Well, at least he didn't apologize to the Indians for something. Yet, President Obama arrived in India bearing a gift; a statement that India should be a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/08/obama-calls-india-permanent-member-security-council/
As yet, there is no word on the reaction to that proposal from neighboring Pakistan. Oh, wait! Initial reports are coming in now.....
"What about us? We wanna be on the Security Council too!"
And guess who else was part of Obama's 3,000 person retinue.
That's right. None other than Robert Gibbs, White House spokesman and professional comedian, who made his own considerable presence felt as he played the Ugly American in New Delhi. Here he is throwing his weight around with Indian security.
Here's the video:
And it's just starting. This promises to be a real diplomatic triumph.
Well, at least he didn't apologize to the Indians for something.
ReplyDeleteYou mean like how he didn't apologize to the Europeans? I'm sure that Sean Hannity will find a way to doctor one of his speeches to make it seem like he did anyway.
Perhaps, the president should have apologized for Gibbs' boorish behavior.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, you didn't give us any details of Gibbs's boorish behavior. I thought you were putting words in his mouth from your presentation. I don't watch Fox News OR MSNBC.
ReplyDeleteSince we know that the President of the United States has no authority to appoint permanent members of the Security Council, not even recess appointments, his statement can only be considered a friendly diplomatic gesture. Hey, France is a permanent member, and right now Germany has a better claim -- although we all know why it wasn't in the original five.
Balancing India and China (which already has a permanent seat, for obscure and not always credible reasons, but appropriate now) is probably more important than balancing India and Pakistan. Besides, when did you become such a good friend of the Taliban's sponsors in the ISI? Exactly who IS a "major power" is changing. Maybe we could give Russia's seat to India, on the ground that the Russian Federation is no more the Soviet Union than Ukraine or Byelorussia are? Be creative Gary!
Gary,
ReplyDeleteThe way the Times has it, Gibbs was sticking up for the fourth estate by insisting that all 8 newsmen get in to see the informal meeting as agreed and not reduced as the Indians would have it. (Yes, Siarlys, there is a way to get news besides TV and asking Gary but thanks for the irrelevant history lessons on the Security Council). Anyway, that episode should win Gibbs some points with the press, which he hardly needs. The Indians don't vote so it was all to the good for Obama... politically speaking.
Obama will be as successful negotiating trade agreements with the Indians as he was in securing the Olympics for Chicago.
.
Siarlys,
ReplyDeleteI have been trying to put up the 5 minute video but without success.
Thanks for trying Gary. Miggie: Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it.
ReplyDelete"Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it."
ReplyDeleteThanks for that ... I'm going to get that laminated to carry it around in my wallet. You make that up?
You are a never ending source of irrelevant platitudes.
.
Could be worse, Miggie. He could be a source of irrelevant internet links.
ReplyDeleteOh yeah, I forgot. Your " Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it."
ReplyDeleteshould be
"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." --George Santayana
If .... never mind.
.
Miggie, you never learn, but I tried to warn you.
ReplyDeleteGary, thanks for getting the video posted. Unfortunately, it offers no sound track of what Gibbs said, only some commentator with a British accent telling us its going to dominate the news (I thought he was presenting the news???) Then a Fox News commentator says Gibbs did the right thing.
Now, getting back to the Security Council... (or will Miggie tell us that's off topic? I though it was in the headline...)
Siarlys,
ReplyDeleteIf you look back you will see that the discussion was about what Gibbs did... not what Obama said about the Security Council. You injected it because you didn't know what Gibbs did.
Discussions go in all directions because of your throwing in etymologies and misquotes and other clutter you happen to think of. Try quiting your trying to prove how smart you are. It is making you look even more pathetic.
.
Miggie... oh, Miggie... would you please READ GARY's HEADLINE before you pontificate on what this post is about???
ReplyDeleteSiarlys,
ReplyDeleteI saw the headline but that is NOT what the discussion was about. Read your own first sentence in your first post. You were the only one writing about the UN. You weren't completely off topic just off on a tangent.
.
Miggie, your capacity for self-delusion is complete. The headline is not what the article is about... or are you accusing Gary of oblivious incompetence in choosing headlines for his own posts?
ReplyDeleteGibbs certainly was one topic within the text of the post. Considering the way Gary started, I viewed Gibbs as a bit of a tangent, but in any case, Gibbs was not THE point of the post. Duh.
Now we've gone from debating a sub-point to debating what the point was, which is a very long way from debating the substance of the post itself. What a blind alley.