Who the hell cares if he bowed?

[Mazz 0]

Are we really that stuck up as a nation that we believe our president shouldn't bow to anyone? The dude can bow or not bow to anybody he chooses. The golden rule people. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If we as Americans want respect over sees then we need to show respect to them. Respect and submission are not one and the same.

We need to get over ourselves.

In the Navy, you can't put your hands in your pockets but I was always told not to put my hands in my pockets by people with their hands in their pockets. Kinda funny huh?

[TomAiello 26]

Not me.

I'm more concerned about the trillions of dollars that are being borrowed in my name, and that my kids will be stuck repaying.

Honestly, I'm wondering how many of these non-event "events" are engineered to distract the public from the important things going on.

Turn on the news and you can hear about the great bowing controversy, about the nefarious iPod gift agenda, about the monarchy hug scandal, even about the outfit that Michelle Obama wore to meet with the first lady of France.

What about the actual money spent (or committed to spending) on this jaunt--money we have to provide?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[billvon 3,070]

>Are we really that stuck up as a nation that we believe our president
>shouldn't bow to anyone?

No, the republicans just need to hate him, so this is their latest opportunity. Democrats would have done the same thing had Bush done something similar.

>Respect and submission are not one and the same.

Of course, and most people understand that.

[FallingOsh 0]

If it really wasn't that big a deal then why is the White House feeding us a bunch of bullshit?

The bow is an act of subservience, not mutual respect and understanding. Do unto others as we would have them do unto us means mutual respect. I highly doubt the Saudi King would come to the White House and kiss Obama's feet (although I'm sure there would be a long line of reports willing to fill in).

I don't think this whole thing deserves as much attention as it's getting especially with the current state of the nation. I do, however, think it (coupled with the other remarks about this country on his trip) speaks volumes as to how he views America and it's roll in the world. He's subservient and appologetic. You may think that's a good thing, but showing weakness on the world stage is inviting trouble. That may be why the White House is denying the whole thing.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

If it really wasn't that big a deal then why is the White House feeding us a bunch of bullshit?

To distract you from the really important things that are going on at the same time?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[lawrocket 3]

I saw an interesting documentary a couple of months ago - I think it was "The Secrets of Body Language." A susbtantial part was devoted to international politics, showing dominance by being on the right, not entering a room first, etc.

I would find it amusing if there wasn't so much at stake. Symbolism, etc., is dumb.

However, over the past few years I have come to the conclusion that we live in a pretty damned shallow world.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

Absolutely.

It's all about respect for people and local customs.

If one is in anothers country one should follow the local customs or not make the visit in the first place.

If I was in the states, I'd stand and be silent when the National Anthem was being played.

I would remove my hat when entering a Catholic church , even though I'm not religious in anyway.

It would be rude and the hight of arrogance to do otherwise.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Andy9o8 2]

I watched the video with computer-enhanced audio, and it's very revealing:

Obama (shaking hand): "How do you do? [pause] Ooh! Is that a Rolex? Lemme see."

[shropshire 0]

He was lucky... some of the other heads of state would have had it off his wrist before he even noticed

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[rushmc 23]

I do

And I think would have had it been Bush.

To be fair, I would say the same if Bush did it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

Absolutely.

It's all about respect for people and local customs.

If one is in anothers country one should follow the local customs or not make the visit in the first place.

If I was in the states, I'd stand and be silent when the National Anthem was being played.

I would remove my hat when entering a Catholic church , even though I'm not religious in anyway.

It would be rude and the hight of arrogance to do otherwise.

+1

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Absolutely.

It's all about respect for people and local customs.

If one is in anothers country one should follow the local customs or not make the visit in the first place.

If I was in the states, I'd stand and be silent when the National Anthem was being played.

I would remove my hat when entering a Catholic church , even though I'm not religious in anyway.

It would be rude and the hight of arrogance to do otherwise.

Holding hands is symbol of equality and respect. A kiss on the cheek is a proper respectful greeting. Bowing is the cultural symbol of subserviance. By your own argument it was wrong for him to bow.

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

[billvon 3,070]

>Bowing is the cultural symbol of subserviance.

Not in many cultures. CEO's and CTO's of large companies have bowed to me.

[Andy9o8 2]

OK, joking aside.

I looked at the video. Obama bowed; the king did not.
Obama and the king are each heads of state, therefore protocol would have them greet each other - by whatever means - as equals. Had the king returned the bow (think "Japanese style"), that would have been an equal greeting. But this was not. So technically I think Obama goofed on protocol.

Presidents have staffers whose job is to prepare the President and First Lady on protocol matters - such as how a President properly greets a king; and that should have been done prior to this trip. (Unless he was briefed to expect the king to return his bow, but the king played him by leaving him hanging.)

The significance? It was the kind of slightly-embarrassing rookie mistake a President tends to make in his first months in office. Nothing more; nothing less.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Holding hands is symbol of equality and respect. A kiss on the cheek is a proper respectful greeting. Bowing is the cultural symbol of subserviance.

Not always. In Japanese culture, for example, bows of equal "height" between people are deemed a greeting between equals, essentially akin to handshakes or salutes.

[1969912 0]

Quote

The significance? It was the kind of slightly-embarrassing rookie mistake a President tends to make in his first months in office. Nothing more; nothing less.

Agree.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[SkyBastard 0]

i think the key point that he was visiting them so he bowed.

i think that seems customary enough. i haven reseached it, local customs etc as i supect people posting here havent but...

if i was a king, a few hundred years ago and i took a few knights to go an visit another king, in another land, well, when i got into his castle and he's on his throne, surrounded as he was by all his knights and warlords and advisors and splendor, i don't just think it'd be polite to bow, i think it'd be damn prudent to not offend.

just because i was a king also, doesn't mean i can't show my repect when i'm in his land, and nothing to stop him offing me if i don't

Dude #320
"Superstitious" is just a polite way of saying "incredibly fucking stupid".
DONK!

[AdamLanes 1]

You people realize that this happened in the UK right, and not in Saudi Arabia. I think Tom Aiello is right that this is distracting from the real issues including unsustainable government spending. The U.S. Government is financed in a large part by the Saudis, so Obama probably feels the need to keep King Abdullah happy so he keeps buying U.S. Government bonds.

[billvon 3,070]

>Obama probably feels the need to keep King Abdullah happy so
> he keeps buying U.S. Government bonds.

I suspect he cares a lot more about cheap oil than he cares about US bonds. After all, China holds 24% of our foreign debt; Saudi Arabia holds about 2%. On the other hand, we spend 22 billion a year on oil there.

[TrophyHusband 0]

i saw the video and i'm not sure that he did bow. what i am sure of is this issue is making the right look every bit like a bunch of jack-asses as the left is about every little thing gwb did.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[AdamLanes 1]

2% of the current U.S. national debt is $220,000,000,000. Thats right $220 Billion dollars. That's a hell of a lot of money, and there is no end to defecit spending in sight. I wonder what the interest rate is on that $11,000,000,000,000+ of current U.S. national debt?

[billvon 3,070]

>2% of the current U.S. national debt is $220,000,000,000.

So over the past 20 years we've given him 400 billion to pay for oil and he's given us 220 billion to buy bonds. Sounds like we should be selling him _more_ stuff!

Saudi Arabia is about #20 in terms of countries that hold our debt - and we need his oil far more than we need his bond purchasing power.

[pilot-one 0]

and we need his oil far more than we need his bond purchasing power.

The irony is we DON'T need his oil. We have our own. The problem is we have a bunch of liberal jackasses running our country that have an agenda that drilling for our own oil doesn't fit.

[billvon 3,070]

>The irony is we DON'T need his oil. We have our own.

Sorry, math doesn't work; you really can't rely on Limbaugh and Beck for stuff like this. We have enough oil to run our own country for about 3 years, period. (21 billion barrels P90 reserves, use is 7.3 billion barrels a year.)

So unless you want to be groveling at the feet of _all_ the oil sheiks, best that we find another energy source to run our country.

>The problem is we have a bunch of liberal jackasses running our country
> that have an agenda that drilling for our own oil doesn't fit.

Yes. That agenda is called "the future" - and I am glad we are finally developing a strategy that's better than drill, burn and beg.

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

and we need his oil far more than we need his bond purchasing power.

The irony is we DON'T need his oil. We have our own. The problem is we have a bunch of liberal jackasses running our country that have an agenda that drilling for our own oil doesn't fit.

The SAD thing is that so many are totally ignorant of the size of US oil reserves compared with the US demand for oil.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.