This Could Have Been Ugly

Say what you will about our first lady, but she has cat like quickness ( the dirty little WH secret is that she can take Barry to the hoop all day long), but here she gets the hair and the dress:

Bravo, and thanks for sparing the rest of us. I, for one, am glad I did not get a gander at her Malcom X marks the spot undies.

And is that Camilla behind the pres.? What, no gaudy hat? and you call yourself British.

Last year we saw a pick of Obama ogling some nice Spanish butts with Sarkozy. Now, he is trying to look down the queen’s dress, what’s up with that?

And that guard is really ticking me off, I thought I was the only one that had a pair of those boots.

The good news is that Obama does not have a champagne glass in his hand, from now on the only toast he will be giving is ,“Here’s to the ideal woman; Who could ask for more? She’s deaf ‘n dumb, oversexed, and owns a liquor store”.

Comments are closed.

  1. JimK

    Okay, sorry for editing your headline rich but you know how nails sound on a chalkboard to the right people? Your grammar error did that to my brainteeth. I had to fix it.

    I solemnly vow I will NEVER, EVER edit anyone’s posts for content (BOCTAOE), but I WILL edit for formatting, and if it’s a headline (which is also the URL) I will edit for spelling and grammar because those go in the Googleplex Permanent Record.

    Thumb up 0

  2. Poosh

    I would like your filthy president to leave our country please.

    Sorry if that is offensive, but I’m sick to my stomach. Obama has spent the last two years insulting the British, causing us offence, insulting our Queen and former Prime Minister, bashing out and diminishing the ‘special relationship’… and then comes here for a 3 day or whatever big photo-op. This 2012 photo-opp is offensive.

    I don’t know why one bothers though, most of the Obama Admin’s insults towards the British was hidden from the general public, and the American public no doubt. I wouldn’t have been aware of it if not for blogs like this and others.

    Sigh.

    Thumb up 2

  3. Rann

    This 2012 photo-opp is offensive.

    A lot of us over here aren’t too thrilled about it either. Nor his other actions towards the British.

    I’d apologize for him, but that would be admitting association with him. I prefer to think of him as some sort of crazy person that just wandered into the White House and started saying he was President, and everyone was just too soft-hearted to throw him out. (No, not really, but it makes a funny one-liner.)

    Thumb up 1

  4. Kimpost

    Those are pretty strong feelings. What has Obama (+ administration) done to the British? Surely we aren’t talking about bows, toasts and DVD’s? :)

    Thumb up 0

  5. AlexInCT

    I am with you there Poosh. This feels like Obama pissing on your leg and telling you not to worry because it’s just warm rain. And yes, the media here has done a bang up job hiding Obama’s mishandling of our allies.

    BTW, did you see how he signed some book with a May 24th, 2008 date? No, you didn’t? Can you imagine how this would have been in the news cycle 24/7 with the elite scum in the MSM making fun of Bush and his intelligence if he had done something like this? Obama does more gaffes, and yet neary a peep. Go figure.

    Thumb up 1

  6. InsipiD

    I would like your filthy president to leave our country please.

    I was so hoping that you’d keep him. If not, could you try getting him really drunk and leaving him in Calais or something? I think the continentals are still pretty smitten

    Thumb up 0

  7. CM

    Don’t forget the Churchill bust! (You know, the one that was LOANED to BUSH – as confirmed by both the US and the UK)

    Thumb up 0

  8. InsipiD

    He’s talked a better game today, but he’s been dismissive of Britain’s value as an ally before and attributed similar relationships to less cooperative or valuable countries. Basically, his strategy with the UK is similar to Israel: turn his back on years of excellent good will and attempt to embrace the rivals instead.

    His disgraceful behavior is a minor infraction by comparison. I want the American President to respectfully follow protocol and be polite while making it clear that he and the US bow to and are subjects of no one. Obama has done a terrible job of that.

    Thumb up 0

  9. CM

    Can you give me the ‘dismissive as an ally’ quotes, they must have passed me by.
    How has he turned his back on Israel and embraced their ‘rivals’? I don’t see it.

    Disgraceful behavior? Where? What?

    I almost get the feeling there is a parallel universe going on here….

    Who has suggested that the US are anyone’s subjects? That’s a bit binary isn’t it?

    Thumb up 0

  10. Rann

    Hm. Lemme check my Leftist Playbook…

    Is this the part where I say “Well, Poe’s Law, even if he was being satirical it was so close to the truth no one could tell”? I’m a little confused, because this thing makes no sense, like it wasn’t meant to be comprehended by a rational mind…

    Thumb up 0

  11. Kimpost

    While Israel – Palestine is a huge subject of its own, and I don’t agree with the premise of Obama being anti-Israel by any standards, I would at least acknowledge that there are two sides of a conflict there.

    But the British? Who are the rivals he’s siding with? Scottish separatists?

    Thumb up 0

  12. Kimpost

    You’ve missed the Youtube clips of Obama bowing (= being someone’s bitch) left and right?

    Here’s one focusing on Obama’s visit to Japan. Look at all the other leaders doing it just right, while Obama is being either submissive or disrespectful, most likely both. It’s an outrage. Too bad the Japanese didn’t see it, until after it became an issue in US. ;)

    Thumb up 0

  13. CM

    For sure there are two legitimate sides to the conflict. That seems to be his stance too. I think your comments in the forum on this topic are spot on.

    Thumb up 0

  14. CM

    The narrative is so bizarre that its satire by itself. I like the line about how if it wasn’t for obscure right-wing political blogs, he’s wouldn’t even have known the narrative existed (much like Kimpost says about the Japanese and the bowing).

    Thumb up 0

  15. JimK

    I wonder if there is *anything* of substance that Obama’s fans can admit that he hasn’t done well, and “He hasn’t communicated his plans efficiently” is not an acceptable answer to me. Further, I wonder if they are capable of admitting that he’s made genuine, actual mistakes. Even ones that in the long run don’t actually matter.

    My guess is no. Obama does nothing wrong in the eyes of some. Ever. Which is, to my way of thinking, much worse than ODS. Or BDS. Or even CDS, the most acceptable presidential derangement syndrome of them all.

    Thumb up 0

  16. Miguelito

    I missed it.. was it “could of”?

    If so, thanks for fixing: “would of” and “could of” drive me nuts too.

    I see where it comes from though.. people hear things like could’ve said like “could of” and think that’s the phrase.

    Thumb up 0

  17. Rann

    Or even CDS, the most acceptable presidential derangement syndrome of them all.

    Or NDS, which is probably even more common and permeating, at the very least.

    But yeah, I was thinking the other day, maybe we could call it OWS: Obama Worship Syndrome. Bonus points for sounding like “o/` Ohhhh, the world OWS me a livin’! o/`”

    Thumb up 0

  18. Kimpost

    Oh, I have plenty of Obama criticism. But they are all about actual policies. They are not about which pastor he went to church with. They are not about him really being a Muslim, while just pretending to be Christian. They are not about him bowing or not bowing and they are not about region coded DVD’s.

    Here’s a short list of areas where I have disagreements with him, or his administration.

    – The Patriot Act should be scrapped.
    – Gitmo should be closed.
    – Rendition should be stopped.
    – When will enemy combatants be brought to justice?
    – Biden’s “anti-piracy” push is highly intrusive, and counter productive.
    – Gay marriage and gay adoptions should be legalized.
    – Lack of transparency just is no good. That’s why Wikileaks and similar organisations are so necessary.
    – Israel and Palestine, even if he’s arguable better than the predecessor.
    – Killing people without due process.

    Mostly human rights criticism, as you can see. Since I follow US politics out of interest I have personal opinions regarding domestic issues as well, even if those don’t affect me any more (my sister just recently moved back from the US).

    – Secure the border and push for comprehensive immigration reform. The issues are deeply connected. One can’t be done without the other.
    – Push for a proper national debate on your education system. There’s a disturbing trend of religious groups pushing their agenda on your public school system. Evolution and ID (creationism) are not theories of equal stature to be discussed in science class.
    – I believe that health care is an inalienable human right.
    – Tone down the militarism (and save a ton of money doing so)
    – Reform Social Security and Medicare to make them solvent.
    – I want to see a higher retirement age.
    – I want more nuclear if necessary. I prefer nuclear over fossil fuels any day.
    – Either reform or end the war on drugs.
    – Push for making three strikes laws illegal.
    – Abolish the death penalty.

    Thumb up 0

  19. Poosh

    I wrote a load of stuff out but then came across this link which does everything, there was a leaked comment by an Obama Official staying there “is no special relationship” and that we are not bonded any more than say any other country, I tried to google for that link but for some odd reason I could not find it. It was no doubt blogged on here, however, and many other blogs.

    Thumb up 0

  20. Poosh

    I caught the 2008 think on Atlas Shrugs blog actually. You’re right, if Bush did it it would be all over the news cycle.

    Thumb up 0

  21. JimK

    Not many of those things is anything that could be laid at Obama’s feet. You have problems with the United States Government’s official positions. Virtually everything on your list is simply policy of the United States regardless of leadership. Some of them are horseshit IMHO, and some of them the Feds have no goddamned business being involved in. I know is not easy for a non-US citizen to grasp the idea that the national government should be restrained, but the White House is not and SHOULD NOT be responsible for education policy at the local school board level. Does this mean *some* (and you are blowing it way out of proportion) school boards are overly influenced by Bible thumpers. Yes. Such is the price of having a United STATES of America, and not just say, America.

    The nuke thing though…now we’re talking. He personally pushed to shut down Yucca and reduce any chance of new nuke plants. His ideas on energy policy are at best naive, and at worst destructive to the nation both financially and industrially.

    Thumb up 0

  22. Poosh

    I’m not. I studied the 2008 election and watched Obama’s behavior carefully. He is a disgusting egotist and a liar. Remember that stunt he pulled during your Candidate Debates where he claimed a dead soldier’s parents had asked him to remember or say something and then LIVE could not remember the name of the dead soldier: it said everything you need to know about him.

    He sidelined and went out of his way to ignore Prime Minster Brown, after his election, despite British troops bleeding and dying for an “american” war. I have nothing but hatred for him, he disgusts me. On top of this I’d suggest to you that ACTUALLY he did steal the election, from Clinton. There seems to be a great deal of evidence that he stole the nomination from Clinton.

    Thumb up 0

  23. Poosh

    WOAH, wait. Region coded DVDs isn’t an issue? Obama has PAID GUYS to work out what gifts to give. Don’t try and trivialize an issue you know was a direct insult towards the Prime Minister. It doesn’t wash.

    Policies matter, but so does symbolism: it SHOWS what’s driving the policy.

    A vile cretin can implement decent policy and thus appear good – but the actions and symbols that often go unnoticed demonstrate the CHARACTER and MATERIAL of/that makes the man. Pay attention to the little touches. Like George W. Bush queuing in line for the toilets like everyone else, when it was perfectly fine for him to use the “i’m the president” pass. The things that go under the radar to the average viewer are the MOST important.

    Thumb up 1

  24. Kimpost

    I understand how your government works on fed, state and local levels. That doesn’t mean that Obama can’t push for things, or have public opinions. His words have influence. I’m not saying that he should sign executive orders left and right. If he did, I would add that to the list.

    Thumb up 0

  25. Kimpost

    Unless you can show that Obama deliberately gifted a region coded DVD, to make some kind of unimaginable point, I call it hogwash.

    There’s symbolism and there’s symbolism, and sometimes there just isn’t any.

    Thumb up 0

  26. CM

    I’m not.

    Ah, ok. I picked it wrong.

    Remember that stunt he pulled during your Candidate Debates where he claimed a dead soldier’s parents had asked him to remember or say something and then LIVE could not remember the name of the dead soldier: it said everything you need to know about him.

    I’m always very suspicious when people pick one thing and use that to say “that’s everything you need to know about him”. It doesn’t exactly suggest that you’re being objective.
    Would you agree with someone who said that about something Bush did (hell, pick any of the times he misspoke)? Or would you say that person was suffering from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)?
    (BTW, I’m not American, and I don’t live there, I’m just an interested bystander)

    He sidelined and went out of his way to ignore Prime Minster Brown, after his election, despite British troops bleeding and dying for an “american” war. I have nothing but hatred for him, he disgusts me.

    Ok well anyone who said they hated Bush, and/or that he disgusted them, would be immediately written off as suffering from BDS. So saying that about Obama might just be seen as the same thing.
    Can you give me a link or two about this sidelining and ignoring of Brown?

    On top of this I’d suggest to you that ACTUALLY he did steal the election, from Clinton. There seems to be a great deal of evidence that he stole the nomination from Clinton.

    Is anyone even remotely treating that as credible. If it were credible, don’t you think it would have been used by now (if credible, it would CERTAINLY be a much much better tool than the stupid birth certificate thing)?

    Thumb up 0

  27. JimK

    Wait, so Obama’s OPINIONS on local education policy have weight, but the amount of consideration he and his staff give the leaders of other nations doesn’t mean anything? Even when it’s demonstrated time and time again that he doesn’t give consideration on a basic level? This ain’t a dotty old gramma giving you the same sweater again. International gifts between leaders are and always have been a big fucking deal.

    Interesting set of beliefs you have there. I notice the common element is that Obama is not at fault no matter what the circumstance.

    Thumb up 2

  28. CM

    Forgot what I said before about one-issue defining someone. Anyone who believes sending region coded DVD’s was a deliberate insult (without any evidence) is, frankly, suffering a derangement syndrome.

    Thumb up 0

  29. Kimpost

    One would be a clear opinion on a given subject. The other would be a subjective analysis of one man’s actions. It’s just your opinion that Obama doesn’t give consideration. Unless of course Obama has stated that he doesn’t care? Or someone in his staff might have said as much? Wikileaks? Anyone?

    P.S. People have DVD players that aren’t region free?

    Thumb up 0

  30. Poosh

    It was credible enough that Hilary Clinton and her people thought it was so.

    Actually, you CAN if you catch it right, judge someone from a few actions or off-the-cuff words. You can tell a lot and sometimes everything you need to know. Of course, I would not suggest living like that… but do not consider my one example (which is the one that stays in my mind) the only example to base this on. It is a culmination.

    But break it down. Obama, an intelligent man with an excellent memory – smarter in an academic sense to most of us – claimed this one dead soldier held great importance to him etc (i forget the claim). But then he forgets the name?

    I put the link up above somewhere, I think the sidelining part was in there.

    Thumb up 0

  31. CM

    I have many of the same issues (it’s probably clear by now that Kimpost and I are in agreement on a remarkably large number of issues). However I don’t really care about issues that are solely domestic, beyond a general interest and intellectual (arguing)level anyway. But on the others I certainly hold the current President at least somewhat responsible for some of them. On Gitmo prisoners I find Obama’s position to be WORSE than Bush. Greenwald at Salon set it all out pretty well.

    I wonder if there is *anything* of substance that Obama’s fans can admit that he hasn’t done well, and “He hasn’t communicated his plans efficiently” is not an acceptable answer to me. Further, I wonder if they are capable of admitting that he’s made genuine, actual mistakes. Even ones that in the long run don’t actually matter.

    My guess is no. Obama does nothing wrong in the eyes of some. Ever. Which is, to my way of thinking, much worse than ODS. Or BDS. Or even CDS, the most acceptable presidential derangement syndrome of them all.

    If one is an Obama ‘fan’ then I would guess you’d be right. A ‘fan’ is unlikely to have (or at least state out loud) criticisms. These days I think there probably are people that come across as fans, but that’s only because they’ve scared that if they criticise then they’ll be labelled as an Obama hater, or a Republican, or a conservative. I’m sure it was the same when Bush was President too.

    So, on the flipside, is there *anything* of substance that Obama’s detractors (and haters) can admit that he has done well? E.g. Rich pointed out the ‘It Will Get Better Campaign” in a previous thread. But I didn’t see anyone else agree.

    BTW, just to be clear, I see the ‘Derangement Syndrome’ as being applied when someone isn’t being rational or objective. It doesn’t apply when someone sincerely holds a different view (no matter how strongly they hold that view). The Syndrome inherently needs a degree of unreasonableness. E.g. opposing the Iraq War (and even going out to protest it) doesn’t automatically mean BDS. Objecting to Obamacare and attending a Tea Party rally doesn’t inherently suggest ODS.

    Thumb up 0

  32. InsipiD

    The French! Pretending the French are half as important to us or, for that matter, the world, shows Obama’s total misunderstanding of US political relations.

    Thumb up 0

  33. Poosh

    Without evidence? The DVDs are LITERALLY evidence.

    “The Prime Minister gave Mr Obama an ornamental pen holder made from the timbers of the Victorian anti-slave ship HMS Gannet”

    Obama gave him, a man almost blind in one eye, some crappy DVDs that WEREN’T even in the right region. Look, I don’t know you, but you can’t be politically aware or knowledgeable about the political sphere if you think this is just a silly little thing that happened.

    Obama proceeded to insult OUR QUEEN by giving her some shitty mp player with his shitty speeches in. That is not derangement. That’s an insult.

    “So, what did President Obama give the British PM? 25 movies on DVD. Yeah, that’s it. Brown gives a symbolic gift like the pen holder fashioned from a famous British warship and Obama responds by sending a staffer to WalMart to pick up a few quick movies.

    HERE

    Thumb up 1

  34. InsipiD

    I recognize that Region free DVD players are basically the norm in Australia and maybe New Zealand, too, but the region code is pretty strongly enforced in the US. I wanted to watch a UK DVD set that I bought a while back on something other than a computer. It took me some careful research to find a player that could be hacked to be region free. The big name-brand ones are almost universally unhackable, leaving the cheap ones from dollar stores to be the most likely to work for other region discs. Further, until flat panels became common, you had to make sure that the player could convert from PAL to NTSC, which not all of them can do (most US flat panels I’ve tried work ok with a PAL signal). I’m not sure whether the region codes are as big a deal in UK/EU countries, but it would only be ignorance of the subject that would cause a worldly person to give wrong-region DVDs as an international gift. I would generally take it for granted that it wouldn’t play overseas unless I knew for sure otherwise.

    Additionally, it was kind of a cheap and tacky gift, even ignoring its cluelessness.

    I suggest that next time Brown should give Obama a box set of Shameless. There’s a tacky gift that couldn’t go to a better person.

    Thumb up 0

  35. CM

    Your link to American Thinker? Could you possibly get a more biased piece? It’s very very very thin. It’s all conjecture. The writer is linking together conjecture (his father hated the British, the bust thing, insulting the Queen, not saying ‘special relationship’, etc etc) to form a narrative.

    By all accounts Obama and his wife get on well with the Queen and Prince Phillip.

    Thumb up 0

  36. Poosh

    Gordon Brown is like blind in one eye so maybe a “top 100 dance tunes” CD is a better gift for the Prime Minister of America’s most loyal ally … but whatever! I’m suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome omgzzz

    Thumb up 1

  37. JimK

    Sorry, I do not believe that stating you don’t give a shit is the only empirical evidence allowed that demonstrates you don’t give a shit. I reject the very idea that one has to clearly state a thing before it can be said about you. We’re just never going to agree on that.

    P.S. People have DVD players that aren’t region free?

    Well, I have one that isn’t. But three that are. Although one of them has to be manually changed from region to region with – get this – dip switches. It’s *old*. But I keep it, because I’m a gadget packrat. I have a basement full of old technology. :)

    Thumb up 0

  38. CM

    The gifting of the DVD’s are not ‘evidence’ of anything. Other than Obama gave a gift of DVD’s. The rest is your interpretation.
    Honestly, your link provides a link of its own which apparently illustrates “the entire British press is up in arms” but which is actually a piece on the Guardian’s filmblog section and which says nothing of the sort. That’s the best evidence they could find?? At best, it mentions that the Daily Mail had a problem with it (which, having laughed my way through many issues of that newspapers left behind on the tube, is about the least surprising thing in the world)

    By the way, to be taken seriously by those who have different opinion you should really select some better links to provide ‘evidence – so far you’ve selected very biased low-brow opinion pieces from American Thinker and Newsbusters…..which just suggests that your ideas/narratives come from reading what is written in places like those. I’m sure you’d have a good belly-laugh if someone decided to put forward an opinion piece from the Democratic Underground as ‘evidence’.

    As for the Churchill bust – both the British Embassy and the White House have said that the Churchill bust had not been a gift, but rather a loan that expired with Bush’s presidency.

    ….the decision to return the Churchill bust to the British – it had been presented by former Prime Minister Tony Blair to Bush on loan – had been made before Obama even arrived.

    “It was already scheduled to go back,” Allman said.

    The White House seemed to be trying to make amends when it made a point of reporting that Obama would keep on his desk a wooden penholder that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave him during a March visit. The penholder is crafted from wood taken from the HMS Gannet, the sister ship to the Resolute, a British naval vessel whose wood was used to make the presidential desk.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/05/politics/main6057570.shtml

    Thumb up 0

  39. JimK

    I just wanted to break out a new comment and say thank you to CM and Kimpost. I don’t agree with you two very much, but I enjoy you both. I just wanted to say that while I clearly disagree with most of what both of you have said in this thread, I really and truly am glad to see you guys holding the line on the “other side” and not being assholes about it.

    Thumb up 0

  40. CM

    What’s this obsession with the ‘one eye’ thing (he suffered a retinal detachment after a kick in the head during a rugby match). You’re saying Brown can’t watch movies/tv? What do you base this on?
    (More about the eye issue in this piece from 2004 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/sep/25/interviews.labourconference)

    I’ve read somewhere (can’t find the link now, but I’ll post it if I do) that one his few off-the-job-activities’ of things he likes doing is actually watching movies. Did you even consider that? It could be that Obama got someone to look into what Brown might like, and that’s how the gift was chosen (which would actually make it a far more personal – and well thought out – gift than many other possibilities).

    How many previous presidents have bothered to establish the intended receiver’s likes and dislikes? Those who rush to write and ‘apologise’ to Gordon Brown might actually be the ones insulting him. Poosh, why do you hate Brown so much?

    Thumb up 0

  41. CM

    Just following on from that – I’d be much happier (and more impressed) with a personalised gift from a fellow head of state than yet another ornament that I then had to find a place for (the prominence of which no doubt having to be linked to the closeness of the nations at any given time). Yawn. If the US President gave me a gift of something because he knew I’d actually like it, that would mean a lot more. But hey, that’s just me.

    Is there any evidence of what Brown actually thought? Or do we just invent his opinion for him depending on our politics?

    Thumb up 0

  42. CM

    Hey thanks Jim, that’s really awesome of you to post that. I appreciate it.

    I’m a little surprised that of all the posters in the Moorewatch forums, only Kimpost and I and loserlame have signed up and are taking part here (although Samsgran has posted in the forum here). For the last year Kimpost and I were really the only two remaining ‘lefties’ at the old forums.

    Even though I’m not an American, I’m kind of obssesed with American politics. Ours is very very dull in comparison. I also like arguments (not simply arguing, but well constructed and evidenced arguments). Even though you guys would consider me to be one of those leftists that you dislike so much, I consider myself quite centrist. I am in New Zealand anyway (e.g. I think the current centre-right government is doing a pretty good job, and I can’t help like our current Prime Minister who is doing about a million times better than I ever thought he could).

    I also have some good friends in the US. A really good one in Huntsville, Alabama. He’s lived with me for 3 months here in NZ in 1993 (and we travelled the country together, top to bottom…bungy jumped etc etc) and then I travelled the US with him in 1996 (a 3 month road trip around almost the entire perimeter). I’ve been back to visit him again since, with my wife (in 2002, on our way to live in London for 4 years). I love The South, and really enjoyed visiting civil right and civil war sites the last time I was there. I really am a big fan of America, in many many senses. I know that wouldn’t come through in what I post.

    Anyway, I considered some of the old righty posters on the old MW forums to be ‘friends’ (sincerely), despite the arguments (even when they got heated). I appreciated the ability to HAVE the arguments/discussions. I really liked it when someone who disagreed with me would take the time and effort to argue their case well. And at the end of the day I know for a fact that I have FAR more in common with these people than many others, and we actually agree on much more than we disagree (fundamentally). If you disagree with that, that just means we share the desire to disgaree, so I win no matter what ;-)

    Thumb up 0

  43. ilovecress

    I’m still here – but my work computer isn’t a huge fan of letting me log in. A couple of updates and I should be commenting more frequently…

    And despite my login name CM I’m also an Aucklander…..

    Thumb up 0

  44. CM

    BTW, I’ve spent a bit of time at some lefty forums but I found them to be horrible and full of morons. It became obvious that I’d just get too annoyed, and that I’d spend all my time banging my head against a wall (and wanting to bang theirs – because on some issues we had the same basic opinion, but they relied on garbage to ‘support’ theirs*). Anyway, I’ve found that I much prefer surrounding myself with people who have different opinions. As a result of my years on MW forums I have certainly discovered new ways of considering issues and arguments I’d never come across or thought of (and which I’d never have found at a lefty-forum). My views on some issues have certainly changed (in my normal life I find myself pointing out the-other-side-of-the-argument to lefties without even realising it at the time). Most importantly, I’ve discovered that most people on the other side of the political spectrum have sincerely held beliefs and opinions, and have reasoned their way to that point).

    So a huge thanks to you Jim. And thanks for not having dumb rules like no swearing etc.

    * Which pisses me off WAY more than engaging with people who have a completely different opinion than me, but who are reasonable and sensible and can articulate why in a way that makes sense and doesn’t rely on garbage.

    Thumb up 0

  45. richtaylor365 *

    CM, in two separate comments you slam American Thinker as being somehow unworthy of your consideration, yet, in my “it Get’s Better” thread you link to American Thinker in some manner to bolster the particular argument you were making at the time. first of all, why the inconsistency, where you get to link to them they are somehow worthy, but when someone else links to them:

    Your link to American Thinker? Could you possibly get a more biased piece? It’s very very very thin. It’s all conjecture

    .

    You got caught.

    Second of all, what difference where the information comes from, is it factual or not? That piece you so easily derided included a link to a Nile Gardiner column , Mr. Gardiner happens to be a respected British journalist, who was writing about why the Brits feel slighted, you think you know more than he does about how the Brits should feel?

    Thumb up 0

  46. Rann

    Wow, we’ve already got this one racing towards being on the “Most Commented” list.

    … God I’m tempted to make a gay marriage post just to watch it shoot right up to the top…

    Thumb up 0

  47. Poosh

    lol I do dislike Gordon Brown greatly, he’s the guy that led Britain into a recession, sold our gold (when it was almost worthless) and then borrowed and borrowed to the point that our debt might just be several trillion.
    ,
    You attack my links, I took the first one I could find, but they describe the facts and ‘evidence’ accurately. Infer your own conclusions from them. But this is my final play:
    ,
    Ignore the fact that the regions are wrong. You’re having a first visit as president to your country’s oldest ally – indeed your country’s origins are derived from it. You’re going to a country who is sending its soldiers to die for war your country largely “started” (granted, you opposed the war, but you’re the president now). What kind of presents could you get? In a vast sea of possible gifts for the Prime Minister or Britain, what presents could you get? Now you have advisors who are influencing your every move, giving you detailed cultural assessments etc. What present would you give Gordon Brown? Now. What are the worse presents you could give him? What do you think are the most permissible *bad* gifts you could give Gordon Brown? A bag of frozen chips perhaps? A bag of coal? those aren’t really permissible. But, a bunch of DVDs? … hmmm
    ,
    Imagine if you were Gordon Brown, who:
    ,
    “Former British Prime Minister gave Barack Obama a a pen and holder made from the wood of an anti-slavery ship, along with two biographies of Winston Churchill, valued at $16,500. In exchange the Obamas gave Gordon Brown a set of DVDs. Gordon Brown is is blind in his left eye and was recently said to be having problems with his right.” link
    ,
    And you received from the World’s most Powerful man, some DVDs (let’s PRETEND they are in the correct region! And your children received some cheap little toys from the White House gift shop … how would you feel ?

    Thumb up 0

  48. Rann

    Actually, just to be technical, I think France is our oldest ally.

    However, our most consistent ally would definitely be the British, which I’ll definitely take over just time served.

    Thumb up 0

  49. Poosh

    Sort of following from what Richtaylor365 says, but I hate most of what is written in Slate, but I have all the time in the world for Christopher Hitchens, for example.

    Thumb up 0

  50. InsipiD

    It’s like something from The Onion or something.

    President Barack Obama arrived in Rome today for an economic summit with Silvio Berlusconi. Berlusconi presented Obama with several ancient artifacts of Roman civilization that date to Biblical times. Obama presented Berlusconi with large jar of M&Ms with Obama’s likeness printed on them, a CD of Nas’ Illmatic, and a jar of “the most amazing pasta sauce.”

    The best I can make up is in the same neighborhood as reality. I wonder if he sucks at family Christmas gifts, too.

    Thumb up 0

  51. CM

    You got caught.

    Ah no, that was deliberate. I’ve read plenty of stuff at American Thinker, and pretty much all of it is opinion, as opposed to factual. Their climate change conspiracy stuff is loony-tunes and essentially repeats every long-debunked denier talking-point in the playbook. But I’ve learnt on many many years on MW forums that if I use a source to support my point that the person I’m having the discussion with also uses, that removes any argument about me having chosen a ‘liberal source’ (you have NO idea how many discussions were sidetracked by ridiculous arguments over sourcing).
    So, yeah, as I say, I knew what I was doing. It wasn’t by accident.

    Second of all, what difference where the information comes from, is it factual or not?

    To determine something as fact, it’s generally going to have to be verifiable at more than one few recognised and respectable source. To me anyway. Would you agree? As I said, most of what I have seen at American Thinker is opinion, not news (with facts). They’re got their narratives and they write their pieces accordingly. Unless I’m missing all the stuff that’s fact-based and well written….

    That piece you so easily derided included a link to a Nile Gardiner column , Mr. Gardiner happens to be a respected British journalist, who was writing about why the Brits feel slighted, you think you know more than he does about how the Brits should feel?

    The Telegraph is certainly more reputable than American Thinker. For a start, they have to adhere to certain standards of journalism. And they print news as well as opinion. However this was still an opinion piece.He might be including links to news stories, but he’s still stringing them together to form a narrative.

    And was he writing about why Brits feel slighted? Or was he writing a personal opinion piece (“my Top 10″)? There is obviously a difference. You’d need poll results to determine whether Brits feel slighted by Obama. Not the opinion of a single writer (who seems to just write one anti-Obama anti-“liberal elite” piece after another) in a broadsheet.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/nilegardiner/

    Sourcing and reliability is an interesting topic of its own.

    Thumb up 0

  52. CM

    Crap, now I can’t lie about NZ. ;-)

    Um, what do you mean “I’m still here”? Obviously not the old MW forums….do you mean the old MW front page? Or prevous incarnation of RTFTLC?

    Anyhow, kia ora bro.

    Thumb up 0

  53. CM

    Sorry Poosh, I don’t think you’ve said anything new there. You certainly haven’t addressed whether it was inappropriate because of Brown’s eyesight issue or not. I’d find the DVD’s a refreshing change, and if he knew I liked movies, I’d consider it a ‘warmer’ more personal gift. As I say, that’s just me. BTW I would have the same opinion if Bush had done the same thing.

    Thumb up 0

  54. CM

    I always read Hitchens too, both on Slate and in my wife’s Vanity Fair. I find him incredibly interesting. Even though I disagree with him a lot (and although I think he was staggeringly wrong about Iraq he came the closest to providing me with arguments that I could accept). I find him very honest and principled, and he writes so entertainingly. Have you seen him debate? A relatively recent one against Blair on religion is on YouTube (in parts). I’d hate to debate Hitchens – he’s so intelligent and well read.

    EDIT: It’s so sad that his cancer is so bad and he doesn’t have long left. He will be a loss to the world.

    I’ll take some time to study that Nile Gardiner piece in some depth if I get a chance.

    Thumb up 0

  55. Kimpost

    I remember ilovecress from the MW front page. We were mostly in the forums, even if I had a comment or two on the front pages as well.

    Thumb up 0

  56. richtaylor365 *

    Using the same source that the opposition uses to combat their arguments is smart, slamming a source by labeling it as unreliable when you use the same source yourself for cover? not so much.

    And regarding Nile Gardiner, to dismiss his Opinion concerning the attitudes of Brits to perceived Obama slights, when he is a Brit, lives in Brit land and associates with Brits, with the label of “another anti-Obama writer, can’t believe him”, seems a bit insulting.

    Thumb up 0

  57. CM

    Here is a start (first 4):

    1. Without going into too much background reading and checking I can’t see too much wrong with this criticism. Seems a little silly for the US adminstration officials to be trying to make out that the US is ‘neutral’, like the Falklands are still in dispute.

    2. I find this to be weak. Obama said: “We don’t have a stronger friend and stronger ally than Nicolas Sarkozy, and the French people.” So? Technically, that means that the UK could be equally as strong an ally. But then does the comment really deserve to be analysed to that degree? Is he actually making a real comparison to other countries? Or is he doing some head-of-state gushing? Taking offence at this seems very petty to me, and over-sensitive. Seems to be a case of searching for stuff to make a point as opposed to a point being strong enough to stand on it’s own.

    3. Very weak. He’s obviously making a comparison to Bush and Blair, who seemed to be obsessed by it as part of their joint drum-beat-to-war campaign.

    4. I think this is weak. An argument could just as easily be made that the US wants the UK to be a strong part of Europe because they are a close ally and it would benefit the US much more to have them in there and able to influence to a greater extent. Actually, I think that argument is stronger than the one being made about a desire to weaken UK sovereignty. Why would the US want that? As he says himself, it would be self-defeating to have that as a policy goal.

    Thumb up 0

  58. Kimpost

    Thank you, Jim.

    I enjoy honest and civil discourse, something that Moorewatch gave me an opportunity to partake in. I have a general interest in listening to people with different opinions. And in discussing their views, and sharing mine (Plus, it’s good for my English).

    If that can be done without resorting to name calling or general rudeness, then I think it’s great. I have also learned that people often are more alike than they realize. Internet discourse tends to exaggerate differences.

    If and when it becomes a little too heated I try to remember that I’m probably just talking to a regular guy, just like myself. A guy who likes sports, gadgets, chicks, friends and family. Don’t hold this against me, though, because I just said that I try.

    Like CM, I don’t consider myself being a lefty. Not by Swedish standards, which quite naturally is my norm. I have many libertarian views, which don’t resonate too well with what you guys would call leftism. Or with the left in the US, for that matter.

    Further I consider myself being much more of a pragmatist, than I am an ideologue. I believe that common sense solutions and compromise is the fabric of any civilized society. I’m a fan of reason if you will. That’s why I don’t generally like hyperbole and over-polarization. Bush and Obama are more alike than the political climate sometimes suggests. Or in short, Obama isn’t Stalin, Bush wasn’t Hitler.

    I also tend to think that “we” (most of the problems US has, the west shares) have bigger issues to tend to than to quibble over birth records or over George W Bush’s lengthy vacations in Crawford, Texas. Crappy or non-crappy gifts between heads of state – especially amongst friendly states belong to the same category. I should say here, that noting them as being crappy is just fine, as an amusement (not all discussions need to be about life or death issues), but suggesting deliberate insult by carefully choosing crappy gifts (not too crappy, though, since that would make it obvious) – that’s just crazy talk. :)

    Thumb up 0

  59. Kimpost

    Which means we have things to discuss on rainy days! :)

    P.S. You must know that The French Open is on. Watching any of it? Isner almost shocked Nadal. That would have been an upset, especially on clay, even with the new faster balls.

    Thumb up 0

  60. CM

    5. The Telegraph story was apparently wrong. http://www.defenceviewpoints.co.uk/defence-news/false-fears-about-uk-deterrent-info

    6. Really? Asking BP hard questions after one the worst ever environmental disasters is evidence that Obama hates the UK (and his “relentless desire to crush Britain’s biggest company”)? Over-blown much?!. How should they have been treated? With sympathy? Ambivalence? Can he prove how much Obama influenced the drop in BP’s share price? Wouldn’t it possibly have much more to do with the environmental catastrophy?

    7. As outlined, this seems to have been misreported.

    8. Covered.

    9. Seems like a dumb off-the-cuff comment from one person (anonymous…hmmm) who sounds like he/she was angry at a question and shot back with that. Only reported in the Telegraph it seems. I guess we gotta assume it’s true, but would have been good to have seen it reported elsewhere (not just sourced back to the Telegraph).

    10. I’d like to see more detail about this “giving France a role at the UK’s expense” thing (I’ll look into it). But suggesting that Obama was apologising for “hurting their feelings over the war in Iraq” is extremely disingenuous. We’ve discussed this already. I don’t buy the ‘apology’ narrative.

    Thumb up 0

  61. CM

    I can’t believe how much your English has improved since you first started posting at MW forums. Nobody would know it isn’t your first language.

    I am also a big fan of logic and reason and evidence and long walks on the beach (and also off short piers). I have little time for opinions that seem entirely constructed from rumour and conspiracy theory and accusations taken apparently from the internet.

    Please be aware that when I post about a subject here, what I post is in no way the entirety of my opinion on that subject. I might just be questioning what someone has posted about one aspect of the subject. It became apparent at MW forums that some people made up entire fundamental stances for me on big topics for me, basing it on the fact that I questioned a few things.

    Just something else while I’m on this rant – I think Bush Derangement Syndrome was extremely counter-productive to the left. Arguments are significantly weakened by unnecessary exaggeration. Good points can be ruined. Potentially good discussions can be sidetracked. It really annoyed me during the build up to the Iraq War.

    Thumb up 0

  62. CM

    The Isner almost-result made huge news here as he is a local favourite – he won his first ATP title here last year. Wasn’t able to defend it this year, but by coming back to try he ‘won the hearts’ etc etc. He also donated $5K from his first winners cheque to the Haiti Earthquake Appeal. And then of course he really made his name with that amazing record-smashing 11hr 5min match at Wimbledon.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heineken_Open_(tennis)

    Thumb up 0

  63. CM

    Using the same source that the opposition uses to combat their arguments is smart, slamming a source by labeling it as unreliable when you use the same source yourself for cover? not so much.

    I slammed the source in general, and opinion pieces there specifically.
    I did make sure the piece I linked to (and certainly the relevant information) relied on external links. I have no problem with linking to biased sources IF they then link directy to the evidence (although it’s obviously always better to link directly to the primary source because that negates arguments over sourcing – however in this case there were a large number of primary sources, so makes sense). The bullet points were the key, alongside the fact that the American Thinker was making the argument.

    Anyway, I also used it see whether anyone would get stuck into the American Thinker. Or defend them somehow. Or ignore it.

    And regarding Nile Gardiner, to dismiss his Opinion concerning the attitudes of Brits to perceived Obama slights, when he is a Brit, lives in Brit land and associates with Brits, with the label of “another anti-Obama writer, can’t believe him”, seems a bit insulting.

    I’m not dismissing his opinion. It’s his opinion clearly and I have no reason to believe that he isn’t being sincere. But if you look at my link you’ll see one hit-piece after another. He’s clearly not writing as a balanced objective journalist is he. He’s found his niche and narrative and he’s clearly sticking to it. And he provides no evidence about how much of his opinion is shared by Brits. So how can he, or anyone, claim that he is speaking for Brits. Especially since he’s Washington based, so he doesn’t live in the UK.
    Anyway, his clear and obvious bias means that I wouldn’t consider him a good barometer for Brit feelings about Obama. There’s nothing insulting about that.

    Thumb up 0

  64. InsipiD

    You’re awfully quick to demand clarification and seek info from different sources just because you disagree with them, but you’ve used liberal blogs and the like for sources before. You have requested clarification on statements you didn’t like when what you should do instead is find a different source and make a case for it not being true.

    Don’t feel compelled to defend Obama on everything. Go ahead and admit sometimes that he’s done or said some incredibly stupid, thoughtless, amateur, and graceless things since becoming president. Many things he’s said or done should be indefensible to smart and reasonable people. He has not done that every single time, but both he and his team are given to doing it enough that it’s hard not to see it as a pattern that makes them look unprepared. Is it enough of a pattern to suggest that it’s indicative of their thoughts instead of incompetence? Probably. Either way, I don’t understand why you’d be so thoroughly defending Obama. Does Gardiner have an agenda, and does he have a bit of a chip on his shoulder? He sure seems to, but he’s mostly right. Remember that the “special relationship” Blair cozyness dates back at least to Clinton, and Reagan and Thatcher were known to be close as well. Some of the list is petty bitching. Most of it is not. Obama treated BP very unprofessionally just as he did the cop in the Gates case. He’s been quite inconsiderate of the cooperation we’ve shared with Britain. That’s only the start of it.

    My point here is that, outside of the war, Obama has done almost as bad a job overseas as at home. He bows to people he should at least see as his equals, he kisses the wrong asses, and is otherwise an ignorant buffoon with everything from gifts to history. He and his team are so inexperienced and lacking in judgment that I can’t believe that half of this country was foolish enough to put him in charge. The only problem with the end of his presidency will be the things he’ll feel free to say when he’s no longer in charge. He will doubtlessly be a vocal and visible critic of everybody. If Al Gore is bad, just wait for Obama. The only reason that won’t be as obnoxious as he is now is that he won’t be able to actually do anything about it.

    Thumb up 0

  65. InsipiD

    I would’ve thought that Obama’s perpetual vacation would’ve put an end to any talk about Bush’s vacations.

    Thumb up 1

  66. richtaylor365 *

    But if you look at my link you’ll see one hit-piece after another.

    Maybe the reason he is not so keen on Obama is because of the slights he has felt, as a Brit, from Obama’s actions.

    He’s clearly not writing as a balanced objective journalist is he

    So, in order for you to consider the substance of any opinion piece, the author of that piece must show a 50/50 balance of favorable/negative regarding the subjects of their opinions?

    Especially since he’s Washington based

    ,

    And that is relevant how? He is a born and bred Brit, Yale/Oxford grad who worked for Margaret Thatcher. Yes, this particular day he lives in the States for work, but this in no way negates his ability to gauge the pulse of his homeland.

    , his clear and obvious bias means that I wouldn’t consider him a good barometer for Brit feelings about Obama

    .

    And you have every right to weigh any perceived bias but as I said earlier, I think him and Poosh has a better handle on English sentiment than any one here.

    Thumb up 0

  67. richtaylor365 *

    Yes, I’ll throw something up later when things get juicy. Nadal going 5 against Isner and Maria’s dress (ho hum) are the only things being discussed of late.

    Thumb up 0

  68. richtaylor365 *

    I must say, it appears that the Obama’s are doing everything right (botched toasts notwithstanding) while in England. That Parliament speech went a long way in re establishing that special relationship between the two nations. Obama and Cameron look like the best buds with their ping pong/barbeque gigs.

    I understanding that mending bridges is important but I would like him to get back and tour some of those tornado ravaged towns.

    Thumb up 0

  69. loserlame

    Obama is perceived as trying to do “good” by Euro standards, which pretty much makes him a near-equal in overseas. One of my German aunts kept a portrait of JFK on her living room wall into the late 70s. All he had done for Germany was say “Ich bin ein Berliner”

    Nary any locals praised Reagan’s request that “Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall.”. All the praise was later heaped on the green movement and Gorbachev, he got the Nobel prize

    Several senior staffers and aides advised against the phrase, saying anything which might cause further East-West tensions or potential embarrassment to Gorbachev, with whom President Reagan had built a good relationship, should be omitted.
    On May 18, 1987, President Reagan met with his speechwriters and responded to the speech by saying, “I thought it was a good, solid draft.” Chief of Staff Howard Baker objected, saying it sounded “extreme” and “unpresidential,” and Deputy National Security Advisor Colin Powell agreed. Nevertheless, Reagan liked the passage, saying, “I think we’ll leave it in.”

    Although it has been called “The four most famous words of Ronald Reagan’s Presidency”, the speech received “relatively little coverage from the media”, Time magazine reported 20 years later. Communists were critical of the speech, and the Soviet press agency Tass accused Reagan as giving an “openly provocative, war-mongering speech.”

    Euros know from peace and love better than anyone.

    Former West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl said he would never forget standing near Reagan when he challenged Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. “He was a stroke of luck for the world, especially for Europe.”

    Haha. Gorbachev was, not Reagan. Rightwingernut Kohl was voted out, and having saved the world, Krauts went fully green and took to wearing well-earned kaffiyehs and sandals in government, openly cussing fellow members as “assholes”..

    So, in short, while Obama is okay, hes still but a puppet of the US, albeit excluded from the Lovers’ enduring “Death to America” chants

    Thumb up 0

  70. CM

    Maybe the reason he is not so keen on Obama is because of the slights he has felt, as a Brit, from Obama’s actions.

    Not so keen? That’s a big difference from writing almost nothing but hit pieces.

    So, in order for you to consider the substance of any opinion piece, the author of that piece must show a 50/50 balance of favorable/negative regarding the subjects of their opinions?

    No, I said that he’s clearly not writing as an objective, balanced journalist. I’m happy to consider the substance of an opinion piece, but some are obviously more balanced assessments than others. These are clearly designed as nothing more than hit pieces. That is the obvious intent of them. There doesn’t even seem to be even an attempt at objective analysis. And digging deeper, it’s no surprise to me to find that it lacks substance.

    And that is relevant how? He is a born and bred Brit, Yale/Oxford grad who worked for Margaret Thatcher. Yes, this particular day he lives in the States for work, but this in no way negates his ability to gauge the pulse of his homeland.

    You stated that lived “in Brit land”. I was pointing out that he doesn’t, he’s Washington based. What was your point about him living “in Brit land”?
    Anyway, my point is that one Brit doesn’t represent what Brits think. He represents what he thinks. And if he has a strong opinion on something, he is a far greater representation of people that hold that strong opinion than fellow countrymen.

    And you have every right to weigh any perceived bias but as I said earlier, I think him and Poosh has a better handle on English sentiment than any one here.

    Is he even claiming that his views are representative?

    During my years of living in the UK I remember high levels of public cynicism over ‘the special relationship’. Does that count for anything?

    Thumb up 0

  71. CM

    Did you know that she asked for it?
    Did you know that it was accompanied by an extremely rare Rodgers and Hart Songbook (containing the words and music of 47 songs by the composed Richard Rodgers – of Rodgers and Hammerstein fame – and the lyricist Lorenz Hart from 22 shows and two films)? Or that there was special personal significance in that?

    Thumb up 0

  72. CM

    You’re awfully quick to demand clarification and seek info from different sources just because you disagree with them, but you’ve used liberal blogs and the like for sources before.

    Because I disagree with an opinion piece? Sure. But I only said that about one of the ten, and only because I know little about the details.
    Which liberal blogs have I used?

    You have requested clarification on statements you didn’t like when what you should do instead is find a different source and make a case for it not being true.

    Not sure I understand that. If someone is putting something up as evidence, but in reality it’s not evidence of anything, then it should perfectly fine to point that out and ask if they have a factual source. Of course linking to opinion is fine, but nobody can pretend that it’s anything more than ‘an argument’.

    Don’t feel compelled to defend Obama on everything. Go ahead and admit sometimes that he’s done or said some incredibly stupid, thoughtless, amateur, and graceless things since becoming president.

    Um, you mean like I’ve done, including in this thread (more than once)? Ah ok then. Thanks.

    Many things he’s said or done should be indefensible to smart and reasonable people. He has not done that every single time, but both he and his team are given to doing it enough that it’s hard not to see it as a pattern that makes them look unprepared.

    Sure, I have no problem with that. But don’t be surprised if some of those ‘examples’ turn out to be something different (i.e. there is much more to it than the narrative that is being pushed by whatever conservative blog is pushing it). Smart and reasonable people should be seeking primary sources before they just believe something.

    Is it enough of a pattern to suggest that it’s indicative of their thoughts instead of incompetence? Probably. Either way, I don’t understand why you’d be so thoroughly defending Obama. Does Gardiner have an agenda, and does he have a bit of a chip on his shoulder? He sure seems to, but he’s mostly right. Remember that the “special relationship” Blair cozyness dates back at least to Clinton, and Reagan and Thatcher were known to be close as well. Some of the list is petty bitching. Most of it is not. Obama treated BP very unprofessionally just as he did the cop in the Gates case. He’s been quite inconsiderate of the cooperation we’ve shared with Britain. That’s only the start of it.

    Either way, I don’t understand why you’d be so thoroughly defending Obama.

    I would strongly disagree that I am. Pointing out that someone writes one hit piece after another isn’t a defence of Obama. And, again, if you read my other comments (even in this very thread) you’ll see that I have issues over Obama.

    Does Gardiner have an agenda, and does he have a bit of a chip on his shoulder? He sure seems to, but he’s mostly right.

    So let’s have a detailed discussion of whether he is “mostly right” or not. Isn’t that kinda why we’re here? I broke it down. Feel free to respond to what I said on each.

    Remember that the “special relationship” Blair cozyness dates back at least to Clinton, and Reagan and Thatcher were known to be close as well. Some of the list is petty bitching. Most of it is not. Obama treated BP very unprofessionally just as he did the cop in the Gates case. He’s been quite inconsiderate of the cooperation we’ve shared with Britain. That’s only the start of it.

    Obviously that’s opinion. It’s not unreasonable to disagree.

    My point here is that, outside of the war, Obama has done almost as bad a job overseas as at home.

    Well again, that’s obviously your subjective assessment.

    He bows to people he should at least see as his equals, he kisses the wrong asses, and is otherwise an ignorant buffoon with everything from gifts to history.

    You’ve decided those are all of extreme importance. Others disagree. As Kimpost pointed out, who the hell cares about the bowing thing? Yeah, sure, it’s funny, good for a laugh, maybe a little cringe, but doesn’t it even remotely compare to the substance of foreign affairs/engagement/discussion/agreement? I can’t see how it even comes close.
    Who determines which arses he should kiss? Isn’t that somewhat determined by your own political leanings? Where has be shown himself to be an “ignorant buffoon with everything from gifts to history”. It seems that some of you guys only consider part of the available information sometimes (bust, DVD’s, ipod).

    He and his team are so inexperienced and lacking in judgment that I can’t believe that half of this country was foolish enough to put him in charge.

    Well you can’t blame people for not knowing what would happen, even if they agreed with your take on all this. And I’m sure there are many many people who sincerely held the same view about Bush (who was then re-elected).

    The only problem with the end of his presidency will be the things he’ll feel free to say when he’s no longer in charge. He will doubtlessly be a vocal and visible critic of everybody. If Al Gore is bad, just wait for Obama. The only reason that won’t be as obnoxious as he is now is that he won’t be able to actually do anything about it.

    Wow, tell us how you really feel!
    I didn’t realise Gore has been a vocal and visible critic of everybody…..can you give me some links?

    Thumb up 0

  73. Poosh

    I am not too sure… A BBC Show just, correctly, discussed that Obama basically used Britain – and our Queen – for the start of his 2012 campaign. We were used, but “in a nice way.” A bitter taste in the mouth.

    Thumb up 0