Speak Out: Obama's Nice Guy Act Gets Him Nowhere on the World Stage

Posted by blogbudsman on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 6:12 AM:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662822,00.html

When he entered office, US President Barack Obama promised to inject US foreign policy with a new tone of respect and diplomacy. His recent trip to Asia, however, showed that it's not working. A shift to Bush-style bluntness may be coming.

Barack Obama looked tired on Thursday, as he stood in the Blue House in Seoul, the official residence of the South Korean president. He also seemed irritable and even slightly forlorn. The CNN cameras had already been set up. But then Obama decided not to play along, and not to answer the question he had already been asked several times on his trip: what did he plan to take home with him? Instead, he simply said "thank you, guys," and disappeared. David Axelrod, senior advisor to the president, fielded the journalists' questions in the hallway of the Blue House instead, telling them that the public's expectations had been "too high."

The mood in Obama's foreign policy team is tense following an extended Asia trip that produced no palpable results. The "first Pacific president," as Obama called himself, came as a friend and returned as a stranger. The Asians smiled but made no concessions.

http://www.wisdomquotes.com/003840.html

Making your mark on the world is hard. If it were easy, everybody would do it. But it's not. It takes patience, it takes commitment, and it comes with plenty of failure along the way. The real test is not whether you avoid this failure, because you won't. it's whether you let it harden or shame you into inaction, or whether you learn from it; whether you choose to persevere.

Replies (47)

  • I figure the stress of the job will get to him sooner or later and he will forget to smile to reporters and just snap.

    He has such a huge ego to believe that the whole world would love him.

    -- Posted by Skeptic1 on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 7:58 AM
  • It does not matter if the POTUS is a Dem. or Rep. the world by large hates us. I can see where it would get on anyones nerves to be constanly in the spot light and being asked the same questions over and over again. So, if you did give a diffrent answer it would end up on the news.

    I'm sure the stress gets to them at at sometime. It might be time for another beer summit.

    -- Posted by Airborne 95B on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 8:36 AM
  • Cadillacman,

    Please use paragraph structure.

    I wouldn't say our foreign policy sucked. We were in a difficult position.

    Fact is, Sadam needed to be removed. Fact is, France, Russia and many of our "allies" did not want it because they were profiting off of him. So it was a difficult time. However, we use 9-11 and WOMD as an excuse and it back fired, further alienating us from the rest of the world.

    Its not that the world hates us. In fact, with the exception of VE day and VJ day, we were probably never loved more than on 9-12. But we exploited those feelings and it has caused some animosity.

    I am glad we took a tough stand, but we used the wrong message. We do have some make up to do.

    -- Posted by lumbrgfktr on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 9:45 AM
  • Ah, but President Obama is not the "average African American" is he. References to his race are really becoming tiresome.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:08 AM
  • OK, people. Damned if he does, damned if he don't. SOME of you were just griping b/c he LOVES the spotlight, now you gripe b/c he shuns it. Anyone else seeing a pattern here??? ☻

    -- Posted by Turnip on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:14 AM
  • I'll tell you what is getting tiresome. It is the rhetoric caddy and others use to defend Obama rather than face the facts. His popularity is dropping like a rock. And popularity is all he ever had... like a rock star.

    We need a strong leader. Not one trying to pass a healthcare program off on Americans that less than 40% want, simply to keep his ego from getting dented again.

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:16 AM
  • OK, people. Damned if he does, damned if he don't. SOME of you were just griping b/c he LOVES the spotlight, now you gripe b/c he shuns it. Anyone else seeing a pattern here??? ☻

    -- Posted by Turnip on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:14 AM

    Yes, there are two predominant: 1. He can do no wrong. 2. He can do nothing right. I don't accept either though I admittedly would be hard pressed to point out one of his policies with which I agree. I try to separate the policies from the person.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:25 AM
  • Sucess engenders jealousy. Weakness fosters contempt. Sadly, Obama is swimming in deep and treacherous waters for which he is ill prepared.

    A likeable person, but a disastrous political leader. By 2012 the American people will realize it and make him a one termer.

    -- Posted by voyager on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:39 AM
  • Honestly I think he bit off more than he could chew with this job. He believes him being a nice guy internationally will translate into the world liking us. While he may be liked personally, it is my opinion that other world leaders don't respect him as a leader. I believe he is afraid to make the "hard" decision that may impact him politically. That is my main concern with the President, he doesn't impress me as a leader, merely a consensus builder to upset the least amount of people as possible.

    -- Posted by TheArmySarge on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 11:05 AM
  • Voyager -

    And by why measure do you conclude that Obama is, "a disastrous political leader"? The true ramifications of a President's policies and time in office are often not realized until years after their term or terms have ended. To label Obama's administration as a disaster or failure in only his 10th month in office leads me to conclude that you either have unreal expectations of the office or you are using this as a manufactured excuse to try and sway public opinion to your political ideology

    -- Posted by DADES on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 11:52 AM
  • You may be correct Sarge, about being afraid to make the "hard" decision. But then again Bush set the stage for electing a consensus builder by being too quick to make the "hard" decision. I am speaking of his decision to invade Iraq. Bush's diplomatic tone of, "your either with us -- or against us" I believe alienated many of our allies and hurt our standing in the international community. I will say this, whether you support Obama or oppose everything he stands for, I do believe that he is defiantly the person to try and mend many of the fences that were broken while Bush was in office. I mean the guy won the Nobel Peace Prize for no other reason than his message of "hope" that he brought to the table. That has got to worth something. Whether he is the right man for anything else remains to be seen.

    -- Posted by DADES on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:00 PM
  • Ike, you got eyes or have you been asleep the last 10 months? The porkulus bill, the bank bailouts, the seisure of GM and Chrysler, cap and trade, and possibility of seisure of 1/6 of national economy by collectivization of healthcare, dithering on Afganistan...shall I go on?

    You want to know more? You have heard of Google, have you not? Use it.

    -- Posted by voyager on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:16 PM
  • The "hard" decision I am referring to is Afghanistan. Every day that he doesn't make a decision is sending signals to friends and foes alike that President Obama can't make a decision. Whether us Americans believe he is making an intelligent well thought out decision after getting all input or just doesn't want to take a stand that may hurt him politically, is irrelevant. I just heard that he has now made a decision to send 34,000 troops, see now he has a made a decision. :-) Kudos to him. Whether it's the right decision or not remains to be seen.

    -- Posted by TheArmySarge on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:38 PM
  • DADES - just curious, what would you consider a mended fence? And just what exactly is broken? There is now fence trampled more than the Ugly American tourist. Actually it seems that a number of European countries have tired of their years of social liberalism and are drifting back to the center. I think we just passed them heading the other direction. We don't have much to apologize for - except possibly those countries that tried to take advantage of our good graces.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:52 PM
  • .. no fence .. (Freudian?)

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:56 PM
  • and caddilac man - like the old adage goes, you are entitled to your opinion, but not your facts; although a little fantasy don't sound half bad about now.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:58 PM
  • Caddy,

    Glad to see you driving an economy car there, gives you the right to criticise what others drive... correct?

    Now for the popularity of Obama and Obamacare. It is the polls Caddy, the polls, not talk show hosts. Where does your information come from other than a desire to cover Obama's ***.

    Oh, and the race thing... it is getting damned old Caddy!

    -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 1:05 PM
  • cadillacman,

    No offense, but while I use to read all of your posts, I have just about given up trying as they seem to be endless Obama infomercials. I am sure there are some valid points in there, but darned if I have the time or energy to find them. "Brevity is the soul of wit".

    Also, you can assure us that Obama will succeed with no more legitimacy than can those who guarantee he will fail.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 1:08 PM
  • Ike, you got eyes or have you been asleep the last 10 months? The porkulus bill, the bank bailouts, the seisure of GM and Chrysler, cap and trade, and possibility of seisure of 1/6 of national economy by collectivization of healthcare, dithering on Afganistan...shall I go on?

    You want to know more? You have heard of Google, have you not? Use it.

    -- Posted by voyager on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 12:16 PM

    I suppose it is . . .THEORETICALLY possible to use Google for something other than porn, however I'm going to have to pull your man card for suggesting it.

    And did you mean to address Ike with that post or myself? Either way, did you mean for that to be a list of his accomplishments or is that your justification for declaring his administration a failure?

    -- Posted by DADES on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 1:21 PM
  • Sarge,

    I assumed you were referring to Afghanistan, that is why I mentioned Iraq specifically. And you are correct, his lack of a decision on Afghanistan could be seen as weakness by some. Or it could also be seen as calculating, as opposed to the brashness of the previous administration.

    -- Posted by DADES on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 1:38 PM
  • For some it seems no matter how hard they may try or pretend to try the unending loop back to Bush is just absolutely too much to bear.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 1:42 PM
  • When it comes to presidents, why not reverse the discussion and start focusing on what president did what good in foriegn policy and domestic.

    I can remember one who was not liked much by some of the world and very liked by the others. Those some made up for the dislike with respect. I do not see being liked by the world a sound basis for policy. And besides, a lot of these very expensive trips are just a way for a president to treat his family and freinds to great sights around the world, the bowing is just an excuse to travel.

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 2:10 PM
  • And I hesitate to point out the obvious, but this whole thread is based on an opinion written by a German columnist in a German newspaper. Just thought I'd mention it.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 2:13 PM
  • Ah, but President Obama is not the "average African American" is he. References to his race are really becoming tiresome.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 10:08 AM

    Oh ... thank you. (But I have a problem with 'brevity' too, though ... ~sigh~)

    Although ... I think people like cadillac (whatever his/her 'race' may actually be) are also not the norm for the "average African American." They appear to be in the minority who probably are an embarrassment to those blacks, including our president, who take their responsibilities seriously, and who might see the attitudes such as those presented by cadillac as being deliberate attempts to continue the 'racial divide,' in order to excuse and justify their own personal lack of responsibility and the continuation of preference programs.

    Example: "One problem for people who don't want to commit to it, they are afraid that a minority ... may get the same kind of good health coverage that they are getting. i am just gonna say it , no sugarcoat here. we know why those who are against it are really against it. ... it comes down to a issue of people's race ..."

    I'm wondering ... Is Obama perhaps mainly guilty of wanting to try to please almost everyone? Is he guilty, perhaps, of listening too much to his advisors, his aides, his political party, and of trying to solve too many problems too quickly?

    -- Posted by gurusmom on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 2:48 PM
  • Gurusmom,

    As to brevity, no comparison as I am sure you are aware.

    As to President Obama, I try not to judge his performance too much at this point as I simply don't know where it will take us and also believe it takes many years to truly judge any presidency.

    I don't like the direction we seem to be heading in which began before he was elected and seems to be accelerating. When someone is in the front of a stampede, it is difficult to tell if they are leading it or are only being carried along by others behind him.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 3:38 PM
  • I did, ordered lots of stuff from them.

    Gee, I sure wish I was all sophisticated and stuff.

    -- Posted by D'oh on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 3:42 PM
  • President Obama is my president, regardless of how I feel about his policies I have to deal with the fact he is my "Commander-in-Chief", so I'll carry out my orders like a good troop. :-)

    -- Posted by TheArmySarge on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 3:55 PM
  • I thought Madaline and Bill gave the Koreans the technology to make that peaceful power plant soon after duties of State Dept were handed off to Commerce so missile tecnology could be traded to China for campaign contributions. I didn't know Reagon helped. But I admit, not fact, just what I thought.

    -- Posted by Old John on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 4:33 PM
  • Sorry, blog I meant to post sooner but work has a pesky way of interfering with my blogging.

    You asked "DADES - just curious, what would you consider a mended fence? And just what exactly is broken?"

    I was merely referring to the previous administrations brashness, their "you're either with us or against us" mentality, using water boarding to interrogate suspects, Gitmo, etc. I am neither condemning nor condoning these actions, merely pointing out that they seemed to have caused a lot of the overseas sympathy we garnered after 9/11 to quickly evaporate into anti-war and anti U.S. protests.

    Obama on the other hand, as Mr. Wiffle so often likes to point out, was a community organizer. And the world is just one big community. I'm not saying he has done anything that Bush wouldn't have done, but he has at least taken a more conciliatory tone than his predecessor and ended some of the U.S. bashing that was going on overseas. I at least see less of if mentioned. It's not gone, but I see less.

    As for the opinion you posted coming from a German newspaper, I really don't know much about this paper so I can't really speak as to whether or not this paper expresses views that are representative of the German people. For all I know, this article may have been followed by an article titled, "My romantic evening with bigfoot."

    -- Posted by DADES on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 4:34 PM
  • DADES - "...and ended some of the U.S. bashing that was going on overseas. I at least see less of if mentioned. It's not gone, but I see less."

    Actually it is a completely different dynamic. The 'bashing' was a mostly fabricated complaint that liberals and hostile despots filtered through a willing media to undermine the efforts of the Bush administration to properly protect our country's interests at home and abroad. Now that the liberals have achieved their objectives that process has dried up, although very little has changed. What you are hearing now are the true concerns of our allies and debtor nations who are now a little worried about the world as we continue our fall toward our demise as a strong, viable global leader.

    And DADES other comment - "...I really don't know much..."

    Mmmmm.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Nov 25, 2009, at 6:04 AM
  • http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6646179/Bob-Ainswort...

    Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, has blamed Barack Obama and the United States for the decline in British public support for the war in Afghanistan.

    Mr Ainsworth took the unprecedented step of publicly criticising the US President and his delays in sending more troops to bolster the mission against the Taliban.

    A "period of hiatus" in Washington - and a lack of clear direction - had made it harder for ministers to persuade the British public to go on backing the Afghan mission in the face of a rising death toll, he said.

    But Mr Ainsworth is the first Government minister to express in public what amounts to personal criticism of the US president's leadership over the conflict which has so far cost 235 British lives.

    Polls show most voters now want an early withdrawal, following the death of 98 British service personnel this year alone.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Nov 25, 2009, at 6:29 AM
  • There's a lot of difference between organising a group to vote someone into office or helping citizens boycott banks so they will give loans to deadbeats compared to dealing with countries that wish our total destruction. He has no financial or diplomatic background. Just a smile, nice suit, and a group of followers.

    You aren't going to change other countries against their will and have to play hardball to keep them out of you back yard. Take Korea for example. Every time we gave them a chance they took advantage of us. They teach children in school to hate America so it never will end. Do you think they will set around the campfire with America and have a sing-a-long?

    -- Posted by Mr. Wiffle on Tue, Nov 24, 2009, at 6:12 PM

    So your argument is that he is just a community organizer who, despite his obvious disadvantages, managed to get himself elected to the presidency of the most powerful nation to ever exist on the face of the Earth and is therefore unqualified to deal with, "countries that wish our total destruction." Is that your argument? I will concede that it doesn't necessarily follow that he must be a great diplomat, but it certainly doesn't preclude it.

    You seem to be set on Obama's failure and honestly, as I sit here typing this, I can't help but dread the day Obama does make a serious mistake because I have no doubt that you are just chomping at the bit, waiting for the day that you can come on here and dance at your computer and type little sign-songs and rhymes about how you were right, how you've said so all along and you've been predicting this since way back in early 2009. You may be right; Obama may fail, so here is your chance to justify your future jubilation. Can you explain to me what makes you so certain that his administration is going to be a failure? Honestly I haven't seen enough to be able to come to a conclusion. And if he were up for re-election today I honestly don't know who I would vote for. It would depend on who he was up against. But you have been a doomsayer all along. Maybe you're smarter than me, maybe you have some insight you would be willing to share. Just spouting conservative jargon like, "porkulous" and "wealth redistribution" isn't going to cut it. Those aren't reasons, they are just conservative scare tactics designed to make them sound worse than they actually are in the hopes of influencing undecided or uneducated voters. After all, "wealth redistribution" sounds evil, while "making healthcare affordable to all and not just the wealthy elite" makes it sound like more of a good thing. So, no jargon and please no cut and past from Limbaugh, Beck or any of the other conservative sycophants. Convince me that your opinion is based on something more than simply partisan prejudice.

    Honestly, if you know of some reason why I shouldn't support the President, I want to know what it is. Convince me and I'll join your little cloister of conservatives and I'll campaign against him. But you have to convince me that your aversion to him is based on reason and not your desire to be the first kid on your block to vilify him if/when he does fail.

    -- Posted by DADES on Wed, Nov 25, 2009, at 11:41 AM
  • Blog said:

    "The 'bashing' was a mostly fabricated complaint that liberals and hostile despots filtered through a willing media to undermine the efforts of the Bush administration to properly protect our country's interests at home and abroad."

    Wow! And were the liberals behind 9/11 too? I mean, it makes sense if you think about it. The liberals cause 9/11 and frame Al Qaida knowing that the warmongering conservatives would never turn their backs on a good conflict. With everyone distracted by the invasion of Afghanistan the liberals were then free to plant highly subjective evidence linking Iraq with WMD's. And to ensure the success of their planning, they kidnap Dick Cheney and replace him with Sylvester Stallone in heavy make-up (hey if the terminator can be governor, whey can't Rambo be V.P.?) Stallone, as Cheney, then steers Bush toward invading Iraq and recommends water boarding and Gitmo to stir up international hostility, which the liberals could then use to undermine the existing conservative administration! My God, why didn't I see it before!

    Blog also said:

    And DADES other comment - "...I really don't know much..."

    Mmmmm.

    My apologies Blog, henceforth rather than admit I am not an expert on all subjects I will make asinine statements to support fallacious conclusions.

    -- Posted by DADES on Wed, Nov 25, 2009, at 1:03 PM
  • ...well at least you made Theorist laugh.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Nov 25, 2009, at 1:42 PM
  • Dades, I listed his failures which are his own creations. Nothing either you or I can say will change that. Laugh or be dismissive if you want, nothing is going to make failures anything but failures. And more to come. The left wing Lugnuts in Congress and Senate are doing nothing to help him or improve the situation.

    November 2010 will soon be upon us which will see a new direction. Obama is headed to be a one termer in 2012 whether you like it or not. It will be the one thing he will be successful in doing.

    -- Posted by voyager on Wed, Nov 25, 2009, at 4:26 PM
  • Every President has to answer the same questions over and over. The only difference is....We get a different answer to the same question everytime it's asked....This President's policy's do need to fail to save our nation..His policy's will destroy the country the way we know it today. So wake up Mr. President. I'm not impressed! Either is the people of India or the Asian's...He has become a joke on BBC! Mr. President, your making Jimmy Carter look good. Don't you think that's a problem?

    -- Posted by northmountain on Sat, Nov 28, 2009, at 8:28 PM
  • The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574558300500152682.html

    In the Arab-Islamic world, Barack Obama has come down to earth.

    He has not made the world anew, history did not bend to his will, the Indians and Pakistanis have been told that the matter of Kashmir is theirs to resolve, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the same intractable clash of two irreconcilable nationalisms, and the theocrats in Iran have not "unclenched their fist," nor have they abandoned their nuclear quest.

    There is little Mr. Obama can do about this disenchantment. He can't journey to Turkey to tell its Islamist leaders and political class that a decade of anti-American scapegoating is all forgiven and was the product of American policies--he has already done that. He can't journey to Cairo to tell the fabled "Arab street" that the Iraq war was a wasted war of choice, and that America earned the malice that came its way from Arab lands--he has already done that as well. He can't tell Muslims that America is not at war with Islam--he, like his predecessor, has said that time and again.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Mon, Nov 30, 2009, at 10:18 AM
  • I gather that Mr. Obama is not popular with a considerable number of folks. I wonder why, really?

    -- Posted by voyager on Mon, Nov 30, 2009, at 7:51 PM
  • Not altogether, Wiff.We must look forward to and plan for November 2010, the beginning of the counter revolution. It is our only hope...a large enough change is Congress to block any socialist/collectivist program OB tries to pass. He must be made a one termer in 2012.

    -- Posted by voyager on Mon, Nov 30, 2009, at 9:44 PM
  • I like this one...

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703939404574567780798946274.html

    The defense of Obama is that he's not indecisive, he just has trouble making tough decisions. When decisions are easy, bang, he makes them just like that! Imagine him sitting in a diner:

    Waiter: Would you like eggs for breakfast?

    Obama: Yes, I most certainly would!

    Waiter: How would you like them cooked?

    Obama: Hmm, let's see. Bush liked deviled eggs, so that's out. Sunny-side up? No, wait! Scrambled--that way they're cooked through, so the risk of food poisoning is less. Or I could compromise and have them over easy. Then again, there's something to be said for hard-boiled . . . Gosh, this is tough . . .

    You know what? I'll let you know at dinnertime. I'm just gonna eat my waffle right now.

    Achenbach's eagerness to portray Obama's vacillation in a positive light reinforces another stereotype: that of journalists as courtiers rather than critics of the "new" president.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Tue, Dec 1, 2009, at 6:39 AM
  • "... current schedule for withdrawing troops in Iraq, where Mr. Obama has committed to withdrawing most combat units by August and all forces by the end of 2011."

    And if the health care bill passes, it won't go into effect until 2013?

    So ... for the next presidential campaign ...

    'See, I've pulled the troops our of Iraq as promised (okay, a few years later than promised but there was a good reason for the delay), and I've passed a health care bill as promised (but we won't really know how it all will work until after you elect me, but we're confident you'll love it). Therefore, it's obvious that you should vote for me. Oh, and I've decided on a ham and cheese omelette if it isn't too late to order it.'

    -- Posted by gurusmom on Tue, Dec 1, 2009, at 3:31 PM
  • http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1234291/NILE-GARDINER-Does-Obama-Brita...

    Does Obama have it in for Britain?

    Here's the story:

    "The only conclusion that can be drawn is that while the special relationship may not be dead yet, it's certainly dying, a fact that should be enormously worrying to politicians - and voters - on both sides of the Atlantic.

    And yet Obama seems strangely oblivious to the dangerous path he has embarked on, becoming the first U.S. President in modern times to place no importance on the historic relationship between the U.S. and Britain. This is a watershed moment in the political evolution of our two countries.

    We cannot say, however, that we weren't warned."

    My comment: Indeed.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Wed, Dec 9, 2009, at 11:34 AM
  • Obama Snubs the King

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-12-09/obamas-oslo-snub/full/

    "You just don't say no to an invitation from a European king. Maybe Obama's advisers are not very educated about European culture, but he is coming off as rude, even if he doesn't mean to."

    My comment: Worse than a tourist. Our head 'ugly American'. I miss "W".

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 6:32 AM
  • Riddle me this blogman. According to the article you posted, Britain feels snubbed because Obama didn't give them a "shout out" in his West Point address. However, Tony Blair was forced to step aside as Britain's Prime Minister due in large part to his close ties to the U.S. and the Bush administration in particular. So am I to take this article as Britain's implicit endorsement of Obama?

    -- Posted by DADES on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 10:27 AM
  • Uh, no?

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 10:30 AM
  • Caddyman,

    There is a distinction between reading and taking seriously something you try to write.

    -- Posted by voyager on Thu, Dec 10, 2009, at 11:28 AM
  • "...organizers replaced him with an Obama cardboard cutout."

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h4byyCERQn0IS0kjtYz2SHOq0qvwD9...

    But he skipped several other activities, including lunch with the king, a news conference at Oslo's Grand Hotel, CNN's traditional interview with the prize winner and a "Save the Children" benefit concert, where organizers replaced him with an Obama cardboard cutout. Obama also won't be around for Friday's Nobel Concert.

    Obama blamed his schedule. "I still have a lot of work to do back in Washington, D.C., before the year is done," he said during an appearance with Stoltenberg. The president's quick visit also reflected a White House that saw little value in trumpeting an honor for peace just days after Obama announced he was sending more troops off to war.

    -- Posted by blogbudsman on Fri, Dec 11, 2009, at 6:29 AM

Respond to this thread