of Japan do you travel to? I lived in Himeji and later Osaka in the early 90s. Loved being there except the one time a friend took me to a little joint that specialized in chicken stomachs, and it turned out that’s ALL they served. Boiled, baked, grilled, fried, etc. Apparently a real delicacy but it took me lots of Asahi to get through it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 0843 hrs
But of course respect on this blog and in whacko rightwing world is usually in short supply.
Ah good old Keith…I am not sure if I should be classified as a part of right wing world or not, but of course respect is in short supply, you pegged it. Could that be because no one in this decade is worthy of it, at least in the US national political arena? Bush had a few instances, he handled 9/11 pretty well, he handled Britain very respectably, but Obama? What has he done worthy of respect, yet?
Is he a stand up guy? In the US has he done what is right or has he kowtowed to his special interests? Internationally, does he learn how and then act as protocol and custom dictate, or does ‘wing it’, something you consistently bashed Bush for.
Did he earn a peace prize, or was that international liberal media at work? Could you explain that one to me? I haven’t really heard a liberal defense of that. I think he was given a peace prize for his campaign promises which he hasn’t delivered on, not for any actions. If he deserves a peace prize for staying in Iraq (after promising again and again to get out immediately) and intensifying affairs in Afghanistan, doesn’t Bush deserve it more for starting them?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 0849 hrs
Who hated Bush for winging it? You mean like rubbing the shoulders of Angela Merkel at the G8 and she was visibly upset? And unlike Bush’s father at least Obama has yet to throw up in someone’s lap.
Handled 9/11 pretty well? Like not getting Bin Laden? Like focusing on blowing our money and killing thousands of civilians in Iraq while terrorism grew around the world? Like lisping Rudy dragging this event out time after time and an all-purpose answer for anything? I’d like to see what you’d regard as a screw up.
Love how you people are just being driven nuts by the Nobel Peace Prize, especially since the committee has explained why he got it. This, you know, involves fereners, and of course rubes are suspicious of fereners.
And of course you can’t track, can you. We are not talking about respect for Obama, though that would be nice for once. We are, if you recall, talking about our leaders respecting other leaders and assorted figureheads. But again, respect on this blog and especially over at Syke’s place is replaced by acting out.
Am I irritating you TUERQAS? Mission accomplished.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 0951 hrs
Actually, I feel my mission was accomplished. I made two small positive comments about Bush while condemning his entire tenure specifically to see how petty you could get in one comment.
You mean like rubbing the shoulders of Angela Merkel at the G8 and she was visibly upset?
Like not getting Bin Laden?
Like lisping Rudy
And unlike Bush’s father at least Obama has yet to throw up in someone’s lap.
This, you know, involves fereners, and of course rubes are suspicious of fereners.Yeah,
you aren’t petty, you are deep…Irritate me? Heh, heh, good ole Keith. It really is petty of me to set you up like that, but it is a hard day at work today and I needed my comic relief. See, I am petty too.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 1039 hrs
Let’s explain how this works TEQUILA. You guys bring up this nonsense about BOWGATE. We slap it down. It’s T-Ball at its best.
In your spare time why don’t you apply a protector to measure the angle of the bow? You need more to talk about.
Oh the horror. The President has sold us out!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 1053 hrs
Typical B&S BS. Any opportunity to bash the other side, but when your side did similar—no problem. How many US presidents have bowed to foreign dignitaries? Anyone? Know how many of them were Republicans? How many of them were named Bush? Christ you people are a bunch of perpetually outraged, ill-informed loudmouths. There’s plenty of legitimate criticisms one might make of Obama. Stick to those. Because when you don’t you end up sounding like shrill, paranoid idiots. Then nobody listens to you or takes you seriously but yourselves. And Glenn Beck.
At least some conservative commenters here get it. I’m really glad to see that.
Posted by scott on November 17, 2009 at 1225 hrs
Let’s explain how this works TEQUILA.
Haha! Oh yeah, I am the petty one. Please! Please no more abuse Keith! I could get in trouble for laughing that loudly at work.
Are, are you crying? Your parents spoiled you didn’t they?
Scott:There’s plenty of legitimate criticisms one might make of Obama. Stick to those.
Name one, or a few. I do not remember a word of critiscism from you on an Obama topic and it is always harder to have a liberal/conservative debate when you feel that the other side is too partisan to accept a single word of criticism. Those who are not Keith know what I think of the Bush administration. You could hardly criticize me of partisanship. I do think Obama made a mistake doing the chicken dance there, but in importance, I would label it a 1.5 on a scale of 10.
Is it worth a snipe on a conservative blog? Sure. Just as Keith can pull up a poor man’s illness and blame him for it from many years ago. Keith seems to believe that Bush Sr. yakked in someone’s lap on purpose? That was a faux pas, really? Or that GWB was somehow responsible for not finding Bin Laden? Bush was lax or made a mistake by failure to personally direct his troops in successful search of Bin Laden? Yet conservatives are petty and liberals compassionate free & noble thinkers… Whatever.
I appreciate many of your opinions Scott, whether I agree with them or not. But I do not remember you ever really criticizing or agreeing with a criticism of Obama so I would really like to hear a few of them from you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 1427 hrs
Name one, or a few
Sure. He didn’t close gitmo. He is being too secretive (like Bush). He gave away the health care debate by not starting negotiations with single-payer. And, yes, I begin to think now that his Afghanistan plan should be established by now—stop wasting time. Also, the stimulus package was too small and too focused on tax cuts. Plus the wall street bailout should have come with more strings and more regulations. Tim Geithner is an idiot.
I do think Obama made a mistake doing the chicken dance there, but in importance, I would label it a 1.5 on a scale of 10.
I don’t know enough about international protocol to start spouting off about whether it’s a mistake or not—let alone vociferously condemning the man for it. And neither does anyone else here, probably. On a scale of 1 to 10 I give it a “partisan bullshit.”
Worth a snipe? Maybe had Owen’s single word commentary been “heh” I might let him off the hook. But “disgusting”? That to me seems like a pretty strong, not tongue-in-cheeck condemnation. And many of the subsequent comments would have us believe that this is unprecedented to the point of treason. Which is of course ridiculous.
The Obama administration reminds me of the Clinton years. The right wingers were after this guy hardcore right from day one. And it was relentless. In point of fact, he was a moderate Democrat who implemented mostly pretty non-controversial policies and who presided over a period of peace and prosperity.
Seriously, you don’t like the health care bill? You don’t like his Afghanistan plan (if there is one)? You don’t like his economic efforts? Fine. But to go apeshit every time the man does some innocuous thing like salute soldier’s coffins or bows to a Japanese person…shit. Find a real problem and go with that instead.
Posted by scott on November 17, 2009 at 1520 hrs
I would rate anything under 3 as partisan bullshit. Of course it is partisan bullshit and guess what? Owen is a Republican! The fact that it wasn’t worth more than one word is what gives it a pass in my book. The only reason I started in on this thread was because it was the only recent one with comments.
He is being too secretive (like Bush).
Restate that to all 20th century Presidents and beyond and I understand you completely. I appreciate the complaint, but I personally believe that some secrets are necessary. It seems to me that you trust his judgement or you don’t. I really have no idea what made him change his mind, but it seems the reasons were both good enough for him and the need for secrecy great enough for him to refuse to publicize his reasoning. Same with not ending the Iraq ‘conflict’. What I disagree with is condemning Bush (Keith: “Like focusing on blowing our money and killing thousands of civilians in Iraq while terrorism grew around the world?”) while praising Obama or at least giving him a complete pass on the whole issue. Could it be that since Obama has decided to keep Gitmo open and continue the Iraq conflict, that Bush had those same good reasons?
Note to Keith: That was not a praise of Bush or a condemnation of Obama. It was merely pointing out how stupid I think liberals look still blasting Bush for continuing a conflict that their peace loving candidate is also continuing after receiving his secret presidential briefings.
Personally I am with you on the war thing, Scott. I think Obama seems planless in Afghanistan as Bush seemed planless in Iraq and it is a major loss of US funds to continue them.
The Obama administration reminds me of the Clinton years. The right wingers were after this guy hardcore right from day one. And it was relentless.
Add that left wingers hounded both Bushes equally as relentless and I agree with you completely. I think Clinton did his job with professional polish. Outside of having his knob polished for him, there are not many stigmas attached to his white house, comparatively.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 1556 hrs
how stupid I think liberals look still blasting Bush for continuing a conflict that their peace loving candidate is also continuing after receiving his secret presidential briefings.
I don’t blame Obama for continuing the Iraq war. I blame Bush for a) starting it and b) screwing it up in that first year or two. After that, our collective bed was made. No good options left—not for Bush and not for Obama either.
left wingers hounded both Bushes equally as relentless and I agree with you completely.
I don’t agree that this was anywhere near equal. I don’t remember anyone being down on Bush until he started going after Iraq in his rhetoric. And the media didn’t go after him until well after the invasion, when things started going really wrong. With Clinton it was day one. So it is with Obama. He’s not a citizen! He bowed to a Japanese person! He’s a socialist! We’re organizing tea party protests! Seriously, who was protesting Bush before 2003? The man started a war and the justification for it didn’t um, pan out. People get upset about that. What’d Obama do on day one? Nothing that I can recall.
Anyway, I appreciate your levelheadedness in your above comment. Now I’m going to take a deep breath and try to do the same.
Posted by scott on November 17, 2009 at 1611 hrs
ABC’s Jake Tapper reports that at least one Japanese newspaper is not printing the picture of the president’s mortifying bow because the Japanese are embarrassed by his behavior. A scholar of traditional Japan tells Mr. Tapper, “The bow… did not just display weakness in Red State terms, but evoked weakness in Japanese terms… The last thing the Japanese want or need is a weak-looking American president.”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 17, 2009 at 1657 hrs
So… mistake. Sounds like maybe it was. What baffles me is that the very people blowing a gasket over it are the very people who sat there staring and blinking when the previous occupant started an unnecessary war and alienated entire continents left and right.
I know, I know—we keep talking about Bush. But damn, people. The double standard is breathtaking sometimes.
Posted by scott on November 17, 2009 at 1706 hrs
See, my memory is not quite that short. Virtually everyone except the guy keeping it going voted for starting that war including Pelosi and HRC. No one sat and stared and the vast majority agreed with it.
I am pretty sure pre-Day 1 of the GW Bush administration was that he was criticized for ‘stealing the election’ and it never really let up from there. I remember that he handled the emotions of the US very professionally after 911, but there was already a lot of BDS syndrome in the press because I seem to remember being disgusted with Bush complaints even though I saw some of his speeches. Just like you for Obama, criticize Bush fairly or stop whining. Everyone agreed to go to Iraq. If you believe the conspiracy theory that the Bush admin knew more, but just felt like going to war so suppressed it, you should be prepared to understand that Republicans look for their theories all the time too, like Obama is trying to appear obsequious world-wide.
Besides, there is always a partisan double standard. You display it for Democrats even as Owen displays it for Republicans. Media displays it for whoever they support, more is the pity.
Thanks elovrich, from my Japanese History minor, that is what I was sure the Japanese would feel, but I had not delved for proof at all, because I don’t really care how bad Obama makes himself look to the world.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 18, 2009 at 1624 hrs
pre-Day 1 of the GW Bush administration was that he was criticized for ‘stealing the election’
You know what? I’ll give you that one. Sort of. But jeez, man, the supreme court made him president. Surely you can see where that made a lot of people—the majority of voters, in fact—feel a little raw? But what I don’t agree with is that Bush was being protested and ill-treated by the media post 9/11. That my friend is baloney. The country was more unified in that subsequent year than it ever has been since. I think what broke the spell was not just starting the Iraq war, but the fact that the WMDs weren’t there. And then the crushing blow: The war had been mismanaged and perhaps poorly planned. We were now holding a finger in the dike of a civil war and there seemed to be nothing we could do about it. Yeah, at that point? Not so unified. But I would argue that such outrage as there was is entirely justified by the real facts of the Bush presidency.
If you believe the conspiracy theory that the Bush admin knew more, but just felt like going to war
In my heart of hearts, I do believe that. There are very credible, eyewitness accounts from inside the Bush white house that indicate the president had a hard on for invading Iraq within days of the 9/11 attack—even though there was absolutely no reason to think there was any connection.
Then, however it happened—whether just ineptitude or gamed by the white house—the CIA told them what they wanted to hear: Saddam was an immanent threat. Was the president the victim of the CIA’s bad information? The CIA is part of the executive branch so in some sense he can’t be absolved from responsibility even if it was entirely their fault.
Congress? I’m pretty sure they only know what the intelligence agencies tell them. But unlike Bush, the CIA isn’t on their payroll. I think their real failing was spinelessness. They could have asked hard questions and demanded answers. They didn’t. And I believe they didn’t because they sensed it was impolitic to go against the tide of nationalism then sweeping the country.
I don’t really care how bad Obama makes himself look to the world.
You do realize that Obama “looks to the world” a hell of a lot better than Bush did, right? You do know that, don’t you? Bush was despised—even by our allies. Obama is well liked—even by some who have always viewed us skeptically. (I doubt, for the record, that Islamic radicals see a difference in them at all—who knows what they make of American politics.)
Posted by scott on November 18, 2009 at 1706 hrs
Vowing is a sign of respect to each other. We should know that! Being a humble man is good… Some people comment on this blog is ridiculous. US is powerful but some of their citizen are racist and selfish, in that video Pres. Obama just give respect to Japanese emperor because of their status and their Age. Here in the Philippines we give emphasized on respect for our elders and its a tradition. We Human must respect each other as we share common grounds.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 19, 2009 at 0525 hrs
Surely you can see where that made a lot of people—the majority of voters, in fact—feel a little raw?
In my heart of hearts, I do believe that.
Both of those beliefs are utterly reasonable and even expected, if you are a liberal or a Democrat or both. Re-read what Keith frothed about in 47. You are a moderate liberal. Now how is it unreasonable for conservative or a Republican to be equally critical of Obama and be willing to believe whichever conspiracy theory they personally favor?
Look, my first point to you and anyone still reading this is simply that even as your thoughts and comments are colored by your beliefs, so are everyone elses. I think that I have established enough cred to be able to say that I tend to give both sides at least that much leeway.
Bush gives a back rub, inappropriate, sure. Big news, not especially. But a Bush hater thinks it is. Obama tries to show respect by bowing without learning first about the Japanese cultural rules. Unless the Japanese irrationally decide to derive deep meaning or insult from it (The Japanese are arguably the most racist group on the planet, but they are not irrational) it is about equally newsworthy. Of course Obama haters are going to treat it as big news, though.
My second point is that Keith and sometimes you look just as extreme as the Obama haters in your name calling defense of everything he does. (Great catch on yourself when you recognized that somehow Bush keeps coming up again and again. It is just not about him. The people who still bring up Clinton are pretty much hopeless cases, who just wouldn’t get this conversation at all.)
If this sounded preachy, I humbly apologize. I did not mean any condescension that may easily be inferred above.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 19, 2009 at 0857 hrs
Both of those beliefs are utterly reasonable and even expected, if you are a liberal or a Democrat or both.
I get what you’re saying and I don’t intend to argue with you about it. But for the record, I don’t agree. I don’t think outrage over the 2000 election, or outrage over the Iraq war can be chalked up to simple partisanship in the same way that outrage over Obama’s bow is. But as I said, I don’t intend to argue it—there’s no way to “prove” such a thing. You either get that a court-decided election at odds with a majority of voters and a war whose justification turned out to be false isn’t in the same league as the idea that Obama’s bowing to a Japanese dignitary is part of an unprecedented and outrageous pattern of subservience to foreign powers—or you don’t get it. I’ll drop it.
Bush gives a back rub, inappropriate, sure. Big news, not especially. But a Bush hater thinks it is.
Maybe so. But I don’t think I ever wasted a single breath, pixel or drop of ink discussing it. It’s silly. It’s a gaffe, not something inherently indicative of the man’s ability to govern. It’s not a serious issue of policy. It’s import is strictly a matter of opinion. And your’e right—the only people who thought it was worth discussing were the people who were just looking for a way to revel in their intense dislike of the man. I dislike him, too. But as a matter of public discussion? Silly waste of time.
Also, I certainly defend “everything he does.” It just so happens that this blog and others like it are a continual stream of negative things about him and other Democrats. Many of these items are like this one—like the Merkel back rub—simply a trumped up way to express one’s extreme dislike of the man, not a serious discussion of anything other than that. It gets under my skin and I feel like I have to respond. This is why I may appear to defend literally everything he does to B&S readers. I mean, really? This bow is part of an unprecedented, dangerous pattern of subservience to foreign powers? Really?? Such beliefs are Peter DiGaudio stuff. Nobody without a diagnosable psychiatric condition is going o feel like they’re on firm ground trying to convince others of that, are they?
Nobody’s perfect, but what say we level headed people try to find actual issues to argue about instead of trumped up, matter-of-opinion excuses to express outrage. Back rubs and bows included.
Posted by scott on November 19, 2009 at 1132 hrs
I pretty much agree with what you say above. Personally I compared his bow to Bush back rub not to court decided elections, but I know others did or would compare what you did above and it is crap.
The only other comment is that blogs must entertain, so not only are inflaming topics needed, partisan topics must be introduced as well. if we stuck only with the serious issues, the blog would die, because everyone pretty much has their opinion and only new info can be discussed. Sometimes, that just doesn’t happen often enough. The bottom line is that you are stuck with the sensational as often as the serious or there just wouldn’t be enough interest or material to continue. So keep on defending and we will cross metaphorical swords again soon. En Garde!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 20, 2009 at 0950 hrs
En garde indeed.
Although, I’m not sure that blogs “must” be anything. Entertaining blogs are out there, of course. As are informative ones. Saying that it “must” be this or that is like saying that the telephone must carry a certain kind of conversation or that Newsweek must be like Mad Magazine. (Although, now that I think about it…)
Posted by scott on November 20, 2009 at 1000 hrs
Although, I’m not sure that blogs “must” be anything. Entertaining blogs are out there, of course. As are informative ones. Saying that it “must” be this or that is like saying that the telephone must carry a certain kind of conversation or that Newsweek must be like Mad Magazine…
FINE! You win that point, you happy? I amend my statement to say ‘often gain more popularity by entertaining’ rather than ‘must’.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 20, 2009 at 1206 hrs
Look, I get your point and I agree with it: Entertainment is entertaining and it draws an audience. I’m just saying not every blog has to be politically provocative to the point of cheap shotism just to have readers. I’m sure we’re all in agreement about that, too.
Posted by scott on November 20, 2009 at 1209 hrs
That was totally tongue in cheek. I was trying (and failing…sigh) to be cute.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on November 20, 2009 at 1305 hrs
And I think my humor-o-meter fizzled out somewhere late on Wednesday. Hopefully I’ll recharge this weekend.
Posted by scott on November 20, 2009 at 1320 hrs
He is the one good ever giving respect to other leaders. Hands off to him.
Posted by Obama Politics on November 27, 2009 at 0124 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134051
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 10:25 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 127
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 11:26 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).