What has Obama done well?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BringBackJoeT

On this note, what would the expectation be for a Catholic president meeting with the Pope? From a starting point, such a meeting would be a meeting of two heads of state (U.S. and Vatican). But, I suppose theoretically, there would be a level of meaning for that particular U.S. president that would transcend politics, and isn't it common for Catholics meeting the Pope to make a sort of gesture? (Kneeling maybe? I honestly don't know.) If it is common for a Catholic to do such a thing, and a president happened to be Catholic and did it, but claimed that it was in his/her "status" as a Catholic, how would people come down on that?

I'm Catholic, I believe the correct greeting for the Pope is to kneel and kiss his ring. I can't speak for all Catholics, but if it was me as President meeting the Pope, I would greet him as any other head of state, with a handshake. I wouldn't kneel and kiss his ring because as President I would be meeting him as POTUS, not as a "Catholic". Maybe that's just me and I'm completely wrong, but that's what I would do.

Behind closed doors with just the Pope and I, I would show his position the respect all Catholics should. To Catholics this greeting is not to the man but for his position as Christ's ambassador to the world.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

My warrant officer would've had my ass if I had bowed in the way the Japanese did.

Agreed. It may not be in the UCMJ, but my superiors would've made it very clear that bowing that way is unacceptable.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Angry

1. Iraq had nothing to do with the attack on American soil. You cannot fight a war against terrorists on a typical battlefield. The terrorists that attacked the U.S. were sent by a man hiding in Afghanistan. But you are right, Bush had the balls to persuade less intelligent people like you that going into Iraq was what we needed to do. Now before you start questioning my patriotism, realize that I was there. I could argue on and on about the war, but I would rather point out that you’re a hypocrite.

A lot more to the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 than links to 9/11.

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

George Tenet (Clinton hold-over) provided the intel to Bush, Colin Powell, Sens. Tom Daschle (sponsor), Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Diane Feinstein, John Kerry, Joe Liberman, Harry Reid, and Jay Rockefeller (Intel Committee) must all be included in the "less intelligent" category too. And Obama must be at least partially included too for voting to approve over $ 300B in funding for the war.

2. You said thanks for telling you how to spend your money. Isn't that what America does every day by telling countries that they cannot invest in their nuclear programs?

No. You may want to read up on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. You say that I want money for healthcare and I am for abortion. Let’s get one thing straight. I am for healthcare, but nobody is for abortion! There are just people out there that realize that there are circumstances that exist in which abortion is the lesser of 2 evils. If a woman is raped and she does not want to keep a child...I understand. If the mother has 50% chance of survival and the child has zero...I understand. You guys have to stop thinking in terms of it's this way or that way, and realize the grey areas out there.

As firstdown mentioned, the VAST majority of abortions are completely voluntary. For those that view abortion as murder, they don't want to be forced to participate or fund abortions through their tax dollars.

4. Only you can prevent narrow mindedness. Do you really think that by adopting universal healthcare that we would actually allow a person into their 90's to just die? We as a society would not allow this. You guys bitch about how much money Obama is spending and how much is coming out of your pocket and you truly believe that the government is just going to take your money let grandma die? That's good old Republican cynicism at its best. Nothing like some good ole hell and damnation preaching! Grandma is going to be OK, so are your son, your father and anyone else. The good news is that there are also going to be people that never had healthcare before that are going to be OK as well.

When providing treatment is done via a cost-benefit analysis in terms of "life years", then there will be a reduction in services to the elderly and treatments may not be provided that would either enhance life (hip-replacements, etc.) or prolong life (transplants, etc.). I have first hand experience in watching services to my father be reduced when he was forced to transfer from a private insurance plan to Medicare. So don't be naive, reduction in services to the elderly will happen and happens everyday in the UK & Canada.

Good article from the WSJ:

ObamaCare Will Lead to Rationed Care for Elderly - WSJ.com

I'm sure you wouldn't want this in the U.S.
Elderly left at risk by NHS bidding wars to find cheapest care with reverse auctions - Times Online

Also, here is some information on the Complete Lives System and by Emmanuel's own words this system "disrciminates against older people". The "death panel" thing is Glen Beck-esque garbage, but the fact is under a Gov't option services to the elderly will be reduced.

Ezekiel J. Emanuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The framework for the cost-benefit decision-making has already been approved in Obama's stimulus bill:

From the link:
Elderly Hardest Hit
Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.
Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).
The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.
In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.
Ruin Your Health With the Obama Stimulus Plan: Betsy McCaughey - Bloomberg.com

[KLHJ2]

1. You were dupped, almost everybody was duped, don't get mad at me. I was pissed that we had to be there for some BS. Once we made the mess though, we had to clean it up.

2. They are not following our rules, so we get all huffy and puffy. Yes they signed a treaty so what. It was only supposed to last 25 years. Then it was extended by a "consensus". Were they part of that consensus? Anyway all you did was support my point. We are trying to tell them what they can and cannot do with Nuclear Energy. Not that it is a bad thing. FYI the U.S. is the workhorse of the U.N.

3. If you read my response to Firstdown then you say that I agree with some his sentiments on abortion. I am stating my POV on the subject. My point of view does not believe that all abortions are OK. On the other hand Rowe VS. Wade had cut down on crime. Did Roe v. Wade Abort Crime? | The American Prospect

The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. Don't worry, I will take care of my grandma if Obamacare falters. It's not going to fail. It is a bunch of speculation by a bunch of people who will lose money over the whole ordeal.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Angry

1. You were dupped, almost everybody was duped, don't get mad at me. I was pissed that we had to be there for some BS. Once we made the mess though, we had to clean it up.

2. They are not following our rules, so we get all huffy and puffy. Yes they signed a treaty so what. It was only supposed to last 25 years. Then it was extended by a "consensus". Were they part of that consensus? Anyway all you did was support my point. We are trying to tell them what they can and cannot do with Nuclear Energy. Not that it is a bad thing. FYI the U.S. is the workhorse of the U.N.

3. If you read my response to Firstdown then you say that I agree with some his sentiments on abortion. I am stating my POV on the subject. My point of view does not believe that all abortions are OK. On the other hand Rowe VS. Wade had cut down on crime. Did Roe v. Wade Abort Crime? | The American Prospect

The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. Don't worry, I will take care of my grandma if Obamacare falters. It's not going to fail. It is a bunch of speculation by a bunch of people who will lose money over the whole ordeal.

You say it wont fail because you look at the other goverment programs and see how well they run. Lets look at the post office ops bad choice. How about SS ops bad choice. Lets see what program does the goverment run that has stayed within budget and runs great. Hmmm, nothing. It would stay afloat with the tax payers bailing it out but I think they will need to get a faster clock.U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Angry

1. You were dupped, almost everybody was duped, don't get mad at me. I was pissed that we had to be there for some BS. Once we made the mess though, we had to clean it up.

I wish I had the foresight you have. When you have the lottery numbers and ATS picks for each week let me know.

2. They are not following our rules, so we get all huffy and puffy. Yes they signed a treaty so what. It was only supposed to last 25 years. Then it was extended by a "consensus". Were they part of that consensus? Anyway all you did was support my point. We are trying to tell them what they can and cannot do with Nuclear Energy. Not that it is a bad thing. FYI the U.S. is the workhorse of the U.N.

We, as in the U.S. unilaterally, isn't telling them anything. We as in the international community (which libs love so much) are telling them. And yes the U.S. is the primary funding for the UN, big mistake IMO for an organization which is more often than not against US interests.

4. Don't worry, I will take care of my grandma if Obamacare falters. It's not going to fail. It is a bunch of speculation by a bunch of people who will lose money over the whole ordeal.

Hopefully it never gets passed with any gov't option.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Agreed. It may not be in the UCMJ, but my superiors would've made it very clear that bowing that way is unacceptable.

You're telling me that if you were stationed in Japan and a local person bowed you wouldn't reciprocate? Not bowing is not only acceptable but preferred by superiors? How vile, especially coming from people who value and fight for their traditions and way of life. I suppose one can not expect certain men to be wise, fortunately U.S. commanders and generals have traditionally showed respect to Japanese customs even under disgraceful circumstance.

Rear Admiral James Kelly, the top U.S. naval commander in Japan, bowed and apologized to the mayor of Yokosuka City, where the U.S. navy is headquartered. U.S. ambassador Thomas Schieffer expressed condolences and regret.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Angry

4. Don't worry, I will take care of my grandma if Obamacare falters.

Then what's the point of giving $$$ and control of the U.S. health care system over to the Fed Gov't if you have to then "take care of grandma". If you want to give more $$$ and control of your family's health care to the gov't, have at it. Me, I'll keep my $$$ and control of my family's health care in the private sector, thank you.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're telling me that if you were stationed in Japan and a local person bowed you wouldn't reciprocate? Not bowing is not only acceptable but preferred by superiors? How vile, especially coming from people who value and fight for their traditions and way of life. I suppose one can not expect certain men to be wise, fortunately U.S. commanders and generals have traditionally showed respect to Japanese customs even under disgraceful circumstance.

I was stationed in Japan for 3 years. Huge difference in returning a bow to another citizen, which I did often, and bowing (especially as POTUS) to a monarch or king. In this instance the US commander was bowing to show remorse and regret, which he should've in this circumstance. Someone under his command disgraced him and the entire U.S. Obama has NOTHING to bow to any foreign leader for (I know we've gone down this road before so rather than the page long responses let me summarize: saden: The U.S. has many things to be ashamed of. SS33: The U.S. is the greatest country on earth. Both posts contain YouTube clips and links to various sites backing up each point)

In meeting with anyone from another government I would shake hands but never bow (and certainly not hold hands and kiss either). In the Far East I would return a bow, but not bow first.

[firstdown]

I fanally thought of something Obama has done good.

Getting people to show up to local town hall meetings.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by firstdown

From what I have read in the post here people are not saying he hates America because he was not born here

Ok, that wasn't the impression I got from this post

http://www.thewarpath.net/576518-post73.html

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by saden1

You're telling me that if you were stationed in Japan and a local person bowed you wouldn't reciprocate? Not bowing is not only acceptable but preferred by superiors? How vile, especially coming from people who value and fight for their traditions and way of life. I suppose one can not expect certain men to be wise, fortunately U.S. commanders and generals have traditionally showed respect to Japanese customs even under disgraceful circumstance.

Flush your head out new guy. You think this is about freedom? This is a slaughter. If I'm going to get my balls blown off for a word, then my word is puntang.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by firstdown

You say it wont fail because you look at the other goverment programs and see how well they run. Lets look at the post office ops bad choice. How about SS ops bad choice. Lets see what program does the goverment run that has stayed within budget and runs great. Hmmm, nothing. It would stay afloat with the tax payers bailing it out but I think they will need to get a faster clock.U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Enlighten me. What is wrong with the postal system? Does your mail not get delivered in a timely manner. Does your grandmothers mail not arrive because it would be a waste of time for her to look at it because her eye sight is so bad? I would ask similar questions about SS but there are a couple of serious issues there. On the bright side though, it still pays out when it is supposed to. The problem is that it pays out when it isn't supposed to as well.I do not see the federal govt using universal healthcare as a personal piggy bank like they did with SS. And if they do, they should go to prison for embesslement.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

I was stationed in Japan for 3 years. Huge difference in returning a bow to another citizen, which I did often, and bowing (especially as POTUS) to a monarch or king. In this instance the US commander was bowing to show remorse and regret, which he should've in this circumstance. Someone under his command disgraced him and the entire U.S. Obama has NOTHING to bow to any foreign leader for (I know we've gone down this road before so rather than the page long responses let me summarize: saden: The U.S. has many things to be ashamed of. SS33: The U.S. is the greatest country on earth. Both posts contain YouTube clips and links to various sites backing up each point)

In meeting with anyone from another government I would shake hands but never bow (and certainly not hold hands and kiss either). In the Far East I would return a bow, but not bow first.

My post was in response to TTL post that indicated that his superior and himself (admittedly surmised from his previous posts and his general dickishness) viewed bowing as unacceptable proposition under any circumstance which you voiced as agreeable. Clearly, by your response, you don't seem to share this view and so I am left confused as to what you find agreeable.

Bowing in apology is acceptable but bowing in pleasantries is not? Would you think it acceptable if Obama (the commander in chief) bowed to the same mayor, prime minister or emperor of Japan under similar circumstance of remorse?

When in foreign lands wise men show the utmost deference to other cultures and their customs even if one perceives such endeavor to be embracing and shameful for to do otherwise is ultimately acting against ones own self-interest. Do not limit yourself to simply returning a bow my friend. Perhaps knowing what bowing is and its significance in different cultures might be helpful assessing its permissibility and irrelevance of order of bowing which you find virtuous.

p.s. What does the Office of Protocol say about the Commander in Chief and citizens not bowing to heads of states (monarch or otherwise), where can I find the protocol text?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

My post was in response to TTL post that indicated that his superior and himself (admittedly surmised from his previous posts and his general dickishness) viewed bowing as unacceptable proposition under any circumstance which you voiced as agreeable. Clearly, by your response, you don't seem to share this view and so I am left confused as to what you find agreeable.

I was interpreting TTE's response as in reference to the POTUS's deep bow (much like a Japanese bow), maybe I missed or misinterpreted something.

Bowing in apology is acceptable but bowing in pleasantries is not? Would you think it acceptable if Obama (the commander in chief) bowed to the same mayor, prime minister or emperor of Japan under similar circumstance of remorse?

The difference is in the situation. Bowing as a civilian in a non-offical capacity to another civilian in a foreign land is completely acceptable. But Obama isn't a civilian for at least the next 3 1/2 years, he's the POTUS and Commander in Chief. As Commander in Chief, no, he shouldn't bow in remorse IMO, nor should the Secretary of State, a lower level official like the regional or base commander, fine.

When in foreign lands wise men show the utmost deference to other cultures and their customs even if one perceives such endeavor to be embracing and shameful for to do otherwise is ultimately acting against ones own self-interest. Do not limit yourself to simply returning a bow my friend. Perhaps knowing what bowing is and its significance in different cultures might be helpful assessing its permissibility and irrelevance of order of bowing which you find virtuous.

Thanks for the info, but again what a civilian does in a social setting isn't comparable to bowing in deference or submissiveness to any foreign gov't official or monarch/king. If that makes me unwise to only bow before the Pope and the Eucharist, then I guess I am unwise.

p.s. What does the Office of Protocol say about the Commander in Chief and citizens not bowing to heads of states (monarch or otherwise), where can I find the protocol text?

Working on it.