"Hey, a quarter! Finders keepers!"
Up to now, I haven't written anything about President Obama bowing to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, but the comment by White House Press Spokesman, Robert Gibbs, has only exacerbated the issue. When asked about it during a press briefing, Gibbs stated that the President didn't bow-only bent down.
Funny, I didn't see that quarter lying on the floor.
That reminds me of the old Clinton line that oral sex wasn't sex (but it is now-or was it the other way around?)
In all seriousness, why can't the Obama camp just admit he bowed and forget about it? This guy Gibbs just can't concede one little point, and now he's compounded the issue by making a Clintonian denial. But as they say on the left, if we get down to the root cause of the problem, none of this would have happened if the Secretary of State had properly advised the President that bowing to an oil potentate is not considered proper protocol for a President of the United States.
That's you, Hillary.
So my advice to President Obama is to flip that quarter he was "bending down" to pick up; if it's heads, fire Gibbs. If it's tails, fire Hillary.
Or better yet........
That denial is pretty stupid, but the big deal that a lot of right-wing pundits are making over it is just as stupid. After all, Bush held the guy's hand and kissed his cheeks (which I'm sure Obama will do eventually as well).
ReplyDeletePersonally, I wish that our leaders would give that guy the bird and then follow it up with a kidney-punch. Why we pretend that guy is anything less than an evil tyrant is beyond me. (Actually, I know exactly why, but it's still sad.)
So let me get this straight:
ReplyDeleteMichele Obama SHOULD have curtsied to Queen Elizabeth, because it's the proper protocol.
President Obama should NOT have bowed to the Saudi King even though it's the protocol.
Either you believe in following protocols with royalty or you don't, Gary. You can't have it both ways.
Lance,
ReplyDeleteAs for Bush holding his hand and exchanging kisses on the cheeks-that is a greeting or gesture that does not imply subserviency, It is among equals, so to speak.
Bryan,
ReplyDeleteWhaddaya mean I can't have it both ways?
Look, I said previously that this business of curtsying before the Queen is annoying or whatever. Thank God we fought the Revolution.
Is it protocol to kneel before the King of the Burning Sands? I thought they said it wasn't.
There is a distinction, however, at least in my mind. First of all, the First Lady was in England, so the curtsy seems appropriate for her since she is not a head of state and she was in the Queen's country.
Our president should not be on a lower level than Abdullah and he was not in Saudi Arabia, but in a third country.
So I think it was probably appropriate for Michelle to curtsy to the Queen in England but not cool for Obama to bow to the King of SA in England.
There-I have it both ways.
As for Bush holding his hand and exchanging kisses on the cheeks-that is a greeting or gesture that does not imply subserviency, It is among equals, so to speak.
ReplyDeleteIf that makes you feel better...
Lance,
ReplyDeleteOf course it makes me feel better.
When I was in Thailand, men could hold hands and was just a sign of friendship. In the Middle East, men kiss on the cheeks as a sign of friendship. In Japan and Korea, the bow is reciprocal. Who is subservient or superior depends on the deepness of the bow.
But I'm sure you know that allready.
BTW-You do remember "The King of the Burning Sands", don't you?
Ray Stevens? I won't repeat the name of the song.