Doh-bama Bows To Saudi King

[Madame Vengier]

He apparently did not do so for Queen Elizabeth. But she also has the common sense not to require it nor expect it, for obvious reasons.

Video: [url="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/04/obama_bows_down_to_saudi_king.html"]http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/0...saudi_king.html[/url]

He sickens me.

[Vincent Vega]

I swear...
And they said Bush was dumb.

[Resurrexi]

I don't see what the problem is. I'm sure Obama would bow to a dance partner...

[ardillacid]

That is disgusting. Of all the stupid things.

[Lilllabettt]

Big deal. Americans Presidents are famous for messing up this protocol stuff. Americans in general, not having monarchs of our own, are typically ignorant or forgetful of how to behave. The foreign press knows this about us, so they were all keyed up waiting to say "gotcha!" when it happened. As expected, the First Lady touched a Queen and the President bowed to a King. Fear not, the sense of outrage will pass.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1823032' date='Apr 2 2009, 09:24 PM']I don't see what the problem is. I'm sure Obama would bow to a dance partner...[/quote]
There's a huge symbolic difference there.
While one would genuflect before a girl to whom one was proposing, the Pope, and the Most Blessed Sacrament, each indicating some level of respect and honour given to each, the intent and amount of honour varies.
Similarly, one bows to a dance partner out of respect; one bows to a king out of submission. [i]That's[/i] the problem.

Edited April 3, 2009 by USAirwaysIHS

[Brother Adam]

What do you expect from a head of state that gives a queen an ipod. Different situation entirely than when the Holy Father received one as a gift - it wasn't from a visiting head of state.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Brother Adam' post='1823155' date='Apr 3 2009, 12:22 AM']What do you expect from a head of state that gives a queen an ipod. Different situation entirely than when the Holy Father received one as a gift - it wasn't from a visiting head of state.[/quote]


I have heard that she requested the ipod. But, even if that were true one I believe she should have been given an additional gift along with it, one more appropriate for a head of state.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Lilllabettt' post='1823038' date='Apr 2 2009, 10:30 PM']Big deal. Americans Presidents are famous for messing up this protocol stuff. Americans in general, not having monarchs of our own, are typically ignorant or forgetful of how to behave. The foreign press knows this about us, so they were all keyed up waiting to say "gotcha!" when it happened. As expected, the First Lady touched a Queen and the President bowed to a King. Fear not, the sense of outrage will pass.[/quote]


You make me laugh. Interesting that this "not a big deal" didn't happen with Queen Elizabeth, only to the Saudi King. Again, there is common sense to be applied here. And there is protocol, which he and his staff should be apprised of.

He bowed to the king because HE WANTED TO.

[Archaeology cat]

Wow.

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1823282' date='Apr 3 2009, 11:28 AM']I have heard that she requested the ipod. But, even if that were true one I believe she should have been given an additional gift along with it, one more appropriate for a head of state.[/quote]
[url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/apr/02/barack-obama-presents-queen-ipod"]He did also give a songbook[/url] signed by Rodgers (the Rodgers & Hammerstein Rodgers). That seems like a bit of an improvement, especially since I read Her Majesty likes their musicals.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1823094' date='Apr 2 2009, 10:24 PM']There's a huge symbolic difference there.
While one would genuflect before a girl to whom one was proposing, the Pope, and the Most Blessed Sacrament, each indicating some level of respect and honour given to each, the intent and amount of honour varies.
Similarly, one bows to a dance partner out of respect; one bows to a king out of submission. [i]That's[/i] the problem.[/quote]

I think maybe Resurrexi was implying that the King and Obama are political dance partners.

[XIX]

Re-posting because it really needs to be said...

[quote name='XIX' post='1815900' date='Mar 24 2009, 11:45 PM']My point isn't so much about gallow humor. Just to be clear, my point was that when Bush did something stupid, he was ridiculed from the sidelines similar to the way Obama is right now. Time will tell whether Omama-isms ever catch fire in the same magnitude that Bush-isms did, but if you really look at it objectively, this isn't very different from what liberals did to Bush for eight years.

Politicians are publicized and scrutinized on a constant basis. Every single action is analyzed and mercilessly picked apart (even when it's a media darling like Obama). Reason being, it's the information age. It's the internet age. We have immediate access to literally everything a President does in the open. Translation: Obama is under a constant microscope. Constant. Him being given a free pass by the MSM isn't going to stop the alternative media from jumping on him when they get the chance.

It's like a giant interview. Obama is trying to sell himself everywhere he goes. He's going to do the "right thing" a lot, but sooner or later, the law of averages will bite him in the butt o and he'll do the wrong thing. That's all this is. He did something stupid. If people hear you talking long enough eventually they will hear you say something pathetically dumb. That goes for anybody.

Do you think it's a coincidence that the most quotable President in our nation's history was also the first President since the internet became popular?

That is why I don't care about verbal gaffes. It's just people getting stuck and doing the wrong thing on spur of the moment. It happens. It happens to everybody. I didn't care when Bush said whatever he said. I didn't care when Howard Dean went "rRRRAAAAAAHHHHH!!!11" I didn't care when Sarah Palin got stumped in that interview, or that she publicized her frustration with the way the media portrayed her. I didn't care when Pelosi said that 500 million Americans lose their jobs every month. I don't care that Obama accidentally thanked himself. And I don't care about this.

I care insofar as I know it affects pubic perception of a particular politician. I care that every dumb thing that Obama does theoretically decreases his chances at getting re-elected. Hopefully, something like this will undermine the Dems for awhile. But that's it. It doesn't affect my own opinion of a politician. I don't think less of politician for being less-than-slick in front of a microphone, or even for using a teleprompter. Generally, my opinion of a politician is cemented by his views on important moral issues, especially abortion. My opinion changes if their convictions change (or more accurately, if my perception of a politician's views change).

I hate to be "that guy" who compares everything I don't like to Hitler, but it's worth mentioning that he was one of the greatest public speakers this planet has ever seen. [b]Ability to portray yourself well in public does not make you a good politician. Morals do. Values do.[/b]

[b]Let's not forget that Obama was elected by people who, largely, cared more about appearances than about values.[/b] Obama was elected in spite of his views on abortion, not because of them.[/quote]
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=91979&st=20&start=20"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...20&start=20[/url]

Seriously. Enough with this picking of nits.

[Fidei Defensor]

oh my, must be a conspiracy!

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1823955' date='Apr 3 2009, 07:00 PM']oh my, must be a conspiracy![/quote]

No conspiracy. Just the worst president since JFK.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='T-Bone _' post='1823968' date='Apr 3 2009, 07:05 PM']No conspiracy. Just the worst president since JFK.[/quote]
Don't be absurd, [i]everything[/i] is a conspiracy! Don't you watch the news?