www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Osama vs. Obama

One reason he returned the bust was that the US didn't mown it. It was only at the White House on loan. When something is loaned, that implies it will be returned.
You state that the President's "jealosy" is behind this. Did you have a personal conversation with him to determine this or are you merely judging the condition of his soul?

"One reason he returned the bust was that the US didn't mown it. It was only at the White House on loan. When something is loaned, that implies it will be returned."

The British did not ask to have it back--the "loan" was open-ended, making it, for all intents and purposes, a gift. When Gordon Brown came to visit, the gift he gave President Obama was a hand-crafted pen set made from the wood of a 19th century British warship used to suppress the slave trade; it matched a desk previously given to President Bush. In return, President Obama gave Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of America's closest ally, a half dozen DVDs which were not even formatted for use in the United Kingdom. Not to worry, though--Brown's eyesight is failing, and he seldom watches television, anyway.

When Obama visited the Queen, he gave her a monogrammed iPod--loaded with the collected speeches of Barack H. Obama, no less. Never mind that the Queen already possessed a custom-made, jeweled iPod that she bought after her grandson's showed her theirs.

Both gifts were utterly inappropriate both for the occasion and for the recipient. They gave no indication that the President understood the significance of such exchanges, or the impact that they can have on international relations. Through his careless choices, the President came off as cheap, and the action as a deliberate snub to Great Britain. It was certainly covered in that way over there.

"You state that the President's "jealosy" is behind this. Did you have a personal conversation with him to determine this or are you merely judging the condition of his soul?"

I doubt the President was jealous. The man's self-regard is far too elevated for that. No, he's simply clueless, a shameless narcissist who thinks everything is about him, and for whom other people and other countries are just tools for his self-exaltation.

That's not looking into his soul--that just analyzing his behavior. Intelligence services around the world are doing that 24/7, and drawing appropriate conclusions. Let's hope there is no lasting damage from his tenure in office.

"The British did not ask to have it back--the "loan" was open-ended, making it, for all intents and purposes, a gift. "

It was not an open-ended or loan or gift, if you read the afore mentioned article.

"It was not an open-ended or loan or gift, if you read the afore mentioned article."

In effect, it was. Salient quote: "But when British officials offered to let Mr Obama to hang onto the bust for a further four years, the White House said: 'Thanks, but no thanks.'"

"You state that the President's 'jealosy' is behind this. Did you have a personal conversation with him to determine this or are you merely judging the condition of his soul?"

I was making a point. There is a conflict between perception, or hoped perception, and reality regarding Obama's skills as a speaker. I would not presume to judge Obama's soul, but I can judge the quality of his statesmanship and his command of the oratory.

What gets me about the speeches he has made in the Near East is that he does not apparently recognize how he is being perceived by his audience. He can not stop Iran from wanting to wipe Israel off the map with a speech. He can not change the minds of the Palestinians who would rather possess the whole Israel than accept a two state nation with a word or two about hope and change.

His arguments would not appeal to them, but rather they will make him look weak in their eyes. I can only conclude that his speech is not for his particular audience, but for the Europeans and Americans who will look at our President's heroic rhetoric with hope and admiration.

I agree but let's take a clue from the integrity of Pres. Bush who won't utter a negative word or critique about the new Pres., and let's stand behind him and wish him our best in tackling the world's problems...

As far as the gift he gave the Queen, he and the first Lady are breaking molds in many ways, and though it may not seem 'classy' at times, that isn't necessarily bad.

They dress differently (there was a witty and brilliant article yesterday which I read on how he broke the supreme rule the author of the article grew up in Ct. with: he did not wear a tie to the theater in NYC!!), and they seem to be bridging a generational mentality that exists.

All of our Presidents were so different in their life styles because of their different backgrounds. Pres. Obama's and his wife Michelle's (and for the record, I really like the clothes she wears despite not wearing the traditional lady's suits) are just another one.

Anyway, I don't think that Al Queda gives a hoot about any of this, so let's stay tuned to the reactions to his Middle East trip.

Alice

"Anyway, I don't think that Al Queda gives a hoot about any of this, so let's stay tuned to the reactions to his Middle East trip."

Actually, if Al Qaeda perceives weakness I think that Obama could inspire hope in Osama's aspirations of Jihad. Fortunately our military is stronger than rhetoric.

Terry

Atleast he is trying to reach out from a background which he knows is unique to the Presidency...

I am not one who thinks we should vote on the politics of personality, but just as many Americans do, so do many others around the world who will heed or not heed the words of an American President because of this...

The concept of what foreigners consider 'sympatique/Fr.; sympathitikos/Gr.' is alien to us, (the concept doesn't even exist in our language though 'charisma' would come closest) but very real and important to many of them...

I say this because I know that in that part of the world, all too often, the stereotype of the WASP American President (and what they consider to be arrogance and a sense of superiority) creates a barrier to likeability and without likeability, there is no wanting to understand America. This barrier exists from Greece and on eastward....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8082676.stm

Personally, I wait for history to prove the wisdom or folly in his appeal. It may make an impact, it may not.

When he speaks of a two nation state in Israel he is delving into theory, such as 'it would be nice if such and such happened'. Whether it happens will depend on both parties coming to an agreement. If historians can later give him credit for peace in Israel he will have a strong place in the ranking our presidents.

Who knows if he will be successful in anything...but at the very least, there is someone alot of Muslims are willing to 'like', and likeability can often attain alot, that is all I am trying to convey.

I didn't vote for him, but I am willing to give him a chance. I don't want to be negative because I didn't like when democrats demonized and were negative about President Bush. I like to be objective and positive *where possible*...

Regards,
Alice

"I didn't vote for him, but I am willing to give him a chance. I don't want to be negative because I didn't like when democrats demonized and were negative about President Bush. I like to be objective and positive *where possible*... "

It's precisely because I'm objective (and an historian), that I am, frankly, appalled by what I see the Administration doing. If one definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different outcome, then the Administration is insane, because all of its pet projects and initiatives have been tried--not once, but repeatedly--with disastrous results each and every time. Though liberals like to think they are progressive, they are in fact soul mates with the France's Ancien Regime--"They remember nothing, and they forget nothing".

Stuart,

I think you missed the point of an earlier post of mine on this thread.

From Greece through the Middle East, people have not connected to our WASP Presidents. They consider our mannerisms and personality arrogant. I have been there/lived there and heard this firsthand.

This President has the unique position of being of color and raised in different backgrounds, and from what I have heard personally on the ground in those countries, they *like* him.

*LIKE* is not a criteria for good politics, infact it is a lousy one, and I am genuinely appalled at how many in the U.S. vote basically on that criteria, but it is *a good start* for this President in the Middle East in that atleast his words are being listened to. We all *want* to hear the words of those we like and can relate to on some common level more than the words of others who we don't. It is human nature.

That is all I am saying...

Alice
Alice

"From Greece through the Middle East, people have not connected to our WASP Presidents. They consider our mannerisms and personality arrogant. I have been there/lived there and heard this firsthand"

But it matters not one whit--because the tensions between the United States and the countries of the Middle East are cultural, not personal. I'm a big Samuel Huntington fan, and when he spoke of "clash of civilizations", he knew whereof he spoke. Push comes to shove, no matter how popular our President may be, their culture and ours are not compatible. We have different values, and my only fear is we may decide to sacrifice ours in the hope of winning them over, but they will never sacrifice theirs.

As for Greece, they may have liked Truman and Ike (probably resented them, though), but they never really forgave LBJ or his successors for the Colonel's Coup (necessary though it may have been). Since that time, Greece has been fundamentally anti-American (for all that every Greek would love to come here), which allows them to overlook their own political and economic dysfunctionality.

By the way, very few of our Presidents in this century have been WASPs. Roosevelt? Nope--Dutch. Truman? Yup. Eisenhower? German. Kennedy? Irish. Johnson? Scotch Borders. Nixon? Ditto. Ford? Yup. Carter? Yup. Reagan? Irish. Bush? Yup. Clinton? Who knows? Bush? Yup. Obama? Whatever. Our Presidents represent most of the immigrant groups who made this country.

Stuart,

I would clarify alot to you but what's the use? I don't want to argue. I mean no disrespect, but it seems like you may be one of those persons who needs to be right about everything or to argue and/or debate about everything...That is fine, but a conversation where people are not willing to understand the other is a one way conversation.

As an Orthodox Christian I have learned the spiritual discipline over the years to defer in such situations..You have the last word!

I have listened to you, I saw your point of view, and I respected your thoughts. Many of them are quite valid and insightful and I do agree with much of what you say, however, I do not feel that you have afforded me the same respect.

Have a good night.

In Christ,
Alice

Alice,

I am by profession a strategist who deals with international security issues. I gave you my professional opinion, which is based on years of experience. It really doesn't matter how well people in other countries connect with the President of the United States.

At the end of the day, it is his policies, and how well he implements them that matter. In my carefully considered judgment, there is nothing Obama can do, short of sacrificing American strategic interests and security, that will make the United States popular in the Middle East. Certainly, the disjunction between his rhetoric and his actions is already creating tremendous disappointment, not the least among the very Arab moderates and human rights advocates we should be supporting. Instead, delivering a speech in the capital city of one of the Middle East's most repressive regimes, he attempts to circumvent all of the irreconcilable differences, all of the problems of the Arab world that, ultimately, lie at the feet of those societies, and about which we can do nothing whatsoever.

I was particularly disappointed that Obama continues to peddle the nonsense that Islam is not the root cause of the problem, but is in fact part of the solution. Anyone even remotely familiar with Islam would never say that. It proves the man is either naive, or disingenuous, or utterly mendacious. But it doesn't really matter--his entire foreign policy approach is nothing but sandcastles in the air, with no substance and no foundation. Even if he believed every last word he uttered, he could not make it happen, because it is a fantasy at odds with reality.

Like Jimmy Carter (whose second term Barack Obama seems interested in filling) in 1979, our President is setting himself up for a fall. Like Carter, he'll look around and say he was deceived by our enemies. Well, duh! That's what enemies do. The first step in countering your enemies is acknowledging that you have them--and I do not mean Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney, either.