British Newspaper Blasted Bush's Etiquette Flub, but Glosses Over Obama's

[웃 910]

British Newspaper Blasted Bush's Etiquette Flub, but Glosses Over Obama's

(Update: The Associated Press, describing Obama's toast to the queen as a "blooper," reported that Obama on Wednesday made light of speaking over the British national anthem. Obama told British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg that the orchestra provided a soundtrack to his closing passage, while Clegg — who was at the dinner — told Obama the music had added "a crescendo" to his words.)

(CNSNews.com) - Imagine the newspaper headlines if President George W. Bush had written the wrong date in the Westminster Abbey guest book; or if he had continued toasting the Queen of England after the British national anthem started playing.

Obama did both of those things on Tuesday, and while media outlets reported the incidents, there was no suggestion that he is a blundering fool.

"Doesn’t Obama know what year it is? President signs Westminster Abbey guestbook 2008!" said the headline in the Daily Mail online. The subhead read: "Orchestra also accidentally starts playing National Anthem over Obama as he toasts Queen after misunderstanding a pause from the President."

Contrast that with the Daily Mail headline on May 8, 2007: "Blundering Bush makes ANOTHER gaffe as he winks at the Queen".

The British newspaper reported that Bush winked at Queen Elizabeth II during his welcoming remarks at the White House, after he came close to suggesting that she last visited the United States in 1776.

As the New York Times reported on May 8, 2007: "Mr. Bush set a relaxed tone to the White House gathering, albeit unintentionally. “You helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 — in 1976,” he said as laughter broke out. A moment later, Mr. Bush said the queen had flashed him a look 'that only a mother could give a child.' That line brought more laughter."

The Daily Mail commented at the time that turning to the queen "and giving her a sly wink is probably not included in any book of royal etiquette."

The New York Times also questionned Bush's grasp of etiquette, in a May 5, 2007 report on White House preparations for the British monarch's visit -- before Bush misspoke at the welcoming ceremony. The report began this way: "How does George W Bush, a towel-snapping Texan who puts his feet on the coffee table, drinks water straight from the bottle and was once caught on tape talking with food in his mouth, prepare for a state dinner with the Queen? With tips from an etiquette guide, of course - and a little gentle prodding from his wife."

As for Obama speaking over the British national anthem at Tuesday's state dinner, ABC News senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper described it as an “awkward” moment in which the orchestra and Obama were “a bit out of synch.”

Tapper noted that when the music started, “The president kept going,” and the queen appeared uncomfortable.

In fact, said Tapper, because the anthem was still playing when Obama finally finished his toast, “no one drank from his or her glass, including the president, who put his glass down on the table.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/british-newspaper-blasted-bushs-etiquett

[_Simpson_ 250]

Unfortunately I think a lot of it has to do with how they felt about Bush on the whole. No media outlet if free from letting their personal opinions seep into the news. So with that said the good guys dont need to be ridiculed over minor mistakes but the bad guys deserve it...no?

[faust-yusov 103]

I've little interest in defending tradition, austere social etiquette or, my goodness, the sodding royal family, but the distinction between each of these "gaffes" is surely self-evident.

Continuing a toast after the palace orchestra prematurely ejaculates our mawkish, masturbatory non-sequitur of a national anthem is an unfortunate (but ultimately well handled) misunderstanding.

Winking at HMQ, however much I appreciate the proverbial two-fingers to our pompous and indulgent republican graces, is clearly the act of a man childishly trying to see quite what he can get away with in an overbearingly stuffy atmosphere.

In short: Obama was in an awkward situation; Bush was purposely playing the impish provocateur. Not that I care, but don't expect the conservative, right-wing British press to turn down any opportunity for incredulity.

[faust-yusov 103]

Point 2:

2007: Anglo-American relations under severe scrutiny after Blair's government (still in power at this point) is lengthily and publicly lambasted for supporting and fabricating evidence for Bush's "war on terror".

2011: New governments in power in both countries. Anglo-American relations quite pleasant.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why do people post this stuff? Do they not know that newspapers have agendas?

It's not even about something important

[Danno 1,228]

I've little interest in defending tradition, austere social etiquette or, my goodness, the sodding royal family, but the distinction between each of these "gaffes" is surely self-evident.

Continuing a toast after the palace orchestra prematurely ejaculates our mawkish, masturbatory non-sequitur of a national anthem is an unfortunate (but ultimately well handled) misunderstanding.

Winking at HMQ, however much I appreciate the proverbial two-fingers to our pompous and indulgent republican graces, is clearly the act of a man childishly trying to see quite what he can get away with in an overbearingly stuffy atmosphere.

In short: Obama was in an awkward situation; Bush was purposely playing the impish provocateur. Not that I care, but don't expect the conservative, right-wing British press to turn down any opportunity for incredulity.

Obviously your grasp of what a wink means, is lacking,

Why don't you just admit you like the "haloed one" more?

Edited May 26, 2011 by Danno

[faust-yusov 103]

Obviously your grasp of what a wink means, is lacking,

Why don't you just admit you like the "haloed one" more?

Not that my preference ought be relevant given that I was at pains to articulate my apathy for either "transgression", but you appear to have overlooked my sympathy towards Bush's impertinence:

Winking at HMQ, however much I appreciate the proverbial two-fingers to our pompous and indulgent republican graces, is clearly the act of a man childishly trying to see quite what he can get away with in an overbearingly stuffy atmosphere.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Well, it is (as more than one Brit has stated) the Daily Mail.