Obama's domestic foreign trip
I have found an Internet connection! It is here at this rather wonderful hotel which has graciously granted me access to the outside world (despite us not staying) and which has - aptly given the conversation since my last posting - statues of Churchill and Roosevelt in the garden.
As I prepare to re-enter the world of the US election I am seized with the fear that the whole thing has gone terribly flat. Hillary versus Barack had a Shakespearian quality that Barack against that other older fellow just does not have. My fear was confirmed by an American writing in a UK paper last week - by far the best thing I have seen on this British trip.
I do hope she's wrong. And it is not McCain's fault - in fact the blame is really to be laid at the feet of his opponent. The sudden "ordinariness" of Barack Obama seems to many Brits to have been confirmed by the journey on which he is now embarked, during which he appears to be speaking only to Americans in a manner that is, well, very American and somewhat imperious if not Imperial. As the London Times put it:
"Should any of his hosts be under the illusion that the trip is not primarily a White House campaign event, Mr Obama, 46, is taking no foreign journalists. Instead, he has filled his campaign plane with US reporters, including three television news anchors, who are in discussions to hold prime-time interviews with him on consecutive nights."
I have written before about the brilliance and sure-footedness of the Obama team and as usual I suspect that they know exactly what they are doing in avoiding messy encounters with suspect foreigners. But is this change that foreigners can believe in? Should this fascinating and important message not really be delivered by the man himself? Perhaps it is a matter of timing - of doing the job that needs to be done at home before turning to the outside world - but I do hope, and I think it is reasonable for the outside world to hope, that both candidates have some proper encounters with foreign journalists before November. And of course the best way to do that - to be heard in Afghanistan and the UK and indeed back in the US - is to talk to the BBC!
They know my number in the Isle of Wight - though I do hope they haven't been emailing...
Hello, I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~27~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I think it's fatigue more than anything else right now. Even the more passionate supporters of the candidates want to take a bit of a breather before the post-convention campaign season starts. There are some real differences between the candidates, and Americans are aware that this will probably lead to a bruising home-stretch battle.
We also as a country have a lot of balls in the air right now and our current government is on the hook to juggle them. Both candidates can and should talk about what they would do, but neither has the power to alter our current course like those in power now do.
p.s. We achieved the 500 post mark while you were gone! I thought we were going to get to 1000, but then trolls showed up. Pity.
Complain about this comment
Justin - can you find out why it has been impossible to post anything to the previous discussion? After #500, nothing was possible; I had a rejection notice from the Moderators when the original posting was never shown. Something's amiss at the BBC!
Complain about this comment
Obama and his campaign team were correct when they decided to make an overseas trip prior to the Democratic Convention, similar to what McCain did a few weeks ago when he went to Colombia and Mexico. A fact finding trip is bound to improve Obama's first hand impression of conflicts in the Middle East, and will give him an opportunity to meet and discuss issues with important allies, but it will not change the minds of those who are concerned about his limited foreign policy experience.
Obama has a sound domestic policy platform, he demonstrates confidence and vision, seems to have a good grasp on economic issues, and has a dynamism and wit that are clearly lacking in his opponent; but he needs to select a running mate with solid foreign policy experience, and impeccable credentials, to address concerns among the electorate. Selecting someone like Joe Biden will do him more good than any overseas trips he might make between now and election day, which most people will see as little more than photo ops.
Complain about this comment
Justin:
Give credit to the Obama team but acknowledge that the three networks who are sending their anchors as well as MSNBC and CNN are in the tank for Obama.
The fourth estate objectivity is a joke.
And Obama has not earned (nor has McCain) to speak in front of Brandenburg gate.
Only two U.S Presidents have JFK and Reagan.
Complain about this comment
Ref #2
You have to click on Next to go to the next page. Looks like the maximum number of postings allowed in one page is 500.
Complain about this comment
"MSNBC and CNN are in the tank for Obama."
Are you sure it isn't the result of a desperate need for new stories? How many times can they run pictures of $4 gas, "for sale by bank" signs, and pictures of bank owned high-rises and expect to keep an audience engaged?
Just another perspective.
Complain about this comment
Dear American Citizens and the Press
As a concerned citizen, I consider it is my duty to bring following message to you all.
"We the citizens of the United States of America have the ultimate responsibility to elect the " Right Candidate" to lead our nation, out of our huge present and future internal and external challenges as well as opportunities. This is to prevent depression and isolation in-spite of being the only superpower in the world morally, democratically, economically, and militarily.
We need to consider the "critical qualities and characteristics" of our presumptive presidential nominees at the time we vote.
In my personal and professional opinion the critical considerations are as under:
1. Calm, cool, and collected " temper " [ Presidential Temperament ].
2. Sound and sustained "Judgment and Caliber".
3. "Thought-fullness and togetherness" of purpose and positions.
4. Minimum "ex-poser and exploitation" around "Washington and Washington insiders".
5. Renewed " Vigor and Vision " for our Greatgrand Nation.
6. Foreign policy based on " American Values, Virtuous, Vastness".
Stay informed, stay involved, and stay engaged. Do not allow some partisan media, pundits, pollsters, and perpetual political opinion makers effect your vote in the wrong direction.
Don't be effected and duped by "Psychological Terrorism" that is afflicted upon you all the time.
Long live U.S.A and its diverse but democratic people.
Col. A.M. Khajawall [Ret] MD., ABFM., ABDA.
Chief Consultant: World Wide Porfessional Consultants[WWPC]
Colonel, USAR/MC Combat Stress Control[Ret], Disabled American Veteran and Freedom team.
Consultant Psychiatrist: CA State, Medical Board of California, and Los Angeles Mental Health Department
Address: 7642 Eaglehelm Court Las Vegas NV 89123
Complain about this comment
Justin (forgive the patronizing familiarity),
Just what are your reasons for believing that space on the plane should be given to foreign reporters (even the BBC!) in the midst of an American election campaign?
Could you make up a list of the assumptions that cause you to say this?
Complain about this comment
Re: Candidates talking to foreign journalists
Obama is the junior senator from the great state Illinois. Foreign policy is the purview of the President. While members of the Senate do occasionally make trips overseas, they are keenly aware that their primary mission while they are there is to report back to their constituencies and not to make foreign policy statements. Sen. Obama's comment of "we only have one president at a time" reflects this tradition.
It's hard to deny that the foreign press is a primary means of communication with the peoples of the world, and as much as I personally disagree with much of my country's foreign policy right now, it's the sole job of the president to communicate America's interests to foreigners. It would be chaos otherwise.
I understand that's not great for foreign journalists but I'm afraid that's the way it has to be.
Complain about this comment
Not to sound too isolationist/US-centric/America-first, etc. but....
Why should an American presidential candidate going overseas during his campaign NOT be catering especially to American journalists? It's all well and good to want the world to love you (which would make life alot easier for America) as it seems Mr. Obama has already partially accomplished. However, keep in mind that no matter how much the citizens of Europe might love you, they cannot vote for you in November. And when elected, you are not representing their interests, but rather America's.
In other words, perhaps it should matter less to Obama whether Italians really dig him or not, as long as he and their Prime Minister are on speaking terms.
Complain about this comment
Much as I would love Obama to talk to you Justin his mission is to win the US presidency and from there to change things around. His prime concern at the moment is the people in Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, etc. who I doubt get their info from the Beeb. Maybe if someone from the BBC had shown some foresight and given him some attention last year he would be more accomodating but now everyone wants a piece of him he has to prioritise and you're, alas, with the also-rans in the IOW.
Perhaps, you could opine about Gordon Brown's and the British govt's strange rhetoric with regard to the troops in Iraq today - it seems to be diametrically opposed to Obama's plans - and since Obama is the favourite to win the presidency at this moment....oh well.
Complain about this comment
If ever there was proof of the liberal bias of the media it's in the fact that the three network anchors are accompanying Obama on his much-hyped trip to the war zones. We now await the sickeningly fawning interviews with the candidate. Picture two empty suits and a skirt interviewing another empty suit!
McCain must be wondering where this biased trio were when he made HIS many trips to say hello to our soldiers who are doing such a wonderful job for us.
Complain about this comment
I think bloggers and journalists (and journalist bloggers) are often as much or more in the moment than everyone else. I think that's a positive thing for the most part -- the day to day happenings is what makes things change -- but it also creates a sort of "if things are this way now, this is the way they will be in months."
So I think it's true that enthusiasm for the election is down right now. I suspect you'd find that's a pattern that holds true in other elections as well. The nomination process was emotionally exhausting for all involved. People need to go on vacation, enjoy no politics for a while, and then the conventions will be held and interest will ramp up a little, and then the first debate will be held and interest will be ramped up a little more, and then the day of reckoning will approach and interest will be at a frenzy.
Complain about this comment
AndyPost wrote:
"MSNBC and CNN are in the tank for Obama."
Are you sure it isn't the result of a desperate need for new stories? How many times can they run pictures of $4 gas, "for sale by bank" signs, and pictures of bank owned high-rises and expect to keep an audience engaged?
Just another perspective.
I'll give you one example, Chris Mathews on MSNBC moderated the debates on his networkhas said that when Obama talks he gets a tingle up his leg when Obama talks and likened his talk on race to MLK "I have a Dream" speech
Complain about this comment
You really don't get it Mr. Webb. You, BBC, the the foreign press, and foreign governments right now are about as important and relevant to the American presidential race as an untouchable from Calcutta would be at a meeting of the British House of Lords in Parliament. You have been given a ticket to watch as an outside observer, not as a participant. That may not seem fair to you but the reality is that in this campaign, not only is BBC and other foreign journalists not of any value to the candidates, undue attention and even the appearance of their endorsement could work against them and they know it. Americans guard the proprietary nature of their politicians to act exclusively on their behalf as much as people of any other country do. Support or undue attention from foreigners could be seen as the candidate having mixed loyalties, a killer liability.
The question is not whether or not BBC or foreign press and governments will be of any interest to the candidates before the election....but whether they will get more than occasional lip service after the inauguration. BBC may be big in Britain but believe me, most Americans have never even heard of it. Don't make the mistake Nick Robinson made. You are a guest in a foreign country. America is not an extension of Britain.
Complain about this comment
DominickVila wrote:
Obama has a sound domestic policy platform, he demonstrates confidence and vision, seems to have a good grasp on economic issues, and has a dynamism and wit that are clearly lacking in his opponent; but he needs to select a running mate with solid foreign policy experience, and impeccable credentials, to address concerns among the electorate. Selecting someone like Joe Biden will do him more good than any overseas trips he might make between now and election day, which most people will see as little more than photo ops.
I agree with you about Bider being a good VP choice. I disagree about Obama having a grasp of the economic issues.
Standard liberal
Tax
spend more on govt program
Don't drill for oil
Give labor unions what ever they want.
Complain about this comment
MA speaks truly. Favorable foreign comment would be used AGAINST the candidate in much of the USA!!
One US issue that a journalist might pick up on:
LEGALISM. Few in the public know what it is.
If they did, there could be a mighty clash in the USA- is it an explanation for the moral decline of the USA and its reputation?
Complain about this comment
So Mr. Obama gives to the UK, Germany and France (Iraq and Afghanistan being fact finding missions) the honour and privilege of hosting his presidential campaign for a while but only on his terms.
He is a guest in foreign countries, they are not extensions of the USA.
Complain about this comment
Re: #14
He's a talk show host and a pundit. I guess he was a journalist at one point, but he doesn't qualify as one anymore. I'm not a fan of any of the pundits, so I watch him very rarely and never for long, but I've never noticed any pretense of neutrality from him. If he does make that claim I think that's inappropriate because he's decidedly left of center in my opinion.
I think the blurring of punditry and journalism by the networks is a _major_ mistake. I can't think of anything that has hurt the credibility of the network news organizations more. While newspapers have their opinion sections, somehow the separation that's evident there has not translated to TV.
So, no argument there. How about an example of reporting bias from the networks?
Complain about this comment
Xie_Ming wrote:
MA speaks truly. Favorable foreign comment would be used AGAINST the candidate in much of the USA!!
Depending on how it is done. I can imagine the groans in the dnc headquarters when a British news paper urged a certain Ohio region to vote for Kerry to correct America's mistake in 2000
The problem is the condescending tone some European outlets like Le Monde or the propoganda network like Al Jazeera when they tend to lecture the U.S as if they know what is best for us.
Complain about this comment
For once #17, I agree but he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. The polls suggest that he has an edge on domestic policy but when you ask who Americans want as Commander in Chief, McCain comes out tops. How does he address this without establishing some international credentials? It's a though call.
Complain about this comment
"LEGALISM. Few in the public know what it is.
If they did, there could be a mighty clash in the USA- is it an explanation for the moral decline of the USA and its reputation?"
Jury nullification can still be observed in this country. Judges have the power to overrule a verdict based on points of law, but it's very rare.
Also, our founding fathers, Adams in particular, set out to create a government ruled by law not by men, and they were successful. In other words, we've always had a significant legalistic streak to us.
BTW, I don't accept your presupposition of a moral decline in the U.S. There certainly is a decline in fundamentalist influence, but that's just fine with a lot of your countrymen.
Complain about this comment
It's funny how the foreign press does
not complain about lack of access to
McCain...
I say, buy stocks when they are down,
not when they are up!
Complain about this comment
I tried to post two responses to #16, but nothing happened. My posting never came up as awaiting moderation.
Complain about this comment
MagicKirin #16
Show me one piece of evidence that Obama has a clue about how to handle the US economic crisis. Don't tell me it's because he knows a gas tax moratorium won't work. Even amateur economists like me know that. McCain doesn't know much more it seems to me. We're in for a very rough ride ahead no matter who wins. No it's not the wars that did us in, those cost us only around 1% GDP. It was the sub prime mortgage fiasco and the suddenness with which it hit. Combined with the rise in oil prices and food prices we are at the eye of a developing huge economic storm. A treaty on global warming will only make it worse. The Fed has all but exhausted its ammo with lower interest rates. Now it's time for the Treasury to take over by printing money. And that's exactly what it is doing indirectly by swapping bad mortgages for Treasurey securities. To pay for the mortgages that default, the Treasury will have to print money like it is going out of style. That is what it has done in the past in similar situations. Look for a major round of inflation and much higher interest rates as well as a continuing falling dollar. That presents remarkable opportunities for profit for some people IF you know how. What do you think it will do to Europe and China?
Xie_Ming
Insofar as the moral decine of the US and its reputation, that is a joke. The US NEVER was ruled by morality. It's history right from the getgo was one of amorality. And as for its reputation, whatever illusions either Americans or foreigners had about it was just that, an illusion. The US has been a nation of vagabounds, outcasts, throwoffs of other societies, in short the wretched refuse of the world. The delusions of the DAR so called blue bloods is also a joke. Their ancestors who came over on the Mayflower were considered criminals and religious heretics who were driven out of Europe. And the nations policies both internally and externally were never anything to point with pride to if you were a moralist. Fortunately, if you read the peamble of the US Constitution which defines the purpose of government, being loved around the world and upholding high moral standards is not among them.
Every nation has its fears. America fears not being loved. Britain fears being isloated and alone. France fears having to work for a living. Russia fears being seen as a weak feeble power. All of these fears have to one degree or another a basis in fact. The US has always been hated. Britain IS isolated. They pay the Scots huge tax subsidies to remain in the UK but they still want out. France's days of living high off the hog on borrowed money with five to seven week vacations, guaranteed jobs for life, and a social safety net that nobody can fall through are coming to an end as they are bankrupt. Russia may have a lot of oil and enough hydrogen bombs to blow up the world but in the bigger picture, it is a weak, backwards, impovrished nation. Germans would just like it if history before1946 could just be forgotten. Canada would like the US to disappear so that it can figure out who and what it is. See, every country is afraid of something.
The US will soon prove its amorality again. Count on it. The government will remain as indifferent to the consequences of its actions around the world as it ever was. That is the way we Americans want it. Just like China.
Complain about this comment
The domestic scene was very well covered in the primary campaigns and if you remember the Democrats were put in Congress two years ago to stop this Iraq war and the huge financial drain on our economy. Needed domestic programs have suffered. Our economy is a major issue which is embedded in this horrific war. It is the next logical step in Obama's campaign that he have first hand knowledge and solutions to our presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Complain about this comment
#5. DominickVila - Thanks for the tip about 'next' - I really hadn't noticed the word. However, when a posting is made, it comes back to 500!
#15 MarcusAureliusII "BBC may be big in Britain but believe me, most Americans have never even heard of it." Once again absolute rubbish! Not only is the BBC well represented on Public Television but it has a cable channel of its own. It may not have a viewing audience as big as, say, Fox, with its American Idol (incidentally, a BBC creation called Pop Idol) but to say *most* Americans have never heard of it is wishful thinking on the writer's part.
MarcusAureliusI remarks that Justin is a guest in a foreign country - he should also remember that he too is a guest - on a foreign blog. Better manners and respect for the host and all the other guests would be appreciated, but I fear his earlier life did not include such basic societal requirements.
Turning to the Guardian article, the election coverage will pick up steam after Labor Day, when the vice-presidential candidates will be known, if not revealed before. Let's have a relatively peaceful summer before the wall-to-wall coverage which we shall endure during September and October.
Complain about this comment
The trip is just election flim-flam. They claim Obama has no expertise in foreign affairs, so he goes abroad. Two day here. Two days there. Instant expert.
Actually, Obama, given his multcultural background, is a natural. Once you understand one foreign people it makes you receptive to the needs and expectations of others. It is much easier to negotiate if you know your friends, and your enemies. Most Americans, and that includes politicians, expect that everyone would be happy to be just like us.
I worked overseas professionally for almost 25 years. My four children were born in the Middle East, and they spent their formative years there. They attended local schools, spoke the counry's language and, as part of their school curriculum, studied Islam. Later we moved to Portugal where they spoke Portuguese and were immersed in Catholicism. England, where they attended public schools, was yet another change for them, with different attitudes and a different religion.
My children may have preferences, but no prejudices. They are insightful and receptive to new ideas. They are comfortable in different societies and eager to understand them. Their backgrounds are very similar to Obama's. And, it appears likely that his mother's attitude was similar to mine.
Just as Obama, living in a Moslem country, did not become a Moslem, neither did my children. In fact, having been exposed to several religions, it nullified all of them. I suspect that is also true of Obama. In desperately emphasizing he is not a Moslem, he goes overboard being Christian. Politics, or true faith?
But this is taking us away from Obama's trips. McCain made a ridiculuous claim to understanding Iraq by saying he had been there blah blah blah many times, whereas Obama had been there only once. Absolutely loony. So now Obama must lay claim to expetize by indulging in political tourism. The only thing he will see of the countries he visits are fancy dinners and the view through the window of an air-conditioned car. And the only people he will meet will be carefully selected.
The media will love it.
Complain about this comment
David_Cunard
PBS's audience shrare is small. Even among those relatively small percentage who get their news on PBS, most watch the PBS Nightly News Hour, a far better news program than BBC World TV's half hour coverage. On NPR, BBC is broadcast at hours only insomniacs would be away for. And as for cable TV, it is on a premium pay section most either don't buy or if they do, buy it for other channels in that package. Only British Ex-pats and some news junkies ever tune it in more than occasionally in the US. As for its other programs, when you can even understand what is being said, most BBC produced programs are boring to most Americans.
Complain about this comment
#28, allmymarbles, these are actually
very interesting observations.
The question that I have is, since Obama
is so good at sizing up people and societies
as a way of appearing to be one of them,
is that what he is doing with us?
Complain about this comment
MarcusAureliusII wrote:
David_Cunard
PBS's audience shrare is small. Even among those relatively small percentage who get their news on PBS, most watch the PBS Nightly News Hour, a far better news program than BBC World TV's half hour coverage. On NPR, BBC is broadcast at hours only insomniacs would be away for. And as for cable TV, it is on a premium pay section most either don't buy or if they do, buy it for other channels in that package. Only British Ex-pats and some news junkies ever tune it in more than occasionally in the US. As for its other programs, when you can even understand what is being said, most BBC produced programs are boring to most Americans
I'm don't know where you live but BBC is brodcast at 9:00 AM Eastern Standard time on NPR and I think 4:PM weekend. There is some BBC programing that is good like DR Who Torchwood and Mystery but BBC America has too many antique, food and auto shows.
Complain about this comment
#30, guns and religion.
I am sure that is part of it. But that is not to say that under the politicking and the flim flam, he does not worthwhile policies and goals.
But it would certainly be refreshing if some day a poltician would treat us with honesty and respect. They are still caught up in the notion that we are of sub-normal intelligence.
I should think the growing number of independents in the voting population would tell them something.
Complain about this comment
Ref #16
If the fiscal irresponsibility of the past 7.5 is "conservatism", please spare us liberalism! The borrow and spend policies of the Bush years are largely responsible for the economic mess we currently have. Obama proposes to raise taxes on the wealthy and on corporations to balance the budget, reduce our national debt, and eliminate the need for unfunded liabilities. Paying for the services we expect is true conservatism.
McCain was against offshore oil drilling until he discovered last month that he could turn it into a wedge issue. We have been importing oil from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela and Nigeria for decades, while keeping our reserves relatively intact for a rainy day. Depleting them to keep our Hummers running is irresponsible. Conservation, alternative fuels, and energy efficient cars are the answer.
The most dramatic reductions in government in recent decades occurred during the Clinton Administration, Obama plans to pursue that goal.
Labor unions are irrelevant. Nobody is pandering to them.
Complain about this comment
#17, #22, #25
"Legalism" does not mean "legalistic".
As I say, the first thing is to learn what it means and then how it influences the culture. (There is a female profesor of political science at NYU or CCNY who specializes in legalism).
MA raises the issue that morality really does not exist in government. Others have said that politics is about power and who gets the most pie.
Surely, man is sinful- but many can act idealistically and altruistically at least part of the time.
To the latter, Obama seems to offer hope.
_________________________
Yes, to a disadvantaged audience, he speaks in their language
and to the more analytical, in a more elite language.
Is this not a favorable thing?
[I guarantee you, Eisenhower's private language was not his public speech]
Complain about this comment
reply to gunsandreligion's quote:
"#28, allmymarbles, these are actually
very interesting observations.
The question that I have is, since Obama
is so good at sizing up people and societies as a way of appearing to be one of them, is that what he is doing with us?"
And who pray tell is "US"? You are not ME. Obama was born in the USA, is a citizen, properly elected to office [unlike Prez Dubya], and so he IS US. That's the whole point. Unless you come from "a galaxy far away," yourself?
So tired of anti-Obama folks pretending that Obama isn't American. Just another form of racism - IGNORANT - and, possibly, stupid.
Complain about this comment
#34. I am sure that many politicians begin as honest and even idealistic. It is the ystem which is currupt and in order to exist within that system, and get anything done at all, concessions are made. These are rationalized. "It is all for the greater good."
We are watching this today. The Clintons have a shady past, and yet Obama is currying favor with them, possibly to keep them from stabing him in the back. What has he promised them? Whatever it is, it can't be good for us.
Complain about this comment
#35, Grrrrlie, please don't take my
comments as being anti-Muslim, or
anti-anything else.
But, there is something about Obama
which needs examination. Right now,
we need someone who can span our
differences and bring us together.
Is Obama that person, or is he a
political opportunist? I haven't made
up my mind.
Part of the reason is that Obama is
quite complex and intelligent. But,
intelligence does not always coincide
with a good inner being.
Now, here is my problem with the guy:
I basically agree with him on most
points. But my luck is characteristically
bad. So, in this case, it would have
to be counterbalanced by some great
personal flaw.
I'll be watching for that flaw. The man
is too good to be true.
Complain about this comment
"Legalism" does not mean "legalistic".
Dude, I looked it up. I was not familiar with the term. You were right about that. Then again, you aren't either. Have you tried Google?
It's an idea that comes from China, believe it or not. There was a philosophy that believed that given the right set of laws, and only those laws, and complete adherence to them by the population, a people could live together in harmony. Moral appeal was not allowed. It was a system of law that could have been run by a computer (if they had them, which of course they didn't from 700 - 200 BCE).
That is Legalism.
Fundamentalists have come (to my complete surprise) to adopt that idea as a criticism of the separation of church and state, that we're not appealing enough to God when judging what course of action to take.
Nonsense. The Pope was right: we are a pious people. We are not able to ignore the teachings of our major religions. It just not within our power as Americans. The Fundamentalists have set up a straw man.
BTW, Legalism didn't work. It devolved into a totalitarian system.
Complain about this comment
Obama is treating the foreign press (and foreigners) the same way he treats everyone.
Obama is first and foremost out for himself. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.
A junior senator running for president is not someone who lacks ambition.
If the foreign press could help him get elected, they'd get a seat on his plane very quickly.
Complain about this comment
#29. MarcusAureliusII "As for its other programs, when you can even understand what is being said, most BBC produced programs are boring to most Americans." If the moderators will allow me to say so, you really are the most obnoxious twit. There's another good American word I'd prefer to use which begins with 'a' but I fear it would not pass - although it might in The Times, Guardian or Telegraph. If you cannot understand basic English as it is spoken, there's something wrong with your hearing - and how do you know that programmes are "boring" to most Americans. They may be boring for you, but since you don't watch them, how can you tell?
I note that you make no comment about being a guest on the BBC's web site; not only are you a prig, but an ill-mannered prig as well. (And yes, that's the way it's spelt, not with a ck.)
Complain about this comment
Personally, I watch the BBC news
all the time. (I don't want someone
at the BBC to pull the program because
they don't think that anyone is watching.)
Complain about this comment
#39, AndreanNY, you may well be right.
Either Obama is this near-messianic
figure who can defy traditional politics
and bring the country together at this
critical, divisive time, or he is a very
shrewd fraud.
I would love to believe the former,
but I fear the latter.
Complain about this comment
#40. David Cunard. Why are you so impossibly rude? No one can take you seriously because your choice of language so overshadows whatever it is you are trying to say. Since you turn me off, I can help but think that whatever you would like, I wouldn't, and vice versa.
Complain about this comment
#43. allmymarbles asks me "Why are you so impossibly rude?" Because the poster in question is so ignorant of Europe, a continent which, by his own admission, he has not visited for 34 years - and never, ever, the United Kingdom. He makes sweeping statements about things of which has has no empirical knowledge and denigrates the history and peoples of all Europe. If you have ever read or seen the stage and film versions of 'The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie', he reminds me a great deal of her - and the fate which became her. Sandy, her favourite, turns against her and says words to the effect that she (Brodie) must be stopped. In this case, someone has to take a stand against him. Had you been reading this blog from the beginning, you would know that it is not I who is 'so impossibly rude', but rather the poster at #29 who forgets that it is by the grace of the BBC that his sneers and ill-considered opinions are made public.
Complain about this comment
Barack Obama brought American reporters on his foreign trip because it is the American audience that votes in November. However, there should be no doubt that the entire world will benefit from the change an Obama presidency would bring. The daily progress of the amazing Barack Obama campaign can be tracked at the website,
http://www.barack-obama-president.com
Complain about this comment
On July 11, 2008, Barack Obama, once again proved that he has very poor foreign policy judgment, as he did in his disastrous 2006 trip to Africa when he openly criticised the democratically elected presidents of South Africa and Kenya, which were then the two most stable and economically advanced societies in Africa. Obama did so in 2006 for the sake of cheap publicity, from a horde of news media who accompanied Obama to Africa, to promote his own presidential ambitions at the expense of American taxpayers. However, what was and remains overlooked by an American press corps intoxicated by Obamamania was the fact that Obama used federal government funds to openly campaign for his then undisclosed first cousin Raila Odinga by appearing in Odinga political rallies to promote the Kenyan presidential candidacy of Odinga and chide the democratically elected government of Kenya, while openly extolling a bunch of Kenyan political operatives seeking to defeat the government. Last week Obama was at it again, displaying the very same character flaws that undermine President Bushes leadership abilities -- arrogance, dismissive of counter views and criticism, stubbornness, and a false sense of his own historical importance.
Prior to ever stepping foot in Afghanistan and before leaving on a purported "fact finding" trip to that country Obama in an internationally televised interview with CNN (which was televised on July 13,2008) had the temerity to publicly criticise Afghanistan's president, by proclaiming: "I think the Karzai government has not gotten out of the bunker and helped to organize Afghanistan and (the) government, the judiciary, police forces, in ways that would give people confidence," Obama said. So there are a lot of problems there," he added, ahead of an expected visit to Afghanistan and Iraq. "A big chunk of the issue is that we allowed the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to regenerate itself when we had them on the ropes," Obama went on to say. "That was a big mistake and it's one I'm going to correct when I'm president."
Was this good foreign policy judgment in front of Obama's first trip to that country to openly criticise the democratically elected government of Karazi, as a freshman Senator with no foreign policy experience, save insulting the presidents of South Africa and Kenya in 2006? They are two important American allies in Africa fighting the spread of Islamic fundamentalism and jihad, as is Karazi.
Obama, whose only life experience was a stint as a civil rights worker in South Chicago before joining the Chicago machine and winning office by disqualifying all other candidates in the Democratic primary for state senator, made some off-the-cuff gaffs that the political press corps has all but ignored. Afganistan, like South Africa and Kenya is a multi-ethnic and tribalistic society. What would any person with a modicum of true foreign policy experience say publicly before meeting President Karzai? Little, if anything. For the conduct of foreign policy is given to the executive branch of the U.S. government by the Constitution. Obama, despite all his public arrogance, has not yet been elected to executive office. Moreover, Obama's rhetoric confuses glib and cheap campaign tactics of Chicago machine politics with the refined nuances of conducting foreign policy with democratically elected governments of sovereign nations. Obama needs to be reminded that Afganistan was not stabalised by the Soviet Red Army from its December 1979 invasion through its 1988 pull-out. Progress in Afganistan, like Africa, in political and economic development, as well as legal systems has been and remains slow and painful.
Furthermore, Afganistan is not an American possession and public criticism of its democratically elected government serves no purpose other than a selfish agenda to promote Obama's presidential bid by world-wide publicity at the expense of undermining the allied government of President Karzai. Perhaps Obama's criticism would be better directed to Pakistan's creation of jihadi madrassas established under the military rule of madman General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who overthrew the democratically elected government of President Ali Bhutto, hung Bhutto, established Shariah law in Pakistan. The creation of the nationwide web of jihidi incubators throughout Pakistan, through government sponsored and funded madrassas, is the root cause of present day radical Islamic fundamentalism and jihidi terrorism. Just look where the first World Trade Center bomber in 1993, Ramzi Mohammed Yousef, was indoctrinated - - a Pakistani madrassa, although he was a Kuwaiti by birth. Yousef lived in Karachi while he planned several terrorist attacks. Barack Obama, unwittingly revealed that he visited Pakistan in 1981, during the military rule of Zia, as did Islamic fundamentalist radicals, during the infamous "Bittergate" fundraising speech in San Francisco. Query: What was Barack Obama up to in Karachi, Pakistan in 1981?
How can the American press not take a grand standing presidential candidate to task for once again putting his own greedy, selfish and megalomaniac interests for free publicly ahead of America's vital interests.
Complain about this comment
#35, Grrrrlie.
Surprise, surprise! I AM supporting Obama, but that does not mean I have lost my critical faculties.
Complain about this comment
Well my my my! According to this 'Lionel Shriver person, Obama's gonna lose in November, so why even let them continue campaigning anyway, right? Is the Gardion on crack? Its one of the UK's most respected and revered news papers! And yet it runs a piece from an ilinformed, ileducated "American" about the US election cycle!! If anything this will just further bulster British and European views that Americans are stupid, ignorant etc etc etc!! Personally I think this person has spent too much lop sided time around British politics and not a near equal amount around American politics to actually honestly be convinced that the election is all but lost, and most importantly, to not know the obvious sequence of events that acumpany every presidencial campaign!! Come on now! Get serious! Everyone knows that there is this great deal of excitement during the primarees, then when the candidates are chosen (prasumptively) until the conventions nothing serious really happens. And then after the conventions have taken place, the excitement and dramma start right back up again!!! And Justin! What pains me the most is that you actually seem to believe this stuff!! Its not Obama's fault that there is a lul now! He and McCain are both still giving speeches, rallies, holding town hall meetings etc, but its not as interesting because there is no wondering who will be up against who in November that's all!! And I know you may find this hard to believe, but I bet the candidates/their teams probably get tired with the constant obsessive non stop coverage of this all for 2 years as the people do! Ever think of that?
Complain about this comment
ImpostorWatcher, #46, the trip to Pakistan
in 1981 is rather interesting. Someone
with more direct knowledge could probably
provide a better explanation, but with
the state of the region at that time,
here are 4 possible reasons to have gone
there at that time:
1. At the time, Pakistan was on the banned
travel list for all US citizens, and the only
way that the Zia regime allowed non-Muslims to enter was if they had
business in the country.
2. Assuming that Obama declared himself
a Muslim, he could have entered to
attend a religious school, to participate
in Jihad, or to buy drugs.
3. Of course, he could have been
a CIA operative, but I think that he
was probably too young for that.
There is definitely something here that
requires investigation. It will be interesting
to see if the NY Times (or even the BBC!)
follows up on this event, which could
be pivotal in the election.
Complain about this comment
Oh, and I forgot, there could have been
a 5th reason - Obama could have been
working for a news organization at
the time.
BTW, I am NOT anti-Obama, I would just
like an explanation for his trip to Pakistan.
John McCain is not exactly a tremendous
door-prize, either. He's departed from
the path of the righteous, in my book,
when he made up with the religious
right.
Complain about this comment
MagicKirin #31
As a point of fact, I receive 3 NPR stations, 2 in NYC WNYC and WNYE and one in Philadelphia WHYY. Two rebroadcast BBC, WNYE and WHYY. Both from about midnight to around 6 AM. BBC TV World news gets half an hour on PBS at 6pm on WNET NY and 7 on WHYY. It gets a repeat at 11 PM on WHYY. I do not subscribe to BBC TV on cable TV.
David Cunard
How do I know most Americans have never heard of BBC? Because when I mention it they say often "what's that?" How do I know many Americans can't decipher many of the words spoken with British accents on British TV programs rebroadcast in America? Because when I ask them about some of the Britcoms and other British TV products I do watch, if they've encountered them at all, they tell me they don't watch these programs in part because they often don't understand what is being said. It must come as a shock to you that between differences in words and pronunciation familiar enough to be intelligable, Americans and Brits really do speak different languages. Unfortunately, I am hearing more and more British accents on American TV, mostly hired actors used in advertising promotions so they at least do not use British words which make no sense to most Americans, words like loo, lorry, windscreen, boot (for the trunk of a car), petrol (for gasoline), lift (for elevator)
While it is true that there are a handful of British television programs I enjoy very much (most other Americans either never heard of them or of the few that have don't share my opinion) I find most of them dreadful (a word you rarely hear in American usage.) And among the least favorite of episodes of favorite American TV programs are the occasional one where the story happens to take place in Britain, usually London. (Murder she wrote, Columbo, etc.)
I don't think you need to go to Ohio to get the flavor of what people there think and how they see the world if you've never been there but have visited Indiana or Pennsylvania and then see Ohioans on TV voicing their opinions regularly. And I don't think I have to go to Britain having lived in France and traveled around Europe and then watching what Brits say and do, not just on BBC but on other media outlets and speaking with many of them when they visit here. There's no secret about it. Maybe Europeans are surprised and unhappy that Americans know what they say and do and have reacted to them but after all, don't many Europeans say we in the US never pay attention to them? Well we have and a lot of us don't like what we see at all.
Complain about this comment
"The sudden "ordinariness" of Barack
Obama seems to many Brits to have been confirmed by the journey on which he is now embarked, during which he appears to be speaking only to Americans in a manner that is, well, very American and somewhat imperious if not Imperial."
*Red Light!!*: Warning!! Warning!! You are in danger of turning hypricritical!! Be advised, the above coments must be spoken with extreme caussion!!!
Ex-Cuse Me! speeking to Americans in a manner that is very "American, imperious, and imperial"? And what, prey tell, do you mean by that? Do Americans speek in an imperial fashon-as if to talk down to those around them? Do American presidents do this? Will you please define for me, if you please, what speeking to someone in an "american" fashon sounds like? You know, for one who generally does an absolutely wonderful job of fighting and correcting irrational anti-American sentament, these massive backslides just only surve to absolutely stunn me!! Three would deam to be not very kind generalations of Americans in one post!!!!!!
Most Brits should not, in my opinion, be surprised or shocked by Obama's "sudden" "ordinaryness"! You make it seem as if he has completely changed his tune/message/policies, when in reality he hasn't! And while I agree with you that the candidates should, at some point during the campaign, speek with foreign journalists, you must keep in mind that they are taking trips abroad mainly to asure American, not British voters of their foreign policy cradentials!!
How would you feel if I complained that Cameron or Brown won't speek to CNN or MSNBC during their general election season?
Complain about this comment
#52, NoRashDecisions:
I believe that Justin is just a little miffed
that the Obama people won't let him
on the plane. He had the same problem
with Hillary, and you saw what happened
to her!
If it's any consolation, Justin, they probably
won't let me on the plane either! So, there
goes the Obama prospects for California!
p.s.: Justin, you could probably get on
the plane if you put a turban on your
head and yelled "Barry!!!" at the top
of your lungs amongst the assembled
press crowd.
Even better, you could dig out the dirt
on the guy and his Pakistan trip in '81.
I'll bet they would let you on then!
However, I wouldn't count on making
it all the way to the next runway.
Just trying to be helpful...
Complain about this comment
Justin
The priory is a lovely hotel, but a bit overpriced for what it is. Lovely food though and great bay for the kids. Have you been down to Blakes on Ventnor sea front and bought the best and freshest crab you can buy, bar-none!?
I suspect that the reason why Obama doesn't want any foreign journalist on-board, even though he is no longer in the US but on foreign soil, is that he wont have to face up to questions that the US media wont or cant ask.
It also says a lot about a 'candidate' that really really wants deliver a speech at the Brandenburg gates (as if he is making history...yeah right!)...yet doesn't want any of the said countries reporters alongside.
As those links suggest. What has been questioned by the foreign press about Obama is now appearing, he doesn't want to open up another frontal attack of his "worth" as president and what he means and stands for.
Perhaps Obama should employ MAII, as both seem incapable of answering a direct question...just evasion and diatribe and no reference to the question in hand. Priceless..
I just love this one though..
"How do I know many Americans can't decipher many of the words spoken with British accents on British TV programs rebroadcast in America? Because when I ask them..."
Ah, so how many Americans have you polled??...you live in CA, so i take it you have travelled the whole state to take a straw poll, or if your 20mpg car is too costly to drive very far, and around corners, perhaps just your local district? I wonder what percentage of the total population you have polled....and how this is then defined as "many"....this base upon last census around 50% perhaps, so you must have spoken with some 150million. Low and behold, this is more than the total of CA..hmmmm...however, Jolly well done for doing so in such quick time...i applaud your conscientiousness for spending your own money and time in speaking to some 150million Americans to just ask the question about British TV. rather like your comments really....utterly pointless.
Complain about this comment
DominickVila wrote:
Ref #16
If the fiscal irresponsibility of the past 7.5 is "conservatism", please spare us liberalism! The borrow and spend policies of the Bush years are largely responsible for the economic mess we currently have. Obama proposes to raise taxes on the wealthy and on corporations to balance the budget, reduce our national debt, and eliminate the need for unfunded liabilities. Paying for the services we expect is true conservatism.
McCain was against offshore oil drilling until he discovered last month that he could turn it into a wedge issue. We have been importing oil from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela and Nigeria for decades, while keeping our reserves relatively intact for a rainy day. Depleting them to keep our Hummers running is irresponsible. Conservation, alternative fuels, and energy efficient cars are the answer.
The most dramatic reductions in government in recent decades occurred during the Clinton Administration, Obama plans to pursue that goal.
Labor unions are irrelevant. Nobody is pandering to them.
Obama wants to add more spending programs, the tax increases he wants to add effects everyone. We couldcut 20% of the goverment work force both federal and local and be fine.
Yes McCain recently changed his view $.00+ gas prices will do that. Obama thinks higher gas prices are great.
The Democrats have been blocking drilling and alternative enrgy like Nuclear and the biggest hypocrites the Kennedys have blocked wind because it spoils their views.
As far as Unions of course they are pandered to, The Schools systems are bad because the Unions block and innovation like charter schools or longer school sessions.
And you can't fire bad teachers the way you can in most fields.
Finally 2 years of dem led congress have lead to nothing. Because of the pettiness of Pelosi and Reid. Great example is her refusal to bring the Columbia Free trade up for a vote because of labor union and human right right hypocrites oppose.
Complain about this comment
Ref #55
Obama has no plans to raise middleclass taxes, only those of the rich. He also plans to divert some of the money ($12B a month) that we are wasting in Iraq and use it for badly needed improvements in the USA.
Republicans and and Dems have been blocking offshore drilling for decades. Some off the staunchest opponents of offshore drilling in Florida were Jeb Bush and. until recently, Gov. Charlie Crist.
Labor unions are a jurassic concept that has no room in modern-day America, but handing money to Charter (religious) schools is not the answer to our educational inadequacies.
The Dem majority in Congress is tiny, in fact in the Senate we have 49 Dems, 49 GOP, and 2 Independents, with one voting to the right of most Republicans!
Complain about this comment
#37
You raise a good point!
The greatest flaw in Obama may be a vindictiveness- the inability to forget (and possibly, also not to forgive) a slight.
Complain about this comment
Ref #55
The last thing our country needs is more "free trade" agreements that invariably benefit other countries to the detriment of American workers. Besides the debt incurred by flawed economic policies the past few years, the biggest threat to our economic security comes from moving factories and technology overseas to increase corporate profits. No wonder China shows no animosity towards the USA, we are giving them everything we have without them firing a shot! Perhaps we should worry less about lapel pins and more about policies that are affecting our livelihoods, our industrial and intellectual might, and our ability to remain an economic superpower.
Complain about this comment
Ordinariness. Yes, precisely. If we had all-greatness all-the-time, then the fall from such a height would indeed be spiritually devastating to the emotional journey a president(ial candidate) and his people share.
So, greatness must come in fits and spurts and moments. It needs to sometimes be quiet. And sometimes be the loud booming voice rising above the 10,000 cheering votes who have risen around an idea.
B.O. needs to take this time to remind us that he is but a man. And on the late August night in Denver, when he walks from the convention center to the stadium of 75,000 screaming voters thristy of an America reborn of ideals built on truth, then he will also serve as needed there.
He understands that it is the idea that receives the applause; it is freedom for which people stand; and that he is simply the vessel, perhaps the least likely vessel one would expect, to return idealism and truth to the center of Americans' hearts.
Complain about this comment
#38
Re: Legalism
China does have recurring episodes of legalism. It is very authoritarian and may become totalitarian.
The worldview there is cyclical, where one dominant philosophy replaces another and then itself is replaced over time.
The Western worldview assumes the Zoroastrian (Persian/Judaic) teleology of continual progress toward a higher state.
Hebraic legalism is also different from Chinese legalism and is more personal. We need to become more aware of this vector.
Some examination of this is being done at Columbia and at USC.
When MA says that the USA has always been "legalistic", it might even suggest that a blend of the two legalisms exists there.
For a specific example, consider the moral issues in the Guantanamo situation. There was considerable moral outrage over the government policy, the Supreme Court ruled against the government and the government then passed legislation making the outrageous practices legal.
The principle involved is: "if we make it legal, that makes it right".
Complain about this comment
Ordinariness. Yes, precisely. If we had all-greatness all-the-time, then the fall from such a height would indeed be spiritually devastating to the emotional journey a president(ial candidate) and his people share.
So, greatness must come in fits and spurts and moments. It needs to sometimes be quiet. And sometimes be the loud booming voice rising above the 10,000 cheering votes who have risen around an idea.
Obama needs to take this time to remind us that he is but a man. And on the late August night in Denver, when he walks from the convention center to the stadium of 75,000 screaming voters thristy of an America reborn of ideals built on truth, then he will also serve as needed there.
He understands that it is the idea that receives the applause; it is freedom for which people stand; and that he is simply the vessel, perhaps the least likely vessel one would expect, to return idealism and truth to the center of Americans' hearts.
Complain about this comment
#38
Good point!
The comment linking fundamentalism to legalism is an important one that also deserves further exploration.
It could, for example, be a reason for the harmony between the NeoCons and the Evangelicals!
Complain about this comment
Xie Ming, where did I ever say the US is legalistic? Where did I even use the word? But now that you brought it up, you are right. There is a connection between the so called neocons and the so called Christian fundimentalists in regard to legalistic views of legislation, the Constitution, and their religious views of the bible. Conservatives do not like judges who bend the Constitution to effectively legislate from the bench because the court exists to interpret the laws in light of their constitutionality, not to enact new ones under the guise of judicial rulings. Judges who restrict themselves to this limited activity which is all that is permitted under the constitution are called "strict constructionists." This is one major bone of contention between conservatives and liberals. American law is interested in what is legal, not what is just. By enacting a law making GITMO legal, it didn't make it right, it made it legal unless the Court rules that it violates the Constitution. If a law is Constitutional but the people don't like it, their remedy is through their legislature, not the court. That is why we have separation of powers undemocratic societies don't.
Complain about this comment
dalereinert wrote:
Ordinariness. Yes, precisely. If we had all-greatness all-the-time, then the fall from such a height would indeed be spiritually devastating to the emotional journey a president(ial candidate) and his people share.
So, greatness must come in fits and spurts and moments. It needs to sometimes be quiet. And sometimes be the loud booming voice rising above the 10,000 cheering votes who have risen around an idea.
B.O. needs to take this time to remind us that he is but a man. And on the late August night in Denver, when he walks from the convention center to the stadium of 75,000 screaming voters thristy of an America reborn of ideals built on truth, then he will also serve as needed there.
He understands that it is the idea that receives the applause; it is freedom for which people stand; and that he is simply the vessel, perhaps the least likely vessel one would expect, to return idealism and truth to the center of Americans' hearts.
This is where I have my major problem with Obama supporters. One that he is different from every other politician. He rose through the hard Chicago political ranks. Many of us still feel we have this ideal of truth, and never lost it.
I am looking for some one who has constructive solutions.
To quote on old BK commercial "Where's the Beef?
Complain about this comment
"I have written before about the brilliance and sure-footedness of the Obama team and as usual I suspect that they know exactly what they are doing in avoiding messy encounters with suspect foreigners."
Well well well! It certainly looks as if someone has a chip on his shoulder, doesn't it? So let me get this streight. You think, that just because Obama won't let any foreign journalist on his plane this one particular (first ever!) trip abroad because it is too short, there is probably not enough room on the plane for all the journalists who want to come, and that there is too much riding on it, that he lothes all foreign journalists, and that he has an attitude of '"I'm a US presidencial candidate!! I'm too good for some lower than pond scum "foreign" journalist to waste my time with pointless questions!!" A little rude, presumptive, and a lot exadurated, don't you think?
Who knows Justin! Just because he won't let them on his plane, doesn't mean that there isn't a chance of a foreign journalist getting a conversation with him (if you are that seriously worried that his success hinges on this trip and this trip alone, and his ability to talk to "non Americans" on it!!) Why don't you try and get in on a press confrance somewhere!! Or perhaps trale him from event to event. Just a suggestion.
gunsandreligion #52: O God! You don't actually believe that a major factor in why Hillary lost was that she didn't speek to the BBC do you? I think it was because she made some pretty false claims, and didn't talk to a lot of news organisations who wanted to talk to her!! Yes of course including the BBC! But its not as if she treated everyone else like royalty and the BBC like dirt!! Believe me!! A lot of people got pushed aside!!
And besides, Justin could mention other organisations with which he feels candidates should talk to in order to get their message across!! Or is the BBC the only worthy one? Because the last time I checked, CNN was pretty close up there with the BBC in terms of people watching it and reading it!! O but wait! CNN and the BBC hate each other!! Never mind then.
Complain about this comment
Kecsmar #54: "I suspect that the reason why Obama doesn't want any foreign journalist on-board, even though he is no longer in the US but on foreign soil, is that he wont have to face up to questions that the US media wont or cant ask."
And what, prey tell, are these? This is very, very disturbing if it is true!! After all he's a Democrat!
Complain about this comment
NoRashDecisions wrote:
Kecsmar #54: "I suspect that the reason why Obama doesn't want any foreign journalist on-board, even though he is no longer in the US but on foreign soil, is that he wont have to face up to questions that the US media wont or cant ask."
And what, prey tell, are these? This is very, very disturbing if it is true!! After all he's a Democrat!
It's also why Obama is afraid to go on the leading nightime news interview show: The O'Rielley Factor.
Unlike the three network anchors or Larry King and chris Mathews Obama would have to answer touch questions
Complain about this comment
This is where I have my major problem with Obama supporters. One that he is different from every other politician.
Actually, it is the Republicans that follow their leaders blindly. To their credit, it is that discipline and unwavering orthodoxy that makes them so effective. I am a Democrat and I don't think Obama's campaign is much different from McCain's or anyone else's. They both pandered to La Raza, the NAACP, talk through both sides of their mouths on trade issues (dependent on who their audience is), and pander to the religious right. I have to admit that I find McCain's lack of religiosity, his ability to compromise, and his moderate track record very appealing; and that I was very disturbed when I heard Obama advocate for an expansion of the Faith Based Initiative championed by President Bush. However, on balance, I like Obama's vision, the confidence he exudes, his intellectual acumen, energy, and political platform.
Complain about this comment
Not only are foreign political opinions irrelevant to most Americans, but they can actually harm candidates favored by foreigners. Al Maliki's endorsement of Obama's withdrawal timetable will work in MCCain's favor, and whatever expressions of sympathy Obama might get during his trip will be used at home to undermine his credibility. While we don't hesitate to intervene in the internal affairs of other nations, most of us reject even the mildest interferrence in ours.
Complain about this comment
NoRashDecisions, #65, I was just kidding
about the Hillary thing. You have to view
my posts from the point of view that I attempt
to never shy from the task of dragging leading
political figures down to my level.
Complain about this comment
DominickVila wrote:
Not only are foreign political opinions irrelevant to most Americans, but they can actually harm candidates favored by foreigners. Al Maliki's endorsement of Obama's withdrawal timetable will work in MCCain's favor, and whatever expressions of sympathy Obama might get during his trip will be used at home to undermine his credibility. While we don't hesitate to intervene in the internal affairs of other nations, most of us reject even the mildest interferrence in ours.
Al Maliki is now claiming that Das Spiegal mis translated his remarks. I'm not saying he is changing what he said but Das Spiegel is not a very relliable source.
but I agree with your premise in most cases.
Canidates get into trouble when the foriegn editorial boards do the endorsing
So the DNC if they have not already done so should say to the BBC and everyother major foriegn news source , Please don't endorse us in an Editorial, pretty please
Complain about this comment
12 nobel . there i was thinking you were educated.
how wrong.
Complain about this comment
Rosie O'Donnel for Obamas Vice President!
That way they can be all types for all people, they'll, Ebony, Ivory, striaght, gay, male and female.
Heck, he's already the first to take a domestic foriegn trip to the middle east.
Calling for a pull out from Iraq, a surge in Afganistan! Change! Change! Change!!!!
More cost
Complain about this comment
A lot of non Americans still don't get it. Obama is on this trip as part of his campaign to run for President of the United States of America and for no other reason. His job is to convince Americans that he is qualified (with only two years experience in government he isn't by a long shot but that doesn't seem bother a lot of people.) He wants the plane packed with reporters who will help him in that mission. Reporters from BBC or Le Monde are useless to him now, in fact if anyting they could hurt his chances. Maybe some other time but not now, not until after the election is over at the earliest. To do otherwise would be to take unnecessary risks with no possible rewards for him. Just because he is not experienced enough to be President yet doesn't mean his is stupid or deliberately reckless.
Complain about this comment
jacksforge #72
I on the other had had no illusions about you. Not from the first of your postings I've read.
Complain about this comment
#51. MarcusAureliusII "How do I know most Americans have never heard of BBC? Because when I mention it they say often "what's that?" Goodness! I didn’t realise that you had the entire United States listening to you. You could be an asset to any commercial or political advertising. And since you loathe Britain and all it represents, why are you watching any TV programmes that are made there? "Americans and Brits really do speak different languages." Having lived here for forty years, I speak British English every day, and I have never been questioned about what I have said because of the pronunciation. Only when speaking to a Hispanic has there been a loss of clarity, but I can say "tomaydo" and "b-nanna" with the best of them if I so wish. As for British actors in American advertising, it may surprise you to know that they actually follow a script, hence the lack of idiomatic English. On the other hand, American words are understood by British readers and viewers - they know for example that 'gas' is 'petrol'.
What people in Ohio think would, I suggest, be rather different to what people in California think. Attitudes in Arkansas are distinctly different - I once considered moving to Hot Springs, but the atmosphere was not generally welcoming. Certainly the French pursue life in a different way to the British, as do the Danes, Swedes and all the rest of the European Union. Europe - or Britain - cannot be judged by living in France - or by the experience of three decades past.
For what it's worth, from Monday on, I shall again be experiencing the joys of Europe and the United Kingdom. Whether there will be contact with this blog I do know - like Justin, I too am visiting the Isle of Wight, but for a much shorter stay. No doubt the several discussions will be continued during the next four weeks, and possibly the two vice presidential choices will be made known. That in itself will be seen in European (and British) newspapers; not being fluent in Italian, no doubt I shall understand the pictures!
Complain about this comment
Jack: You can do better than that! There I was, thinking that you had overlooked this Justin blog, and you were lurking in the bushes all the time. Actually, I was educated in the School of Hard Knocks, after leaving school in 1935 at the age of 14 to earn money to help the family in those far-off days when much of England was in dire economic straits.
Am I to assume that you disagree that the media is not biased when three network anchors accompany their man on his trip?
No insults please! Your earlier remarks hurt me to the quick.
Complain about this comment
ggrrrliie
well said. as always.
Complain about this comment
David: May I echo your sentiments regarding living in America as a transplanted Brit. Since we moved to Florida in 1957 the English accent has been nothing but a positive in our relations with the natives. However, we still say banana and tomato the English way, and we love that marvellous Cockney accent of the Geico gecko. There must be something about the English accent that advertisers like since the gecko ad now has an elderly English bloke lurking in the background observing that engaging lizard.
Complain about this comment
Unlike the three network anchors or Larry King and chris Mathews Obama would have to answer touch questions'
maybe he does not like being touched?
Complain about this comment
75. At 7:12pm on 20 Jul 2008, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
jacksforge #72
I on the other had had no illusions about you. Not from the first of your postings I've read.
that is because you cannot understand english.
no comprehension.
think the words mean what you want like history and science are created by you. and no one else has the same abillities as you.
despite not once being able to prove your argument.
so no worries. when the slime doesn't understand me.I don't worry.
after all no brains= no understanding.
Still annoyed that nasa had to join with the euros to build the hubble eh.
So how about the texas oilman telling america to go wind powered.
I think , erronious, that you are the perfect solution.
Complain about this comment
In my modest opinion, the attention that Obama is getting from the press is attributed more to the excitement that he generates, and sometimes to his controversial pronouncements, than ideological bias on the part of the news media. Traveling with McCain to Colombia and Mexico was, clearly, not something any network anchor would waste time on because they all concluded - correctly - that nothing important or controversial would come out of that trip. Like it or not, Obama, is big news because of his race, background, and party affiliation, sometimes to his detriment. The same is evident in the amount of money that his campaign has received from donors, in contrast to what McCain has collected.
Complain about this comment
TO:#49. At 06:49am on 20 Jul 2008, gunsandreligion:
Perhaps BBC can delve into the issues surrounding Barack Obama's failure to refute the excellent journalism of L.A. Times Djakarta Bureau Chief Paul Watson investigative report on Obama's past pracctice of Islam with the catagorical denials of BarackObama.com? Here is the issue presented:
The plain and simple truth is that there is sufficient credible evidence that the BO campaign has deliberately misrepresented Obama's past practice of Islam to secure the Democratic Party nomination. The Obama campaign website makes the unsubstantiated claim: "Barack Obama Is Not and Has Never Been a Muslim. Obama never prayed in a mosque. He has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ." (http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck2/religion/ ),dated 12 Nov. 2007.
What is Obama hiding. We know that Obama has claimed he has always been a Christian, yet Paul Watson of the L.A. Times Djakarta Bureau published an investigative report replete with numerous accounts that Obama worshiped in mosques and Islamic prayer rooms while he lived in Indonesia. Read the never refuted Watson report for yourselves styled: "Islam an unknown factor in Obama bid," which can be found at: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/bal-te.obama16mar16,1,7181735,full.story?coll=la-headlines-nation .
Here is but one paragraph of the Watson report that has never been specifically refuted by Barack Obama or his campaign:
The childhood friends say Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque. "We prayed but not really seriously, just following actions done by older people in the mosque. But as kids, we loved to meet our friends and went to the mosque together and played," said Zulfin Adi, who describes himself as among Obama's closest childhood friends.
According to the SWAMP, the Chicago Tribune's political bog of December 22, 2007, Barrack Obama specifically denied EVER practicing Islam. Obama stated: "I've always been a Christian" and "I have never practiced [Islam]." This raise the question: Is Barack Obama an Impostor? Did Obama's answers to direct questions obfuscate the truth? Was Obama deliberately lying to gain the highest office of the land by blatant misrepresentations of material facts that his campaign considers so important that it has dedicated a good portion of its website to support the claim that: " Obama Has Never Been A Muslim, And Is a Committed Christian."
Did Paul Watson fabricate a story about Obama's Muslim prayers at a Djakarta mosque? Were the quotations form the Los Angeles Times report of march 16, 2007, which can be accessed on the Obama website by a hyper-link false? Was the account of one of Obama's closest friend in Djakarta an utter falsehood, which hoodwinked Watson to write: "The childhood friends say Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque. 'We prayed but not really seriously, just following actions done by older people in the mosque. But as kids, we loved to meet our friends and went to the mosque together and played,' said Zulfin Adi, who describes himself as among Obama's closest childhood friends." What motive to fabricate such basic historical facts did Zulfin Adi and /or Watson have at the time the report was published? I submit none whatsoever.
This is a fundamental question of personal integrity of Obama, not an anti-Muslim attack on a political candidate. Why has the American news media missed the big question of whether Obama may have deliberately lied about his past practice of Islam to secure the Democratic nomination?
On January 16, 2007, Obama launched BarackObama.com and issued a press release stating that on February 20, 2007, he would make an announcement on his running for President of the United States, as reported by local Station NBC5 in Chicago. Following that announcement, on January 27, 2007, The Kaltim Post, an Indonesian newspaper carried a story about Obama's Indonesian friends clearly discussing that Obama was a practicing Muslim when he lived in Djakarta, reporting in Indonesian: " Mengenai agama yang dianut sang senator AS, Akhmad Solikhin, wakil kepala SDN 1 Menteng, tidak yakin Barry beragama Islam. . . .menurut Tine sang guru, Barry mengikuti pelajaran agama Islam semasa sekolah." That translates into English as: " Concerning the religion that was followed by the US senator, Akhmad Solikhin, the representative of the SDN head 1 Menteng, was not sure Barry was religious [devoute] in Islam. . . . according to his teacher(guru) Barry took part in the Islam religious lesson during the period of the school." Additionally, another Indonesian newspaper The Benjarmasin Post, in a July 9, 2006 report on Barack Obama's time in Indonesia, based upon Obama's local friends in Djakarta wrote:"Barry dulu memang beragama Islam," which clearly translates into English: " Barry was previously quite religious [in] Islam."
Go to this page on the Obama wbsite: http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/12/obama_has_never_been_a_muslim_1.php . There you can be linked to Paul Watson's March 16, 2007 article reporting on eye-witnesses accounts Obama's worshiping in a mosque on Fridays in Djakarta. The link is in the paragraph quoted directly below:
Obama Spokesman Robert Gibbs Issued A Statement Explaining That "Senator Obama Has Never Been A Muslim, Was Not Raised As A Muslim, And Is A Committed Christian." "Obama's campaign aides have emphasized his strong Christian beliefs and downplayed any Islamic connection. The Illinois senator was raised 'in a secular household in Indonesia by his stepfather and mother,' his chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said in a statement in January after false reports began circulating that Obama had attended a radical madrasa, or Koranic school, as a child. 'To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago,' Gibbs' Jan. 24 statement said." [Los Angeles Times, 3/16/07]
Just compare the Obama Website's material representations with the Watson story linked to the Obama website and ask yourselves: Why has the Watson story never been specifically refuted by Obama?
Again, this is a fundamental question of personal integrity of Obama, not an anti-Muslim attack on a political candidate. Why has the news media missed the big question of whether Obama may have deliberately lied about his past practice of Islam to secure the Democratic nomination.
It appears that the American press has become so intoxicated with Obama's personality and oratory skills that the press failed to have vetted Obama properly and now appear to be unwitting purveyors of the false claims that Obama never practiced Islam and never prayed in a mosque.
Moreover, Obama has eviscerated his entire raison d'etre of his candidacy, raising the question: Is Obama an IMPOSTOR?. Within one month of his defeating Hillary he has changed positions on withdrawal from Iraq, public finance of elections, the death penalty, hand guns, government funding of faith based organisations (going so far as to support discrimination in employment by those groups for religious reasons) abortion rights(David N. O'Steen, the executive director of National Right to Life, said Obama's recent change of positions "are either quite disingenuous or they reflect that Obama does not know what he is talking about." O'Steen added: "You cannot believe that abortion should not be allowed for mental health reasons and support Roe v Wade."). He also fliped on unconditional meeting with the heads of state of the Cuba, Iran, and the DRNK. Obama flip-flopped on Jerusalem the day after a publicised speech to AIPAC, on merit pay for teachers and welefare reform.
Obama has flipped more in the last 6 weeks than a short order cook at IHOP. He appears to lack integrity and has the same personality flaws as George Bush: he is arrogant, dismissive of criticism, stubborn, self-absorbed with his winning two terms and deceitful. He claims to have never practiced Islam, but Paul Watson's investigative report in the March 16, 2007 L.A.Times contains quotations from long time friends of Obama in Djakarta that vigorously dispute Obama's naked claim on the Obama website.
He has stuffed his plane on his foreign policy junket with American journalists, but refused a spot for a writer for the New Yorker, apparently as punishment for the recent cover, demonstrating another common personality flaw with George Bush: Vindictiveness.
Complain about this comment
been banging away nobel.
allmarbels
#40. David Cunard. Why are you so impossibly rude? No one can take you seriously because your choice of language so overshadows whatever it is you are trying to say. Since you turn me off, I can help but think that whatever you would like, I wouldn't, and vice versa.
if you cannot understand why then you are as lost (in a less offensive way ) as MA2
the afore mentioned twit has been nothing but offensive, has never added to the debate.
never backed his assursions with anything other than lies.
and your more offended by the messenger than the little trumped up self styled dictator(who's childhood dentist recognised as a twit).
Sorry for dc. he makes many comments that support the US . he has tried to be even handed(too much for me), but at all times this has been thrown in his face by a donkey.
get real.
Complain about this comment
77
cause yo dont getit .
Complain about this comment
David Cunard #76
Why do I watch Britain? I think it's important to know what the enemy is up to. Unlike most people, I don't think the American war for independence from Britain or for that matter from Europe has ended. The treaties that supposedly ended them like most treaties are worthless scraps of paper. The war of 1812 was an extension of the Revolution. That Britain sided with the Confederacy was still a continuation. Wilson made a catastrophic blunder entering WWI. Europe and America set aside their differences to a degree during WWII against the Nazis and World War III against the USSR because it was in neither of their interests for the common enemy to win. But those are over and it is clear that Europe has no stomach for World War IV against militant Islam. Other wars have been set aside for generatons. The treaty of Versailles didn't end WWI. It was fought out as a continuation in the Balkins where it started, fought with renewed violence in the 1980s and 1990s. That was another war America never should have entered into.
I think all Americans at some time in their lives should make a pilgramage to the Old North Church in Boston to see the steeple tower where the signal was given to Paul Revere at midnight on the 18th of April in 1775 at the start of the American Revolution and imagine the vigil that was kept and the famous ride that spread the alarm to every middlesex village and farm. It was the call to arms that changed the world.
The enemy doesn't come in Red Coated uniforms anymore, they have gotten far more clever than that in 233 years. They come in all forms and it is hard to tell anymore how they may be disguised or what tactics they will use. For all I know, British journalists from BBC may be spies for the British Crown. I think that Ted Galen who wrote "The Coming War With China" got it dead wrong. China is America's ally in its war with Europe. Is the US really in a war with Europe? Without the slightest doubt in every possible way except open military conflict. And I think the US is winning. Now is no time for it to let its guard down. The battlefronts are economic, techological, political, and cultural. The looming recession or inflationary spiral in the US combined with high oil and food prices, the rise of China and India, and the export of much of the sub prime mortgage debacle to European financial institutions have been powerful weapons which will soon start having ripple effects throughout the EU. Yes America will suffer but I think the EU will fare far worse. The global warming treaty that Europe wants so badly and American pullout from Iraq it also wants will probably come before much longer and do enormous damage to the world's economy and stability in general and to Europe in particular. Remarkably, if Obama wins and lives up to my expectations of his incompetence, that will be the frosting on the cake.
Complain about this comment
I should clarify that i am not sorry for DC writing but that I feel sorry for him because he has tried to make an effort. for quite a long time now.
at no stage has any attempt been made by the emperor of wrong
Complain about this comment
I'm sorry jacksforge, you can insult me all you like, I cannot get angry at someone who shoes horses for a living. I think we should just be happy we have someone here who still knows and practices this nearly lost art. I'm sure the horses are even more grateful than I am :-)
Complain about this comment
I think obama is wise to leave the foreign press out. like all say here, he is running to win in the states, and unfortunately some here think the rest of the world is irrelevant.
not true, in the big picture.
just imagine if they did not hate america.
wow.
strange concept.I forgotten how that was.
1+1=2 and marcus would agree, but then to him 2" means"3 and were all ignorant for not knowing that.
that is how I see his arguments.
Complain about this comment
jacksforge #87
Yes DC has made an effort. Unfortunately...he's shown he's just not up to it :-(
Complain about this comment
DominickVila wrote:
This is where I have my major problem with Obama supporters. One that he is different from every other politician.
Actually, it is the Republicans that follow their leaders blindly. To their credit, it is that discipline and unwavering orthodoxy that makes them so effective. I am a Democrat and I don't think Obama's campaign is much different from McCain's or anyone else's. They both pandered to La Raza, the NAACP, talk through both sides of their mouths on trade issues (dependent on who their audience is), and pander to the religious right. I have to admit that I find McCain's lack of religiosity, his ability to compromise, and his moderate track record very appealing; and that I was very disturbed when I heard Obama advocate for an expansion of the Faith Based Initiative championed by President Bush. However, on balance, I like Obama's vision, the confidence he exudes, his intellectual acumen, energy, and political platform.
Dominick if you agree with his platform than you are making an informed decision. I don't agree with it but it is based on your views
But would you admidt there are a good percentage of Obama supporters who think his mere presence will bring world peace and properity.
The point I would disagree with is your oppinion on which party allows dissent. Exhbit A before McCain ran is Joe Liebermann. I don't see the Republicans being as intolerant to a leading Senator and a great man.
Complain about this comment
#86. "Why do I watch Britain? I think it's important to know what the enemy is up to." Now I know you're either unwell or into your dotage. Britain the enemy of the USA? I can hardly think of a more ridiculous statement. What nation backed the US incursion into Iraq? Would she have done so if it was "colluding with the enemy"?
In addition to the Old North Church, it's a pity that you won't ever visit England, because you might visit Runnymede, where the basis for modern law and order, the Magna Carta, was signed, a document which has had greater effect on the World than the Declaration of Independence. I feel sorry for anyone who sees the state of the world in such a negative way: "if Obama wins and lives up to my expectations of his incompetence, that will be the frosting on the cake." Whoever wins - and Mr Obama was not my first choice - the new President will be for *all* Americans, even yourself. Why on earth would you wish anyone to fail?
jacksforge - thanks for the kind words - and nobleFloridian, I normally use English pronunciation, but for those whose mother tongue is Spanish, very often there is difficulty in understanding American English, let alone our own, so I modify it as needed.
Complain about this comment
#90. MarcusAureliusI: I hadn't seen your remarks before posting #92: "Unfortunately...he's shown he's just not up to it :-(" Unlike another, I am well aware of my limits. But if I am "not up to it" then I am not alone - the pot is calling the kettle black.
And to think of all the fun I shall be missing in the next four weeks; brushing up on my 'accent' and no doubt explaining, as best I can, Messsrs. McCain and Obama to interested Europeans. But who knows, perhaps I shall find an internet connection in distant places. (In case anyone should comment, I do know that one is not supposed to start a sentence with a conjunction, but it's done in conversation and acceptable, I think, in blogs.)
Complain about this comment
DC, the magna carta was a pact between the central tyrant the king, and the local tyrants, the barons. It gave nothing of value to the common man. It's interpretation as an early beginning of democracy is just that, prelude to the rule of law over a king but not by the majority of his subjects by a long shot. British really do stretch the truth on this one as is usual. The overwhelming majority of the population the serfs remained the same pathetic slaves they'd always been. Gordo and his fellow tyrannical thugs in all three parties continue to rule Britain with an iron fist to this very day. If not, there would have been a referendum on the EU Constitution and even EU membership a long time ago as who would be making the laws that govern the British would have been front and center. Truely free people would not allow a government give away their rights over their own dominion over themselves without a civil war. That isn't going to happen. The British population is so accostomed to being treated as serfs, they don't even think of rebelling. Small wonder they are so frightened by the US where even the suggestion of overly strong central authority brings out the guns and religion. Although David koresh was a nut job, you have to give him grudging admiration for standing up to the FBI the way he did. Something like that is unthinkable in Britain.
Complain about this comment
DC, is it you who are into your dotage or are you deliberately discarding the facts as they were known at the time? It was in M5's Dodgy Dossier that sexed up Iraq's WMD capability that the British government believed that Iraq could field WMDs within 45 minutes of an order from above. Britain did not fight Iraq because it supported the US, it fought Iraq because it saw it as a dangerous threat too. Britain did not go to war as a favor to the US, let's get that clear. Frankly, I think the coalition of the willing was better off without the French on the Battlefield. They would only have gotten in the way and made the overthrow of the tyrant Saddam Hussein and his Baathist criminal regime longer and more costly.
Complain about this comment
#91, Magic.
As an Obama supporter I find his romancing of the religious right both phoney and upsetting. If I think it is phoney, what do the evangelicals think? Does he think they are fools? (And you are right about McCain. He seems to be leaving the subject of religion alone.)
His biggest mistake is that, in reaching for a few marginal votes, he is challenging the loyalty of his base, those people who were responsible for his meteoric rise and his clinching of the nomination. Without our enthusiasm and our money he would have been northing more than a flash in the pan. At one point I was so annoyed with him that I was thinking of staying home in November.
And as for his profession of great faith I don't believe that for a minute. He has the wrong personality and the wrong background. Probably, having been pigeon-holed as a black politician, he felt it would further his ambition to join a black chruch. He has now carried it a step further, forgetting that he is representing a liberal group that, for the most part, believes in the separation of church and state, and disdains the evangelicals.
When all is said and done, a politician is a politician. One hopes that, beneath the politicking, the person we supported actually exists.
Complain about this comment
David Cunard, jacksforge and others.
You know the old one about chasing a wasp around with a rolled up newspaper is a sure way of getting stung?
I think MAII really has lost it now. What do you say we ignore him and see if he goes away?
Complain about this comment
Allmymarbles;
Why do you think GM called some of their junky little cars Chevette and Corvair? Because they correctly surmised that people would buy them and imagine that they had gotten at least a piece of a Corvette. Oldsmobile and Buick owners were in shock and anger in the 1980s when they found out what every automobile mechanic in America knew, the engines in their rocket Delta 88s and Electras were the same engines made and used in Chevys made in Chevy plants. The only difference...the replacement part numbers and the higher prices they charged. Lincoln said "you can fool some of the people all of the time." Opening your presents on Christmas morning will give far less disappointment than what you will get if you man wins. He's a fraud.
Complain about this comment
"Does he think the Evangelicals are fools?"
Probably.
Is it a just assessment of Evangelicals?
Well, there are at least three factors at work:
1) Guilt and the forced semblance of conformity is part of the subculture.
2) Media, money to ministers and manipulation have many of them (formerly populists) believing that Jesus Christ was a Republican.
3) Some of them are being recalled the true message of their Saviour.
Many really believe in End Times and Armageddon, etc.
How should an honest politician (oxymoron?) address such an audience?
Complain about this comment
Welcome back Justin Webb.
I'm happy for a new topic. I think many are becoming weary of the campaigning on both sides. I would like to see more engagement between McCain and Obama. I'm sure that will come. Polls and predictions seem to serve only the media.
What I think most of us are hoping for is a president who will lead us in a positive direction. We would like a little more honesty, a little more integrity and a strong resolve to actually work for 'we the people,' instead of 'me the president.'
Complain about this comment
Note to: Threnodio
I left you a message on the previous blog. I hope you read it.
Complain about this comment
Note to Glo-worm001
I left you a message of thanks on the previous blog for the data you so kindly supplied. So, if you are on here, thanks, again!
Complain about this comment
Threnodio
A very hearty AMEN to that! Your words are measured and wise, as we see in your post #97.
Complain about this comment
#93Davidcunard
I think you are very 'up to it.' The problem is not in your reasoning, information or debate. The main problem lies with whom you are trying to reason.
Complain about this comment
#97. threnodio: "I think MAII really has lost it now. What do you say we ignore him and see if he goes away? An excellent idea! However since I have the comment box open, I can't help but quote him at #95: "are you deliberately discarding the facts as they were known at the time?" I haven't a clue as to what you are referencing. I haven't mentioned WMDs or anything the present UK may or may not have done, other than supporting the US with the Iraqi invasion. As usual you go off on a tangent which is irrelevant to the posting upon which you make a comment.
Regarding the Magna Carta, all, that is ALL, historians and politicians acknowledge the document as the basis for modern law and that no-one should be above it. You might take the time to Google Magna Carta or go to this which may explain it further.
With regard to #98, in addition to my comment about you at #40, I surmise that you're a snob into the bargain: "junky little cars Chevette and Corvair? Because they correctly surmised that people would buy them and imagine that they had gotten at least a piece of a Corvette." Junky little cars for the (little) people. Leona Helmsley would have loved you, since she said that 'only the 'little people' pay taxes'. It's the same mind set. The quotation "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time" is also attributed to P.T. Barnum, proprietor of the eponymous Circus. I take it that you are one of the clowns.
Complain about this comment
#58.
The US govt cant act the way you suggest as it will be the kettle calling the pot black. Since what you are suggesting is the US policies create more protectionism laws against free trade just simply to the benefit the US and its workers/economy only.
It however already does this, very surreptiously...but still cries foul at other nations!!....pure hypocrisy.
MAII
"..Unlike most people, I don't think the American war for independence from Britain or for that matter from Europe has ended..."
So, please tell me, what is it like in your delusional world?
Where the rest of the world is wrong but only you are right. Since the rest of the world does not live up to your own personal expectations...must be jolly strange for you, having to ignore every peace settlement et al made by your US Govt with other nations, inter alia.
The only people i know with such delusional paranoid behaviour are popping pills in institutions. I didn't realise these establishments have free Internet access...
Complain about this comment
MagicKirin 67: "It's also why Obama is afraid to go on the leading nightime news interview show: The O'Rielley Factor. Unlike the three network anchors or Larry King and chris Mathews Obama would have to answer touch questions"
Leading night time show? Hahahaha that's hilarious!! Even many Republicans see Fox news as far right wing and somewhat propagandist!! But I see that we have differing views of Kexmar's annalisis. I thought what they ment by that is that US jurnalists are not nearly as tough with our presidents as foreign ones are with their leaders and our presidents. You appear to interprit that all the journalists on his plane are in the tank for him, and that this is why they won't ask him tough questions. I totally disagree with this by the way!! A good journalist, no matter how much they like or dislike someone, should always be respectful and tough with their interviewees.
Might I just ask you, though, what makes you think foreign journalists will be tough with him? The last time I checked, foreigners were more head over heals for him than Americans!!
Complain about this comment
#103 - Hi aquarizonagal!
To be honest, when the total posts got close to 600, I pretty much gave up, but I have revisited it and seen your message. Thank you for your thoughts.
I also caught MAIIs deft serialisation in bite sizes of the Declaration of Independence. Doubtless Google would have found it for me if I had not already been familiar with it.
I could have risen to it, since the argument is as usual intellectually flawed but I have pledged not to be wound up.
So I will leave you with this thought:
"The purpose of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to avoid finding oneself in the ranks of the insane".
Marcus Aurelius Antonius Augustus
See you on the new blog.
Complain about this comment
DC #105, you really don't know much, at least about the United States. Corvair and Chevette had some of the worst reliability records and some of the poorest performance characteristics Consumer Reports had ever seen. Only Yugos and British cars, renowned for their poor engineering were among those worse ever offered on the American market until the KIA Sephia came along.
The Chevy Corvair was a principal subject of Ralph Nader's book, Unsafe at Any Speed and was his claim to fame.
From Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed
"The sporty Corvair"
The subject for which the book is probably most widely known is covered in the first chapter, General Motors' Chevrolet Corvair. The chapter is subtitled "The One-Car Accident". The 1960–1963 Corvairs had a rear engine and a suspension design which was prone to "tuck under" in certain circumstances and...."
You also got the quote about fooling some of the people all of the time wrong;
http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/27074.html
Abraham Lincoln as I said was the author of that quote.
What PT Barnum said was; "There's a sucker born every minute."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There's_a_sucker_born_every_minute
So you got that wrong too. I could go on with the rest of your mistakes but the ones in your most recent posting alone would take up more of my time than it's worth.
If being right makes me a snob...then I'm a snob, I take it as a compliment.
The one thing you said that I believe true is that you don't have a clue. My estimate of you exactly. That's why I said you aren't up to it.
As for Magna Carta...I've read it and the analysis. IMO it's overrated insofar as the real development of modern democracy is concerned. One more item of British hype which doesn't stand the test of facts. Britain has NEVER really been a democracy before or after Magna Carta and the example I gave of its government ceding away its peoples' sovereignty to the EU without so much as a referendum or public debate is ironclad proof.
Complain about this comment
#105Davidcunard
Excellent post! I visited the web site about the Magna Carta. I remember learning all this in school but it is good to be reminded of what an important document this is.
I will add that I have read posts by this person (I won't name him, its rather like speaking the name Voldmort) on other blogs and his comments there were less astringent. Perhaps we have provided too much attention and Mr Threnodio has the best idea for dealing with it.
Enjoy your holiday. We will miss you so, I hope you can connect up while you are abroad.
Complain about this comment
David Cunard 93:: Actually, as I understand it (in American English anyway), it is considered incorrect and improper to start a sentence with "and". "But" and "however", however, are more grey areas, as there are plenty of perfictly gramatically correct and acceptable profesional sentences which can be started with these words. O and I agree with threnodio at #97. Just don't respond to Marcous Aurelious anymore-he is a narcicist!!
threnodio #18: "He is a guest in foreign countries, they are not extensions of the USA."
Yes, and I think he is fully aware of this fact! I understand completely why Europeans feel cheated, if you will, by the fact that some foreigner is just hop cotching around their country as if to take advantige of it and then leve without giving anything back (in this case with an interview or two to the host country's journalists)!! But again I reiterate, it gets complicated with presidencial candidates!! Read my earlier posts at 52 and 65. And again I draw the comparison, if during a general election in the UK, if the candidates came to the US for one reason or another, but wouldn't talk to a single American broadcaster, you would probably think, '"They're just trying to show us that they can handle foreign policy." Where as some Americans would be thinking, '"Way to give something back!" But you see? That's the nature of campaigning. For what its worth, I don't think Obama is trying to delibrately hurt or offend anyone in Europe. I just think that he is kind of caught between a rock and a hard place now, and realises that the only way in which he can really woo Europeans is to become president first. My appologeese.
Complain about this comment
Kecsmar, you think the cold war is over just because the USSR no longer exists? Just wait and see what Russia does to Europe's gas and oil prices in the next few years. They are already thumbing their nose at what little is left of Britain's sovereignty. Their agents operate freely inside Britain. In their war with Britain...they are winning. In China's war with the EU they are winning. They are eating Europe's lunch. I was in a very high end supermarket and looked at some beautiful glassware and pottery. I was sure it was from France. Nope, made in China and NOT expensive.
These treaties are worthless. Just pull out a copy of the Maastrict treaty and pay close attention to the Growth and Stability pact. Who insisted on it? France and Germany. Who insisted on huge penalties for violating the restrictions? France and Germany. Who were the only ones to violate it and never paid one Euro in fines? France and Germany.
Take out a copy of the treaty your PM Neville Chamberlain signed with Hitler. Peace in our time he proclaimed. Wasn't worth the paper it was printed on. You want to see paper that is worthless. Open your wallet and see if you have any US dollars. Better cash them in for Euros or Pounds now because before long they will be worth even less. The US market will be shut tighter than a drum to European manufactured goods no matter what the WTO treaties say.
Complain about this comment
QED
I rest my case m'lud.
Complain about this comment
NoRashDecisions
I'll bet if you asked 100 Americans at random who the Prime Minister of Great Britain is today, I'd be surprised if even two of them knew...or cared. If candidates from GB came to the US to campaign, they'd just be more anonymous faces in the crowd. I'll bet if your football hero David Beckham were to walk into a supermarket in Peoria Illinois, excluding teenage soccer girls and their soccer moms, nobody would know him from a bag of sour apples. Most people in America don't know or care what goes on in Europe most of the time. Only when there's a war and it makes the front page of the newspaper do most Americans pay any attention.
I'm the one who said in posting #15 that Justin Webb is a guest in a foreign country here as an observer and he should not forget it. Nick Robinson, the political editor of BBC was at a press conference on the White House lawn a few years ago and was given the privilege and honor to ask the President of the United States a question. Instead it launched into an insulting diatribe about whether or not the President knew what was going on in Iraq. He revealed himself not merely as an ignoramus but as a boor, a soccer hooligan with a suit and tie. Maybe he thought he was in the British House of Commons during Prime Minister's Question Time where the political parties waste their time with rhetorical insults phrased as questions only to get equally insulting rhetorical answers. I watch it on C-Span as a comedy of fools. Only it's for real.
Complain about this comment
And other taxes:
DIVIDEND TAX
MCCAIN 15% (no change)
OBAMA 39.6%
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
McCain 15%
Obama 39.6%
Plus tax increase on Gas, tax on houses over 2400 square feet, new taxes on all forms of energy and the return of the Inheritance tax.
Yes, the ecomomy was poor after 911, less taxes let us have some good years and an easier ride through recession. A democrat Congress with earmarks on the budget that set a record with plenty of quilty Republicans there too, but watch, we won't them back next time. Its about the money!
Your right about the campaign being just like any other. Neither are the best we could have, but the choice is going to go done to the money.
freedom ain't free
Complain about this comment
88. At 8:12pm on 20 Jul 2008, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
I'm sorry jacksforge, you can insult me all you like, I cannot get angry at someone who shoes horses for a living. I think we should just be happy we have someone here who still knows and practices this nearly lost art. I'm sure the horses are even more grateful than I am :-)
Again the ignorance, no really he knows already but can't accept that Jacksforge.etsy.com has no horse shoes even used as"art"
the real stuff of blacksmiths. something he can't understand as a lowly engineer.
how do you get a piece of 1 1/4 inch square bar into a pitcher plant and frog.
Mods allow people to judge let them see the work of this horse shoe fitter.(by the way for those with comprehension on their side that's a farrier)
Now if I were a farrier I would be no less proud after all it takes longer to qualify as a guild farrier than ALL his engineering education put together.
And probably is harder to complete than a french medical degree(no insult to the french really just MA can't finish one).
plop
Complain about this comment
97. At 10:02pm on 20 Jul 2008, threnodio wrote:
David Cunard, jacksforge and others.
You know the old one about chasing a wasp around with a rolled up newspaper is a sure way of getting stung?
I think MAII really has lost it now. What do you say we ignore him and see if he goes away?
tried that once before , but seeing as times change and old ideas become new(solar wind) I will give it a try.
Cheers.
G'day
Complain about this comment
I didn't realise these establishments have free Internet access...
kecsmar , neither did I , but I applaud their decision.
how forward thinking
Complain about this comment
Hi, Justin!
Welcome back! While it is not my intention to hold a brief for BO as such, I think his decision not to include foreign journalists on
his flight may not be such a bad one. It is for the simple reason that certain interested
lobbies indulge in tendentious reporting of
certain bona fide encounters with VIPs as being too cosy relationships to the detriment of the person who is reported on-not unlike "moles".
Complain about this comment
Obama's bellicose statements about Afghanistan were foolish, and I suspect that he himself doesn't believe in them. It was pandering. He is a black man, racism is embedded in American culture, and Obama is attempting to whitewash himself.
If Obama continues to pander to what he and his "handlers" conceive us as mainstream America, I will vote for Ralph Nader.
Complain about this comment
This comment has been referred to the moderators. Explain.
It's an idiotic strategy of journalism to put a reporter in a spot where there is some kind of background to photograph which is in some way relevant to the story. You see it with a reporter standing out in a hurricane with an 80 mile an hour wind that could wreck the camera and result in injury. You see a reporter in front of the White House when it's five below zero farenheit takling about something the President said or did. And now you see Obama talking to American cameramen and reporters with foreign images in the background. All show and no go. Hype is hype. Anyway, it's a diverson from the current lull.
Complain about this comment
Small point Justin (and some would say a little off topic to the above debate) - it's called The Times, not the London Times, and as a journalist, it would be good if you got the name right!
Complain about this comment
I clicked on this link because it said America blog - and it's all about Obama - whatzzz up! i suppose you mean usa. the election stuff is only interesting since gambling is generally prohibited in the US (except on the stock market) and it fills that "who is gonna win gap", and the press want to ram the topic down our throats.
Letter from America topics of more interest would be - local primary education funding - Bush in China, why the big cities vote Democrat and the rest of the country Republican - why outside of large cities, public transportation isn't available - how truckers keep commerce and the country going- public health care hardly exists and it's not an election topic (i.e. doesn't matter), post 911 immigration rules, what role does the US state department (the civil servant lot)play in foreign relations, the IRS refund to boost spending, the weather - earthquakes, tornadoes, tropical storms, heat - american sports radio (on the eve of the Olympics), why US TV and radio stations and newspapers only report local issues, how difficult is it to find a job in the US and how much does it cost to rent an apartment - how many guns have been sold to US citizns in the last 20 years and why people buy them, and not last Dairy Queen.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS