[JSanders]

Personally, I think the White House isn't having a problem defining what a 'bow' means. Otherwise they woudl schluff if off like you and deny it meant anything.

Instead (wow) they think the Obama lemmings will fall right in line and never "see" that Obama actually moved his left leg back, brought his left arm inward and bowed almost 90 degrees, at the hip. Uhhhh, yea White House, that was not a bow.

[kathrynhr]

Originally Posted by JSanders

It is what it is. Don't try to define a "bow" for what you want it to be.

In the 1700s, when this nation was born, if two gentlemen in Britain or in the American colonies met one another, they bowed. When a man was introduced to a lady, he bowed. Bowing was about respect, period. It was NOT about the king. And when it was decided that Americans would not bow to their former king, to make a political statement, that did not mean that they all immediately stopped bowing to one another.

I am not redefining a bow. I am simply aware of its origins. It's not about what I "want it to be." I have no investment in a bow meaning one thing or the other. My general question to you was: what do you believe that Obama intended his bow to mean?

[John Clark]

If it were just his way of showing respect why did he not bow to the Queen of England?

[JSanders]

kathryn, this thread is not about me, or you, and what I believe. I've answered your question.

And you're wrong about Obama's bow. You might be aware of it's origins, but you aren't aware of protocol, obviously. This is not about Christians bowing to Caesar, me to the Queen or you to whomever.

It is about our President making an unprecedented bow TO the ruler of another nation. Two different things, I wish you could understand that.

We're not going by your definition of two people walking through colonial America. We're talking about protocol here.

Though, come to think of your "definition", does Obama not have the same respect or honor for our closest ally, the Queen of England. She didn't get a bow. She got a head nod.

Only the Saudi King gets the full 90 degree bow.

[kathrynhr]

Originally Posted by John Clark

If it were just his way of showing respect why did he not bow to the Queen of England?

I assume that he is trying to behave toward each leader he meets in the way that he believes is most likely to be beneficial to his cause. I'm sure it was intended to show respect, and probably also to disarm.

I do not for a moment believe he was acting on impulse or trying to pass out cultural warm-fuzzies. Whatever else he is or is not, Obama is a calculating human being.

[kathrynhr]

Originally Posted by JSanders

kathryn, this thread is not about me, or you, and what I believe. I've answered your question.

You have, and very well, I must say. However, I continue to disagree. Respectfully. <curtsey>

[mriff]

I can see both arguments here. I guess it wouldn't bother me so much were it not for the poor condition of human rights in their country. To know what the King supports within his country (and I won't get into that here, as some might be offended), and then to think that our president is bowing to him just kind of turns my stomach.

[bigolsparky]

McCain wouldn't have bowed. It would have thrown his back out. I feel Obama is going to be very weak in foreign affairs, simply due to lack of experience and age. This bow, in time, will be a drop in the bucket.

[JSanders]

Originally Posted by kathrynhr

I'm sure it was intended to show respect, and probably also to disarm.

But the White House is not so sure.

[Dawg]

Yeah I find it very strange the Queen didn't get a bow. I don't think any other President in history ever would have, or ever will again.

A huge mistake by the man. Then again if he lets the Saudis run this nation hes sittin pretty lol <<<<<< A joke. I really hope that it was a simple mistake, But I fear it was a calculated move as Kathryn stated.