President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[RossValoryRocks]

Here is something I VERY much support the President on:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34169108/ns ... ngton_post

Lobbyists on advisory panels? NOT ANYMORE! Good job Mr. President! And I mean that sincerely.

[Behshad]

.... and, dammit, here he is bowing again .....

Obviously a photoshop. My Islamofacist friend you are a hoot!

Have you been living in a fucking cave Stu??? This was all over the media when it happened.....
Go on youtube and you can find video footage of Bush kissing the Saudi King,,, but of course, you choose to ignore Saudi Arabia and move a bit more west to the river in the egypt area

[G.I.Jim]

.... and, dammit, here he is bowing again .....

Obviously a photoshop. My Islamofacist friend you are a hoot!

Have you been living in a fucking cave Stu??? This was all over the media when it happened.....
Go on youtube and you can find video footage of Bush kissing the Saudi King,,, but of course, you choose to ignore Saudi Arabia and move a bit more west to the river in the egypt area

As much as I hate it, I have to admit you're right on this one. There are also pictures of Bush walking through a garden holding hands with him. What males would want to live in a fucking country where guys kiss? Okay... OTHER than Jason and Bobby? That is just nasty!

[RossValoryRocks]

.... and, dammit, here he is bowing again .....

Obviously a photoshop. My Islamofacist friend you are a hoot!

Have you been living in a fucking cave Stu??? This was all over the media when it happened.....
Go on youtube and you can find video footage of Bush kissing the Saudi King,,, but of course, you choose to ignore Saudi Arabia and move a bit more west to the river in the egypt area

That picture is a photoshop...I know they did the hand holding thing...and I know they did the cheek kiss thing...but that is photoshopped to make it look like a mouth kiss.

[Behshad]

.... and, dammit, here he is bowing again .....

Obviously a photoshop. My Islamofacist friend you are a hoot!

Have you been living in a fucking cave Stu??? This was all over the media when it happened.....
Go on youtube and you can find video footage of Bush kissing the Saudi King,,, but of course, you choose to ignore Saudi Arabia and move a bit more west to the river in the egypt area

That picture is a photoshop...I know they did the hand holding thing...and I know they did the cheek kiss thing...but that is photoshopped to make it look like a mouth kiss.

video footage shows a minor lip contact as captured by this close up frame freeze

[Voyager]

.... and, dammit, here he is bowing again .....

Obama can bow all he wants!

No shit... it's better than french-kissing an Arab!

[Voyager]

I just read on CNN that the GOP is so desperate that they want to draft Dick Cheney as a candidate for President in 2012. What a joke!

[Ehwmatt]

I just read on CNN that the GOP is so desperate that they want to draft Dick Cheney as a candidate for President in 2012. What a joke!

Who reads CNN?

I don't think the GOP qualifies as "desperate" these days. A year ago? Sure. But, public opinion seems to be shifting away from this experiment in liberalism. 2010 doesn't bode well for the Dems, at least if the wind keeps blowing the way it is right now.

[Voyager]

I just read on CNN that the GOP is so desperate that they want to draft Dick Cheney as a candidate for President in 2012. What a joke!

Who reads CNN?

Everyone except for a few GOP radicals who worship Glenn Beck. (Glenn is the new face of the GOP: desperate, crying, sad, lonely, and embittered.)

[Ehwmatt]

I just read on CNN that the GOP is so desperate that they want to draft Dick Cheney as a candidate for President in 2012. What a joke!

Who reads CNN?

Everyone except for a few GOP radicals who worship Glenn Beck. (Glenn is the new face of the GOP: desperate, crying, sad, lonely, and embittered.)

Must be a lot of those types then

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2 ... -networks/

I actually like CNN for the most part. They are running a terrible business over there though.

[7 Wishes]

Too bad actual polls don't support the notion the GOP is in recovery. Your party is in the worst state it has EVER been, and has no voice nor a substantive leader. Good luck.

[Voyager]

I'm guessing that these two will be running mates in 2011:



When the terrorists strike, Glenn Beck will probably fall off the wagon and start crying in his beer, and Sarah Palin will resign and elope with Levi Johnson.

Let's hope Limbaugh has been stockpiling pain pills... the GOP will be needing them. Good luck guys!

[7 Wishes]

Lie Finder, far more Conservatives are running for re-election in 2010 than are Democrats.

Yours is also the party of hate, extremism, and intolerance. The political winds are NOT shifting in that direction.

A recent Gallup poll found that only 25 percent of Americans have a positive opinion of the Republican Party (compared to 42 percent for the Democrats). So, tell me, where is the revolution beginning? Why don't you and the Tea Party form your own banana republic?

Let's see...some recent quotes from the GOP's House members...

"Get the Red Out of the White House," "Waterboard Congress," "Ken-ya Trust Obama?" Obama is a traitor to the U.S. Constitution." Another sign showed pictures of dead bodies at the Dachau concentration camp and compared health care reform to the Holocaust. A different placard depicted Obama as Sambo. Another read, "Obama takes his orders from the Rothchilds". Hopefully, you know what that means.

Yours is a classic case of squeezing the Charmin while Mr. Wipple's not around. As soon as Obama cleans up the economic DISASTER that Dubbya left behind, and the healthcare reform bill gets passed, and the unemployment rate drops - the GOP will be BURIED in 2010. Have fun at your hate rallies.

[7 Wishes]

I can never figure out who the biggest douchebag is between Beck, Katz, Blimpaugh, O'Reilly, and Hannity. But none of them let actual facts interfere with their rants.

[Behshad]

Lie Finder, far more Conservatives are running for re-election in 2010 than are Democrats.

Yours is also the party of hate, extremism, and intolerance. The political winds are NOT shifting in that direction.

A recent Gallup poll found that only 25 percent of Americans have a positive opinion of the Republican Party (compared to 42 percent for the Democrats). So, tell me, where is the revolution beginning? Why don't you and the Tea Party form your own banana republic?

Let's see...some recent quotes from the GOP's House members...

"Get the Red Out of the White House," "Waterboard Congress," "Ken-ya Trust Obama?" Obama is a traitor to the U.S. Constitution." Another sign showed pictures of dead bodies at the Dachau concentration camp and compared health care reform to the Holocaust. A different placard depicted Obama as Sambo. Another read, "Obama takes his orders from the Rothchilds". Hopefully, you know what that means.

Yours is a classic case of squeezing the Charmin while Mr. Wipple's not around. As soon as Obama cleans up the economic DISASTER that Dubbya left behind, and the healthcare reform bill gets passed, and the unemployment rate drops - the GOP will be BURIED in 2010. Have fun at your hate rallies.

[separate_wayz]

Some of you seem to be missing the point about Obama bowing.

The issue isn't whether his bowing is proper protocol or not (answer: it isn't -- Obama seems often to have no clue, or interest in, protocol or tradition) -- the issue is that his bowing is creating a public perception of weakness and validation that his White House is amateurish and ad hoc.

If the mood of the country were generally one of content and satisfaction with our place in the world at the moment, a bow might seem like a gracious gesture. But when Americans are feeling uneasy about our place in the global economy, and our place on the global stage of international relations, then a bow takes on a whole new meaning. It comes across as servile compliance, or dutiful submissiveness. It makes Americans cringe.

It's been said that, "The first year [of a presidency] is when indelible impressions are made and iconic photos emerge." Witness how photographs of Gerald Ford's slippage on the jetway was translated into a buffoonish image of his presidency, even though Ford was arguably the most athletic president to ever hold the White House (having played football for the University of Michigan and having been offered pro football contracts for two teams, including the Green Bay Packers). If it is the case that the first year of a presidency is when indelible impressions are made (and iconic photos emerge), Obama's iconic image is one of: clueless diplomatic protocol, and weakness on the international stage. Is it any wonder that Obama's poll ratings drop every single time he goes overseas?

As I've said before, Obama's behavior toward allies and enemies is gaining him no favor with either. Obama would do himself (and the country) a favor by dropping the bow.

[strangegrey]

separate_wayz, well thought out comments. A pleasure to read something that seemed to be delivered from an objective pov.

There's probably alot of truth in the fact that the 'bow' is more about our perceptions of it than the act itself....


I used to salute guys around the office....until 9/11. Then, it became an uneasy thing for me to do and for other people to deal with...so I stopped doing it. Prior to 9/11 it was a fun way of showing respect and authority around the office without getting 'formal'

But when solders started fighting and dying again, following 9/11...it wasn't fair for me to do it or expect anyone to reciprocate.


So really, the act is more or less, the one stable thing....where our perception of the act, is the issue.



I still think the YoMama bow is inappropriate and a show of weakness....but I'm now thinking that it might be less of an issue to me if it were either a different time or a different president....

[strangegrey]

"Get the Red Out of the White House," "Waterboard Congress," "Ken-ya Trust Obama?" Obama is a traitor to the U.S. Constitution." Another sign showed pictures of dead bodies at the Dachau concentration camp and compared health care reform to the Holocaust. A different placard depicted Obama as Sambo.

Yep!

That sorta thing goes right alongside the pictures comparing Bush to Hitler over the past 8 years.


Sorry, your party is hardly blameless. With both sides guilty as dirt, we can dispense with the bullshit and look at next years elections for exactly what they will be....an up or down vote on both YoMama and Congress.


We can speculate all you want....but history shows us that the mid-year elections following a new president is pretty much directly corelated to the president's approval ratings. YoMama's numbers keep trending the way they have through next year....I'd start saying goodbye to Ms Skeletor. a GOP party member will be 2-gunshots away from the big chair....

[The_Noble_Cause]

The issue isn't whether his bowing is proper protocol or not (answer: it isn't -- Obama seems often to have no clue, or interest in, protocol or tradition) -- the issue is that his bowing is creating a public perception of weakness and validation that his White House is amateurish and ad hoc.

Gee, SW, the word “protocol” sure sounds awfully official.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think Obama was guilty of some constitutional high crime.
Mind sending me a pdf copy of this protocol?
Also, who determines it?
The State Department?
Miss Manners?
Here’s the facts – there is no such thing.
We went through this during Obama’s last trip abroad.
Like “death panels” and “socialism”, it’s a FOX News bumper sticker slogan designed to whip the base into a pitchfork-raising tizzy.

If the mood of the country were generally one of content and satisfaction with our place in the world at the moment, a bow might seem like a gracious gesture. But when Americans are feeling uneasy about our place in the global economy, and our place on the global stage of international relations, then a bow takes on a whole new meaning. It comes across as servile compliance, or dutiful submissiveness. It makes Americans cringe.

Look, if you’re going to split hairs on meaningless bullshit until 2012, that's cool, but at least be man enough and say so.
Don’t pretend you object to the bow on some sort of well-founded principled ground, because you don’t.
We all know this.
As others have pointed out here, history is legion with examples of presidents breaking so-called “protocol” including Nixon buying Brezhnev a car; or more recently, Dubya giving Merkel a back rub and playing seven minutes in heaven with Saudi sheiks.
The right has NEVER missed an opportunity to paint a lib as soft on terror or appeasing America’s enemies.
Such attacks have nothing to do with the current state of the economy or international relations, and everything to do with your party’s intellectual bankruptcy.
Get off the stage.

[separate_wayz]

The issue isn't whether his bowing is proper protocol or not (answer: it isn't -- Obama seems often to have no clue, or interest in, protocol or tradition) -- the issue is that his bowing is creating a public perception of weakness and validation that his White House is amateurish and ad hoc.

Gee, SW, the word “protocol” sure sounds awfully official.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think Obama was guilty of some constitutional high crime.
Mind sending me a pdf copy of this protocol?
Also, who determines it?
The State Department?
Miss Manners?
Here’s the facts – there is no such thing.
We went through this during Obama’s last trip abroad.
Like “death panels” and “socialism”, it’s a FOX News bumper sticker slogan designed to whip the base into a pitchfork-raising tizzy.

If the mood of the country were generally one of content and satisfaction with our place in the world at the moment, a bow might seem like a gracious gesture. But when Americans are feeling uneasy about our place in the global economy, and our place on the global stage of international relations, then a bow takes on a whole new meaning. It comes across as servile compliance, or dutiful submissiveness. It makes Americans cringe.

Look, if you’re going to split hairs on meaningless bullshit until 2012, that's cool, but at least be man enough and say so.
Don’t pretend you object to the bow on some sort of well-founded principled ground, because you don’t.
We all know this.
As others have pointed out here, history is legion with examples of presidents breaking so-called “protocol” including Nixon buying Brezhnev a car; or more recently, Dubya giving Merkel a back rub and playing seven minutes in heaven with Saudi sheiks.
The right has NEVER missed an opportunity to paint a lib as soft on terror or appeasing America’s enemies.
Such attacks have nothing to do with the current state of the economy or international relations, and everything to do with your party’s intellectual bankruptcy.
Get off the stage.

Wow. Some here apparently O.D.'ed on tryptophan after gobbling turkey two days ago. I'll try to simplify for them.

Obama's bowing
1. Not necessary.
2. Makes Americans cringe.
3. Gains him no favor with anyone.
4. Gives the appearance of weakness.
5. Creates an iconic photo of his presidency (and probably an indelible image as well).

And I'll add one too:
6. Confuses personal gestures with public ones.

Just like how Obama's cultic campaign elevated the personal to the political, his public bowing confuses personal gestures with public ones. Obama (supposedly) represents the entire U.S. If so, he so act accordingly and not engage in gestures that confuse his own personal relationships with public diplomacy.

Oh, and here's your pdf summary on diplomatic protocol.
"Protocol for the Modern Diplomat"
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/99260.pdf

The "Bible" of protocol is:
"Protocol", 25 Anniversary Edition
http://www.usaprotocol.com/

No pdf for this one. You can buy your own copy with proceeds from your paper route.

By the way, I'm really enjoying how the Left/loony liberals, when they run out of ideas and credible retorts, squawk "FOX News! FOX News!". I'm pretty much convinced this has become the debating equivalent of "Mommy, they're picking on me! Make them stop!".

[The_Noble_Cause]

Oh, and here's your pdf summary on diplomatic protocol.

"Protocol for the Modern Diplomat"

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/99260.pdf

What a bitch slap...BAM! SALP! POW!

Batman couldn't have did it btter.

It says nothing about bowing.
The whole argument was that bowing is in violation of protocol.
Way to torpedo your own garbage talking point.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Wow. Some here apparently O.D.'ed on tryptophan after gobbling turkey two days ago. I'll try to simplify for them.

Obama's bowing
1. Not necessary.
2. Makes Americans cringe.

Those are your opinions and you are entitled to them.
And if that is what you believe, you should defend it without hiding behind imaginary facts about state “protocol”, and playing this forum for dumbasses.

3. Gains him no favor with anyone.

Do you live overseas?
Who are you to say that Obama’s foreign policy approach won’t have far reaching ramifications?
The Egypt speech, just as one example, where he addressed the Muslim world, was the first of its kind, and may pay dividends.
Or it won’t, I won’t bullshit my fellow posters by pretending to know how people in foreign nations think and react.
But before you skeptically say, “when did a speech ever contribute to action?”, kindly direct your attention to West Berlin and the wall that is no longer there.
After eight years of demonstrably failed cowboy tactics, I’m all for letting Obama give diplomacy a try.

4. Gives the appearance of weakness.

Only to flag waving Hannity cocksuckers insecure about their own country’s superiority, both economically and militarily.
What are you afraid of?

5. Creates an iconic photo of his presidency (and probably an indelible image as well).

Wait –
So you are officially going on record to say you want a president who governs not by what he feels is right, but by what public relations spinmasters dictate?
Not exactly my criteria for leader of the free world, but I’m glad we know where you stand.

Just like how Obama's cultic campaign elevated the personal to the political, his public bowing confuses personal gestures with public ones. Obama (supposedly) represents the entire U.S. If so, he so act accordingly and not engage in gestures that confuse his own personal relationships with public diplomacy.

I’ll ask again, according to whom?
If you have a personal problem with bows, come out and say it.
But don’t couch your partisan nitpicking under the guise of Washington officialdom and words like “protocol”, because the facts and history are not on your side.

By the way, I'm really enjoying how the Left/loony liberals, when they run out of ideas and credible retorts, squawk "FOX News! FOX News!". I'm pretty much convinced this has become the debating equivalent of "Mommy, they're picking on me! Make them stop!".

Ok, so you’re brainlessly parroting talk radio or World Net Daily talking points instead of FOX News.
There. Better?
Who cares what the origin is?
What matters is, you’re full of shit and the .pdf file you generously provided now proves it.
Petard, meet hoist. Hoist, petard.

Admittedly, I was wrong about a copy of the protocol not existing –I, along with other posters on here, had looked for it previously with no luck.
But the point still stands - bowing is not against protocol.

[Lula]

It is customary to bow in Japan.
The president was following proper protocol when addressing the leader in his country.
One could argue his bow was too low, but the action itself was appropriate and expected.

[Saint John]

It is customary to bow in Japan.

So is taking a fucking picture every 8 seconds! Why didn't he do that, too?

The president was following proper protocol when addressing the leader in his country.

Bowing to someone dressed like he just got off of a camel pisses a lot of Americans off in the post-9-11 world. Myself included.

One could argue his bow was too low, but the action itself was appropriate and expected.

I think Obama intentionally went to great lengths to show his allegiance/unity to his Muslim brother. That long-legged Muslim fuck is a giant embarrassment to this country.

[Lula]

what the hell you talkin' 'bout?

[Jana]

what the hell you talkin' 'bout?

LOL

[separate_wayz]

The issue isn't whether his bowing is proper protocol or not (answer: it isn't -- Obama seems often to have no clue, or interest in, protocol or tradition) -- the issue is that his bowing is creating a public perception of weakness and validation that his White House is amateurish and ad hoc.

Gee, SW, the word “protocol” sure sounds awfully official.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think Obama was guilty of some constitutional high crime.
Mind sending me a pdf copy of this protocol?
Also, who determines it?
The State Department?
Miss Manners?
Here’s the facts – there is no such thing.
We went through this during Obama’s last trip abroad.
Like “death panels” and “socialism”, it’s a FOX News bumper sticker slogan designed to whip the base into a pitchfork-raising tizzy.

If the mood of the country were generally one of content and satisfaction with our place in the world at the moment, a bow might seem like a gracious gesture. But when Americans are feeling uneasy about our place in the global economy, and our place on the global stage of international relations, then a bow takes on a whole new meaning. It comes across as servile compliance, or dutiful submissiveness. It makes Americans cringe.

Look, if you’re going to split hairs on meaningless bullshit until 2012, that's cool, but at least be man enough and say so.
Don’t pretend you object to the bow on some sort of well-founded principled ground, because you don’t.
We all know this.
As others have pointed out here, history is legion with examples of presidents breaking so-called “protocol” including Nixon buying Brezhnev a car; or more recently, Dubya giving Merkel a back rub and playing seven minutes in heaven with Saudi sheiks.
The right has NEVER missed an opportunity to paint a lib as soft on terror or appeasing America’s enemies.
Such attacks have nothing to do with the current state of the economy or international relations, and everything to do with your party’s intellectual bankruptcy.
Get off the stage.

Bowing by one head-of-state to another is clearly against protocol -– heads-of-state in international relations are sovereign equals. So any posters on this forum who think bowing by an American President to the Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party Chairman is in accordance with protocol are, in fact, dumbasses.

(By the way, bowing in China -- as Obama did to Wen Jiabao -- has not been customary since the Ming Dynasty.)

Incidentally: would any posters here accept an American president bowing to a Fuhrer? How about one bowing to a South African president under apartheid? Didn't think so.

So please address the following points below:

1. Provide evidence that there is “necessity” in bowing.
2. Some American do cringe at Obama bowing, especially to a Communist Party Chair.
3. Provide evidence that bowing gains anything.
4. The U.S. is superior economically and militarily to any other major state. Superior heads of state do not bow to those inferior.
5. A photo that will survive our lifetimes showing clumsy obsequiousness of an American President is hardly a matter of “spin.”

Personal-political: That a U.S. President represents the country, and not just himself, in international relations is substantiated by Article II –- he is the commander-in-chief. If Obama just wants to represent himself, then he can go back to being a private citizen and not be a head of state –- this is not seriously an arguable point. Then he can bow all he wants.

Re: Fox News being more balanced/unbiased than any other network:
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/facu ... Bias.8.htm

[The_Noble_Cause]

Look, if you’re going to split hairs on meaningless bullshit until 2012, that's cool, but at least be man enough and say so.
Don’t pretend you object to the bow on some sort of well-founded principled ground, because you don’t.
We all know this.
As others have pointed out here, history is legion with examples of presidents breaking so-called “protocol” including Nixon buying Brezhnev a car; or more recently, Dubya giving Merkel a back rub and playing seven minutes in heaven with Saudi sheiks.
The right has NEVER missed an opportunity to paint a lib as soft on terror or appeasing America’s enemies.
Such attacks have nothing to do with the current state of the economy or international relations, and everything to do with your party’s intellectual bankruptcy.
Get off the stage.

Bowing by one head-of-state to another is clearly against protocol -– heads-of-state are in international relations are sovereign equals. So any posters on this forum who think bowing by an American President to the Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party Chairman is in accordance with protocol are, in fact, dumbasses.

What the hell is this?
You already responded to the post above.
You don’t get to hide below decks until your disproven propaganda has blown over, and then repeat the same big lie hoping everyone here is none the wiser.
Your much-hyped copy of State Department protocol said NOTHING about bowing.
That’s it.
Game over.
There are no mulligans in the full contact, bloodsport cage-match of MR political jousting.
Unless you’ve brought new smoking gun evidence to the table, consider this issue a done deal.

By the way, bowing in China -- as Obama did to Wen Jiabao -- has not been customary since the Ming Dynasty. Incidentally: would any posters here accept an American president bowing to a Fuhrer? How about one bowing to a South African president under apartheid? Didn't think so.

Why not?
We accepted Nixon bowing to Emperor Hirohito, who approved Pearl Harbor; as well as Chairman Mao, whose track record of human rights abuses and murder makes Wen Jiabao look like a piker.
Mark my words – four or eight years down the road, President Sarah Palin will greet world leaders with a folksy “Howdy!”, and one strap of her overalls undone to permit her newborn to suckle her like a piglet, and we won’t hear one godamned highfalutin syllable out of GOP hacks like you about impropriety or protocol - just as we didn’t hear jack when Bush got whisker burn in the rose garden from the Saudi sheiks.

So please address the following points below:

1. Provide evidence that there is “necessity” in bowing.

You’re the one making the case that bowing is against protocol.
The burden of proof is on YOU.
Nobody here said bowing is necessary.
If you had one iota of intellectual honesty, you would admit that greeting world leaders is presidential prerogative and past presidents have done far worse to much less feigned outrage.

2.Some American do cringe at Obama bowing, especially to a Communist Party Chair.

If it bothers you so much, maybe you should spend more time speaking out against having China as our chief trading partner, rather than something as stupid and insignificant as a bow.

3. Provide evidence that bowing gains anything.

Nobody said it does.
You seem to be real good at setting up and knocking down your own straw arguments, less so when it concerns actual facts.
Here’s what we DO know– eight years of George Bush cowboy diplomacy brought America careening perilously close toward a Dr. Strangelove moment.
After that, Obama could greet leaders by putting daisies in their hair and loading the teleprompter with Dan Fogelberg lyrics.
I could not give less of a blue fuck.

4.The U.S. is superior economically and militarily to any other major state. Superior heads of state do not bow to those inferior.

Says who?
A history of presidents ranging from Clinton to Bush Sr. to Reagan to Nixon to Eisenhower would seem to suggest otherwise.

5.A photo that will survive our lifetimes showing clumsy obsequiousness of an American President is hardly a matter of “spin.”

Sure it is.
Photos and video currently exist of past American presidents curling up alongside foreign leaders.
Nobody cares.
The only time they’re even remembered is when a dumb right winger like yourself accuses a liberal of unprecedented treason, and someone has to bring up all the times other presidents have made nicey-nicey with evil incarnate.
The fact that you think Obama's bowing is some sort of historical singularity just goes to show what a meaningless bitchfest this is.

Personal-political: That a U.S. President represents the country, and not just himself, in international relations is substantiated by Article II –- he is the commander-in-chief. If Obama just wants to represent himself, then he can go back to being a private citizen and not be a head of state –- this is not seriously an arguable point. Then he can bow all he wants.

Uhh, the President is a civilian leader.
The title of Commander in Chief is applicable only to the military and the navy.
If you want to live under military junta, go move to Burma.
Once again, YOU may have a personal problem with bowing, but neither the State Department nor the Constitution forbids it – despite you best attempts to bastardize both.

[separate_wayz]

What the hell is this?
You already responded to the above post.
You don’t get to hide below decks until your disproven propaganda has blown over, and then repeat the same big lie hoping everyone here is none the wiser.
Your much-hyped copy of State Department protocol said NOTHING about bowing.
That’s it.
Game over.
There are no mulligans in the full contact, bloodsport cage-match of MR political jousting.
Unless you’ve brought new smoking gun evidence to the table, consider this issue a done deal.

Huh? Sorry, friend -- the burden of proof is on *you* to demonstrate why just a series of obsequious, stupid gestures shouldn't be reviled by everyone back home in the U.S., and smirked at by leaders overseas.

Oh, and if this is "full contact, bloodsport cage-match political jousting", you're sitting on the sidelines with the girls and the peanut vendors.

Why not?
We accepted Nixon bowing to Emperor Hirohito, who approved Pearl Harbor; as well as Chairman Mao, whose track record of human rights abuses and murder makes Wen Jiabao look like a piker.
Mark my words – four or eight years down the road, President Sarah Palin will greet world leaders with a folksy “Howdy!”, and one strap of her overalls undone to permit her newborn to suckle her like a piglet, and we won’t hear one godamned highfalutin syllable out of GOP hacks like you about impropriety or protocol - just as we didn’t hear jack when Bush got whisker burn in the rose garden from the Saudi sheiks.

Totally stupid and misses the point, as usual for you (unless you're being intentionally obtuse, parroting your bullshit from the politico.com website).

Nixon didn't bow to Chairman Mao -- he nodded his head after shaking hands with him. (Again: sovereign actors in international relations, not subservience.) Show me a deep, boot-kissing bow like Obama has done. Even if I concede the point about Nixon bowing (and I absolutely do not), he was at the same time splitting the Sino-Soviet alliance and arming Taiwan to the teeth. Understand the difference? Any gestures by Nixon were tied to policies that clearly affirmed and strong national interests.

So where's the Deep Obama Bow by Nixon, huh?? Show me the the video. (Answer: it doesn't exist, like so many other of your bullshit when someone follows up on it.)

By the way -- I do enjoy the comparisons with Nixon, and I think they'll be a lot more over the next four years (but not the complimentary ones).

You’re the one making the case that bowing is against protocol.
The burden of proof is on YOU.
Nobody here said bowing is necessary.
If you had one iota of intellectual honesty, you would admit that greeting world leaders is presidential prerogative and past presidents have done far worse to much less feigned outrage.

Yeah, ummm, after you lied about the Nixon assertion and the Fox News citation, I don't think you're in the position to be lecturing anyone about "intellectual honesty". But it's kind of your method of operation, isn't it? Throw out a bunch of bullshit, and by the time your "facts" are checked, they turn to be a stinking load of horseshit (and a parroting of whatever bullshit Ben Smith is pushing on politico.com).

If it bothers you so much, maybe you should spend more time speaking out against having China as our chief trading partner, rather than something as stupid and insignificant as a bow.

I'm totally against deficit spending on bankrupting entitlements that force the U.S. to go hat-in-hand into the bond market to beg for money and compromise American sovereignty. Additionally I am against all proposed new entitlements (like single-payer socialist medicine) that would obviously do more of the same.

Nobody said it does.
You seem to be real good at setting up and knocking down your own straw arguments, less so when it concerns actual facts.
Here’s what we DO know– eight years of George Bush cowboy diplomacy brought America careening perilously close toward a Dr. Strangelove moment.
After that, Obama could greet leaders by putting daisies in their hair and loading the teleprompter with Dan Fogelberg lyrics.
I seriously would not give a blue fuck.

I know you're in the mode of licking Obama's balls for the next three years, but you really should be more objective.

Says who?
A history of presidents ranging from Clinton to Bush Sr. to Reagan to Nixon to Eisenhower would seem to suggest otherwise.

Not going to address the obvious. And, again, you miss the point or are intentionally obfuscating (probably the latter).

Sure it is.
Photos and video currently exist of past American presidents curling up alongside foreign leaders.
Nobody cares.
The only time they’re even remembered is when a dumb right winger like yourself accuses a liberal of unprecedented treason, and someone has to bring up all the times other presidents have made nicey-nicey with evil incarnate throughout history.
The fact that you think Obama's bowing is some sort of historical singularity just goes to show what a meaningless bitchfest this is.

Yeah, unfortunately for you, people do care -- that's why Obama's poll ratings drop every time he flies overseas. Between his idiotic mealy-mouthing overseas and stupid ad hoc gestures, I figure he loses about 300-400,000 votes every trip, which is about right given that his approval rating is 47% and falling.

Uhh, the President is a civilian leader.
The title of Commander in Chief is applicable only to the military and the navy.
If you want to live under a military regime, you’re in the wrong place.
Once again, YOU may have a personal problem with bowing, but neither the State Department nor the Constitution forbids it – despite you best attempts to bastardize both.

Stupid and misses the point again. Hey, Obama can do The Chicken Dance for all I care -- just don't claim that it gets him anything, or that there's some vault of videos of Nixon doing the same. The best thing would be for you and all the other Obama Worshippers (and the White House itself) to admit that it was a stupid mistake and not to repeat it. But, of course, you're so into Obama worship that you can't bring yourself to admit that the guy fucked up.

On the Fox News piece, you totally misrepresented the research (again, your typical m.o.). The ACLU was an outlier in the research because they opposed the McCain-Feingold campaign contribution legislation, and that affected how they were scored. The researchers themselves brought this up and noted it. Your comment on it was irrelevant and stupid, as usual.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Huh? Sorry, friend -- the burden of proof is on *you* to demonstrate why just a series of obsequious, stupid gestures shouldn't be reviled by everyone back home in the U.S., and smirked at by leaders overseas.

I never claimed that people aren’t entitled to their own opinions.
I even stated in this very thread that “Obama's behavior is a bit much.”
You, however, asserted that the act of bowing is in direct violation of US protocol.
You made the bogus claim, now back it up.

Totally stupid and misses the point, as usual for you (unless you're being intentionally obtuse, parroting your bullshit from the politico.com website).

Nixon didn't bow to Chairman Mao -- he nodded his head after shaking hands with him. (Again: sovereign actors in international relations, not subservience.) Show me a deep, boot-kissing bow like Obama has done. Even if I concede the point about Nixon bowing (and I absolutely do not), he was at the same time splitting the Sino-Soviet alliance and arming Taiwan to the teeth. Understand the difference? Any gestures by Nixon were tied to policies that clearly affirmed and strong national interests.

Oh I see…
So first you'd have us believe bowing was never done before by any sitting president, and that Obama's head was waging an assault on all things holy, apple pie, and American, as well as violating protocol.
Now you're saying it has been done before and is OK, but only when initiated first by evil communist dictators.
Quit splitting hairs and moving the goalposts.
You know, it’d be a lot easier if you just admitted you let Rush Limbaugh tell you what to think and say.

So where's the Deep Obama Bow by Nixon, huh?? Show me the the video. (Answer: it doesn't exist, like so many other of your bullshit when someone follows up on it.)

So apparently you’re not really concerned with presidents making friendly overtures to evil tyrants, but rather the angle at which they are made.
Nixon bowing at 30 degrees is ok, but Obama at 90 degrees crosses some imaginary threshold into politically lewd and indecent behavior
A bow is a bow.
Clearly you're just making this up as you go along.
Give it up.

By the way -- I do enjoy the comparisons with Nixon, and I think they'll be a lot more over the next four years (but not the complimentary ones).

Why?
Will Obama break the Nixon-era FISA law and start illegally wiretapping people?
Oh wait – my bad, we just went through that.

But it's kind of your method of operation, isn't it? Throw out a bunch of bullshit, and by the time your "facts" are checked, they turn to be a stinking load of horseshit (and a parroting of whatever bullshit Ben Smith is pushing on politico.com).

Projection much?
Last I checked, you were the one matter o’ factly telling anyone who would listen that bowing was in violation of US protocol.
Another poster already apologetically backtracked after being caught flat-footed peddling the same BS.
Like him, you too have outed yourself as reactionary wind-up cymbal crashing monkey, the only question is, who's twisting your key?
Talk radio?
Fox News?
Spam chain emails?
Either way, I’m glad I could help expose you as the Manchurian dittohead fraud you truly are.

As for Ben Smith, never heard of him.

Not going to address the obvious. And, again, you miss the point or are intentionally obfuscating (probably the latter).

Eisenhower bowed to De Gaulle – true or false?
Bush Sr. bowed at Hirohito’s funeral – true or false?
Clinton bowed to the Japanese emperor – true or false?
It seems history is just stacked with so-called "protocol" violators.
And there’s plenty more.
You’ve yet to address Nixon buying Breshnev a car, or W giving Merkel a back massage and playing grabass with Saudi royalty, or Carter kissing Brezhnev, and it goes on and on.
“Breaking protocol” is just another trumped up fake political issue to attack the administration with.
Just like the times Obama purportedly called Palin a “lipstick pig” (he didn’t), or Kerry attacked Iraqi troops (also didn’t happen).
Luckily for GOP officials, they have an endless reserve of dirt stupid rank-and-file more than willing to go on the attack - facts and truth be fucked.

Yeah, unfortunately for you, people do care -- that's why Obama's poll ratings drop every time he flies overseas. Between his idiotic mealy-mouthing overseas and stupid ad hoc gestures, I figure he loses about 300-400,000 votes every trip, which is about right given that his approval rating is 47% and falling.

I couldn’t care less about Q ratings.
Do you have proof that bowing is against protocol or not?

Stupid and misses the point again. Hey, Obama can do The Chicken Dance for all I care -- just don't claim that it gets him anything,

Nobody in this thread has claimed bowing will bring about world peace.
More strawmen.
Like any President at this early stage, the jury is still out on what ramifications his foreign policy will have, if any.
If McCain was President, I'd adopt the same cautious wait-and-see approach. Same is true with the economy.

...or that there's some vault of videos of Nixon doing the same.

Nixon bowed and talked with our enemies.
I don’t care how you choose to micro-analytically parse it.
Them’s the facts.
And just like now, the right wing crazies went apeshit over it too.

The best thing would be for you and all the other Obama Worshippers (and the White House itself) to admit that it was a stupid mistake and not to repeat it. But, of course, you're so into Obama worship that you can't bring yourself to admit that the guy fucked up.

A “stupid mistake” and a “fuck up” by whose or what standards?
Your own?
Surely, you don’t mean State Department “protocol”.
That’s already been ruled out, and you were caught lying.

On the Fox News piece, you totally misrepresented the research (again, your typical m.o.). The ACLU was an outlier in the research because they opposed the McCain-Feingold campaign contribution legislation, and that affected how they were scored. The researchers themselves brought this up and noted it. Your comment on it was irrelevant and stupid, as usual.

Look, I don’t need a study from some university (say, aren’t those ivory towers’ supposed to be teeming with communists anyways?) to tell me up from down and black from white.
I’ll trust my own lying eyes, thanks just the same.
Fox News, with the exception of Shep Smith, isn’t remotely Fair and Balanced.
Most of my Republican friends turn it on just to laugh.
If you think it's a legitimate news network, I truly pity you.
See, that’s the fundamental difference between a liberal and a conservative.
I turn on MSNBC and am keenly aware that I am being fed ideological comfort food.
You guys turn on Sean Hannity and think you’re hearing the immutable word of God.