[DELETED BY AUTHOR]
4 Mar
British Not Happy With Obama’s Diss of P.M.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Wednesday, March 4th, 2009 at 12:45 pm | 56 views
Stats
LOL, now what the President decorates the oval office now has some special meaning… Geez a bust was banished! Was that a presidential banishment or a decorator’s banishment.
@blast: If you are unfamiliar with how that act was perceived by our ally I suggest you visit the link provided or do a google on the subject.
Your ignorance on this point is glaring.
So much for “working with our allies”
All the British want is some parades and ceremony to reaffirm they’re respected. Obama can’t even do that?! Too cold to go to the airport and meet our best ally? Nice.
Washington Post too. Kinda hard for the Admin to ignore.
Dana Milbank too
hmmm
Some of the things Obama has done can be explained by his world-view (Socialism). Others can be explained by his narcissism and naïveté. But, this makes no sense. Why be down right rude to the Prime Minister, especially a Progressive one? As I have said, a lot of what he does is purposeful and other is because he is clueless. The interesting exercise is to figure out which one is at play. I guess…this falls into the clueless category.
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
The Telegraph is like Fox News for the UK and is a mouthpiece of the conservative party. So if you have a non partisan source then let me know, but until then this piece is laughable.
blast, the bust was given to Bush after 911 as a gift for display to commemorate the allied bonding.
When Obama offered to give it back, since he didn’t want to keep it in the Oval Office himself, the British (rather appalled he wanted to give it back) came back and reiterated they like him to keep it.
He didn’t need to put it in the Oval Office, but could have had it on display elsewhere in the WH. Instead, he chose to slap our British allies with a return of the gift with little fanfare. Obviously, Obama places no import on it’s historic significance in time… and we know he’s not much of a Churchill fan.
His action was rude, and uncalled for. None of which surprises me.
@blast: Was there something about doing a simple Google on the subject that escapes you or are you just being an ASS?
Don’t bother answering. I know.
OK, here are some non-Telegraph news stories that you apparently have missed:
Newsweek. Are they part of the conservative conspiracy?
How about Dana Milbank at the Washington Post? Is he a right wing hack?
I suppose you think that the London Times is in the tank for conservatives but they also objected:
17,400 more links here if those don’t satisfy you.
Mata, if you could produce all of the story on that I would buy your explanation. I doubt Obama was going to send back a “gift” but something that was an heirloom lent by the British. And I am also sure the WH has “people” who decide what is the right protocol for such things. I tend to see this in the light of hysterics when it comes from people like mikeA and “The Telegraph” (BLOG). I would believe you Mata if there was more meat on the bones of this story. Frankly I am skeptical, very skeptical.
@blast: “I would believe you Mata if there was more meat on the bones of this story. Frankly I am skeptical, very skeptical.”
@MataHarley: Your #1 fan is ready and waiting to do some butt kissing.
I think we should change “Frankly I am skeptical, very skeptical”
to
“Frankly I’m ignorant, very ignorant.”
It was lent… not banished! It was not lent to Obama. Get a life mikeA.
@blast: If you don’t have anything substantive to say which addresses the subject of this post then why say anything at all?
Your habit of nit picking is nothing more than a further demonstration of your wankering egocentrism.
Obama had the bust removed. It upset the British.
More to the point, the removal of the bust appears to be part of a broader attitude change in the White House.
THAT is the subject here.
Either stick to it or see your comments deleted.
I am under no obligation to allow you to take this thread hostage to your malformed ego.
First of all, blast, there is no ‘hysteria” on my part for Obama’s rude and insensitive behavior. Nor is his lackluster support for our current allies (i.e. Britain, Columbia and Israel, just to name three) a surprise.
Yes, the “gift” was a long term loan… renewed thru Bush’s second term, and offered again for Obama
third term… sorry, freudian slip there with the possible Mr. Chavez… er Obama… multiple and endless terms in the future.It did not come with the stipulation that it had to be displayed in the Oval Office.
However I commented on the return of the Churchhill bust before, using the somewhat tempered Telegraph article at the time to show the effect of doing so.
So the Churchill bust, which has significant import to the Brits was just not up to the Obama snuff. As I said, he didn’t need to keep it in the Oval Office. It was, IMHO, a serious diplomatic slap to the face, and made our British allies queasy.
BTW, instead of the loan of British heirloom to honor the transatlantic relationship, I guess they couldn’t figure out anything that would satisfy the picky and rude POTUS. So they brought him a pen holder instead.
Considering all the spending bills he’ll be signing into law this year… hang in the next month or two… it’s probably appropo
BTW, since you have such an aversion to the Telegraph, here’s the Daily Mail’s version relating to the subject of Mike’s post; also noting the not so subtle snub by our arrogant POTUS.
You wouldn’t expect a socialist/communist/nazi to keep a bust of Churchill, the last true Brit to fight for freedom, in his office, would you?
The British know they’re burnt toast anyway. They just turned a murdering Kennedy into a Knight.
Hey, the Brits are P.O.’d and the Russians have told Hussein O to kiss their a** twice in a month. Hussein O’s influence is far and wide among the residents of America’s mental health facilities, aka insane asylums.
hahaha….
Will Hussein O have the statue of liberty destroyed next?
Mata: Did I just hear the sound of lips puckering up?
@Scrapiron: France will be told to come and get it and send it to the recycling heap.
No press conference, no lunch. For the PM.
What on earth is Obama thinking? Perhaps he fears to give another press conference because that would put the DOW under six thousand
It’s obvious why Acting President Obama didn’t want to have a stand up. I mean how would it look with the dummy Obama and his little teleprompter buddy standing next to the PM. The Obama act is a little screwed up without his little buddy to read the script from.
It’s pretty obvious that Obama doesn’t care a whit about foriegn policy. That’s why he dumped state on Hillary. But at the same time, he also doesn’t understand it, and neither do his staff flunkies and so just look for more of this crap down the road.
Of course, for all the Telegraph’s bluster, the British are just auxiliaries at this point. Like everybody else.
If you are given a gift – it is impolite to try and give it back. The Queen gets all sorts of gifts which she either stores or gives away – she doesn’t make a point of trying to hand it back. Plus it’s Churchill – if it was a bust of Posh Spice – I would understand.
Maybe when Obama visits the UK – we should hold back the usual pomp & pagentry and put on a cold buffet at Heathrow airport;)
@GaffaUK: Touched a raw nerve with you too hunh?
Will wonders never cease?
Sure Obama is looking to fix up the damaged U.S. relationships around the world. He’d be happy to patch up things with Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, etc. Screw those other guys! Who needs the English anyways? I mean he is the Big ‘O’ right? He knows what is best for England!
We are sooooo screwed these next 4 years. We better hope that the repubs regain control of congress in the next election. Maybe that can slow the hemorrhage we’re starting to see.
GafficUK, if you dig in deep in the story you find that “If you are given a gift – it is impolite to try and give it back. The Queen gets all sorts of gifts which she either stores or gives away – she doesn’t make a point of trying to hand it back.”
The reality was the bust was on loan to George Bush from Tony Blair and Obama returned it. If it had been a gift, I would say that would be a bit out of place, but it was a British Heirloom which was simply returned. Much ado about nothing.
@blast: In the above comment: blast you said: ““if you have a non partisan source then let me know, but until then this piece is laughable.”
You were then showered with a host of sources including Newsweek and the Washington Post.
You simply ignored that refutation of your lame argument:
blast“I am skeptical, very skeptical.”.
You then attempted to avoid the obvious charges of intellectual dishonesty by sucking up to Mata then tried to nit pick the word “banishment.” Fine… let’s use the words “ejection” or “rejection” from some of those mainstream sources you demanded then ignored.
Now, here you are back again blast: “Much ado about nothing.”
Are you telling a citizen of the U.K. that he doesn’t have a right to feel dissed? Or are you just in denial that apparently so many subjects of the crown feel that way?
Either way, you continue to represent a level of willful ignorace and a lack of intellectual integrity.
A smarter man would know better than to come back and refocus attention on his buffoonery.
You daily demand an exceptionally high standard from every single one of us here. It’s past time you lived up to that standard.
I’ll be waiting for your apology.
blast is a troll. He is here just to be obnoxious.
This thread is absolute proof.
Ok, he may just be in need of some geodon.
I hate to change the subject, but the Kennedy Knight-hood deserves notice. If he accepts the title, Kennedy will have to resign his Senate seat or be in violation of the Constitution.
The Constitution of the United States prohibits both the United States and the separate states from granting titles of nobility. Moreover, certain U.S. citizens are prohibited from accepting foreign titles while holding office of profit or trust. The text follows:
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8. No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.
It gets better:
0bama had no urgent need to gratuitously affront the Brits, it only cost him, but did not buy a thing, if anything, 0bama’s current friends will have very carefully taken notes on the pathetic petty style in which 0bama cut their best and most loyal ally, the UK, adrift.
Remember, Labour went up against their own voters and their own country to help the US in Iraq(in fact, they committed treason to do so).
“The Telegraph is like Fox News for the UK and is a mouthpiece of the conservative party. So if you have a non partisan source then let me know, but until then this piece is laughable.”
Labour is going to lose the next election to the Conservative party and already are a spent force in many aspects, people are just waiting for the election now, Labour is in no position to promise or plan anything anymore — other than their forthcoming retirement.
Hey GaffaUK, I’ll apologize for the dip stick in the White House.
I’ve always apprecitated the alliance with the Brits even at times when they were a bit too progressive.
Always liked the Margaret Thatcher and Reagan combination too.
BTW “I blast”,,,, do you always act like a dickhead ignoring facts you’re too lazy to look up????
I’ll bet you think it’s cute or you really think you “showed them”???
You’re laughable and quite entertaining as moonbats go..
No $100 per lb (yes that’s an old English measurement) for the British prime minister?
tsk tsk tsk
@RightWingHippyChick
Yep I’m looking forward to the day when the unelected Gordon Brown gets booted out. It took at least 10 years after Blair’s first landslide for the Tories to recover. They chose several uninspiring too far to the right candidates – in Hague, IDS and Howard. This is warning to the Republicans. What might have worked for Reagan and Thatcher probably won’t work now.
Yeah, the bust of Churchill had to go to make room for the kwanza wall hanging he got from Rev. Wright.
What’s laughable about this story is it highlights the low class renters we have in the White House – always actin’ a fool. No respect for reality. It’s the friggin’ Jeffersons moving on up to Washington. And the 58 million who didn’t vote for those fools are embarrassed every day with some new stupid move.
Hey Blast, maybe we can count on Iran and the Palestinians to help us out in Afghanistan? Come on! You know they want to back us up against their muslim brothers.
Apparently, Obama’s grandfather was detained in a British prison and tortured by Churchill’s forces during the Mau Mau revolution in Kenya. I can understand his reticence to remove the Bust from the Oval Office, but he handled the situation poorly.
Obama should have explained why he was bothered by the bust, and then should have moved it to a different spot in the White House. I’m sure he could have found a spot that his family doesn’t use but where guests and others could view it. By rejecting the gift (and in the manner described), Obama committed a serious diplomatic faux pas.
I’m frequently amazed at the hollow echo resounding from his empty shell, and his wife isn’t getting off to a great start either.
So Obama gives this country a black eye – not unexpected from a bully.
Jeff V
That should have read “his reticence to *keep* the Bust *in* the Oval Office.”
Sorry for any confusion.
Jeff V
It was not a gift! It was on loan to President Bush and was offered to be loaned to President Obama but the loan was declined. There is a big difference between a loan and a gift. If the bust was given to the USA, and was now property of the USA, that would be a big difference.
It gets even betterer.
#10 Downing Street has tried to keep quiet what BO gave to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
What did BO give to the Prime Minister you ask?
Well, you weren’t the only one to ask that question.
Apparently it wasn’t anything worth braggin’ over.
Now, if you thought that part was great, just wait.
Remember the subject of this post and the Churchill statue that was returned to the Brits?
Seems that BO received one other special gift:
Heh.
blast, you consistently miss the point of not only the Churchill bust… but the piling on by thoughtless, insignificant return gifts by the Obamas.
The British perceive the nonchalant return of the bust and the Obama reception of Brown less than respectful. Witness even Gaffna… one who is far from anti-Obama… finds their behaviour insulting.
*That* is the point being made here. You may parse words and intents all you want. But you still miss the larger picture. Obama prefers to snub our allies, and move closer to despotic regimes. He figures if we dilute our relationships with other western countries, the Islamic regimes will be more pliable.
He is a fool, and evidently has putzs as diplomatic advisors.
blast, since you seem hell bent on nit picking words…
“It was not a gift! It was on loan to President Bush and was offered to be loaned to President Obama but the loan was declined.”
OK, so .. we understand it was ON LOAN and not a gift since it wasn’t given. GOT IT.
So, you don’t have to keep parroting the same frigging line!
The loan was extended to Obama and he declined. GOT THAT TO.
Move on to another reply now. You are starting to sound like a broken record.
The point you are refusing to entertain IS SIMPLY that the Britains are feeling dissed.
The question is WHY NOT ACCEPT THE EXTENSION OF THE LOAN? What does it hurt to do so? Why the hurry to decline? Why not accept it when such a move would do no harm and would not be a SOCIAL/POLITICAL faux pas? What as gained by returning it?
Can you address those questions or will you repeat yourself like the broken record you seem to be now? Ball is in your court and the spot light is yours. Give us something original and non-repetitive IF POSSIBLE.
Obama simply put his arrogant nose in the air and returned it, damn the consequences!
And as far as Ms. Obama in the article sighted by Aye Chihuahua … would it be possible to show LESS CLASS? One would think that at least they could have asked the people around them what would make a good gift to the Browns. Perhaps something the boys had always wanted? But to cough up something that took 5 minutes to pick out? CRASS! Just plain low class and crass!
With all due respect Hawk, I was addressing the misnomer in ruaqtpi2 #35. Leaving the impression that a gift was returned is inaccurate. As to the whole affair being a purposeful slap at the British, I don’t see it. I see it as a perpetual bullshit storm.
Mata, do you think George Bush shopped for gifts for foreign dignitaries? Oh yeah, let me go out and shop while the stock market is tanking and we have two wars going…. Don’t you think their are protocol officials responsible for this?
So from what I read here, people think… the following happened: Obama decided, lets insult the British by sending back a “loaned” bust of Churchill, and lets see what they have on sale at Walmart for a gift? Nuts.
Can you say what George Bush gave to Tony Blair when they first met? Maybe the VHS versions of the same movies huh? Maybe a big cowboy hat? You have no idea of course.
Yep, there is a whole office in the State Department (along with many in the White House) who tend to these issues.
What was worse… the DVD’s and returning something that did not belong to you or… White House Protocol Gaffes Insult Chinese .
Like I have said, much ado about nothing.
ooieevay, blast. You’d better step outside and clean off your combat boots after stepping in da sheeeeet, guy.
Of course I know what Bush’s first gift to Blair was… a vintage leather bomber jacket with fur lined collar, emblazoned with the Presidential logo and his name embroidered on it. I remember it because when Brown came to power, Bush also gave him one. He was less than enthused, much to his wife’s chagrin. Evidently she thought it might give him a more casual appearance to his usual stoic and stiff dress code. I believe Brown may have refused the gift. Blair, however, has been photographed wearing his.
Perhaps you missed it due to the Obama love in the Bush final days, but he had a ceremony where he bestowed parting gifts of the nation’s highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom. Given to Blair, Australia’s John Howard, and Columbia’s Alvaro Uribe.
All more thoughtful and personalized gifts than what the Obama’s chose. As I said, he’s either a naive fool on allied diplomacy, or he has putzs as his diplomatic advisors.
Lastly, this isn’t about what you think. This is about the perception of our allies across the pond. And frankly, they just don’t agree with your choice to toss this aside as much ado about nothing.
@blast:
Since when is a loan of something valuable not a gift? From Webster’s online dictionary:
gift (definition #2): something voluntarily transferred by one person to another without compensation
The loan of the bust sure sounds like a gift to me.
By the way, I don’t see this as a slap in the face at all, at least, not an intentional slap. Nonetheless, it’s a terribly embarassing moment for the U.S. One would expect a bit more culture from an American President and his administration. Classless at best.
Jeff V
Bush Bombs With Bomber Jacket Gift for Brown
Mata, Interesting you remember the bomber jacket, it caused quite a stir back when PM Brown dealt with his:
Do you think that was a slap in America’s face? IT WAS MEANINGLESS, JUST LIKE THE PRESENT SITUATION.
Oh, and Brown gave Pres Bush some books as well. Can’t Brown get his act together and come up with something more personal than books, again! /sarcasm
I would never call the Medal of Freedom a parting gift, and yes, I remember the occasion.
As far as the Anglo-American Alliance, I see no change. Both leaders are liberals and I have not seen any “real” policy or diplomatic changes. No bomber jacket dumped by Brown, nor DVD collection given by Obama will change the meat and potatoes of our relationship.
Why not look up LOAN which was in fact the issue we are discussing? From Webster’s online dictionary: loan -1b. something lent for the borrower’s temporary use 2a. the grant of temporary use.
What part of temporary to loan don’t you understand. When I get a gift, I know it is mine to enjoy and keep. When someone loans something to me, yeah, I can enjoy it, but ultimately it goes back… it is a LOAN.
THAT”S ENOUGH BLAST!
All you are doing now is spamming this thread with a bunch of half baked rationalizations.
Your goal is to totally obfuscate the point of this post.
You know it. I know it and the readers know it.
You are engaged in tactics which reveal an extremely low level of intellectual integrity.
Yet you continue to demand the highest standard of intellectual integrity in others.
No more of your comments will appear on this thread and I will be taking an equally hard line to any of your comments appearing on my other posts.
I do not intend to allow you to make this the Blast ego blog.
blast, Bush didn’t consider it a slap, and that’s the point. It is the perception of a gift and/or “loan” (since you want to keep harping on that) that is important.
Because Bush had the class not to be insulted when Brown shunned his gift… which is far more thoughtful and personal than a set of movie DVD’s that Brown could order online at Amazon… makes it a non event. BTW, Brown is not even known to be a cinema buff of any kind… let alone “American classics”. Might as well have given the guy a gift certificate to Blockbuster.
It’s also a non-story that French Prez Chirac gave Blair many vintage bottles of wine that he never used, and never cared about. But Chirac didn’t feel slighted. Non story.
What makes this an event is that the British *are* feeling shunned. Do get this thru your head. Just because you think it’s “meaningless” doesn’t mean the British feel that way.
I repeat, this story isn’t about *YOU* and *YOUR* feelings. This is a story about how the British react to Obama’s cold shoulder reception for what he termed “was” a great American ally. Yes, they also noticed he used the past tense.
And the books given to Bush were about Churchill… something he very much appreciated, and a sweet complement to the gift loan of the bust.
Obama has no class, and his diplomacy advisors are sorely lacking.
It looks like BO went shopping personally for the Prime Minister’s gift.
A short video which captures the symbolism of this state visit.
This is just too funny.
Roll the tape:
H/T to the good folks over at Red State.
Since when is 58% a “vast majority?”
Were that 58% an election majority, it would be called a landslide, Don Miguel (i.e Reagan).
But to substantiate your comment, that would be 58% of 1000 or so poll responders to any given, badly worded question by the particular pollster. Even less significant when you consider the small segment of population sampled.
But the desperate cling to any silken thread when trying to justify the herd mentality.
Aye? You’re on a roll keeping me in grins today, dude…. LOL
Blast:
Since you continue to be a picayunish self-appointed Proofreader Extraordinaire, please allow me to point out that you were the first to comment on the use of the word gift, in your message (post #8), and I quote:
“… I doubt Obama was going to send back a “gift” but something that was an heirloom lent by the British.”
I know (rather, presume) that you can count, so you’ll recognize that my comment (post #35) and your rant (post #37) came well after post #8. So you can’t just hide behide some silly (and incorrect) assertion that the issue was whether or not the word “loan” was used properly. The issue is clearly whether or not the loan was presented in the spirit of gift giving. So, yes, a loan can be a gift if it is “something voluntarily transferred by one person to another without compensation.” The bust was a loan, certainly, with a time frame understood to be as long as the countries remained allies with a special relationship. No doubt each country’s leaders expected (at the time) that the bust of Churchill would never have to be returned as long as the US considered Britain to be a respected ally and friend (and vice-versa.)
Did any of this occur to Obama? Did he stop to think about the ramifications of his actions, or is he too immature socially and diplomatically to realize that one’s actions (however small they may seem) just might have consequences? I honestly can’t decide if he’s too ignorant in such situations, or if he’s too damned arrogant. The Brits stand on ceremony, even if some classless Americans don’t recognize this or act appropriately. Either Obama doesn’t understand this, or intended to impress upon the Brits that he doesn’t consider them valued allies or friends with a special relationship. Either way, as our Number One ambassador, he did not do this country proud!
Obama needs to take culture classes, and perhaps his diplomatic advisors should attend with him.
Jeff V
Obama’s lack of experience in foreign affairs is showing. Even Carter wouldn’t have been that tactless and oblivious. A shame Hillary or Biden wasn’t there to explain the finer points of diplomacy.
In the future Encyclopedias will have Obama’s picture next to the entry for “Peter Principle”.
ruaqtpi2
“35″ Apparently, Obama’s grandfather was detained in a British prison and tortured by Churchill’s forces during the Mau Mau revolution in Kenya. I can understand his reticence to remove the Bust from the Oval Office, but he handled the situation poorly.
Was Obama’s Luo grandfather actually detained and tortured by the British during the Kikyu uprising ?
Fact is the Mau Mau uprising was exclusively fought between the British and the Kikuyu tribe the rebellion did not spread to the other native peoples of kenya
Link:
http://www.lycos.com/info/mau-mau-uprising–kikuyu-guard.html
Obama’s Kenyan family are from the Luo tribe and their history states:
“Unlike many other Kenyan tribes, the Luo tribe were not particularly troubled by the arrival of the white Europeans and settlers. Given the location of their territory in western Kenya, they didn’t have their lives interrupted nor their land taken from them. They were not particularly involved in the Mau Mau rebellion, but helped create an independent Kenya through politics instead.”
Link:
http://www.kenya-advisor.com/luo-tribe.html
Did the British torture an innocent Luo tribesman thinking he was a Kikyu rebel or did Obama’s Kenyan family enhance the Grandfather’s history to make them more interesting to the young Barack Obama and Obama was too ignorant of Kenyan history to know any better ?
.
I suppose Cesar Millan is busy today.
@Missy: Interesting comment…
blast, again you’re veering off the point of topic and playing “it all depends upon what the meaning of “is”… is”. So before Mike finds you and just hits the delete button, let me clear up your anal definition of the word “gift”.
It means something voluntarily transferred by one person to another without compensation…. there is no “permanent status” time requirement for a gift. One might consider an engagement ring as a gift. But then if the engagement is broken, it is good protocol to return that gift as it was given with a promise of nuptials. Is then the engagement ring a loan as well until the wedding occurs?
In the transitive verb usage, as if “to gift” or “gifting”, it means to present, or to endow. Again, the word is not contingent upon the length of time for that endowment.
To loan is to grant another temporary use. Compensation may or may not be required. Certainly a collateralized “loan” requires compensation in interest and a lien in a real asset. However your Dad loaning you his 1969 Cougar may not require any compensation (but perhaps filling up the gas tank… LOL)
Thus you have made much ado about nothing, banking this endless argument on semantics that really apply either way. Frankly, since we discussed return of the bust on another thread days ago, we were already aware that the Churchill bust was not a permanent gift to Bush alone that he could purchase and take to his home in Dallas.
It is a “gift” in that it is given freely, without compensation… and has no time deadline as they continued to offer that “gift” to the successor POTUS. It is also a “loan”, sans compensation. Which, if you want to get technical, can legitimately make it a gift loan.
All in all, you are no more correct in your verbage that it’s a “loan” than anyone else is in calling it a “gift”. Both are correct in context.
And that, blast, is a demonstration in diplomatic compromise on a truly anal point of conversation. I strongly suggest you let it go at that, or I’m pretty darned sure the thread nanny will be swooping in to mitigate this in his own, less diplomatic way. LOL
@MataHarley: Mata, he’s been spamming the threads for a while today. I’m not going to put up with it anymore.
If you want to let him play his games on your posts be my guest.
It isnt’ going to happen here.
philly_nj,
I have reviewed those links, along with many, many others, and there are inconsistencies among some of the stories; the particulars are not crystal clear. I haven’t seen anyone dispute that the family was from the Luo tribe, which was not particularly affected by the fighting between the Brits and the Kikyu, but the involvement of Obama’s grandfather is hard to sort out due to different accounts of whom the Brits rounded up, detained, and tortured. Parts of the story may have been embellished for dramatic purposes, but by Obama’s actionI’d say he definitely believes that the Brits roughed up the older man.
No matter what specifically happened, Obama’s actions were very low-class and rude. For a Harvard grad, he don’t seem too bright sometimes.
Jeff V
You Brits don’t understand the psyche of the ONE.
Wait for us chinese to visit the Whitehouse.
We’re gonna give Obama a bust of KARL MARX to put on his desk.
Actually we made one for Clinton(the male) with a condom dispenser in it, but after some consideration that plan was shelved.
When you press the Karl Marx bust on the forehead, it says: “Ohh, Barack, you are the One!”
Pingback: Fausta’s Blog » Blog Archive » A post-mortem on the Gordon Brown visit: Round One