For the next four years. Too bad most of us won't be laughing by the time it's over.
Unfortunately for Barry, it was Hillary Clinton that had seances with Eleanor Roosevelt, not Nancy Reagan. So not only is he not funny, he's ignorant too.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You do know that he publicly apologized almost immediately for that remark, right? (And to Mrs. Reagan, personally.) Don't bother mentioning that...(Yes, I know, the First Amendment allows you to be as one-sided as you wish.) His apology was more than many would have done. We all make mistakes in life; it's how one handles them after the fact that shows one's character.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, it was an easy mistake to make. As you probably know, (but did not happen to write) was that he was recollecting Nancy's use of astrology during the Reagan administration. Which is better, holding a seance or astrology influencing a presidency?
Hillary "talking" with a former (dead) first lady is no comparison to astrology's influence over the Reagans. Research Donald Regan, (Reagan's White House Chief of Staff), Mike Deaver (his Deputy Chief of Staff) in regard to the use of astrology.
Or the CIA's anger over the fact that Mrs. Reagan was taking about US/Soviet relations (and other sensitive issues) with an outsider(their astrologer, Joan Quigley) on non-secure phones, etc. Also the fact that direct phone lines were installed at the White House and Camp David to speak with Quigley, that she was paid for her "consultation work", etc. (Effective use of taxpayer's money.)
With all due respect, sir, please do a little research on your topic before before throwing the "ignorant" comment in there without even mentioning the other side of the story.
Finally, I gotta say that the Onion News video you posted on the 5th was freakin' funny, and the video about the grade school teacher you posted on the 6th WAS disgusting. I can't believe how openly biased the teacher was to her students, and how she lied straight to the camera.
Eric, did you have your tin-foil hat on when you wrote that?
ReplyDeleteHey Eric -
ReplyDeleteMrs. Reagan's talking to an astrologer over unsecure lines is kinda like good ol' Bill talking things over with his current bimbo on unsecure lines, don't you think?
And if you had any real understanding of the whole astrology thing you wouldn't come across as such an idiot. Mrs. Reagan turned to astrology after her husband nearly died. The predient's staff saw little wrong with doing whatever they could to comfort her and if talking to an astrologist did that, more power to them.
Obama's comment wasn't funny - it was malicious and showed an underlying attitude that is disturbing, at the very least.
cjh
Did anyone notice that he said he'd "spoken to all of them", yet Clinton is the only one he actually named? That struck me as odd. Why specifically name Clinton, but no one else?
ReplyDeleteeric - I only heard that he called Nancy Reagan and apologized directly to her. I've never heard of a public apology. Got a link?
ReplyDeleteThe Bronze,
ReplyDeleteLol. Tin-foil hat? Nah, I actually wear a lead one, much more effective in blockin’ them cosmic rays from da conspiracy aliens….
Anyway, nothing I said can’t be researched by looking up Ronald Reagan’s White House Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff (Donald Regan and Mike Deaver, respectively) in relation to astrology and Nancy. They even both wrote books about their White House careers which included the struggles with Mrs. Reagan on this topic.
BTW, I do not claim that Reagan’s Presidential *policy* was influenced.
All I was getting at was that 1) you only included the most negative aspects of this story without even adding that he apologized for it right away- to Mrs. Reagan herself, and, 2) you left out the fact that Nancy followed astrology and that’s what Obama was referring to.
Have you ever said anything, trying to be funny perhaps, that you regretted almost instantly? If you never have, then I respect your intellect and the control you must possess.
CJH,
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely right! That was deplorable what Bill did, and it is definitely similar to what Mrs. Reagan did. I suppose the only thing I can say there is that Bill, as the President, may have known where to draw the line in exactly what to discuss…whereas the First Lady may not have? I don’t know, but you’re right in that it DOES NOT justify what Clinton did.
Sorry about coming across like an idiot to you :) Yes, I do know about the background, and while they were always into astrology (when he was Governor, during his Presidential campaign, etc.), you are right in that she *really* turned to it to do what she thought was protecting her husband after the assassination attempt. Many staffers may have not had a problem with it, but those high up did, (like I have mentioned above). Many times the astrologer’s restrictions were very tight on when the President should or shouldn’t do things- like traveling, press conferences, meeting with leaders and signing treaties.
With respect, CJH, these aren’t opinions- look it up.
5150wife
ReplyDeleteI stand corrected! True, he did not apologize *to* the public; he made his apology to Mrs. Reagan public by means of his spokesperson, Stephanie Cutter.
I chose my words poorly before, thanks.
Here’s the link:
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/07/obama-apologies-nancy-reagan-seance-comment/
Eric,
ReplyDeleteI don't really care whether he apologized or not, that's between him and Nancy Reagan.
He didn't say Nancy was into astrology, he said that she was into seances. That's not true. My original point stands. He said what he said, that's what's important. The fact that he apologized for it, is irrelevant. And yes, I have said things that I regretted, but I wasn't the President-Elect at the time.
BTW, were you so indignant about people that pointed out George W. Bush's gaffes? How about his father's?
The Bronze,
ReplyDeleteYou said, “I don't really care whether he apologized or not, that's between him and Nancy Reagan.”
That not true. It was made just as public as everything else you post. C’mon The Bronze, don’t hide behind that weak statement. You can do better than that.
Hey, we are all human- you, me, Presidents, President-Elects, etc, and we are all prone to mistakes...no one is perfect. Obviously, just because someone becomes the President or President-Elect they do not become immune to gaffes. Do you really believe that they should somehow then become perfect, omniscient beings? (Yes, insert joke here about Obama supporters thinking he’s the next Messiah...)
No, I wasn’t so indignant about people who criticized Bush’s gaffes. Personally, I try to build people up instead of tearing them down. (And btw, the fact that you mentioned both Bush’s made gaffes, proves that Presidents aren’t perfect, right?) Many, many were/are unfair to President Bush, as people always are to any President, Vice President, etc. And especially because the media is generally liberal. Presidents are in the public eye practically 24/7 and it’s easy to say 99% of everything right and 1% something wrong, and that 1% is what makes the headlines.
And so, with that said, you are just becoming one of those people who will criticize the 1%, and make it look as bad as you possibly can without telling the whole story. Just because others unfairly criticized the Bush’s missteps you feel it’s open season to rip on Obama’s? I can understand that- it’s not unexpected- it’s basic human nature to always try to make “your side” look the best, while always making “their side” look the worst. (And it’s basic “politics as usual”.)
Of course your original post stands, it was true at that moment in time, (and it’s your blog, man!) But to be blind to other surrounding circumstance shows a *lack of credibility*. You’re slingin’ conservative, Republican, one-sided propaganda which is no better than people slingin’ liberal, Democratic, one-sided propaganda. You’re not doing Republicans any justice.
Rise above it. Don’t be insecure about being afraid to show that the “other side” sometimes has some good things about it. You will get more people to listen and appreciate the core of your message and ideology.
And, for crying out loud, stop the silly 6th grade name calling and cute “typos” (O’bama, Barry, democRATS, tin-foil hat wearing, etc). Again, Credibility. My 11 year old daughter even knows that.