Gift-gate, Grope-gate and now Bow-gate

All right, that's it! President Barry is not, repeat, not allowed to leave the country anymore! At least not until he's read a book or something on how all of this going overseas stuff and interacting with the leaders of foreign countries (who are supposed to be on our side!) is supposed to go. Maybe "Foreign Relations and Home and Abroad for Dummies" or something like that? Because I was able to overlook Gift-gate when President Barry gave Gordon Brown of the UK a bunch of DVDs (which I still think would have been fine if and only if they had been DVDs of the appropriate Region so that Gordon Brown could actually watch them. But they were the wrong region and he cannot watch them, thus rendering the gift inappropriate and wrong.) and I was totally against Grope-gate when Michelle Obama and her new BFF, the Queen of England, actually touched one another (you'd have thought they were in a tub full of Jell-O in the middle of a bar the way everyone was carrying on about it. Though I would like to see that, simply because it'd be so, so strange.). But now President Barry is teetering on the brink of "buffoonage." (Made that up. Just now!) And it has to stop. Soon. Tell me I'm overreacting. I'm not (for once)! Look, I'll spell it out for you.

For example, according to Gadling, whilst President Barry was over there in Europe and taking questions from reporters, an Austrian reporter asked "...about his impressions of European leaders." A simple enough question, right? Regardless as to your real impressions, you always, always say you liked 'em. That's easy. And President Barry pretty much went with that by saying that "...the interaction between European lawmakers was really not all that different than the way in which the US Senate operates." (He didn't say whether that was supposed to mean how the two parties of the US Senate can't get anything done or how the two parties of the US Senate are spending money like drunken sailors on leave or if it meant something completely different. I can't imagine what, however.)

In explaining that answer, he said, "...there's a lot of -- I don't know what the term is in Austrian -- wheeling and dealing -- and, you know, people are pursuing their interests, and everybody has their own particular issues and their own particular politics." He doesn't know what the term is in Austrian?! Perhaps that's because there isn't an Austrian language! ::::sigh:::: Video of Language-gate below. ::::sigh again:::::

Even though that's pretty bad, it's almost like I've come to expect these things. You know, what with 8 years of GW out there saying things that don't make sense to anyone (including himself, I have the feeling). So while I wish he had not implied that he thought Austrian was a language (I'm just glad he wasn't up in Canada, America's Hat, and implied that he thought they spoke Canadian!), there are a few other things that I wish hadn't happened on his little jaunt abroad. Like bowing to the King. Of Saudi freaking Arabia. Huh?

The whole 'to bow or not to bow' thing (and apparently there is a thing) is a tricky one. I was under the impression that all of that Declaration of Independence stuff was to get away from the subservience that accompanies royalty. Besides that, to bow in someone's presence is seen as a sign of respect. Let me just give a brief refresher course on how Saudi Arabia works with King Abdullah in charge:

• Corporal punishment, such as lashes, for 'crimes' such as 'sexual deviance' or 'drunkenness'.
• There's no set number for these punishments. It's up to the judges. It can range from a few dozen to several thousand.
• They're also very behead-y over there.
• If a woman is raped, she will can be punished for 'her part' in the rape.
  

Nice, eh? Those are just a few But my favorite one that shows just how bass-ackwards they are over there is that women are not allowed to drive or ride bicycles. They are, however, allowed to fly aircraft! Granted, they have to be driven to the airport, but still! WTF is that all about? Their human rights record is not all that great (that's putting it mildly) and PARADE Magazine named King Abdullah the Number Five World's Worst Dictator for 2009. So if PARADE Magazine says so, it has to be true.

The thing is, the US protocol on bowing is that we don't. So when footage was shown of President Barry allegedly bowing to King Abdullah, some people got their burkas all in a wad. (Naturally, the whole "Barack Obama is a secret Muslim" conspiracy theory reared it's head again with the emergence of this footage. He's not a Muslim!) And really, come on, President Barry! Can we not trust you to leave the White House for just a little while without causing an international stir?! You're the President of the United States! You bowed to King Abdullah as if you were inferior, as if you were subservient. I understand you're new and all, but we don't bow!

It does get worse, by the way. But not before the video. The bowing starts to come in around 0:49 through 0:59 in the video below. It's three minutes long and the commentary is in Spanish (maybe Portuguese, definitely not Austrian), so you might just want to zip ahead to the bow. Video first, then then more bad! Behold!

OK, so what could be worse that the President of the US bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia and all of his oil? If you thought George Bush holding hands with the King of Saudi Arabia as they went for a leisurely stroll, well, you'd be right, but it wasn't what I had in mind this time. But Behold! anyway.

That's lovely. They're a lovely couple. No, the part that really burns my toast is that the White House is denying that he bowed! How stupid do they think we are? VERY apparently! They're saying he didn't bow. "Didn't bow" as in "did not bow". Right. Why would you lie to us, White House? Why? Why?

Over there at Politico.com, a one Ben Smith apparently asked, "Why the bow?" and an Obama aide who would only speak on the condition of anonymity (because you never want people to know who you are when you're blatantly lying) answered with: "It wasn't a bow. He grasped his hand with two hands, and he's taller than King Abdullah." Um, no he didn't. Nor was he looking for a lost contact lens or drop his iPod or comparing shoe size with said King. He was bowing. I have proof. I swear. Behold! Proof!

Here he is starting to go in.

Here he is grasping at the hand which holds all of our fuel in it's oily grasp.

And here he is in the middle of his 'two hand' handshake due to the striking height difference between the two, whatever that means. OH, but what's that?! Why, it's his other hand! It's going to be a bit hard to perform the "two hand handshake" with one of your hands not shaking because you're really bowing!


And there it is again in plainer sight. The uncooperative second hand of Barack Obama. (Is this the part where I get to say "Liar, liar, pants on fire!"? I hope so! I've been dying to say that to someone. Preferably someone I don't know. This works.)


The Washington Times called the bow a "shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate." Wow. I'm glad the Washington Times is getting plenty of use out of their thesaurus! Now I need a dictionary. Fealty?(Intense fidelity.) Potentate? (One who has great power or sway.) They also said that "...it violated centuries of American tradition of not deferring to royalty." And it apparently started a new American tradition of lying to the public about something that is blatantly obvious. They say it's protocol to not bow, but he bowed! They're protocol liars,.that's what they are!


Can someone please inform him of the rules around there? I know that's someone's job. Who's Secretary of State? Oh, that's right. I forgot. It's her. Hillary. :::deep breath::: OK, I never thought I'd say this, but where's Hillary when you need her?

Sphere: Related Content

We Wanted Things Changed, Not Deranged!

Oh, I don't say it often, but when I do, I mean it. God bless Jon Leibowitz. Well, you know him as Jon Stewart, the quick witted host of The Daily Show. That guy really needs to be airing in a time slot which could ensure that more people would catch his act because let me just tell you, folks would learn a heck of a lot about how things really are and how things work. It's what this country has been missing for oh-so many years! A prime time cynic! (No, Archie Bunker did not count!)

Jon Stewart's brilliance is highlighted this time in the political sector which is but one of many of the wide variety of sectors that this country has to offer in order to keep the citizens thoroughly confused at all times. Confusing? Good, it's working.

We begin with our President, Change-y McOptimism Barack Obama, speaking to soldiers and the media and anyone else who could just wander in at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. And with all of the rhetoric of previous administrations, he announced that our war in Iraq would soon come to an end. These were his words: "Let me say this as plainly as I can, by August 31, 2010, our mission in Iraq will end."

Well, that is good news! So they're all coming home?! Ehhhh....not so fast. President Barry, please continue.

"We will retain a transitional force to carry out three distinct functions. This force will likely be made up of 35 thousand to 50 thousand US troops."

Well, that sounds kind of like they're staying there. See, this is what I hate about politicians and politics in general. They talk to the American public as if we're stupid or as if we are four years old and retarded. Look, you can say what you're saying one of two ways. You can say "One mission will end while another one begins" or you can say "We're wrapping it up, but we're not quite done yet." Either of those or a variation thereof is fine. What is not fine is saying that the mission in Iraq "will end". See, "end" means "done", "over", "finished", "kaput", "completed", "no more to do"! Those words mean "end". "Retain" does not mean "end". No, "retain" is just a fancy "not end" is what "retain" is.

But if you're asking the most fervent supporters of the Obama administration or even the less fervent, but still supportive supporters, they will tell you that what the President said, well, that was change and change, as you may distinctly recall, is what we were promised. After all, this is what President Barry had to say about our troops in Iraq:

"Our mission will change from combat to supporting the Iraqi government...training, equipping and advising Iraqi security forces, conducting targeted counter terrorism."

See? Change! Right?.....What?.....Really?.....Wrong?? It can't be wrong! It's change! Let's just compare what President Barry just said to one of Bush's speeches about our troops in Iraq and then the change will be apparent:



George W. Bush on September 14, 2007: "As this transition in our mission takes place our troops will focus on a more limited set of tasks, including counter terrorism operations and training, equipping and supporting Iraqi forces."

President Obama on March 3, 2009: "Our mission will change from combat to supporting the Iraqi government...training, equipping and advising Iraqi security forces, conducting targeted counter terrorism."



OK, that's not change. That's the SAME!! We were promised change!! He said the word "change", but he didn't "change" anything! It's the same!!

I'm catching onto this administration. What they do is re-hash the same old jargon. (I'm tired of the word "rhetoric." Good Lord, give the mainstream media a new word, especially one with a catchy spelling like "rhetoric" and damn it all if they don't beat that word into the ground within a week. Do those folks not own a thesaurus? Even a pocket version would be fine.) They just mix up the words and they seem really fond of keeping something the same and just calling it something else. But I already know that if something has "changed" it will be "different"! But that wasn't "different!" That was the SAME!!

Let's look at a statement by the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates from March 1, 2009 when he was on Meet the Press and said, "The units that will be left there will be characterized differently. They won't be called 'combat brigades'. They'll be called 'advisory and assistance brigades.' " That's like the political-speak version of tom-AY-to / tom-AH-to. Either way you slice it, it's still the same thing.

Below is the video clip of the brilliant and witty Jon Leibowitz on one The Daily Show. It's exactly the same as I described above, so don't go expecting any "change" other than pictures and people who talk so that you can hear them. Aside from that, it's the same.

Rock on, President Barry! I'm still waiting for the change that is being distinctly remembered as having been promised to us. It'd be OK if you started with your speeches. Everyone's gotta start somewhere.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Mess O'Potamia - The Iraq War Is Over

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri Martin

Political Humor
Joke of the Day

Sphere: Related Content

What Did She Say?

Again, congratulations to President Barry. And I'm not about to imply that he isn't President because of the debacle that was the administering of the oath. That's not it. There are just a couple of things I wanted to bring up in regards to the oath however. Well, the oath process more than the oath itself. The oath itself was fine. The process of administering the oath was a disaster.

Pretty much, Barry managed to raise his right hand correctly and have his other hand on the Bible. After that, it's all downhill. You wouldn't think that would be possible. The Presidential oath is only 37 words. I'd think it'd more than that. It definitely gives the incoming President way too much leeway and way too much credit for what he is or is not capable of doing. Here it is:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

See what I mean? It needs something in there like, 'Thou shalt not be a dumbass." ('Thou shalt nots' always makes things sound like you really need to do them.) "The best of my ability"? What kind of a promise is that? This is a person that was elected by the American people who are, by and large, idiots. It is not out of the realm of possibility that a complete moron was elected. (It's not like no one can argue that its never happened before!) What's the best of a moron's ability? Not good enough for me! That's what it is! But I digress.

When Chief Justice John Roberts is reciting what he thinks is the Oath of Office and gets it wrong, Barry stops and gives him a chance to correct himself. (I liked the subtle head nod that he gave him. No need to embarrass the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court before Barry is officially his boss or anything. Just a nod of the ol' noggin and Roberts caught on.) Roberts begins with, "I, Barack Hussein Obama" and then he pauses. Just briefly, but he pauses. And that seems to signal to Barry that it's his turn to repeat what Roberts just said. So just as Barry speaks, Roberts continues with "Do solemnly swear." I halfway expected Nelson from The Simpsons to jump out and yell, "Ha-HA!"

He attempts to continue by saying, "That I will execute the office to President of the United States faithfully" What the hell was that? "The office to President"? That's not the oath. That's not anything. That's just John Roberts making stuff up is what that is. Tell me, who in their right mind goes up to inaugurate a President (who could be Jesus, if you listen to his throngs of followers. Man, I'd love to have throngs of followers. Heck, I'd settle for just a throng.) for the very first time and doesn't have the shpiel written on a little notecard or a cocktail napkin or something? No one except for John Roberts, apparently! Is he going to apologize to President Barry for muffing it up? Probably only if he gets President Barry to say he's sorry for being the only "No" vote when Roberts was being confirmed for the Supreme Court. And I don't see that happenin', so I guess not!

But then, after Barry (he's not President at this point) waits for him to correct himself, then Barry goes and says it the way that Roberts phrased it the first time. That is also known as "the wrong way"! What was up with all of that? Quite possibly the worst Oath of Office ceremony ever. (And just so that administration didn't start off with a major conspiracy theory about whether or not he was actually President after that farce, Barry took the oath of office again on the following day. Probably a good idea, what with a bunch of slipshod bloggers out there whipping up who knows what kind of a frenzy over that one!)

And here's a question: Why is Barry so far away from John Roberts? Why are they not closer together? And why does the photo below make it appear as is Malia Obama is President of the United States, as she appears to be standing directly behind the podium?! I don't have a problem with it, I just find it funny. Does Malia have any ideas about the economy? Perhaps if her Dad tanks it, we can hear from her in the future.

But there's another part of Inauguration Day 2009 that hasn't been talked about much and that's really a shame because it's far more amusing that the oath blunders themselves.

First off, I just want to state that I really like Dianne Feinstein. She's an excellent Senator and does a fine job. I like the woman. That being said, when she introduced Chief Justice Roberts...? Um....I'm pretty sure she didn't say "...will administer the Oath of Office." Yeah, I'm fairly certain that she said "....will administer the Oaf of Office." I swear. I have listened to the clip at least twenty times and I have watched the video of her speaking to see if her mouth does the "f" sound or the "th" sound and it looks like the "f" sound. (Actually, that would be rather appropriate because when I first heard it live, I, too, used the "f" sound as I thought, "WTF? Did she say 'oaf' ?!"

The Oaf of Office? What the hell is up with that?! Barry isn't the Oaf of Office! The Oaf of Office is going back to Crawford, Texas as soon as this ceremony is over! He's the Oaf! Oaf?! Oaf??!! It's Oath!! Oath!! (I am naturally reminded of the scene in The Muppet Movie where Kermit is telling Miss Piggy about something that is a myth. "Myth! Myth!" he shouts. That's when a waitress pops out of nowhere. "Yes?" Hilarious.)

But all witty banter aside, how did she say 'oaf'? She speaks very clearly, makes more sense than most of the Senators, hasn't had a stroke, isn't crazy, isn't a reality show cast member, didn't seem drunk. I don't get it. Dianne Feinstein knows that it's "oath", doesn't she? She knows it's not "oaf", right? You be the judge. The video is below. (The video is from YouTube. It's not my editing, captioning, anything. It's just here.) The entire clip is 4 minutes and 16 seconds long, but Dianne Feinstein starts talking at about 10 seconds and she's already said "oaf of office" by the 23 second mark and John Roberts attempt to swear Barry into office is immediately after that. You can watch the rest if you'd like, but the key points are straight from the beginning and last about a minute. (I like efficiency, what can I say?)

It sounded like 'oaf'. It looked like 'oaf'. WTF, I think she said 'oaf'! Geez. Well, I'm glad that Barry was finally able to take the oath or oaf or whatever it was and is now our President. Can I just ask that the country be run a little smoother than the swearing in part? I don't need someone getting all confused and instead of saying "stimulus" they say "Depression". We don't need that sort of oaf in charge of getting things back on track around here.

Sphere: Related Content

A Change of Tattoos

I'm all for a good tattoo. The key words there are "good" and "tattoo". The "tattoo" being that of the singular variety, as people can get a little carried away once they decide to venture into the land of multiple tattoos. It's like they start thinking "If one is good, covering my entire body, including my face, would be better!" And that's really just not the case. But the other key word is "good". A tattoo must be "good". Who's to decide what qualifies as "good" or not? Definitely not the person getting the tattoo, because even those with the most hideous tattoos or the stupidest tattoos you've ever seen in your life will be the people who think that they're just great. So they don't count. Who does that leave? If my calculations are correct (and I believe that they are), it leaves you, me and anyone else who uses the Internet. (So as you can see I've really narrowed it down.)

I don't know why I never thought about Obama-mania seeping into the world of tattooing, but apparently it has. People have actually had Obama-themed tattoos permanently emblazoned on their skin. In general, getting a tattoo depicting a person is a risky move to start with. You don't know if you're still going to feel the same way about that person several years down the road. What if they do something heinous and there you are with their mug permanently etched on your body, leaving people to wonder why you chose a bodily tribute to a pedophile, for instance. It will leave you ruing the day that you decided to get that John Wayne Gacy clown tat on your forearm. (It can just get awkward, is what I'm trying to say.)

I became aware of the oddity of permanent tattoos of political figures when I saw a photo of what I deemed to be a very poorly done tattoo of a very poorly thought out idea. And the fellow who is now sporting this statement for the rest of his existence is NBA player Gilbert Arenas. Below is his inked tribute to our President-elect, a tribute to a man that I call Barry, one Barack Obama. Behold!

"In believe we charge"? What the hell does that mean? Oh, wait. Start at the bottom and work your way up? "Change we believe in." OK, that....um...kind of makes sense. Why the heck did he have it going in that direction, though? And that does look like "charge" from over here, doesn't it? It's either "charge" or "chapge" and "chapge" makes even less sense than "charge" does.

According to the folks over there at NBC Washington, and a one Dan Hellie, "He told me he got it so he could look at it during games and see the, 'We Believe.' " Well, what about the 'In Change" or the "Change In"? You don't need the "change", you just need to "believe"? What are you going to "believe" in if there isn't any "change"? I'm so confused. Not as confused as Mr. 'We Believe, But Not In Change" there, but still confused.

And on the other side of the "In" pinky finger there you will find a tattoo of the number 44, presumedly representing Barry being the 44th US President. (Is he sure he needs both 4's? Maybe he only needs to look at one of those during a game!)

So after I marvelled in this for a while, I started wondering how many other political themed tattoos are out there, just wandering around on their respective owners. (Please note, that word is "respective", NOT "respected". Some of these you can't respect. You just can't. And nor should you.) Fortunately, there were less than I had feared there would be. Unfortunately, some of them were downright scary. Behold! Political themed tattoos you never knew existed until now!

In sticking with the Obama theme......

I can see the resemblance, but only to the extent that the tattoo below looks like it could be of one of Barry's distant cousins or something like that. The hairline is wrong, the jaw is too thin, so many problems. And that's just with the tattoo!

The tattoo artist who did this one clearly has artistic abilities which far surpass that of those responsible for the above tattoo. But the artistic abilities don't change the fact that it really doesn't look like Barry very much. It kind of looks like Earle Hyman, the guy that played Cliff's Dad on "The Cosby Show."

See?

If you wanted the tattoo below of Barry on your body, a tattoo shop in Oklahoma was offering to do it for free. It was their way of contributing to his efforts. They claim to have done about 100 of them. Go figure. (It looks kind of small. I wouldn't be surprised if it looks like a big glob in a few years that will appear to read "Obama Zoos".)

This one is probably the best, and while it doesn't look exactly like him, it looks more like him than the other ones do. He does look more confused in this rendition, however. It's as if the tattoo is thinking "I can't believe you're getting my head tattooed on your leg, man."

I'm not sure what this one is supposed to represent, exactly, but it reminds me of something out of 'A Clockwork Orange' or 'The Wall'. I don't think it's good, but I'm not really sure.
This chap decided to just go with the Obama campaign logo. Nice of him to show it off like that. It wouldn't appear that anyone ever would have known about it otherwise. (Might I recommend some time in the sun, my good boy? Perhaps a few moments in a tanning bed?)

I then started looking for more tattoos of other political figures. To my dismay, I couldn't find any of either Joe Biden or John McCain. I thought that since McCain had been a Navy guy that there would be other Navy guys out there sporting a McCain tat, but to no avail. Surprisingly, I did find one guy who has a Sarah Palin tattoo. Behold! A tattoo of Sarah Palin that doesn't look a lot like Sarah Palin but you know it's her because the guy with the tattoo said so!

She looks a little frightened and unsure and I can't say that I blame her. The guy who had this "artwork" implanted on his body is pretty darned proud of it, too. He even made a short little video clip which he put on YouTube.

I found tattooed tributes to other political figures from this past year's campaigning. I would like to know a little bit more about the dude who had this Ron Paul tattoo done. I'm sure that the EVOL, which spells "LOVE" backwards is of some significance, but whatever it is was completely lost on me (probably because I was still in disbelief that there was a Ron Paul tattoo out there.).

I don't know what scared the hell out of me more, the actual tattoo or the actual Hillary.

I'm going to assume/hope that the photo below was the inspiration for the frightening tattoo. (Why would you do that to yourself? The guy must have lost a bet.)

And would you have ever thought that someone would have a tattoo of our current President? Well, in fact, someone does. And it's on the bottom of their foot. I think it had something to do with "stomping out Bush" or "stomping on Bush". Either way, Bush was involved and there was some stomping going on.

At this point, I've found way more political tattoos that I thought that I would've. Since I was on a roll, I kept looking. Can't really say if that was a good idea or not, considering what I found. We have.........

A couple tributes to Ronald Reagan (very surprised that there weren't more of these out there. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a Republican that wants to swoon about Reagan. And that's only good in the way that you really shouldn't be swinging around dead cats. It serves no purpose other than to see what you can or cannot hit and really, there's probably better ways of doing that.)

Here's JFK in a UFO, which prompted me to ask WTF?
And finally, what is easily the worst and likely the most regrettable political tattoo ever. The Howard Dean Truth & Hope '04 tattoo (complete with brightly colored flying birds!).

What were you people thinking?

Sphere: Related Content

Congratulations!

Congratulations, Barry! You not only won, you kicked some ass along the way. Your 349 electoral votes are two and half times more than John McCain's 138 electoral votes. You seemed a bit overwhelmed a couple of times when you were speaking to the crowd in Chicago. That's how I know you're going to do a good job. Or, at the very least, I know you're going to really try to do a good job. Because if you hadn't been in awe of what you'd just accomplished and if you hadn't known what you're in for really, really soon, it wouldn't have phased you. But the fact that you looked like a guy who was thinking, "Holy crap, I did it." well, that's a good thing if you're asking me.

Congratulations again, President Elect Barry. Let's look at some of the pictures from Election Day and that night, shall we?

Well, I know one thing. There's going to be a couple of really cute kids (and their new puppy) running around the White House for the next four years.

Barry and Michelle with his soon-to-be Vice President Joe Biden and his wife, Jill. No one wanted Joe Biden for President, but I guess everyone figures he can't do much damage as Vice President.

"No, Barry. I am not voting for John McCain because you think it would be funny."

The crowd in Chicago before Barry gave his acceptance speech. Yep, that's definitely a change.

For some reason, I thought this photo was really cool. Makes me proud to live in this country, even with all of the soft heads.

I'm surprised they don't have a photo of Barry texting or emailing, as I was receiving texts and emails at least twice a day the past week.

Beer? Hey, I like beer, too! He's just like me!

Your 44th President of the United States

Barack Obama

Sphere: Related Content