# At least he seems to have figured out how to dress



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-emperor-akihito-japan.html


----------



## turban1 (May 29, 2008)

*assume the position*

i think the US Congress has given him lessons in bending over


----------



## harland (Oct 13, 2008)

ksinc said:


> https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-emperor-akihito-japan.html


Eh? What's the big frickin' deal? Sometimes a little cultural sensitivity goes a long way.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

I think bowing is a way of saying hello and part of having respect.


----------



## Liberty Ship (Jan 26, 2006)

You either bow OR shake hands. And the POTUS does not bow. At least not until now. Even my dog sits up straight to shake hands.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Good grief. Some people watch way too much Fox News.

Do we have to start posting photos of Bush kissing and holding hands with Saudi Arabia's "king"? You know, the guy who throws people in jail for reading Bibles?


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

I don't want my President bowing before any other world leaders, just like I didn't want my President to curtsy before the Queen of England. It isn't a display of disrespect to not do this, but it does symbolize subserviance to do it.

I will use the U.S. Navy as an example. When ships of different nations pass at sea they often dip their national flags in passing as a greeting. A U.S. Navy warship will never do this. Another ship can dip it's flag all it wants, or not; but the U.S. Flag on a warship will continue flying high. There is no disrespect intended. We just don't do that. 

Nor should our President be bowing to other world leaders.

Cruiser


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Howard said:


> I think bowing is a way of saying hello and part of having respect.


I think if they both bowed then you are correct. If you or I went to Japan, met someone, they bowed, and we bowed back; that is respect. When the President goes and he does it unilaterally; then that is being subservient.


----------



## a4audi08 (Apr 27, 2007)

much ado about nothing as usual. bush and cheney can start a disastrous war that has and will continue to sap this country of thousands of its soldiers and trillions in money we dont have, but gosh darnit at least they never bowed their heads to no stinkin' foreigners!!


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt the first time, but this was just egregious.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^While I am inclined to agree that the US of A should not presume to call the tune that we expect the rest of the world to sing, I do find the continuing acts of social subservience on the part of our President, to be at best, awkward and at worst, humiliating. If Barrack Obama wants to allow the rest of the world to walk over his back, so be it. However, President Obama should stand tall. Should one of our less kindly inclined neighbors choose to walk over me, as I have in the past and shall do in the future, I will kick them in the "Tenders!"


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

At least the left has a sense of humor about this stuff:


----------



## DukeGrad (Dec 28, 2003)

*Walk all over us?*

Gentlemen

I disagree with this comment. He is doing a beautiful job for our foreign diplomacy. Picking up from the mess the last jerk made. And I wanted to use another word.
I consider this man a gentleman, and a very sharp president as well.
We are not able to kick in the tenders, like we did in WW2.

Nice day


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

What you guys seem to be missing is the fact that he is first and foremost an African and it is a known way of life that when an African meets an older person, a bow or genuflection is required to show respect besides the fact that he was raised in another culture (Indonesian) that is somewhat similar to the African culture so I have no problem with his bowing down to his elders whether Americans or other nationals. Lets focus more on his idiotic but dangerous policies than on trivial things like showing respect.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Asterix said:


> What you guys seem to be missing is the fact that he is first and foremost an African and it is a known way of life that when an African meets an older person, a bow or genuflection is required to show respect besides the fact that he was raised in another culture (Indonesian) that is somewhat similar to the African culture so I have no problem with his bowing down to his elders whether Americans or other nationals. Lets focus more on his idiotic but dangerous policies than on trivial things like showing respect.


You wrote that just so the likes of me would come on here and call you the racist that you are so that you could come back and say see the Left is always yelling racist and in this context, yours, you will be absolutely correct, so there's no need to reply.
​


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> When ships of different nations pass at sea they often dip their national flags in passing as a greeting. A U.S. Navy warship will never do this. Another ship can dip it's flag all it wants, or not; but the U.S. Flag on a warship will continue flying high. There is no disrespect intended. We just don't do that.
> 
> Nor should our President be bowing to other world leaders.
> 
> Cruiser


Cruiser, I like you and I think you know that and you're also one of my favorite posters here, but lordy, lordy, not everything relates to your time in thee Navy, ya know.

And in your latest and umpteenth naval analogy you're telling me something I didn't know and I am surprised and saddened to learn your little tid bit because apparently even in the no-mans' land of International Waters we act like we're better than everybody else, something you seem to be proud of.​


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

Peak and Pine said:


> You wrote that just so the likes of me would come on here and call you the racist that you are so that you could come back and say see the Left is always yelling racist and in this context, yours, you will be absolutely correct, so there's no need to reply.
> ​


Pinesol, if you only know how much your ignorance makes you come across as being dense. You would be the second clown on this forum to call me a racist and each time it is because I made a comment concerning Obama. Like I told the last clown, I have more in common with Obama than U can possibly imagine. :icon_smile_big:

By the way, is that the way you new age racists work? Project your despicable characteristics unto others? Now, please educate me about what is racist in my comments. The fact that he is an African born in America or the fact that Africans do bow/prostrate/genuflect in respect to their elders or the fact that he was raised in Indonesia where some of their culture is similar to the African culture?


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

ksinc said:


> I think if they both bowed then you are correct. If you or I went to Japan, met someone, they bowed, and we bowed back; that is respect. When the President goes and he does it unilaterally; then that is being subservient.


The protocol In Japan for bowing as a sign of respect is a fairly complicated procedure. Not so simple as just each bow out of respect.

The Japanese do not expect foreigners to understand (or to participate in) this and generally, we (foreigners) are better off staying out of the bowing business. Chances are good that one will end up embarrassing both himself and the Japanese involved.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Relayer said:


> The protocol In Japan for bowing as a sign of respect is a fairly complicated procedure. Not so simple as just each bow out of respect.
> 
> The Japanese do not expect foreigners to understand (or to participate in) this and generally, we (foreigners) are better off staying out of the bowing business. Chances are good that one will end up embarrassing both himself and the Japanese involved.


Good point.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Asterix said:


> What you guys seem to be missing is the fact that he is first and foremost an African


No, first and foremost he is the President of the United States of America, and during his time as President he isn't African or Causasion or Christian or Jew or Muslim or Southerner or Northerner or any other such designation; he is the President.

I don't care if the President bows or curtsies to another world leader as long as they do the same in return; but if not, I don't want my President to appear to be subservient to the leader of another country. That's just how I feel about it.

And while I'm at it, I wish that just once we could discuss something concerning the President without all of the partisan politics nonsense coming into play. My feelings on this matter have nothing to do with the political party of the President. I don't want a Republican President bowing to anyone either and this President bowing has nothing to do with anything a previous President did. It doesn't seem to matter what the issue is, the hard core left loonies and the hard core right loonies immediately start in with this. Again, just how I feel about it.

Cruiser


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Peak and Pine said:


> Cruiser, I like you and I think you know that and you're also one of my favorite posters here, but lordy, lordy, not everything relates to your time in thee Navy, ya know.
> 
> And in your latest and umpteenth naval analogy you're telling me something I didn't know​


​Then you should be glad I posted it. You learned something that you didn't know beforehand. :icon_smile_big:

Cruiser


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Peak and Pine said:


> because apparently even in the no-mans' land of International Waters we act like we're better than everybody else


But we are.


----------



## MarkfromMD (Nov 5, 2008)

Pentheos said:


> But we are.


andddddddddd +1


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Asterix said:


> Pinesol, if you only know how much your ignorance makes you come across as being dense. You would be the second clown on this forum to call me a racist and each time it is because I made a comment concerning Obama. Like I told the last clown, I have more in common with Obama than U can possibly imagine. :icon_smile_big:
> Now, please educate me about what is racist in my comments.


I appreciate your efforts in trying to come up with a unique and personal brand of vitriol, but I've got a duck's back so you can skip that part in the future. Besides, hurling bombs like _clown_ peg you more a codger than a hipster, a problem shared by many on the antebellum Right.

But to the point. I called you a racist. This can't be the first time you've heard that? No of course it isn't. You've just mentioned that others have called you that. You call them _clowns_. We call you a racist; you come back with _clow_n. I'm not sure you're up to this debate. So I'm leaving this post. There must be others here who can articulate your racist position better than you, sort of a proxy racist poster. I'll check back iin the morning to see who's oozed out of the woodwork. G'night.

This is his orignal racist post:



Asterix said:


> What you guys seem to be missing is the fact that *he [Obama] is first and foremost an African* and it is a known way of life that when an African meets an older person, a bow or genuflection is required to show respect besides the fact that *he was raised in another culture (Indonesian) that is somewhat similar to the African culture *so I have no problem with his bowing down to his elders whether Americans or other nationals. Lets focus more on his idiotic but dangerous policies than on trivial things like showing respect.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Peak and Pine said:


> ...apparently even in the no-mans' land of International Waters we act like we're better than everybody else, something you seem to be proud of.​





Pentheos said:


> But we are.





MarkfromMD said:


> andddddddddd +1


And you two, should you actually meet each other, will probably walk away thinking each is somewhat better than the other because that's the way you like to think on the Right, a vacuous bullying game of I'm The Best.
​


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

Pinesol,

Again, I say, if you weren't so dense or senile you would have been able to see beyond your racist/political BS clearly enough to know the difference between a racist comment and a factual one. Once again, you are a closet racist that desperately needs to project your pathetic and despicable self image unto others.

I humbly await to see who else is asinine enough to call my posting racist!



Peak and Pine said:


> I appreciate your efforts in trying to come up with a unique and personal brand of vitriol, but I've got a duck's back so you can skip that part in the future. Besides, hurling bombs like _clown_ peg you more a codger than a hipster, a problem shared by many on the antebellum Right.
> 
> But to the point. I called you a racist. This can't be the first time you've heard that? No of course it isn't. You've just mentioned that others have called you that. You call them _clowns_. We call you a racist; you come back with _clow_n. I'm not sure you're up to this debate. So I'm leaving this post. There must be others here who can articulate your racist position better than you, sort of a proxy racist poster. I'll check back iin the morning to see who's oozed out of the woodwork. G'night.
> 
> ...


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> No, first and foremost he is the President of the United States of America, and during his time as President he isn't African or Causasion or Christian or Jew or Muslim or Southerner or Northerner or any other such designation; he is the President.
> 
> I don't care if the President bows or curtsies to another world leader as long as they do the same in return; but if not, I don't want my President to appear to be subservient to the leader of another country. That's just how I feel about it.
> 
> ...


I respect your view on this as it is your personal opinion but just because he is the President doesn't make him a God. He is first a human being, a man with a cultural identity that requires respect to people in higher positions or elders and then he is the US president (a temporary position for him or anyone else who occupies the position). It is the myopic view that the US President is a tin god that allows some spittle drooling numbskulls on the Left to think they have something tangible to say. This issue shouldn't even be something that should be making headlines for the simple fact that those of us talking are not the ones who created the position nor are we in the position so whatever he does while he is occupying that position is out of our hands. There is no where in the constitution of the country where it states that the President cannot bow in respect to an elder statesman.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

DukeGrad said:


> Gentlemen
> 
> I disagree with this comment. He is doing a beautiful job for our foreign diplomacy. Picking up from the mess the last jerk made. And I wanted to use another word.
> I consider this man a gentleman, and a very sharp president as well.
> ...


While I have never before found myself in disagreement with DukeGrad, I feel the need to engage in a bit of a rant here. President Obama's bowing to Emperor Akihito is not the only issue. The sad fact is that Akihito did not return the courtesy, retaining the air and claim of superiority. His predecessor, Emperor Hirohito behaved similarly...he also bowed to no one. However, let us recall what he did do.

Hirohito was the Japanese Emperor before, during and after WWII. It was with his blessing and indeed, a result of his urging that countless atrocities were carried out by the Japanese Army, educational and medical communities and indeed, by the Japanese people themselves during and in the months immediatly after WWII. It is a proven fact that Hirohito's office was, at the very least, aware of and condoned the use of captured combatants from at least five different nations, as live guinea pigs in biological warfare research. Hirohito condoned the use of American airmen, held as POWs, as live subjects for various medical and surgical experiments in which they experienced a 100% death rate, their bodies were mutilated with parts being harvested for future use in university anatomy labs and with at least two of the deceased's, body pats were used for cannibalistic ceremonies. Finally, fully two weeks after Japan had signed the surrender, Japanese Army officers were engaged in the beheading of at least 34 captured aircrew members, to eliminate evidence of their previous acts of torture and abuse. According the the article referenced in the OP, Hirohito lived a privileged life until his death on January 7, 1989, well after those who had been victimized under his authority. Yet, he was every bit the war criminal that Adolf Hitler was!

Hirohito at the very least condoned all of this and very well may have urged it's occurrence and that arrogant, pompous a** MacArthur, as an administrative convenience (and with the blessings of the Washington, DC crowd, our elective leadership) to "planting the seeds of democracy", kept Hirohito in power...what a freaking travesty! And now, our President bows to Hirohito's successor, without, at least, the courtesy being returned. President Obama is perhaps too arrogant to be embarrassed for himself in this instance but, there are many of our citizens who are embarrassed for our Country! Rant off.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> While I have never before found myself in disagreement with DukeGrad, I feel the need to engage in a bit of a rant here. President Obama's bowing to Emperor Akihito is not the only issue. The sad fact is that Akihito did not return the courtesy, retaining the air and claim of superiority.


doest that say more about the bad manners of Akihito than the good manners of Obama, seems like the president took the high road and it was not reciprocated


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Asterix said:


> I respect your view on this as it is your personal opinion but just because he is the President doesn't make him a God.


Who said anything about him being a God? Certainly not me. Heck, I didn't vote for him. He isn't a God, but he does stand in representation of all Americans as their elected President; therefore, when performing his duties in public he must put aside such personal notions and remember that what he does reflects on all Americans.



> He is first a human being, a man with a cultural identity that requires respect to people in higher positions or elders and then he is the US president


I would have no problem at all with him bowing to an elderly person IF that elderly person was a private citizen; but not when that elderly person is another world leader. In such a situation they meet as equals regardless of the age or sex of either party. Don't confuse personal conduct with how a world leader must conduct himself/herself when dealing with their fellow leaders.

Cruiser


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

young guy said:


> doest that say more about the bad manners of Akihito than the good manners of Obama, seems like the president took the high road and it was not reciprocated


Makes sense to me.


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> Who said anything about him being a God? Certainly not me. Heck, I didn't vote for him. He isn't a God, but he does stand in representation of all Americans as their elected President; therefore, when performing his duties in public he must put aside such personal notions and remember that what he does reflects on all Americans.
> 
> I would have no problem at all with him bowing to an elderly person IF that elderly person was a private citizen; but not when that elderly person is another world leader. In such a situation they meet as equals regardless of the age or sex of either party. Don't confuse personal conduct with how a world leader must conduct himself/herself when dealing with their fellow leaders.
> 
> Cruiser


But not all Americans have a problem with what he did so that invalidates the point about his standing in representation as being a reflection of ALL Americans. Btw, I didn't know that the only qualification to show respect to an elderly person was only on the condition that the person was/is a private citizen.

It would be fairly difficult to separate personal conduct from public conduct as that would be seen, at best, to pretentious or hypocritical. So if he was a wife beater and child molester but seems like the perfect gentleman in public and in the circle of equals (fellow leaders) because he doesn't do such deplorable acts in public that would be ok?


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

young guy said:


> doest that say more about the bad manners of Akihito than the good manners of Obama, seems like the president took the high road and it was not reciprocated


Not really since Akihito is the Emperor and this is in his own land where no Emperor bows.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> doest that say more about the bad manners of Akihito than the good manners of Obama, seems like the president took the high road and it was not reciprocated


Good point. It would be one thing if the whole world was shocked that the Emperor didn't return Obama's bow, but they are not. Everyone knows it's a one-way deal going in. It was predictable that reciprocation is not on the agenda. I thought this was the 'smart' President?



> In Japanese custom when you bow (ojigi) to anyone you bow also to their ancestors as well. Thus in bowing to Japanese Emperor Akihito, he bowed to his father Emperor Shōwa, thus the despot that bombed Pearl Harbor.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Asterix said:


> Not really since Akihito is the Emperor and this is in his own land where *no Emperor bows*.


And no President bows either.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

ksinc said:


> Good point. It would be one thing if the whole world was shocked that the Emperor didn't return Obama's bow, but they are not. Everyone knows it's a one-way deal going in. It was predictable that reciprocation is not on the agenda. I thought this was the 'smart' President?


Ugly Americanism is only ugly when it's YOUR guy!! :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Ugly Americanism is only ugly when it's YOUR guy!! :icon_smile_wink:


LOL! But he _is_ my guy! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

young guy said:


> doest that say more about the bad manners of Akihito than the good manners of Obama, seems like the president took the high road and it was not reciprocated


The emperor was obviously caught off guard; he looked embarassed to me. He's obviously met thousands of statesmen and suddenly one particularly important one dips into a servile bow--I think returning the gesture was the last thing on his mind.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Asterix said:


> I humbly await to see who else is asinine enough to call my posting racist!


A number of posts have been tacked up since Asterix made the above challange and still not a peep from anyone here. Which to Asterix, and perhaps the rest of you, must mean he's won this one. Fair enough.

CNN finally ripped Lou Dobbs of the air for similar veiled remarks, but here apparently it's okay. (Look for Lou to be posting soon; hey, he's gotta spew bile somewhere.)
​


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

ksinc said:


> And no President bows either.


 of course not! hand holding and a kiss on the cheeks is the absolute limit.:icon_smile_big:


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

If Bush had donned a burqa and walked three steps behind the Saudi, you might have an analogous case. But you don't.


----------



## smujd (Mar 18, 2008)

Is it inappropriate for a President to kiss the Pope's ring? Does it matter of the President is Catholic?


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Cost to visit The Interchange: pennies a month.
Cost to post a reply: fraction of a penny.
The fact one can read such a variety of comments: priceless.
:icon_smile:



eagle2250 said:


> ...His predecessor, Emperor Hirohito behaved similarly...he also bowed to no one.


Oh really?



> ...And now, our President bows to Hirohito's successor, without, at least, the courtesy being returned...


Ah, precedent! Funny thing that:


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Assuming that Nixon is actually bowing (which is a big assumption considering that it looks more like he's leaning over to speak), it's not comparable, since:

1) The emperor appears to be reciprocating with the same gesture; and

2) It's not a sweeping, submissive peasant's bow like Obama gave.

Is this the best the entire left wing of the internet could come up with!?


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Is this the best the entire left wing of the internet could come up with!?


LOL well id say the majority of the 'left wing of the internet' doesn't see this as an issue, the drudge report has little arguement to persuade them it's important


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Yeah, right. It sure hasn't kept them from defending Obama on every left-wing blog I've seen and on every forum I read. The responses seem to go like this:

1) Bush kissed the Saudi (usually accompanied by the fabricated picture of Bush kissing the guy on the lips)

2) Everybody in Japan bows, it's like a handshake! (except they don't bow like that)

3) Oh yeah, Nixon leaned over once while shaking the Hirohito's hand

Really, the only one that even remotely makes sense is:

4) Who cares about protocol anyway?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

PedanticTurkey said:


> 4) Who cares about protocol anyway?


The days of looking like a Hokie Boob were supposed to be over!!


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

smujd said:


> Is it inappropriate for a President to kiss the Pope's ring?


With tongue??

YES!!


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Yeah, right. It sure hasn't kept them from defending Obama on every left-wing blog I've seen and on every forum I read. The responses seem to go like this:
> 
> 1) Bush kissed the Saudi (usually accompanied by the fabricated picture of Bush kissing the guy on the lips)
> 
> ...


you know more about left wing blogs than me

thanks - i did check out dailykos and found this link to Eisenhower, you'll really like the photo of President Eisenhower bowing to the pope,Charles de Gaulle and others


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

Why are some of you trying your best to make this a political discussion? Why can't the politics be left out?

The issue isn't bowing, per se. It's bowing when it conjures up an image of subservience among world leaders. When two people, even world leaders, bow to EACH OTHER as a form of greeting, I see nothing wrong with it. It's no different than two world leaders shaking hands with EACH OTHER as a form of greeting. When it is a mutual display on both sides it is nothing more than a greeting.

I don't know a lot about Japanese culture (although I have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express and I did date a Japanese girl many years ago :icon_smile_big, I think that the Japanese normally shake hands rather than bow when they greet Westerners. And I also have heard that the Japanese do not shake hands and bow at the same time. It's one or the other.

Since the President most likely knew that the bow was not going to be returned, I think that he merely should have let the handshake stand as a respectful greeting. They were meeting as equals and their personal greeting to each other should have reflected that.

Cruiser


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

Cruiser said:


> Why are some of you trying your best to make this a political discussion? Why can't the politics be left out?
> 
> Cruiser


everything is politics, knowingly or not


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

young guy said:


> you know more about left wing blogs than me
> 
> thanks - i did check out dailykos and found this link to Eisenhower, you'll really like the photo of President Eisenhower bowing to the pope,Charles de Gaulle and others


I'm still waiting for one even remotely comparable picture of another American president bowing to _anyone_ like Obama bowed to the Saudi prince and to the Japanese Emperor.

Grab a protractor and get back to me.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I'm still waiting for one even remotely comparable picture of another American president bowing to _anyone_ like Obama bowed to the Saudi prince and to the Japanese Emperor.
> 
> Grab a protractor and get back to me.


oh sorry i didnt understand

you dont care that he bowed,

just how deeply


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Yeah, right. It sure hasn't kept them from defending Obama on every left-wing blog I've seen and on every forum I read. The responses seem to go like this:
> 
> 1) Bush kissed the Saudi (usually accompanied by the fabricated picture of Bush kissing the guy on the lips)
> 
> ...


I would honestly be interested to hear what damage you think this bow has caused to the USA? Not perceived damaged but actual. At most, I just see it as a funny mistake but harmless - I have not read of any changes with our relationship with Japan as a result of this bow.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://gpdhome.typepad.com/royalbl...press-michiko-gives-hillary-warm-welcome.html

https://www.zimbio.com/pictures/i1c...nton+Visits+Japan/CkvNn3x-lbN/Empress+Michiko


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

gsi said:


> I would honestly be interested to hear what damage you think this bow has caused to the USA? Not perceived damaged but actual. At most, I just see it as a funny mistake but harmless - I have not read of any changes with our relationship with Japan as a result of this bow.


Like I said, I see some merit to #4. It's just a little humiliating for Americans. Bowing to the Saudi prince was a lot worse.

Obama thinks these stunts will make foreigners worldwide love him. Maybe that's true (at least as far as polls go), but these gestures and Obama's "apologize to everybody" rhetoric haven't actually gained anything for this country yet, and don't seem to be doing it, either. He couldn't even turn this apparent good will into a second-round runoff for Chicago's olympics bid.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

young guy said:


> oh sorry i didnt understand
> 
> you dont care that he bowed,
> 
> just how deeply


I see a material difference between a statesman nodding his head and going parallel to the floor, yes.

If you don't you're kidding yourself.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Like I said, I see some merit to #4. It's just a little humiliating for Americans. Bowing to the Saudi prince was a lot worse.
> 
> Obama thinks these stunts will make foreigners worldwide love him. Maybe that's true (at least as far as polls go), but these gestures and Obama's "apologize to everybody" rhetoric haven't actually gained anything for this country yet, and don't seem to be doing it, either. He couldn't even turn this apparent good will into a second-round runoff for Chicago's olympics bid.


So there was not any actual damage done from this error of etiquette?


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I would think there's not really any damage distinct from the general disaster of Obama's foreign policy.

But I don't really know what everybody else in the world is thinking.


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I would think there's not really any damage distinct from the general disaster of Obama's foreign policy.
> 
> But I don't really know what everybody else in the world is thinking.


Well (I think) we agree that the bow did not cause any damage. I'll leave the rest for a different time/thread since it's not related to this much blogged about bow.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I would think there's not really any damage distinct from the general disaster of Obama's foreign policy.


No, disastrous is telling bald-faced lies to the American people to justify an invasion and occupation of a country and the murder of 60,000+ civilians.

But thanks for playing.


----------



## PetroLandman (Apr 21, 2006)

*What does one expect?*

After all, this is the guy who gifted the Queen of England with an iPod preloaded with his own speeches. His next clue will be his first one.


----------



## Cruiser (Jul 21, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> No, disastrous is telling bald-faced lies to the American people to justify an invasion and occupation of a country and the murder of 60,000+ civilians.


Oh good grief!!!! Here's a news flash. Everything Obama does isn't right and everything Bush did wasn't right. Likewise everything Obama does isn't wrong and everything Bush did wasn't wrong. You far left and far right fringe guys seem to want to make everything political. If you only knew what you sound like to those of us who reside closer to the middle.

This issue of bowing before a foreign leader has absolutely nothing at all to do with partisan politics. You should think it to be either OK or not OK without regard for the politics of the President doing the bowing.

Cruiser


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

young guy said:


> everything is politics, knowingly or not


Not everything is politics, but there are some who make everything political. Stay away from them.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

FrankDC said:


> No, disastrous is telling bald-faced lies to the American people to justify an invasion and occupation of a country and the murder of 60,000+ civilians.
> 
> But thanks for playing.


But...but...Bush!

Newsflash: Iraq shares large borders with two very nasty sets of people. Can you say "long-term strategery"?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

DCLawyer68 said:


> Not everything is politics, but there are some who make everything political. Stay away from them.


Or put them on ignore!!


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

DCLawyer68 said:


> Not everything is politics, but there are some who make everything political. Stay away from them.


so what is not political?


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

What is this guy doing?


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Cruiser said:


> You far left and far right fringe guys seem to want to make everything political.


Nay. There is a difference. When one begins a political thread, such as this one, they are making a political statement or asking a political question. When the opposition (me!) responds it shouldn't be construed that they (me!) are, to use your phrase, _making everything political._ Why would you think that? They're (me!) simply responding to something already on the table.​


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

Eagle, that piece you did earlier here on Hirohito, well put. I agree with most of what you said (and would agree with everything could I verify all that you stuck in there.) I grew up with that guy still breathing and sipping tea (with the only consolation being my tea cup was stamped Made In Occupied Japan on the bottom.)​


----------



## deanayer (Mar 30, 2008)

The leader of the American people doesn't bow to royalty regardless of cultural norms. We also have cultural norms - oh and also NOBODY bows to Hirohito's little boy except our bower-in-chief who makes up his own nonsensical protocols.

watch this:






This is the whole world not bowing to Hirohito Jr. just the big O.

I also notice akahito wears the same double breasted Navy suit ALL THE TIME.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

"Oba-Mao!" :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

ksinc said:


> I think if they both bowed then you are correct. If you or I went to Japan, met someone, they bowed, and we bowed back; that is respect. When the President goes and he does it unilaterally; then that is being subservient.


So then the foreign leaders weren't impressed?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Howard said:


> So then the foreign leaders weren't impressed?


I've only met one and I did not bow.


----------



## mxgreen (Jan 18, 2009)

Obama's bow is really pathetic. He gave the emperor everything but his nakedness.


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

young guy said:


> so what is not political?


I don't know.

How about rain?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

DCLawyer68 said:


> I don't know.
> 
> How about rain?


https://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N15459972.htm


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Well, the last time the President caught heat for bowing to another world leader, his Press Secretary wrote it off as "The President was not bowing per se, but rather leaning forward to shake the Sheik's hand." Has the White House commented on this faux pas or are they as embarrassed as the rest of us and simply hiding in the far corner of a darkened room, shaking their heads in bewilderment...and shame(!)?


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

ksinc said:


> https://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N15459972.htm


No tool involved there...:icon_smile_big:


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> Has the White House commented on this faux pas or are they as embarrassed as the rest of us and simply hiding in the far corner of a darkened room, shaking their heads in bewilderment...and shame(!)?


I'm just guessing but I think they may have one or maybe even two issues that are a little more important.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

ksinc said:


> I've only met one and I did not bow.


Sometimes you see people shake a hand or even a kiss on the cheek.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

gsi said:


> I'm just guessing but I think they may have one or maybe even two issues that are a little more important.


Yeah, that's it. They would deny that he bowed, but they're just too dang busy right now...


----------



## Henry346 (Oct 31, 2009)

Relayer said:


> Yeah, that's it. They would deny that he bowed, but they're just too dang busy right now...


Should this be anything else that is even mildly substantive I would yield that it is probably less important than the current wars and reforms the President is trying to push. However, it seems that such a superficial thing should not take much energy or resources to clarify.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

They said, "he was just following protocol." 

Maybe they google'd protocol for meeting the Japanese emperor and it said to bow and they just don't know better?!


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

eagle2250 said:


> Well, the last time the President caught heat for bowing to another world leader, his Press Secretary wrote it off as "The President was not bowing per se, but rather leaning forward to shake the Sheik's hand." Has the White House commented on this faux pas or are they as embarrassed as the rest of us and simply hiding in the far corner of a darkened room, shaking their heads in bewilderment...and shame(!)?





gsi said:


> I'm just guessing but I think they may have one or maybe even two issues that are a little more important.





Relayer said:


> Yeah, that's it. They would deny that he bowed, but they're just too dang busy right now...


Listening to last nights evening news, it was reported that the President's job approval rating, in just the last month has dropped in every category, for an overall drop of slightly more than 10%. At this rate, Obama, in just one year, will have achieved the declines in voter approval ratings that it took President Bush eight years to achieve. Now that's progress(?)! It seems to me, that the White House press corps had better make time to explain to the American people, just what in the h*ll the President is doing!


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> Listening to last nights evening news, it was reported that the President's job approval rating, in just the last month has dropped in every category, for an overall drop of slightly more than 10%. At this rate, Obama, in just one year, will have achieved the declines in voter approval ratings that it took President Bush eight years to achieve. Now that's progress(?)! It seems to me, that the White House press corps had better make time to explain to the American people, just what in the h*ll the President is doing!


obama has a long way to go to reach the low of 22 percent that George W had,

still i agree obama needs to do something, it seems like the more middle of the road he goes (or more conservative he becomes) the more his approval goes down


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Would a kiss on the cheek be appropriate?


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

young guy said:


> obama has a long way to go to reach the low of 22 percent that George W had,
> 
> still i agree obama needs to do something, it seems like the more middle of the road he goes (or more conservative he becomes) the more his approval goes down


And precisely which conservative actions/stances has he taken that have caused his rating declines?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> obama has a long way to go to reach the low of 22 percent that George W had,
> 
> still i agree obama needs to do something, it seems like the more middle of the road he goes (or more conservative he becomes) the more his approval goes down


You know, everytime I read a response like this I think "so what?" (George W comparisons.) As if a person can't be doing a bad job if they are doing better than Bush.

It's the relativism of it that just rubs me wrong. It's still striking to some of us that are not values clarified.

It would be nice if Obama would come back from the edge of the cliff as he realizes how far out of the main stream his policy positions are taking him.

I remember being told he just sounded like a far left candidate, but would govern from the center. Now it's hard to pick which was more conservative/moderate - the candidate or the President.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> You know, everytime I read a response like this I think "so what?" (George W comparisons.) As if a person can't be doing a bad job if they are doing better than Bush.
> 
> It's the relativism of it that just rubs me wrong. It's still striking to some of us that are not values clarified.
> 
> ...


i find it difficult to view current event without the shadow of recent events that have influenced them is all,

also my post was in response to eagles post which compared bush's raitings to obama's, so i guess you could say 'so what' to eagles post ot yes?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> i find it difficult to view current event without the shadow of recent events that have influenced them is all,
> 
> also my post was in response to eagles post which compared bush's raitings to obama's, so i guess you could say 'so what' to eagles post ot yes?


If you look at my infraction tab you will see that I'm not allowed to make editorial (or rhetorical) comments regarding the content of moderator's posts. And I comply with this guidance/ruling in the spirit of cooperation and respect for Andy's designated agents. I understand that I have broken other rules at times and it seems like a small price to pay for participation in the board. I also don't want their job; and don't think I could do a better one. So, I defer. They've also come to bat for me or ruled in my favor. It's all part of community/society give-and-take in my view. I realize the tone of my posts can be harsh and unwelcome at times and I wouldn't put up with it either if I was a Mod.

How has Bush's approval rating influenced Obama's approval rating negatively? If anything it would seem to be inflated by those sharing your outlook; no?


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Relayer said:


> And precisely which conservative actions/stances has he taken that have caused his rating declines?


Obama failed to recind "Don't ask don't tell" in his first 100 days in office.

NOW everybody hates him!!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

WouldaShoulda said:


> Obama failed to recind "Don't ask don't tell" in his first 100 days in office.
> 
> NOW everybody hates him!!


He left the troops in Iraq. He hasn't closed Gitmo _yet_. He didn't push forward with hearings on Bush and Cheney or prosecute the CIA ...

I can think of a lot of things that has bothered the left of his party.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> How has Bush's approval rating influenced Obama's approval rating negatively? If anything it would seem to be inflated by those sharing your outlook; no?


i dont think bush's approval rating has influenced obamas. i think people compare the two but the influence is slight if any. i think obamas change in numbers is in part due to progressives not being happy with how slow some of the promises are being fullfiled and i think some of the independents are tired of waiting for the economy to turn around. i am cautiously optomistic as he still has a little over three years (at least) to turn public opinion more favorable


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> He left the troops in Iraq. He hasn't closed Gitmo _yet_. He didn't push forward with hearings on Bush and Cheney or prosecute the CIA ...
> 
> I can think of a lot of things that has bothered the left of his party.


the bush cheney prosecution is something he always said he was against


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> i dont think bush's approval rating has influenced obamas. i think people compare the two but the influence is slight if any. i think obamas change in numbers is in part due to progressives not being happy with how slow some of the promises are being fullfiled and i think some of the independents are tired of waiting for the economy to turn around. i am cautiously optomistic as he still has a little over three years (at least) to turn public opinion more favorable


I agree He has three years, but his party has about 3 more months; then the Nov 2010 races will start in earnest. So He "inherits" the 3 months in the same way people say "insanity is hereditary - you get it from your kids." :icon_smile_big:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> the bush cheney prosecution is something he always said he was against


Yes; I didn't mean it was a broken promise per se only that it was an example of "conservative actions/stances has he taken that have caused his rating declines." Maybe expectations.

So, I think some thought he would, but had to take a moderate stance in the election. I think some people misread him from both angles. Some thought he was being more left to get elected then he would go to the 
middle and some thought he was being more moderate to get elected and then would move more the left.

I'm not endorsing them as consistent just pointing out some complaints I hear...


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Yes; I didn't mean it was a broken promise per se only that it was an example of "conservative actions/stances has he taken that have caused his rating declines." Maybe expectations.
> 
> So, I think some thought he would, but had to take a moderate stance in the election. I think some people misread him from both angles. Some thought he was being more left to get elected then he would go to the
> middle and some thought he was being more moderate to get elected and then would move more the left.
> ...


you know more than me, doesnt every presidents approval raiting go down within the first year or so, i guess thtas why i not worried


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> doesnt every presidents approval raiting go down within the first year or so, i guess thtas why i not worried


Probaby so, but I don't think that's a reason not to worry. Every President's approval goes down, but not all are elected to a 2nd term. There's some other factors.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

ksinc said:


> It would be nice if Obama would come back from the edge of the cliff as he realizes how far out of the main stream his policy positions are taking him.
> 
> I remember being told he just sounded like a far left candidate, but would govern from the center. Now it's hard to pick which was more conservative/moderate - the candidate or the President.


I'm not sure what policy positions you're referring to. On the major issues Obama is doing what he said he'd do during his campaign, and nearly all the criticism leveled at him so far (I mean aside from Glenn Beck's open weeping) has come from the left, not the right. He promised a lot of changes, and like all other presidential candidates he's now dealing with the logistics of implementing those changes, e.g. the legalities of closing the Bush-Cheney gulag, the politics of health care reform, replacing Don't Ask Don't Tell etc.

He's been in office less than a year, and it's my understanding that this coming year we'll see major job creation programs, changes to our corporate tax code that will begin to bring jobs back to the U.S., the reinstatement of sane banking regulations and a host of other changes. Give the man another year and then judge him.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

young guy said:


> i think obamas change in numbers is in part due to progressives not being happy with how slow some of the promises are being fullfiled and i think some of the independents are tired of waiting for the economy to turn around. i am cautiously optomistic as he still has a little over three years (at least) to turn public opinion more favorable


In a very, very small part. You can see the full demographic data from Gallup here:

FYI self-identified "liberals" are only a small part of the electorate and Obama's approval ratings from them have only declined about 5% or so from their peak.

Compare that with "whites" who started out at 63% approval and are now at 44%, or with "males" (64 then, 51 now), independents (62 / 48) etc.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

PedanticTurkey said:


> In a very, very small part. You can see the full demographic data from Gallup here:
> 
> FYI self-identified "liberals" are only a small part of the electorate and Obama's approval ratings from them have only declined about 5% or so from their peak.
> 
> Compare that with "whites" who started out at 63% approval and are now at 44%, or with "males" (64 then, 51 now), independents (62 / 48) etc.


Great link - thanks!


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

So,in Japan or China bowing would mean hello and in another foreign country a bow would mean a form of defense?


----------



## DCLawyer68 (Jun 1, 2009)

Personally my greatest disappointment has been Obama's confirmation of basic Bush era tenants regarding executive power, e.g. the State Secrets doctrine, the inherent authority of the President to detain, etc. 

See Salon's . Especially embarrasing is the complicity of those who were the most vocal critics of Bush on this. 

And .

Here's on Obama's claim that he doesn't need Congressional oversight of the proceedings at Guantanamo.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

ksinc said:


> You know, everytime I read a response like this I think "so what?" (George W comparisons.) As if a person can't be doing a bad job if they are doing better than Bush.
> 
> ...





young guy said:


> i find it difficult to view current event without the shadow of recent events that have influenced them is all,
> 
> also my post was in response to eagles post which compared bush's raitings to obama's, so i guess you could say 'so what' to eagles post ot yes?





ksinc said:


> If you look at my infraction tab you will see that I'm not allowed to make editorial (or rhetorical) comments regarding the content of moderator's posts. And I comply with this guidance/ruling in the spirit of cooperation and respect for Andy's designated agents. I understand that I have broken other rules at times and it seems like a small price to pay for participation in the board. I also don't want their job; and don't think I could do a better one. So, I defer. They've also come to bat for me or ruled in my favor. It's all part of community/society give-and-take in my view. I realize the tone of my posts can be harsh and unwelcome at times and I wouldn't put up with it either if I was a Mod.
> 
> .....


Young guy: The point of my post was to point out that our Presidents actions in the first year of his term have confused and alienated a good many of those middle of the road voters, who were so critical to his getting elected. Those of the far left fringe may still love him but, their numbers are insufficient to get Obama re-elected. Based on his job approval numbers, the 'critical middle' voters are abandoning him in droves. While I did indeed comment that it seems to be taking Obama just a year to achieve the declines in voter approval that it took Bush seven, plus years to achieve, the point of my post was not to compare the two but rather, to emphatically suggest that the White House press corps should be more effectively education us intellectually challenged voters on just "what the h*ll President Obama is doing!" Right now, the average American is at once, confused, frightened and walking a road of quiet desperation.

Ksinc: Your innuendo is at once misleading as to the rules for participation in these fora and personally frustrating to me. You are well aware that a moderator's posts, made as a member participating in a thread discussion, are just as open to comment as posts made by any other member. Only moderation decisions are not open for public debate. What was it about my post, referenced by young guy, caused you to believe it had anything to do with my duties as a moderator? Is it your expectation that I must cease participation as a member and participate only as a moderator? If so, that seems a bit excessive!


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

DCLawyer68 said:


> Especially embarrasing is the complicity of those who were the most vocal critics of Bush on this.


How will US ex-pats in Europe ever face their freinds over THAT one??


----------



## Bermuda (Aug 16, 2009)

Bush kissing and holding hands with the Saudis was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen....he showed he was obviously "in bed" with them


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

eagle2250 said:


> ... Right now, the average American is at once, confused, frightened and walking a road of quiet desperation....


A lament and unsubstantiated hyperbole worthy of Fox News. :icon_smile:

But for any few who trudge thus perhaps they will have another song to sing at least by the time the last song comes.


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

Bermuda said:


> Bush kissing and holding hands with the Saudis was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen....he showed he was obviously "in bed" with them


It is a Bush family tradition. Lots got upset with junior for doing it but not senior. Strange that.

Speaking of Bushes, one commentator has said that Obama wasn't actually bowing but jokingly pretending he was going to puke in the Emperor's lap, just to keep a weird kind of continuity going.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Bermuda said:


> Bush kissing and holding hands with the Saudis was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen....he showed he was obviously "in bed" with them


You do realize the image of his kissing the Saudi prince on the mouth is a photoshop, right? (Protip: look at the front of Bush's jacket.)

The things some people will believe...


----------



## Quay (Mar 29, 2008)

^ You're right. In the originals it's clear they probably just brushed lips.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

Quay said:


> ^ You're right. In the originals it's clear they probably just brushed lips.


It's cheek-kissing, common among equals in many cultures. And even if it was a full on-the-lips smack, I'd far prefer to see my president doing that than bowing and scraping to world leaders.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

Bermuda said:


> Bush kissing and holding hands with the Saudis was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen....he showed he was obviously "in bed" with them


Actually, he displayed a complete and nuanced understanding of their culture, dispite how disturbing it looked!!


----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

ksinc said:


> It would be nice if Obama would come back from the edge of the cliff as he realizes how far out of the main stream his policy positions are taking him.
> 
> .


His job approval rating in the gallup poll is at 50%, how does that put him far out of the main stream? Seems like he's right in the middle.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

gsi said:


> His job approval rating in the gallup poll is at 50%, how does that put him far out of the main stream? Seems like he's right in the middle.


It doesn't. Bad premise. I said his "policy positions" are taking him out of the main stream. Eventually they eat away at job approval and even personal approval.

Job approval is made up of a lot of different things. Just because 65% oppose policy A and 65% oppose policy B does not mean they are the same 65%.

For example, 65% oppose trials for terrorists in NY Civilian Courts and there are similar numbers on other policy positions.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)

Quay said:


> ^ You're right. In the originals it's clear they probably just brushed lips.


Man,that's disturbing.


----------



## Howard (Dec 7, 2004)




----------



## gsi (Nov 3, 2005)

ksinc said:


> For example, 65% oppose trials for terrorists in NY Civilian Courts and there are similar numbers on other policy positions.


 Curious where you got that number from? The Rasmussen Reports 
has it at about 51%. All the articles I saw about it referenced this poll.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

gsi said:


> *Curious where you got that number from*? The Rasmussen Reports
> has it at about 51%. All the articles I saw about it referenced this poll.


CNN https://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.c.../cnn_politicalticker+(Blog:+Political+Ticker)



> The poll indicates that 64 percent believe Mohammed should be tried in military court, with 34 percent suggesting that he face trial in civilian court.


----------



## a4audi08 (Apr 27, 2007)

most of the american people, even a majority of Republicans see nothing wrong with Obama's bow. as usual, much ado about nothing. a lot of people prefer symbolism over reality. is cheney refuses to bow it's great bc it makes us appear stronger, but they don't care or maybe don't even know that his policies have weakened us tremendously.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

a4audi08 said:


> most of the american people, even a majority of Republicans see nothing wrong with Obama's bow. as usual, much ado about nothing. a lot of people prefer symbolism over reality. is cheney refuses to bow it's great bc it makes us appear stronger, but they don't care or maybe don't even know that his policies have weakened us tremendously.


How has Cheney weakened us?


----------



## mxgreen (Jan 18, 2009)

a4audi08 said:


> most of the american people, even a majority of Republicans see nothing wrong with Obama's bow. as usual, much ado about nothing. a lot of people prefer symbolism over reality.


I don't know if your first sentence is true. Are you referring to a specific poll?



a4audi08 said:


> is cheney refuses to bow it's great bc it makes us appear stronger, but they don't care or maybe don't even know that his policies have weakened us tremendously.


Bush/Cheney's policies did not weaken the United States.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Pentheos said:


> How has Cheney weakened us?


Yeah; you have to wonder if in the Russian, Chinese, and Iranian dossiers on Cheney there is just two sentences.

"Shot his best friend in the face with a double barrell shotgun from close range." "Do not test him." :devil:

Gotta love the "grouchy old guys" that "stand in the door" for us and are willing to tell the "right people" to "jump in the lake" when it's necessary. But I still like Rumsfeld ... so there ya go!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

And the bottom falls out ...

https://www.gallup.com/poll/122627/Obama-Job-Approval-Down-49.aspx

This will be interesting to see play out.



> Of the post-World War II presidents, , doing so in his 10th month on the job. Gerald Ford dropped below 50% approval during his third month in office, and Bill Clinton did so in his fourth month. Ronald Reagan, like Obama, also dropped below 50% in his 10th month in office, though Reagan's drop occurred a few days sooner in that month (Nov. 13-16, 1981) than did Obama's (Nov. 17-19, 2009).
> 
> *But all presidents except John Kennedy dropped below the majority approval level at some point in their presidencies, and all recovered after the first time below this mark to go back above 50% approval.*


----------



## a4audi08 (Apr 27, 2007)

Pentheos said:


> How has Cheney weakened us?


you think the war in iraq strengthened our position in the world?


----------



## a4audi08 (Apr 27, 2007)

mxgreen said:


> I don't know if your first sentence is true. Are you referring to a specific poll?


fox news poll

https://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com...ror-was-appropriate----even-in-a-fox-poll.php



> Respondents were asked: "When the president of the United States is traveling overseas, do you think it is appropriate for him to bow to a foreign leader if that is the country's custom or is it never appropriate for the president to bow to another leader?"
> The numbers: Appropriate 67%, Never appropriate 26%. Even a majority of _Republican_ respondents were okay with the bow, by a 53%-40% margin. Democrats weigh in at 84%-9%, and independents 62%-30%.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

a4audi08 said:


> you think the war in iraq strengthened our position in the world?


Provided it remains successful, yes.

In failure, no.


----------



## mxgreen (Jan 18, 2009)

a4audi08 said:


> fox news poll
> 
> https://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com...ror-was-appropriate----even-in-a-fox-poll.php


I saw that article. It's funny how Talking Points Memo trumpets the title - "Americans Overwhelmingly say Obama Bowing to Japanese Emperor Was Appropriate -- Even in a Fox Poll" and, yet, the question speaks only to a "bow to a foreign leader", not specifically to Obama's bow to the Japanese emperor.

I assume that Fox took the poll in response to Obama's bow to the emperor, but I'm uncertain whether Fox sought opinion regarding Obama's bow to the emperor or to the general thought of a U.S. president bowing to any "leader" of a foreign country. If the former, then the question is poorly worded. Aside from the absence of reference to Obama's bow to the emperor, after watching a video of 46 representatives of other countries shaking hands with, rather than bowing to, the emperor fairly recently I think it is debatable that it is customary for a representative of a foreign country to bow to the emperor.

Finally, I am against the president, in his representative capacity, bowing to anyone. The still photos really cast Obama in a pathetic light. But, the video is not that bad.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

mxgreen said:


> Finally, I am against the president, in his representative capacity, bowing to anyone. The still photos really cast Obama in a pathetic light. But, the video is not that bad.


your opinion naturally, but you must understand it is something all presidents have done at least since wwII, so being a traditionalist i think it is appropriate obama follows in this tradition


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> your opinion naturally, but you must understand it is something all presidents have done at least since wwII, so being a traditionalist i think it is appropriate obama follows in this tradition


All Presidents since WW2 have bowed to the Japanese emperor? I didn't know that. I saw a Nixon head-nod-bow (wasn't that China), but I haven't seen pictures of Reagan, GHWB, or Clinton bowing.

Clinton also had a head-nod-bow to the Japanese and was criticized for it.

https://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/19/...ent-s-inclination-no-it-wasn-t-a-bow-bow.html

I like this opening line "IF I see another king, I think I shall bite him," Teddy Roosevelt once growled.



> But the "thou need not bow" commandment from the State Department's protocol office maintained a constancy of more than 200 years. Administration officials scurried to insist that the eager-to-please President had not really done the unthinkable.
> "It was not a bow-bow, if you know what I mean," said Ambassador Molly Raiser, the chief of protocol.
> White House officials described Mr. Clinton's tilt as something of an improvisation. Because Emperor Akihito broke with tradition in turn to raise his glass at the state dinner, some even said Mr. Clinton had managed something of a breakthrough.
> "Presidents don't bow, and Emperors don't toast," one official said. "So this was a little bit like the cultures meeting each other halfway."


No other Presidents are mentioned. I'm sure if there was some recent parallel it would have been mentioned.



> There was that curtsy, during the Reagan years, when Lenore Annenberg, herself the chief of protocol, forgot herself entirely and did a little dip to greet a visiting Prince Charles. That prompted a stern warning from Miss Manners against those who might mock the effort that "was once put into freeing Americans from the necessity of bending their knees." Soon afterward, when Nancy Reagan greeted Queen Elizabeth II behind closed doors, her press secretary acknowledged that Mrs. Reagan had bowed her head but insisted, "It was definitely not a curtsy."


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> All Presidents since WW2 have bowed to the Japanese emperor? I didn't know that. I saw a Nixon head-nod, but haven't seen pictures of Reagan, GHWB, or Clinton bowing.


mxgreen said he didnt like the us pres bowing to anyone, see previous post, us presidents have bowed to many foreign leaders including the japanese emperor but not all to him or only to him, my favorite photo is Eisenhower bowing to Charles deGaulle, that i think should have been reversed for no other reason that france would not have been liberated from the nazi without the us


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> mxgreen said he didnt like the us pres bowing to anyone, see previous post, us presidents have bowed to many foreign leaders including the japanese emperor but not all to him or only to him, my favorite photo is Eisenhower bowing to Charles deGaulle, that i think should have been reversed for no other reason that france would not have been liberated from the nazi without the us


Ok, but that's still not "all."

This is the most I can find of Ronaldus Maximus under Reagan Bows, but it could also be that he is just so much taller then her.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Ok, but that's still not "all."


ok majority then since wwii, both parties


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> ok *majority* then since wwii, both parties


You can't substantiate that either; can you?


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> You can't substantiate that either; can you?


your right, i can only find 5 did and 6 did not


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

> Just 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. That's the lowest level of support measured for the plan in nearly two dozen tracking polls conducted since June.
> The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% now oppose the plan.


https://www.rasmussenreports.com/pu.../healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

ksinc said:


> https://www.rasmussenreports.com/pu.../healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform


is rasmussens methodology reliable? how do you judge?


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

young guy said:


> is rasmussens methodology reliable? how do you judge?


Rasmussen looks for specific answers, so they frame their surveys to achieve their preordained result. It's misleading at best.

A sizeable chunk of people oppose the current bill, because it doesn't include a single-payer or other "robust public option", not because they're opposed to health care reform.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

young guy said:


> is rasmussens methodology reliable? how do you judge?


Rasmussen is usually the most correct / accurate in regard to political predictions, but in terms of sentiment I tend to go with the averaging approach of a RealClearPolitics. I think a lot goes into how a question is phrased, but I would think he's within or near his own estimated error. He has a good reputation.


----------



## young guy (Jan 6, 2005)

since ksnic posted his poll about obama i thought id add one to - seems like all the hoo-haw over independents abandoning obama hasnt really been true since at least august - heres a link to the poll:


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

ksinc said:


> Rasmussen is usually the most correct / accurate in regard to political predictions, but in terms of sentiment I tend to go with the averaging approach of a RealClearPolitics. I think a lot goes into how a question is phrased, but I would think he's within or near his own estimated error. He has a good reputation.


 Scott Rasmussen is bought and paid for by the Republican Party, and while his poll results on the face are fairly accurate, it is his intentional slanting of the questions and more so, the summary of results that causes him to loose bipartisan credibility.

Two perfect examples.

#1 - In a poll in the early spring, Rasmussen asked if people supported Obama's stimulus plan and it received about the same numbers as the other polls. But then in a second poll they asked if those surveyed supported Obama and the Democratic Congress stimulus package. Not surprisingly, with the low ratings for Congress, the numbers went down. 

Fox News was on the air immediately saying Obama was losing support for the stimulus. 

#2 - Another spring time poll was again loaded with four fairly leading questions, the featured one of which read: "Some people say that having the government subsidize mortgage payments for financially troubled homeowners puts the government in the position of rewarding bad behavior. Is the government rewarding bad behavior when it provides subsidies to those who are most at risk of losing their homes?"

This question yielded 55% yes and 32% no.

Rasmussen then publishes and article about the poll, saying the American people are overwhelmingly against this kind of personal bail out.

However, if you look at numerous other polls from the same time frame (Gallup, ABC, Time) - when they asked the same questions in a more straight forward way: Do you support the program or not?

The Post asked this question and got: 64% support, 35% oppose.

The Times asked it and got: 61% yes, 20% no.

In other words, the plan appears to have not just majority but something approaching overwhelming support. But of course, Rasmussen (and the usual right wing suspects - Fox, WSJ, Drudge) didn't pick up on that part of the story. Only their skewed results.

It's called manipulating the results, and Rasmussen is the best at it. They are just a Republican tool--they know it and so does everybody else.


----------



## Peak and Pine (Sep 12, 2007)

That was very informative. Thanks for doing the research.​


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

My "go-to" site for polling information is here:

https://www.pollingreport.com/

It's never a good idea to rely on a single polling source.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> My "go-to" site for polling information is here:
> 
> https://www.pollingreport.com/
> 
> It's never a good idea to rely on a single polling source.


I agree with you about relying on a single source.

I clicked on the Health Care issue https://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm and the first poll is "Fox News / Opinion Dynamics."

Which made me wonder if you think Fox News / Opinion Dynamics is more or less fair than Rasmussen?

FWIW, I noticed all the polls seem to be within 48%-51% opposed, but they aren't as recent as Rasmussen and within the same timeframe he was also at the same percentage. So, it seems all of them are pretty close and they show a downward trend of 1-2% per poll.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Was looking around and found a pretty interesting graph.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Hillary 59.1%/36.3% 
Obama 55.5%/38.5% 

Nice trend line for Hillary.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://www.answers.com/topic/rasmussen-reports#Criticism



> *Criticism*
> 
> Democratic Party activists have pointed out that Scott Rasmussen was a paid consultant for the 2004 George W. Bush campaign.[10] Rasmussen Reports have also performed paid work for Bush opponents. For example, the anti-war organization After Downing Street commissioned a Rasmussen poll on support for impeachment of President Bush. [11]. According to Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com, while there are no apparent records of Scott Rasmussen or Rasmussen Reports making contributions to political candidates and its public election polls are generally regarded as reliable, *"some observers have questioned its issue-based polling, which frequently tends to elicit responses that are more conservative than those found on other national surveys."[12].*
> 
> ...


----------

