Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2017 13:42:19 GMT -5
We need a thread on this, obviously. I hope to god it goes okay on the whole, I really do. I'm scared to death about that speech on Islam he plans to do. It would take one hell of a smooth diplomat to pull that off, and that ain't Trump. So in fact, I'm wishing him success, because, yanno, our country. But meanwhile, I'm going to get in my eyerolls, because that's what I do. I'll start with an observation -- after slamming Michelle Obama for not wearing a headscarf... neither Melania nor Ivanka wore a headscarf. I do not in the least care about anyone's not wearing a headscarf. But I sure as hell care about the hypocrisy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2017 13:48:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 20, 2017 15:46:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 21, 2017 9:06:28 GMT -5
All this news coverage is making me wanna watch Hidalgo again.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 21, 2017 11:52:37 GMT -5
I do not in the least care about anyone's not wearing a headscarf. But I sure as hell care about the hypocrisy. It certainly is hypocrisy, imo. But I guess one could spin it as Trump's position "evolving." Worked for Obama and Clinton... I am happy that Trump did not bow. Beyond that, my sense here is that the Saudis are fairly worried about the future, not with regard to terrorism, women's rights, or the like, but with regard to their bank accounts and OPEC's diminishing ability to control the oil market. They need to kiss Trump's ass to the nth degree, just for the faintest of hopes that Trump might help out in this regard. The Saudis are--right now--seriously lacking in the "sticks to wave" department.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 12:06:02 GMT -5
he didn't bow. he genuflected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 12:32:14 GMT -5
he didn't bow. he genuflected. Are partisans making too much of the whole "curtsy" thing? Yes. Did they also make too much of Obama's "bow"? yes. I posted the Stone reaction to show it wasn't just liberals who saw Trump curtsying, btw. Many say "oh, he was just banding for the medal!" Fine, maybe true, but then there are those who say Obama's bow was him bending to do a handshake with a shorter man, or just a friendly gesture taken out of context. So... Yeah. So the bow/curtsy thing, like the head scarf thing, is actually kind of bullshit, IMO. I'd be smacking the left for hooting at the Trumps for it -- except for those on the right who made such a song and dance about the Obamas. actually, I don't have any big issue with a polite bow, nor with civility and friendliness. I do have an objection to actual subservience and sucking up to foreign leaders.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 21, 2017 12:40:52 GMT -5
Disagree. Obama bowed (twice). He shouldn't have bowed. US Presidents--as representatives of the people of the United States--should never bow to kings or queens. Never.
Was it the biggest deal ever? No. But it was a mistake. People should have just allowed that such was the case and not tried to offer lame justifications for it, imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2017 12:42:59 GMT -5
I think Trump's chummy discussion with Russians in the oval office and numerous call-outs to Putin are far, far more problematic than a polite greeting.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 21, 2017 14:02:34 GMT -5
Disagree. Obama bowed (twice). He shouldn't have bowed. US Presidents--as representatives of the people of the United States--should never bow to kings or queens. Never. My dad says this too. I think it's ridiculous. As though a bow indicates some sort of subservience, or "giving up power," as opposed to politeness and even a modicum of respect to another world leader. There should be mutual respect, and a bit of deference when in the country of the king or queen is not weakness. The U.S. is not subservient to Saudia Arabia or any other country. No amount of respectful bowing will change that. For people to be upset about a couple of bows is just pride and imo a weird (and false) sense of security in (or fear of) symbols, in thinking that "the president never bows" means the U.S. is strong, and if the president bows, it makes the U.S. weak. What nonsense. I think the stronger a country is, the less the need to show it with stupid symbolic measures like "never bowing." And the U.S. is strong.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 21, 2017 14:05:24 GMT -5
Sure. Well, aside from the "polite greeting" description. People bow to royals to indicate subservience. Again, US Presidents should not be in the habit of doing that imo (and in the opinion of many others, past and present). It's bullshit. I wouldn't bow to someone, simply because of the blood that runs in their veins. Not now, not ever. Screw the royals, all of them, in whatever country they exist. They're not special, they're not better than everyone else. Of course, I'm not a representative of the country as a whole. Diplomacy still matters, it is true, but not to the extent of treating royalty as a superior caste. They should be met as equals, nothing more (and frankly, I think most of them can accept this from other heads of state; it's a little insulting to them to assume that they're automatically so petty).
So bowing to royalty isn't okay. Again, Obama erred. That's all. Trump's errors are--imo--already exponentially greater than all of Obama's.
And really, the error is as much the fault of the State Department as it is Obama's: it's something that should have been discussed and explained beforehand, imo. And if we allow that Obama was told, but chose to bow anyway, don't we have to allow that at the very least it was a stupid decision on his part, given that someone as smart as him should have been able to predict the negative fallout that followed, especially given that nothing was gained by doing so?
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 21, 2017 14:13:45 GMT -5
Disagree. Obama bowed (twice). He shouldn't have bowed. US Presidents--as representatives of the people of the United States--should never bow to kings or queens. Never. My dad says this too. I think it's ridiculous. As though a bow indicates actual subservience as opposed to politeness and even a modicum of respect to another world leader. There should be mutual respect, and a bit of deference when in the country of the king or queen is not weakness. The U.S. is not subservient to Saudia Arabia or any other country. No amount of respectful bowing will change that. For people to be upset is just pride and a weird (and false) security or fear in symbolism, in thinking that "the president never bows" means the U.S. is strong, and if the president bows, it makes the U.S. weak. I think the stronger you are, the less you need to show it with stupid symbolic measures like "never bowing." *shrug*The history of the nation is what it is. People fought and died to break free of being ruled by others who claimed a divine right to rule. As far as I'm concerned, bowing is in the same category of averting one's eyes or the like to one's "social betters." You can bow to your heart's content. But the President--indeed everyone in government--represents the country as whole in these kinds of situations. Bowing to kings and queens is indicative of subservience. It's what subjects are required to do.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 21, 2017 14:26:09 GMT -5
Bowing to kings and queens is indicative of subservience. No, not when it's a voluntary show of respect, it fucking isn't. You are basically saying that Obama indicated subservience. Again, the U.S. is not (and will never be, imo) subservient to Saudi Arabia or any other country. Nuclear war would have to happen first. This is pride, ego, and a ridiculous emphasis on symbolism without any appreciation for reality, let alone context. And of course, there's "Obama the Seekrit Muslim."
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on May 21, 2017 17:31:28 GMT -5
No, not when it's a voluntary show of respect, it fucking isn't. You are basically saying that Obama indicated subservience. Bullshit. That's what the bowing means to them, to royalty. That's what it means to their subjects. It's a "see, the President of the mightiest country on Earth recognizes the royal blood that runs through our veins, recognizes our right to rule. I agree. Except it's all on the part of those royals who expect everyone to bow before them (to be fair, I don't think all royalty has this mindset these days, but that's a relatively new development, historically speaking). Seriously, if you think symbolism is meaningless here, why should anyone bow to a royal? Are these royals too unsophisticated in this regard? Do they need to be treated like ignorant children for the sake of...what? Here's the view of such things from back in 1994, for your reading pleasure: www.nytimes.com/1994/06/19/weekinreview/the-world-the-president-s-inclination-no-it-wasn-t-a-bow-bow.htmlThere was never much of a debate on protocol here--as the above piece notes--until Obama screwed up. Yeah, okay. Maybe that's what your father thinks, but it's not what I think. And note, Obama also bowed down to the Emperor of Japan.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on May 21, 2017 18:18:32 GMT -5
No, not when it's a voluntary show of respect, it fucking isn't. You are basically saying that Obama indicated subservience. Bullshit. That's what the bowing means to them, to royalty. That's what it means to their subjects. It's a "see, the President of the mightiest country on Earth recognizes the royal blood that runs through our veins, recognizes our right to rule. So you're worried about what the "subjects" of Saudi Arabia think of your president? How about the "subjects" of England? Of Japan, as you noted? It's not what you and other Americans think, it's what the subjects of the country in question think? And they are monolithically entirely incapable of thinking anything other than that a president of a powerful country bowed to their king/queen because... he defers to him/her as the rightful ruler of the universe or something? Or maybe it really is about how you see it, and how you worry about how they see it, rather than how it is. Again, pride. God forbid an American president show a small sign of respect, or even deference, to a Saudi king or a Japanese emperor in that monarch's own country. Jesus Christ, they'll think we Americans are pussies. ZOMG. And honestly, right to rule? Is this really about succession due to blood lines versus voting? Is *that* why the bowing offends you? If Americans had a custom of bowing to their duly elected president, would that gall you? I'm guessing it would. Maybe it's the bowing, the deference, the humility that is required for such things that gets to you, way more than that it's a standard of countries who still have royalty and royalty is teh evul. It's tradition. It's respect. It's heritage. It's culture. It's not a hand-wringing crisis to go along with it for the sake of those things. What's unsophisticated is for people to whine about our leaders showing respect for the customs of other countries, especially because they fancy themselves would-be soldiers from the War of Independence. Now, if those royals demanded the bowing from a U.S president, we'd be on the same page. But that's not what happened. There are quite a few things we do out of respect for our leaders. We use special, deferential words: "Mr. President." "Senator so-and so." "Congressman such-and such," "Sir," and "Madam." You wouldn't walk up to Trump and say, "Yo. Donald." I mean, you're allowed, of course, but most people would call that disrespectful. And sure, where people are not allowed to not bow -- i.e., if they are forced to do it or be beheaded or something - yeah, that's fucked up. But that has zero to do with Obama voluntarily bowing as a sign of courtesy and/or respect. ETA: And you know, when Obama spoke to these countries (after his deplorable bowing) he talked about human rights. In Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia he hasn't mentioned human rights at all. But at least he hasn't bowed, amirite.
|
|