Stumbling over words, mispronunciations and a Texas slang marked former President George W. Bush’s speech. Fortunately, now, we have a silver tongued devil in the White House whose words have made us the envy of the world. Take the most honorable President Barack Obama’s comments while awarding the Medal of Freedom to a Polish resistance fighter.
It was a small word to get wrong but it had global implications: President Barack Obama’s reference to a “Polish death camp” while awarding the Medal of Freedom to a Polish resistance fighter drew the ire of the Polish prime minister, who wants an apology. The White House has said Obama misspoke, and that he regrets the error, but the president hasn’t actually apologized.
Obama should have referred to a “Nazi death camp in German-occupied Poland,” and the mistake cut deeply: “We always react in the same way when ignorance, lack of knowledge, bad intentions lead to such a distortion of history, so painful for us here in Poland, in a country which suffered like no other in Europe during World War II,” Prime Minister Donald Tusk wrote in a statement on Wednesday. Shortly after the Medal of Freedom ceremony, Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorsky tweeted a demand for an apology, saying the ceremony was “overshadowed by ignorance and incompetence.”
“ignorance, lack of knowledge, bad intentions”
“ignorance and incompetence”
Wowzerz! The Polish sure don’t seem to be able to appreciate what a great president we have. No wonder they’ve been the butt of jokes for decades.
What do you expect from a man who thinks there are 57 states?
Cripes sakes, but you “conservatives” think with a hive mind.
It was a death camp, no? It was in Poland, no? While “Polish death camp” might not be the most accurate phrasing, it’s not totally out of left field.
Do you know what’s almost as dumb as thinking that there are 57 states? Thinking that he actually thinks that there are 57 states. I mean, really? Seriously? Do you think that if he had a written test that asked how many states there were, his answer was “57″? Don’t you think it’s more likely that he meant to refer to having traveled to 57 cities but slipped and said “states” instead?
Crap’s sakes, man.
The interesting thing is the double-standard in the sycophant media.
Bush, Quayle, Palin: idiot rubes.
Obama, Biden, Pelosi: brilliant people who occasionally make understandable mis-statements.
I think that all of their gaffes need to be taken in context. I’ll agree that some of the things that the Republicans have said where they got grief over it were simply slips of the tongue. However, when Palin goes on about Paul Revere warning the British, that’s an example of somebody who doesn’t know what the hell she’s talking about.
“However, when Palin goes on about Paul Revere warning the British, that’s an example of somebody who doesn’t know what the hell she’s talking about.” (LCJ)
.
.
Indeed, it’s very possible that Sarah Palin is a dimwit….after all, she literally mugged America’s Energy Conglomerates and coerced them into increasing their share of the “profit sharing” to be delivered to the people of Alaska when she signed Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES) — a net tax on oil profits that was passed in a bipartisan and transparent way. “While ACES provided oil companies with incentives to develop, the progressivity of the tax meant producers were protected when oil prices were low, but the interest of the resource owners — the people of Alaska — were appropriately protected as well to achieve a fair return for their resource.”
Now, I’ve admired the ideas of Henry George, who felt “the people should receive some revenue from the natural resources that naturally belong to all,” BUT I think taking a literal position vis-a-vis George’s ideas is a bit extreme. So, I think Alaska’s ACES went a little too far on that score, though I’m not an Alaskan and getting an annual stipend from Chevron and Exxon-Mobil might be nice, if one lived up there.
That said, Palin is only outdone by Joe Biden who definitely DID NOT “misspeak” when he said, “Remember that when the stock market crashed, one of the first things that FDR did was to get on TV and calm the fears of the American people.”
It is absolutely more likely than not that Biden DID believe that (1) the stock market crashed during FDR’s administration (Herbert Hoover, the Jimmy Carter of his day, was POTUS in 1929), (2) that TV existed back then (it DID NOT) and (3) that FDR downplayed the dire nature of the crash to “calm the American people” (he did not).
There are a LOT of very dumb politicians!
Actually, there are very few “very bright ones.”
Yeah, well, you won’t catch me defending Biden.
It is absolutely more likely than not that Biden DID believe…that TV existed back then (it DID NOT)
I’m not going to defend Biden either, but if we’re going to pick nits, television certainly did exist. Various people working independently invented television in the 20′s, experimental TV broadcasts began in New York in 1928 and was showcased at the World’s Fair in 1939, and regular broadcasts began in Britain in 1936. What you mean to say is “there were no non-experimental, regular public broadcasts of TV at the time of the Crash”, not that “TV did not exist”. If you’re going to pedantically nitpick others, get it right yourself.
“…television certainly did exist. Various people working independently invented television in the 20′s, experimental TV broadcasts began in New York in 1928 and was showcased at the World’s Fair in 1939….” (T)
.
.
It was actually at the 1900 World’s Fair in Paris where Russian Constantin Perskyi made the first known use of the word “television,” so the invention goes back even further than you suggest. In 1862, Giovanna Caselli invented the Pantelegraph and became the first person to transmit a still image over wires. . .BUT that did NOT make “television” (network television) available.
I wasn’t until 1930 that Charles Jenkins broadcast the first commercial on a television and by 1936 there were STILL just 200 television sets in use worldwide! The 1939 World’s Fair you mentioned was a full TEN YEARS AFTER the period Biden referenced! So, even if our television networks began THEN (they developed years later) they STILL wouldn’t have existed in the time period Biden referenced!
There was no television for FDR “to get on and calm the fears of the American people”. . .and so Biden was completely wrong on that, as he was about FDR being POTUS in 1929.
That’s NOT “picking nits.” What Biden said was one of the dumbest things ever said by ANY modern politician anywhere. . .and that covers a LOT of ground.
This isn’t about “picking sides.” There is no “Red vs Blue”. . .no “Dems vs Reps”. . .BOTH major Parties are committed to the NEW politics of Corporatism – the partnering of business and government. Obama is as beholden to BP & Goldman as G W was to Exxon-Mobil and R J Reynolds.
There are no “good guys”. . .and ESPECIALLY there are NO “bad guys.”
As an example, of the appx $12 BILLION Fund set up for 9/11 victim’s compensation, the sum totals “delivered” were minus any insurance coverage the person had. For instance, if a person was awarded $2.8 MILLION from the Victim’s Compensation Fund and had a $1 MILLION life insurance premium, they were awarded $1.8 MILLION from the Fund. In that way, BILLIONS of dollars was skimmed off the top by politicians (NO monies ever “go back” into any general fund) for personal use. That skimming was an entirely bipartisan affair.
What bothers me (at least a little) is the naivete of so-called “liberals” like yourself.
You didn’t defend Palin at all and I assailed one of the things she did that was hailed by Corporatist Democrats and Republicans alike – getting the Big Energy conglomerates to kick back more money (in stipends) to the Alaskan people.
In theory, I like that Henry George approach, but in practice it can become a nightmare. . .the people benefit from Big Energy using “their oil reserves” with cheaper and available energy that runs the modern economy we all rely on.
The world’s population which had remained constant (at under a Billion) for millennium before the steam engine, ticked up slightly with the widespread use of coal and steam, before exploding into a veritable vertical line with the advent of the widespread use of oil!
As Peter Schiff has presciently noted, “When the oil goes, the people go.” The idea that the conglomerates to which we all owe our very lives to are somehow “evil,” is utterly preposterous. It COULD well be argued that much of the current contraction we’re witnessing is the result of so many of us ingrates making our Corporatist benefactors angry at us.
I’m aware of the earlier developments of television that you mention–I was just sticking close to the time period. If you read what I said, I acknowledged that “there were no non-experimental, regular public broadcasts of TV at the time of the Crash“. My point was that one should speak precisely.
This isn’t about “picking sides.” There is no “Red vs Blue”. . .no “Dems vs Reps”. . .BOTH major Parties are committed to the NEW politics of Corporatism – the partnering of business and government.
I agree completely, and there are many other issues, such as the security state and the erosion of civil liberties in which both parties have shown themselves equally bad. I don’t plan to vote for either in November.
There was no specific statement by Palin that was in your post–if there had been some analogue to the Biden statement, and I had thought your response to it was insufficiently specific, I’d have noted that in her case, too. Actually, though I did not and do not support her or most of the policies she’s espoused, I would have to say that the ACES, as described, would be fine by me. States bend over backwards to give all kinds of incentives to corporations to locate in them, and little enough of the profit actually benefits the people of said states. As far as I’m concerned, more states should emulate Alaska here; and to that extent, my hat is off to Ms Palin and I give her kudos.
As to goofy things that politicians say, even highly intelligent people, if they speak in public (be it as a teacher, a minister, a politician–anyone who speaks regularly before people) regularly, will often say totally goofy things. I know I have. I don’t know if Biden actually thought that what he said is right; and he and Palin may both be dimwits, as far as I know. On the other hand, there have been historical examples of dim bulbs who had enough other positive traits and enough support from brighter people around them to be very effective leaders. At the end of the day, I would support Biden over Palin, if they were running, on the grounds of issues and experience, and not on who was goofier. Though as I said, I wouldn’t vote for either at the current time.
The idea that the conglomerates to which we all owe our very lives to are somehow “evil,” is utterly preposterous. It COULD well be argued that much of the current contraction we’re witnessing is the result of so many of us ingrates making our Corporatist benefactors angry at us.
This is confusing, in that earlier you’d seemed to be railing against corporatism. That we owe our lives, in a sense to conglomerates doesn’t make them automatically beneficent, either. In any case, as I’ve said in several contexts, I tend to think that no one and no system yet tried–capitalism, socialism, communism, corporatism–has yet figured out how to solve the problems inherent in industrial economies of scale. That’s too bad, because the problems seem to be multiplying and having worse effects on us all. I guess we’ll see, one way or another, over the course of the next century or so.
JMK misinterpreting what was written? Say it ain’t so!
No, not at all. I DID NOT “misinterpret” anything.
I STILL adamantly insist that “television” (in the sense Biden referenced it) DID NOT exist at the time Biden claims (circa 1929, the year the stock market crashed). . .otherwise, if it HAD existed I have no doubt that then President Franklin D Roosevelt WOULD HAVE gotten on TV to “calm the fears of the American people,” even though he wouldn’t actually BE POTUS for another 39 months.
While I understand that “some might say” that “experimental television” DID exist, actual “television” (network television) which is what Biden’s quote clearly referred to. . .indeed DID NOT yet exist.
“This is confusing, in that earlier you’d seemed to be railing against corporatism. That we owe our lives, in a sense to conglomerates doesn’t make them automatically beneficent, either.” (T)
.
.
No…I’ve never opposed Corporatism.
I’ve ALWAYS been an avowed Corporatist. Despite the fact that the freer the economy (the more “Capitalistic”) the more prosperous, free economies often lead to “excesses of freedom,” or “people doing too much of what they WANT and too little of what they SHOULD or MUST.
I am a “law & order” Conservative Democrat. I used to term it a “Zell Miller Democrat,” after the very Conservative Georgia Democrat. I was a big advocate of Rudy Guiliani’s in NYC and I found myself becoming less and LESS Libertarian as those years went by and especially in the wake of 9/11.
I think there are many potential abuses inherent in Corporatism, but they pale in comparison to the potential abuses of any form of socialism (which all tend to require strong-armed totalitarianism to be effected) or a “pure democracy,” which is almost certainly why America’s Founders thwarted pure democracy at virtually every turn.
The great poet Ezra Pound wrote a paean to Benito Mussolini titled Jefferson and Mussolini in which he drew those precise parallels.
Pragmatism appears to be firmly on the side of Corporatism. The ONLY slight difference between the two major U.S. parties is that while the GOP favors a BUSINESS-led partnership, the Democrats seem to favor a GOVERNMENT-led partnership. . .I believe that given the LESSER quality of people who go into government, the latter is an abject disaster on all counts.
I certainly DON’T mean to deride or demean Corporatism in any way. You CAN say that it’s ‘the worst possible system except for all the others,’ to paraphrase Churchill.
Take out the “except for all others” part, and I’d agree with you.
It’s certainly NOT “the worst possible system.”
98% of “the people” don’t understand business at all.
if left to their own devices they’d destroy the private sector and we all know that NO (0) government-run industries have eve worked. No. . .the private sector is what allows the public sector to exist. It is the egg from which the chicken springs.
It really is a thorny issue.
ALL human endeavors are rife with “corruption,” because “corruption” is merely the natural outcome of those who are “connected,” or “insiders” pressing their natural advantage over others.
That’s probably why I remain, at heart, a Tammany Democrat. Tammany protected the Unions from cheap southern and foreign labor, made sure that Unionized “Tammany voters” got their cut of the inevitable corruption within the system.
it worked very efficiently, so long as you were a “white ethnic unionized worker.”
Not so much if you were an out-of-towner looking to flood the NYC labor force. . .but no system is perfect.
“I don’t know if Biden actually thought that what he said is right; and he and Palin may both be dimwits, as far as I know. On the other hand, there have been historical examples of dim bulbs who had enough other positive traits and enough support from brighter people around them to be very effective leaders. At the end of the day, I would support Biden over Palin, if they were running…” (T)
.
.
I think that’s a tough choice.
Generally I find that GOP policies are far more producer-friendly.
Job creation is key and since every government job REQUIRES 6 to 7 private sector jobs to fund it, ANYTHING that stalls private sector job creation, ultimately chokes off the public sector and killing the economy for dedicated working people.
Earlier this year a staggering and unprecedented 1.2 million people were dropped OUT of the U.S. labor force.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/record-12-million-people-fall-out-labor-force-one-month-labor-force-participation-rate-tumbles-
Also see: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/People%20Not%20In%20Labor%20Force.jpg
AND: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/01/Participation%20Rate.jpg
It’s often a difficult choice, but I would always look to vote, and to find SOME REASON to vote rather than not to.
I think by November, you’ll be voting one way or the other, as most “likely voters” will.
As a matter of fact, I have voted third party in the past (in 1996, to be precise), and have never voted for the same presidential candidate twice. I wouldn’t rule out that possibility, but I’ve not yet seen anyone of either party who’s impressed me much in his second term. I live in a state in which the electoral votes will (barring a literal miracle) all go to Romney, so my vote won’t effect much, anyway. If I thought that there were a possibility that Obama could win my state (which is about the same as that of a snowball surviving Hell, since in the Democratic primary, running unopposed, he got only about 54% of the vote), and that my vote might help tip it, I’d vote for him as being very, very, very minutely the lesser of two evils. However, I don’t see that happening, so I’ll almost certainly vote 3rd party, gladly invoking a pox on both their houses.
I can understand the frustration. . .NY is reliably Blue, so I’ve also voted 3rd party (Libertarian) a few times.
But, as I said, my Libertarian fervor has waned especially post-9/11.
I’ve come to increasingly like state intrusions based on law and order even while I revile any of those designed to improve our lives.
Generally, the LESS those dolts in government try to “help out,” the better for ALL of us! Cracking down on thugs however is always and absolutely necessary.
I’ve noted often that so much of our economy is predicated on grinding up the “outcasts” and “misfits” among us. An army of lawyers, judges, correction and court officers, Emergency Services (Police & Fire) personnel, hospital emergency room staffs, etc., ALL rely on this process for their livelihoods. Many, MANY of us depend upon government being what Clarence Darrow wrongly condemned it for being, “The tool by which the strong/rich despoil the poor/weak.”
It may not be ideal, but it’s what we have for now. An older firefighter once put it quite well when I first came on the job, “Son don’t WISH for fires, they’ll come and they’re disasters for those effected. It’s bad to wish for someone else’s disaster, but recognize also that that’s how we make our livings – off of the suffering of others. I thank god every night for murder, rape, arson, chaos and lawlessness. If they didn’t naturally exist, we’d have had to invent them! Bottom-line, without them, we’d all be out of a job.”
I’ve never forgotten that. Sometimes the truth isn’t at all pretty.