An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
The Queen’s Secret U.S. Meal
opinions powered by SendLove.to
25 Responses to “The Queen’s Secret U.S. Meal”
Yet more evidence of the complete lack of Liberal Bias in the media:
For Queen and First Lady, Bush Will Try White Tie
The key graf:
To paraphrase a commentator at another site, does anyone think we ever would have seen something like:
But Austin, the point is that Bush isn’t a Texan, towell snapping or otherwise.
And as a Texan myself, I’d like them to quit claiming otherwise.
Born in New Haven CT, educated at Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts and Yale.
He’s a north eastern blue blood. Always has been and always will be. Which could explain his fear of horses and most other activities related to “ranching”.
AR – W sold himself in the “good ole boy” image – remember Merkel. As Davebo points out, in W first political run, W portrayed himself as the educated Yale eastcoaster and the Texans didn’t accept that version. Buy a ranch before his POTUS run is pure hype, like much of W’s image. Clinton never potrayed himself as not being a “redneck”. Gingrich is the leader of the “eatin ain’t cheatin” crowd, so no more Clinton is worse. W and Carter are two peanuts from the same pod, one actually came from a farm, the other pretends to be a cowboy.
Maybe they will eat haggis and chittlins, after that some common gum for desert.
LOL, Davebo and Rudi, the point is that the point you are making is precisely NOT the point in the article quoted (which clearly implies that Bush is a mannerless redneck who lacks social graces; and in that sense, the alternative Clinton query would have been more apropos because BC really did grow up in the trailer park belt). If the NYT wanted to make the point that you are raising, they would have quickly answered their own question: of course GWB knows ‘how to act’ when the situation demands it because he was born into an affluent family.
Monica Lewinsky cannot be described as “white-trash.”
But CStanley, this is exactly the description that Bush has spent years and years trying to cultivate.
In other words, the NY Times served his purpose in that description of him because that’s the meme he wants out there regardless of how divorced from reality it is.
Don’t blame the Times, blame Karl Rove. He was the architect of the “good ole boy” personna that Bush tried so hard to reflect.
CS The original post didn’t include the NYT article. Did you read AR’s linked article. It is about the “white tie” state dinner, a first for the W. It was Lauras idea, our faux-cowboy POTUS relunctantly agreed at his wifes insistance of a very formal dinner. AR then attacks Monika Lewinsky in something completely out of context with the NYT article.
Our points is why does W go to a ranch where there is no cattle. Didn’t the first lady make an inapproriate joke about milking a bull? I would say the first daughters are closer to trailor trash than ML.
Holly,
I think the original version that AR paraphrased just described Lewinsky as a ‘chubby intern’ or something like that, and then also mentioned white trash as a reference (I think) to Paula Jones. Still not very nice, but not the weird insult which it would have been as you’ve pointed out, if Lewinsky had been called white trash.
Davebo: I’m not blaming anyone, just discussing. And I was just pointing out that regardless of whether or not your point is valid, it’s NOT the point that the NYT article makes.
Rudi,
Why should we care about these things? Does it really affect US policy if Bush likes to cut brush, or if he dislikes formal state dinners, or if he’s a ‘real cowboy’ or just likes to pretend to be one? Spending time making such criticisms tends to dilute the real criticisms which can and should be made against GWB. And I won’t even comment on the remark about his daughters.
And…did I say the NYT article was part of the original post? I didn’t think so.
CS ML and Paula Jones can be white trash, but the twins are off base. If W lived in a huge mansion at a private golf course his image would be completely different than his faux-cowboy image. Remember Laura’s joke about W at the correspondence dinner>
Besides, AR went off on the Clenis tangent about a formal dinner, were is your comments about “Clinton hatred”?
It’s not “Clinton hatred” to point out that the NYT would never think of writing that about Clinton. AR didn’t say that they should have written it.
And why do you always argue with me as though I’m denying what you are saying? I’m not arguing that the cowboy image is false, just asking why it matters so much and pointing out that when you find it so important to criticize the unimportant things then the important criticisms get lost in the noise.
CS – AR brought up the article and went off on an out of context Clinton rant. I believe it’s the NYT that questioned the Clinton marriage as a sham, is that Librul bias? Enoughof the strawman bias…
This is a demented discussion.
Can’t we even laugh at a joke about food without political vituperation?
Take my advice, breathe deeply, take a nap, just relax!
Then, tomorrow, we can have an intense debate about the political implications of potatoes.
CS – What about this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/nyregion/23clintons.html?ex=1306036800&en=9147b84160d6cfb4&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
For Clintons, Delicate Dance of Married and Public Lives
The Clintons are on their first sham marriage, where is Rudy and the Newter and what if the NYT writes about their wives?
Rudi,
What was that about AR going off on a rant out of context? That’s odd criticism coming from someone who’s now introduced such relevant topics as: Laura Bush’s sharing an embarrassing story about W’s lack of knowledge about livestock, the Bush daughters (no actual point about them except that for some reason we should call them trailer trash), W not wanting to host a formal state dinner, and now, the NYT reporting about the Clintons’ marriage and speculation about whether or not they’d similarly disparage the infidelities of Rudy and Newt (I think I’d be willing to bet that they’ve covered Rudy’s already, if not Newt’s).
I guess people connect the dots and define context in unusual ways.
CS – I suggest you read the NYT article that AR linked in his comment. The Clinton bimbos weren’t a subject of the article – a history of white tie or black tie dinners(yes), the Clinton phony marriage and womanizing(no). Maybe you could read some of the links before you make an informed comment. Clenis isn’t in the NYT article, please read the article.
LOL domjat – Ask the Irish about potatoes.
Rudi-
I knew it. The minute I wrote ‘potatoes’, I knew it would turn into hot potatoes.
Rudi,
AR’s comment was in reaction to the first paragraph of the NYT article. Did YOU read it? His comment directly addressed something that was written there, yours are all over the map.
I went off on NO Clinton rant.
I simply made an over-the-top, slightly paraphrased example to show that what was written about Bush was absolutely unnecessarily demeaning to the President of the United States, and in a ‘news article’, not a political commentary nor a humor article.
It was simply to make the point that Liberal bias is neither imaginary nor subtle, and that under NO circumstances imaginable would the NYT write anything CLOSE to what I wrote about Clinton, or what THEY wrote about Bush.
And the point of GB really being an East Coast, fourth generation Blue-blood is very good, too.
You are right its not a flattering description. But my only comment is that there are many times at these public affairs where Bush has not acted very presidential. He served cheeseburgers to the Japanese president, has made several well-known public gaffes, was caught on camera giving a backrub to Angela Merkel, and was also videotaped chewing with his mouth open. Maybe if Bush had acted with a little more dignity the description would have been a little kinder.
In general, I believe we owe the president our respect, but I don’t respect Bush very much- and so don’t feel much outrage. He hasn’t shown the American voters, Congress or the Constitution much respect, and is equally willing to flout international law, whenever it suits his purposes.
I think the world of his dad, however. He is a very classy, dignified elder statesman. But he failed with George W.
AR The first paragraph could be taken out of context as a slam on Bush, but the bulk of the article after that paragraph deals with white tie events from Eisenhower to Bush 41.
Are calling Laura’s prodding to be demeaning?
So, as long as you only insult and demean the President in the first graf, that makes it OK?
My point was, and is, they would never have written that about ANY Democratic President. It is the sneering bias that supposedly doesn’t even exist I was pointing out.
PSSSST
Joe posted a funny joke.