Obama General Discussion, vol. 3

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Someone was treating him like an Oscar winner whose speech was going long. :lol:
 
I can not fathom the reaction that would have ensued had W done this.



you're right.

when you're intelligent, articulate, knowledgeable about the world and other cultures, treat other leaders with respect, have an effective foreign policy, treat Muslims like people, and generally have earned the good faith of the rest of the world that you aren't an ignorant, idiot cowboy who invades other countries out of petty revenge or stupidity, people are more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt when you fuck up from time to time.
 
I have to say, I really like all the things Michelle has been doing in an effort to make our country less fat.
 
Obama thinks it's 2008 too, so I don't know what's going on with him. Jet lag? Time machine? Wishful thinking? Bush had that famous gaffe with The Queen, can't remember right now. Maybe The Queen brings out gaffes. She doesn't even put her own damn toothpaste on her own toothbrush, so I wouldn't worry about trying to impress her. OMG, that other time Michelle touched her and they gave her an iPod. The horror.


No crown or tiara needed for Michelle-she looked amazing

a_560x375.jpg
 
I'm confused as to why they started playing the song while he was still speaking.

The cue for the musicians was probably just "to Her Majesty the Queen!" as that would normally be the end of it, but he had more.

Funny watching the coverage of his trip here from both the local news and reporting, and then what seems to be the sum of it on US outlets: His car got stuck in Dublin, he wrote the wrong date in the book, her dress sucked, and he fucked up a toast, so clearly he's making an arse of himself at every turn. That's about it, right? I think a few conservative commentators would genuinely feel very ill if they were here and copping the 24/7 glowing coverage he is actually getting.
 
The local news had a guy who was an expert on royal protocol or something, and he said the cue was when he stood and said the magic words: "to the Queen."

Then he said all things considered, Obama handled the mistake well when he realized he done goofed.
 
Her dress sucked? The white one? I love it and I think she looks so elegant. Even if I don't always like what she's wearing she just carries everything off so well and manages to look great.

The queen always has that pissed off expression so who cares-like I said, she doesn't even put her own toothpaste on. Maybe she even has a butt wiper :wink:

My Mom's cousin in Ireland was all gushy about Obama. They loved Clinton too, I remember them talking about him when I met them.
 
I think a few conservative commentators would genuinely feel very ill if they were here and copping the 24/7 glowing coverage he is actually getting.


eh ... those are just youtube moments, it's not like the trip is being presented as some sort of disaster. some people are trying to make hay of the fact that we've had more disastrous tornadoes and he's still in the UK, but that's certainly not the central narrative. no mater who the president is, he doesn't get much coverage in the US media on these somewhat routine visits around the world unless something noteworthy -- puking on the PM of Japan, maybe -- happens. we're too consumed with domestic debates.

i did read some of his speech from yesterday, and found it fairly impressive:

The reason for this close friendship doesn’t just have to do with our shared history, our shared heritage; our ties of language and culture; or even the strong partnership between our governments. Our relationship is special because of the values and beliefs that have united our people through the ages.

Centuries ago, when kings, emperors, and warlords reigned over much of the world, it was the English who first spelled out the rights and liberties of man in the Magna Carta. It was here, in this very hall, where the rule of law first developed, courts were established, disputes were settled, and citizens came to petition their leaders.

Over time, the people of this nation waged a long and sometimes bloody struggle to expand and secure their freedom from the crown. Propelled by the ideals of the Enlightenment, they would ultimately forge an English Bill of Rights, and invest the power to govern in an elected parliament that’s gathered here today.

What began on this island would inspire millions throughout the continent of Europe and across the world. But perhaps no one drew greater inspiration from these notions of freedom than your rabble-rousing colonists on the other side of the Atlantic. As Winston Churchill said, the “…Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus, trial by jury, and English common law find their most famous expression in the American Declaration of Independence.”

For both of our nations, living up to the ideals enshrined in these founding documents has sometimes been difficult, has always been a work in progress. The path has never been perfect. But through the struggles of slaves and immigrants, women and ethnic minorities, former colonies and persecuted religions, we have learned better than most that the longing for freedom and human dignity is not English or American or Western –- it is universal, and it beats in every heart. Perhaps that’s why there are few nations that stand firmer, speak louder, and fight harder to defend democratic values around the world than the United States and the United Kingdom.

We are the allies who landed at Omaha and Gold, who sacrificed side by side to free a continent from the march of tyranny, and help prosperity flourish from the ruins of war. And with the founding of NATO –- a British idea –- we joined a transatlantic alliance that has ensured our security for over half a century.

Together with our allies, we forged a lasting peace from a cold war. When the Iron Curtain lifted, we expanded our alliance to include the nations of Central and Eastern Europe, and built new bridges to Russia and the former states of the Soviet Union. And when there was strife in the Balkans, we worked together to keep the peace.

Today, after a difficult decade that began with war and ended in recession, our nations have arrived at a pivotal moment once more. A global economy that once stood on the brink of depression is now stable and recovering. After years of conflict, the United States has removed 100,000 troops from Iraq, the United Kingdom has removed its forces, and our combat mission there has ended. In Afghanistan, we’ve broken the Taliban’s momentum and will soon begin a transition to Afghan lead. And nearly 10 years after 9/11, we have disrupted terrorist networks and dealt al Qaeda a huge blow by killing its leader –- Osama bin Laden.

Together, we have met great challenges. But as we enter this new chapter in our shared history, profound challenges stretch before us. In a world where the prosperity of all nations is now inextricably linked, a new era of cooperation is required to ensure the growth and stability of the global economy. As new threats spread across borders and oceans, we must dismantle terrorist networks and stop the spread of nuclear weapons, confront climate change and combat famine and disease. And as a revolution races through the streets of the Middle East and North Africa, the entire world has a stake in the aspirations of a generation that longs to determine its own destiny.

Remarks by the President to Parliament in London, United Kingdom | The White House



what's not to like? seriously, conservatives. he's saying nice things about white people and Winston Churchill, your two favorite things.

i admit, the view from over here really does present the UK as our real, true "friends" in the world, something distinct from our "allies" or our "neighbo(u)rs" (sorry Canada, you come off like a cute kid sister). and while i am certain the "special relationship" does at times feel one-sided, especially during the horror show of the Bush administration, i think the UK wields a bit more psychic power over here than you might initially think, and no other country has as pervasive an influence on American culture as the UK, in so many ways.

i wish i could say the same thing politically, but it seems as if Israel holds that title.
 
^ Yeah...one can't imagine a British PM getting Congress to spring to their feet like trained monkeys with every other turn of phrase. Especially not when his speech is one big defiant finger in the eye to the President (which a British PM wouldn't do).

I did find it rather grating that what coverage we did have of the UK visit seemed almost 100% royalty-focused. I get the symbolic value and all that, but come on, these people are politically irrelevant, he's not there to cut deals with them.
 
Last edited:
^ Yeah...one can't imagine a British PM getting Congress to spring to their feet like trained monkeys with every other turn of phrase. Especially not when his speech is one big defiant finger in the eye to the President (which a British PM wouldn't do).



i do remember Blair addressing Congress at some point either during the build up or immediately after the Iraq War Debacle Thing, and that went down quite well especially with conservatives. lots of leaping to the feet and such.

but, yeah, Bibi has the GOP in the palm of his hand. i have to wonder where this comes from -- we hear so much about not wanting to sacrifice our soverignty to the UN, but when Israel (rather, the Likud Party) says to jump, large sections of Congress ask, "how high?"
 
^ Well on that note,

The Hill, May 26
Rep. Joe Walsh (R-IL) questioned why US Jews have not expressed more outrage over President Obama's demand that the Israeli-Palestinian peace process be based around the 1967 borders, with mutually agreeable land swaps. "The short answer is that most American Jews are liberal, and most American liberals side with the Palestinians and vague notions of 'peace' instead of with Israel’s well-being and security," Walsh wrote in an op-ed for the conservative Daily Caller. Walsh, who is Catholic, added that the American Jewish community should be more pro-Israel.
This is not a new line of attack--Beck and various rightwing bloggers have been working it for a few years now--but we're going to hear more and more of it from the right heading into the elections (great wedge issue). This is all part of the broader pattern you commented on yourself awhile back, re: Huckabee's and Palin's Israel trips--this co-opting by the religious right of the whole discourse of Jews/Israel/Zionism as all-purpose militant-Islamophobic buzzwords. Then if necessary, to smooth over any contradictions, they can always pull out the trustworthy "Well, you see, there are good, faithful Jews, like my friend and donor Abe Foxman, then there are godless leftists like J Street, JVP and [name of most recent Jewish pundit to defend Obama's Israel policy]..."). Hell, even Jeffrey Goldberg--pro-Iraq War, Iran-obsessed Jeffrey Goldberg!--now gets hundreds of hate mails a day branding him a Nazi, a Bolshevik, and a JINO for expressing the view that Israel's status quo on settlements is untenable.

Of course, for the most part this dynamic makes AIPAC very happy, except when guys like Walsh veer into lecturing about good Jews vs. bad Jews, but increasingly that doesn't matter because the more they ally themselves with these types, the less control they have over where it goes.

I love how when the whiny apathetic American left complains about US Israel policy, it's all because of wily, wealthy Jews dragging around the deeply reluctant majority by the balls (as if public opinion polls didn't consistently find the majority of Americans deeply and increasingly hawkish on Israel), while meanwhile when the shrieky apocalyptic American right complains about the same, it's all because of anti-Semitic hippie/Mau Mau leftists manipulating insecure Jewish liberals who just wanna belong (as if the organized domestic opposition to US Israel policy weren't overwhelmingly staffed, funded and supported by Jews).
 
Last edited:
you're right.

when you're intelligent, articulate, knowledgeable about the world and other cultures, treat other leaders with respect, have an effective foreign policy, treat Muslims like people, and generally have earned the good faith of the rest of the world that you aren't an ignorant, idiot cowboy who invades other countries out of petty revenge or stupidity, people are more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt when you fuck up from time to time.

There's also the possibility that our current president, "Navy Corpse-Man,""call the president of Canada," is not as sophisticated and knowledgeable as advertised and that his predecessor wasn't the idiot his political enemies imagined he was.
 
There's also the possibility that our current president, "Navy Corpse-Man,""call the president of Canada," is not as sophisticated and knowledgeable as advertised and that his predecessor wasn't the idiot his political enemies imagined he was.



maybe, but probably not.

but i do think there's a point to be made about how once a narrative is established, it's difficult to wrest oneself free from it.

however, you're really, really straining to equivocate between the two.
 
This is not a new line of attack--Beck and various rightwing bloggers have been working it for a few years now--but we're going to hear more and more of it from the right heading into the elections (great wedge issue). This is all part of the broader pattern you commented on yourself awhile back, re: Huckabee's and Palin's Israel trips--this co-opting by the religious right of the whole discourse of Jews/Israel/Zionism as all-purpose militant-Islamophobic buzzwords.

Cable TV and the internet are just new voices for a union that has been growing since the rebirth of conservatism in American politics 50 years ago. As conservatives (which came to include the Religious Right) embraced our Founding Fathers and Principles they formed a natural alliance with a democratic state of Israel. Conservatives proudly spoke of American exceptionalism which itself was borne out of our founders' belief that the United States unique destiny was to be "a New Israel." The Left has largely abandoned this belief.

At the same time conservatives speak of our heritage of Judeo-Christian values much of liberalism was embracing non-traditional values and views as its members became more secular.

50 years ago the home of antisemitism was largely on the Right. Now it is the Left, especially internationally, that contains groups hostile to Israel and Jews while sympathetic to the demands of Arab nations and Palestinian rights.

Somehow blaming America and trashing Israel go hand in hand in many leftist think tanks, academia and universities, Black Liberation churches, the U.N. and many other segments of the Left.

In 2011 his isn't about "buzz words" or "wedge issues" but something much deeper. Something a great many people in the world would like to see eradicated.

Little Satan and the Great Satan.
 
so how does Israel help us advance our national interests?

surely the world has many other democracies than just Israel.
 
I do often wonder what practical benefit the US is supposed to get out of this arrangement.
 
Cable TV and the internet are just new voices for a union that has been growing since the rebirth of conservatism in American politics 50 years ago. As conservatives (which came to include the Religious Right) embraced our Founding Fathers and Principles they formed a natural alliance with a democratic state of Israel. Conservatives proudly spoke of American exceptionalism which itself was borne out of our founders' belief that the United States unique destiny was to be "a New Israel." The Left has largely abandoned this belief.

At the same time conservatives speak of our heritage of Judeo-Christian values much of liberalism was embracing non-traditional values and views as its members became more secular.

50 years ago the home of antisemitism was largely on the Right. Now it is the Left, especially internationally, that contains groups hostile to Israel and Jews while sympathetic to the demands of Arab nations and Palestinian rights.

Somehow blaming America and trashing Israel go hand in hand in many leftist think tanks, academia and universities, Black Liberation churches, the U.N. and many other segments of the Left.

In 2011 his isn't about "buzz words" or "wedge issues" but something much deeper. Something a great many people in the world would like to see eradicated.

Little Satan and the Great Satan.

Did you get this off the Huckabee revisionist history website? You actually paid money for that?

This is simpleton and short sighted. It's no wonder why Republican policy comes off as such...
 
Cable TV and the internet are just new voices for a union that has been growing since the rebirth of conservatism in American politics 50 years ago. As conservatives (which came to include the Religious Right) embraced our Founding Fathers and Principles they formed a natural alliance with a democratic state of Israel. Conservatives proudly spoke of American exceptionalism which itself was borne out of our founders' belief that the United States unique destiny was to be "a New Israel." The Left has largely abandoned this belief.

At the same time conservatives speak of our heritage of Judeo-Christian values much of liberalism was embracing non-traditional values and views as its members became more secular.

50 years ago the home of antisemitism was largely on the Right. Now it is the Left, especially internationally, that contains groups hostile to Israel and Jews while sympathetic to the demands of Arab nations and Palestinian rights.

Somehow blaming America and trashing Israel go hand in hand in many leftist think tanks, academia and universities, Black Liberation churches, the U.N. and many other segments of the Left.

In 2011 his isn't about "buzz words" or "wedge issues" but something much deeper. Something a great many people in the world would like to see eradicated.

Little Satan and the Great Satan.
That would doubtless all go over very well at a certain kind of rally, but it really doesn't at all address the Obama Administration's Israel policy, which differs very little from that of Bush's, Clinton's and Bush Sr.'s.

Anti-Semitism is a latent and intrinsic narrative within Western culture; it has nothing to do with right or left, and no ideology is incompatible with it. Look into the history of any major political, economic, social or religious movement within the modern West and you will find it. You could make an argument that something similar is true about the Islamic world too, that both cultures are haunted by the figure of the perfidious Jew (in the one case they betrayed the Messiah, in the other the Prophet, and the elaborations proceed from there, sometimes becoming apparently detached from any connection to religion but always retaining the assumptions of shiftiness and connivance). But that's all getting a wee bit abstract, and in any case none of it means Jews aren't also capable of persecuting, oppressing, and dispossessing others just like other human beings, which is probably more to the point here.

"Judeo-Christian values" is a reassuring-sounding but meaningless term. Most people who like to use it couldn't write a basic short overview of Jewish ethics and values adequate to pass an elementary-level Hebrew school class if their lives depended on it. Likewise Christians don't need our help to articulate for themselves what their values are. Peaceful coexistence is good but it won't last without both political and social equality, as my grandparents' generation in Europe learned the hard way.

Incidentally the term "American exceptionalism" was coined by the American Communist Party between the World Wars, though just about everyone, left or right, has long since "abandoned" the sense in which they used it. I don't know what you mean by a "natural" historical attraction between conservatives and Israel. US Israel policy through most of the latter half of the 20th century was, like US foreign policy of that era in general, guided first and foremost by Cold War considerations (i.e. counterbalancing Soviet influence), regardless of Administration, and it was under Johnson that the most decisive swing towards military and political alliance with Israel occurred. I would not call Israel's settlements policy "democratic," and that is in essence what all the huffing over the 1967 borders is about.
 
Cable TV and the internet are just new voices for a union that has been growing since the rebirth of conservatism in American politics 50 years ago. As conservatives (which came to include the Religious Right) embraced our Founding Fathers and Principles they formed a natural alliance with a democratic state of Israel. Conservatives proudly spoke of American exceptionalism which itself was borne out of our founders' belief that the United States unique destiny was to be "a New Israel." The Left has largely abandoned this belief.

At the same time conservatives speak of our heritage of Judeo-Christian values much of liberalism was embracing non-traditional values and views as its members became more secular.

50 years ago the home of antisemitism was largely on the Right. Now it is the Left, especially internationally, that contains groups hostile to Israel and Jews while sympathetic to the demands of Arab nations and Palestinian rights.

Somehow blaming America and trashing Israel go hand in hand in many leftist think tanks, academia and universities, Black Liberation churches, the U.N. and many other segments of the Left.

In 2011 his isn't about "buzz words" or "wedge issues" but something much deeper. Something a great many people in the world would like to see eradicated.

Little Satan and the Great Satan.

That's pretty funny. Thanks for posting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom