The Dali Lama ladies and gentlemen.. he's not pissed but some dummies here are..NEW DELHI — The Dalai Lama defended President Barack Obama from criticism that he has been too soft on China, saying Sunday that the U.S. leader just has a different approach to dealing with the Asian giant.
And FINALLY:
Wow. Just wow.The Wall Street Journal noted that in nearly nine months in office, Obama has found time to meet with Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega and Vladimir Putin, but not the Dalai Lama, a peaceful religious leader who has long been a friend to the US.
Since 1991, the Dalai Lama has been here 10 times and each times he has met the President. Most times the meetings have been "drop-in" visits at the White House.
The last time he was here, in 2007, however, George W. Bush became the first sitting president to meet with him publicly, at a ceremony at the Capitol in which he awarded the Dalai Lama the Congressional Gold Medal, Congress's highest civilian award.
Because the Dalai Lama is a lynch-pin of global economies like Russia and Venezuela. , even Ortega's little banana republic is more important to world trade than His Holiness. I'd like Tibet to be free as much as the next guy, but in case you hadn't noticed, geo-politics and economic development rate higher than humanitarian squabbling with business partners we should never have gotten involved with in the first place if we were such gallant gents.
Does anyone want to seriously state that Obama hasnt been wobbly or soft on China from everything from human rights to global currency to climate change?
That was the point of my observation. Some of you want to turn it into a debate on whether or not Obama has been soft on China which deserves a huge eye-roll.
Its not just China. He punted on the public option that you all wanted so badly. He didnt close gitmo by the end of the year. No gays in the military etc. etc.
I understand that a politician is never going to get eveything he wants so he negotiates. He compromises and makes deals.. yet somehow the resident dead eanders just woke up and decided that Obama is the first politician to do just that...
China, teh gays (rhetorically), gitmo...
As long as Joe Biden isn't in a bunker somewhere trying to figure out ways to take over the world, I'll count my blessings.
We're just taking the points one by one, chief -- you're the one who made our relationship to China the focus. Unroll your eyes a bit and skip back some if you need confirmation.
As to the general observation of broken promises... welcome to the real world, where every politician is motivated by forces we can only catch glimpses of through the dull wash of our media.
Wait a mimute? You mean Obama didn't make up lying?
No...he appeases everyone in attempt to be loved by all and ends up with garbage or nothing.
The only thing he stands firm on is that he's doing a good job.
So you admit Obama lies?
- Chumpdumper
I dont care if China is the focus or not. Bottom line is that he hasnt put any pressure on China on several important issues.
So basically, thanks for nothing.
The Dali lama stuff was just icing on the cake.
Both of his predecessors had the guts to give China the middle finger when it came to their human rights atrocities. But not Obama, everyone's buddy (except Tibet).
Isn't that basically the president's job? It's been true for all the administrations I've borne witness to, starting with Reagan.The only thing he stands firm on is that he's doing a good job.
Maybe. But wasnt Obama suppose to be a different kind of politician? Dont we hold him to a higher standard because he's suppose to be so freaking smart?
Wasnt that what we were told?
We were also told that Bush Jr. was a "uniter." It's marketing: they tell us what we need to believe come election time.
Maybe. But wasnt Obama suppose to be a different kind of politician? Dont we hold him to a higher standard because he's suppose to be so freaking smart?
Wasnt that what we were told?
Anyone with ACTUAL convictions and beliefs would have.
Any Politician?
Not so sure; Ron Paul would have done things differently, and probably Kucinich; they're the ONLY ones off the top of my head, however.
Pelosi, Reid and Obama=the 3 musketeers
So Obama is the same as Bush then?
- Chumpdumper
41 and Slick Willy were down the middle. I don't think any of these men are trying to destroy the middle class. I think they all had different ideas of what will help them. WHat would be a solution though? One idea I would like to see is taking the Senate back to being state appointed.
Last edited by spursncowboys; 01-06-2010 at 05:11 PM.
You figured out his system.
I absolutely admit that he is a politician. Has he kept his word on all of his promises? No. Is this different than any other politician before him? No. Am I disappointed in some (more than you know) of the things he's done? Yes. Do I think he's the biggest liar ever? No. Did he campaign on being different? Yes. Has he been different? To this point no.
I voted for Edwards.
Points 3, 4 and the first part of 5 above are undeniable, I think.
- It seems even his supporters are constantly giving advice on what he should be doing, what he's doing wrong etc. It seems no one has any confidence that he knows how to handle any situation.
- How sad is it that the leader of the most powerful nation in the history of the planet is learning leaderhip from an Abraham Lincoln biography a la "cliffs notes"?
- His latest "the system failed tremendously blah blah blah" speeches seem so transparent. He's obviously in damage control after Napolatano claimed "the system worked". If he wanted to make a statement, he could fire her and people would probably respect him tremendously for it and probably feel "safer".
- The "we'll broadcast negotiations on C-Span" campaign pledge was stupid. A president is not king and he doesnt have the power to mandate this. He looks incredibly foolish and naive now.
- Every month, he's becoming a weaker and weaker leader in the eyes of the public. He wont stand up for a public option, he wont stand up to China etc. He needs to develop some kind of backbone.
- With all this being said, the economy will probably have recovered by 2012, he'll take credit and get re-elected.
The reaction to Obama now is similar to the public's reaction to the candidacy and presidency of Jimmy Carter. The American electorate was SO angry with the Nixon administration's corruption, etc. that Carter was elected because he 'was not a politician'. Four years later he was voted out precisely because he was 'not a politician' and therefore couldn't get anyting done.
In 2008 the American electorate was SO angry with the perceived incompetence, cowboy style of foreign policy and aggressively partisan politics of the Bush administration that they elected a guy who promised to be ' a compromiser'. If Obama wants to be reelected in 2012, he might want to pay some attention to more than Lincoln's and Reagan's presidency, he might want to study Carter's as well.
This is also undeniable.
And how much good did the ten meetings with presidents by the Dalai Lama do for Tibetan independence?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote