ChrisWeigant.com

First Faux Obama Scandal Of The Year

[ Posted Tuesday, January 13th, 2015 – 18:20 UTC ]

Looks like we have a winner for the prize of "first completely GOP-ginned-up Obama 'scandal' of the year," folks. Last night NBC News led their evening broadcast with the story, which they judged to be more important than "U.S. military gets hacked by terrorists." In other words, we're back to chasing shiny, shiny objects rather than reporting actual news. Happy new year, from Brian Williams!

The story, in case you don't know what I'm talking about, is that President Obama didn't jump on a plane and join in the march in support of Charlie Hebdo which happened over the weekend in Paris. This is a ridiculous non-story, but that certainly didn't stop the Republicans from assuming full-on freakout mode about it. The crocodile tears, in fact, fell like rain in Republican circles. This was nothing short of sheer opportunistic political hypocrisy, which was evident for the following reasons:

(1.) Republicans were complaining about President Obama over nothing, once again.

That's really all the evidence that should be necessary. But that is a bit snarky, so I'll attempt to get a little more serious. Let's start over. The outrage over this "scandal" was nothing short of Republican political hypocrisy of the first order because:

(1.) France and the French government didn't have any problem with Obama's absence.

(2.) There were zero Republican leaders at the march.

(3.) Security for an open-air event the United States president attends simply can't be thrown together overnight.

(4.) Republicans are now the best buddies of France?!? Are you freakin' kidding me?

(5.) This is what ambassadors are for, people.

Let's just take those one at a time, shall we?

First, all the faux outrage that I heard was coming from Obama's domestic political opponents. Not one single bit of it was coming from the French people, the French government, any French political leaders, the French leaders of the march, the crowd at the march, French news media, or from Charlie Hebdo. None of it. So if they weren't offended, who are Republicans to tell them to be offended? That right there is a rather condescending attitude towards a sovereign foreign country, isn't it? "We'll tell you when you should take offense" isn't exactly treating the French as equals, to put it mildly.

Second, where were all these new Republican BFFs of France during the march? If they felt so strongly about American representation, why did exactly none of them make the trip themselves? Where was John Boehner, third in line to the American presidency? Where was Mitch McConnell? Where were any of the gung-ho anti-terrorism Republicans in Congress? If Republicans truly want to stand with the French in this outrage over Obama's absence, why weren't they, you know, standing with the French during the march? For that matter, can anyone provide an example of any Republican president joining in any such protest march, anywhere in the world, from, say, the past 100 years? I thought not.

Third, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that the Secret Service would not have been able to provide adequate security during this event, given the time scale involved. Sure, with hindsight, nothing bad happened during the march, but it was impossible to know that beforehand. Providing security for the president is not an ad hoc affair.

Fourth, see the entire history of the Republican Party from the 9/11 attacks right up until last week. Start with "freedom fries" and work your way forward. Don't forget all that nasty language tossed at John Kerry when he ran for president. Remember that? Kerry was "too French" to be president? John Boehner used to use the laugh line during his speeches: "Hello. Or as John Kerry would say, bonjour." Had Republicans rolling in the aisles, that one did. Seriously, I defy anyone to find any Republican quote showing any solidarity with France from the past 14 years. Because it simply isn't believable that Republicans are better friends of the French than Obama or the Democrats. In fact, it's downright laughable. Or, as the French would say, très drôle.

And finally, the word "ambassador" goes all the way back to Chaucer, in the English language (although not always by that specific spelling, seeing as how proper spelling was a somewhat nebulous concept back then). This concept has existed for at least seven centuries. It is a very simple concept, from medieval times to modern times. Heads of state cannot always travel to foreign capitals to hold conversations with other countries' leaders. It is not always convenient or timely for them to do so, to say nothing of the security concerns. So they send someone in their place.

Ambassadors are stand-ins for the head of state of a nation. They are treated the same way the actual head of state would be treated, good or bad. It's a diplomatic nicety, and it cuts both ways. If an ambassador is snubbed in any way by the host government, that insult is exactly the same as if it were given to the country's actual leader. And if an ambassador snubs the host country, it is also seen as the entire nation he or she represents giving such offense to the host.

The American ambassador to France -- the official representative of President Obama and the United States of America -- did indeed attend this weekend's march. There was no snub. There was no offense given, and none taken. The ambassador did exactly what she was supposed to do. If the American ambassador hadn't attended the march, or had said something rude or disparaging about it, then the French might have actually had a reason to be upset. But neither of those things happened.

Instead, what did happen was that President Obama missed a photo-op that 40 other national leaders appeared in. That's it. For this crime against humanity, one Republican was quick to idiotically compare Obama's absence with Adolf Hitler's triumphant march through Paris in the midst of World War II. Nothing like seeing Godwin's Law in action, is there? Republicans are falling all over themselves in trying to prove they're France's best friend ever (now saying things like "our oldest ally" -- a long way from the "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" language they previously used), which is, as I mentioned, pretty downright amusing.

Should President Obama have sent Joe Biden to the rally? Perhaps. Should Eric Holder have attended (he was in Paris anyway)? Definitely. At worst, it was a minor mistake and a missed photo-op. It doesn't even fit the description of faux pas, really, since the United States was indeed represented by our highest in-country diplomat. And one can only imagine what Republicans would have said if Obama had gone to the march, and then some crisis had reared its head while he was gone ("Obama's off marching in the streets with his socialist buddies while there's a serious crisis developing here at home," would be my guess).

The entire "scandal" was nothing more than Republicans making an attempt to score a cheap political point against a president they hate. That's all it was. The American media blew it all out of proportion, apparently because they were too lazy to figure out that the only people complaining were not the French, but American Republicans. The phoniness of this Republican outrage was plain to see, since they suddenly were arguing on the side of a country they love to hate, while comparing Obama to Hitler. If there had been a single Republican who had bothered to make the trip in person, and then came back and complained about Obama not being there, that might have had a tiny shred of believability to it.

There wasn't. End of story.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

29 Comments on “First Faux Obama Scandal Of The Year”

  1. [1] 
    LewDan wrote:

    "Republicans are now the best buddies of France?!? Are you freakin' kidding me?"

    My thought too when I first heard the story.--And I still find the thought chuckle-worthy!

    Another flood-lit elephant of a clue that this is purely a partisan put-up job our stalwart gatekeepers in media somehow managed, yet again, to miss.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    This Republican party and its leaders and adherents are not going to change their spots or their tactics and strategy when dealing with President Obama. They made that clear enough in late January of 2009 and in all of their actions since.

    Personally, however, I was very disappointed by President Obama's absence in Paris for the March For Unity rally, for a number of reasons I won't bother enumerating here.

    I think it was a huge missed opportunity - not for a meaningless photo op or for any conceivable advantage, political or otherwise - but just simply for the leader of the free world being there to stand up, with the victims' families, the people of France and their leaders and Charlie Hebdo in a strong show of support for the freedoms that France, the US and a good chunk of the rest of the world hold so dear and, most importantly, to show the violently deranged Islamist extremists still among us that they are playing a losing hand.

    This rally was a truly historical event, anyway you slice it. And, while I am glad that the US Ambassador to France was in attendance, her presence was not enough.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Instead, what did happen was that President Obama missed a photo-op that 40 other national leaders appeared in. That's it.

    President Obama missed far more than that. Indeed, to imply that the March for Unity rally in Paris last week was merely an opportunity for a photo op betrays an infinitely cynical viewpoint.

    But, then again, Chris, maybe you're absolutely right to think that this was just a fleeting moment in time that won't amount to anything in the grand scheme of things. I just hope you're wrong about that.

  4. [4] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Why can't anything not be about us? I'm glad that BHO didn't disrupt the thing with his presence, but maybe he could've done a jumbotron appearance and let the crowd watch him pull the trigger on a drone strike in Yemen. That would've been a big hit with the crowd in Paris and the GOP.

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    JFC,

    Why can't anything not be about us?

    That's a very good point, actually. Fareed Zakaria said essentially the same thing when trying to compensate for what he thought was a mistake by President Obama in deciding not to go to the rally.

    The thing is, I don't think this event was the one to use to make that point. This event was about all of us who care about defending our freedoms by paying them a little more than lip service.

  6. [6] 
    dsws wrote:

    The heads of state of a fifth of the world's countries could attend, but ours has to hide behind walls and guards. That just might say something about us.

  7. [7] 
    Pastafarian Dan wrote:

    In hindsight (always 20/20), perhaps someone more visible than the ambassador should have gone. Even the administration admits that. We could have sent Joe B. (if you really want some faux pas) or Bill and Hil... But it doesn't come anywhere close to a "scandal".

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ahem...

    The White House Admits Fault in Not Attending Paris Unity Rally
    http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/paris-magazine-attack/white-house-admits-fault-not-attending-paris-unity-rally-n284596

    dsws,

    The heads of state of a fifth of the world's countries could attend, but ours has to hide behind walls and guards. That just might say something about us.

    Exactly!!

    I agree with PD... While it doesn't rise to the level of a scandal (I don't think anyone has called it that) it sure as hell was a major screw up...

    The idea that security was an issue is ludicrous...

    The head of the PA and the Israeli Prime Minister (Likely MUCH bigger targets and a helluva lot more concerned about security) were there..

    Disrupting things with Obama's presence??

    Come on.. Obama has no problem disrupting Americans with his presence every time he steps out to fart!

    Nothing stopped GOP leaders from attending??

    Now that is an excellent point and dead on ballz accurate..

    The long and short of it is this and it is undeniable..

    It was horrible optics.. It played into the notion that Obama really doesn't care about islamic terrorism..

    Obama is the leader of the free world, fer chreest's sake!!!

    Is it too much to ask that he ACTS like it!

    Apparently the NFL Playoffs were more important to Obama than acting like a leader....

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    The entire "scandal" was nothing more than Republicans making an attempt to score a cheap political point against a president they hate. That's all it was.

    Ahem Part 2

    Just as many Democrats were complaining about it as there were Republicans...

    Let's say, for the sake of the argument, that you are right.. Hell, let's just say you ARE right, because you probably are...

    Obama HAD to know it would be commented on that he wasn't there...

    Obama HAD to know how it would look to the rest of the world if he was a no-show...

    Obama HAD to know that the GOP would gin up the hysteria over this...

    So, this begs the question..

    WHY???

    Why didn't he go???

    Why didn't he tell Uncle Joe, "Dood! Pack yer bags! Yer goin' to Paris!"??

    Why didn't he pick up a frakin' phone and tell Holder, "Dood! Get yer skinny ass across the street and link up with the Unity procession!!"??

    WHY???

    Because Obama doesn't care enough about being the leader of the free world to ACT like the leader of the free world..

    Obama could have headed this off quite easily..

    Obama knew it would look bad..

    Obama didn't care...

    If there IS any kind of scandal here, THAT is it.

    He didn't care...

    Michale

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why didn't he tell Uncle Joe, "Dood! Pack yer bags! Yer goin' to Paris!"??

    Who wants to break the news about Uncle Joe
    You remember Uncle Joe
    He was the one afraid to cut the cake
    Who wants to tell poor Aunt Sarah
    Joe's run off to Fire Lake

    -Bob Seger

    :D

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    LewDan -

    Yeah, that one really resonated with me, too. I mean, France? Really?

    LizM [2] -

    I'm surprised you take such a hard line. There were over a million people at that march. The Secret Service would have had an absolute nervous breakdown if confronted with such a possibility. Now, Joe Biden could have made an appearance, I think you'll agree with me there, but Obama? Too risky...

    [3] -

    I lived in Paris for two years. I know what political demonstrations are like there. It's a little more radical a prospect than a march on Washington, DC. Sure, it would have been good optics for Obama to have been joining hands in that march, but it would have been horrible optics if a lone wolf with a gun had cut him down. To me, the risk just wasn't worth it. Again, that's what we have ambassadors for. It's part of their job description, really.

    John From Censornati [4] -

    That would have indeed been the way to go. A Jumbotron announcement would have been the perfect balance between support and presidential security. I tip my hat to you, as I didn't even think about a video message when writing this. But you're right, it would have been politically perfect.

    Pastafarian Dan [5] -

    Now there's another excellent political idea: where was Hillary?

    No scandal, agreed, but a lot of political hay could have been made if Hillary had shown up.

    But I disagree with you on "the ambassador wasn't enough" idea. Any American ambassador (any ambassador from any country, really) is, diplomatically, exactly the same thing as the leader of the country. Sure, it's a diplomatic fiction, but it's one that's endured for centuries, and for a reason.

    Michale [8] -

    I direct you to the part of the article which was written with you in mind:

    For that matter, can anyone provide an example of any Republican president joining in any such protest march, anywhere in the world, from, say, the past 100 years? I thought not.

    ...and...

    Seriously, I defy anyone to find any Republican quote showing any solidarity with France from the past 14 years.

    I extend this challenge to you, personally. Can you find ONE instance of you commenting on this site where you had a kind word for France? Good luck on that search, pal.

    But I'll be reasonable, since you're obviously bending over backwards in an attempt to do so.

    If JFC's comment (above) had been reality -- if Obama had addressed the crowd via video, in other words -- would there have been any reason for outrage?

    I mean, seriously, dude, you were a security type of guy -- there were over a MILLION people at that march. How secure an event was it, really?

    Dubya Bush was faced with a similar situation (Madrid train attacks? I forget...) and he issued a tepid statement and then went to NYC for a fundraiser. Were you just as outraged back then? Didn't think so...

    As for 70s lake songs... well...

    Crazy Janey and her mission man
    Were back in the alley tradin' hands
    'Long came Wild Billy with his friend G-Man
    All duded up for Saturday night
    Well, Billy slammed on his coaster brakes
    And said, "Anybody wanna go on up to Greasy Lake?
    It's about a mile down on the dark side of Route 88
    I got a bottle of rose so let's try it
    We'll pick up Hazy Davy and Killer Joe
    And I'll take you all out to where the gypsy angels go
    They're build like light
    And they dance like spirits in the night (all night), in the night (all night)
    Oh, you don't know what they can do to you
    Spirits in the night (all night), in the night (all night)
    Stand up right now and let them shoot through you"

    -Bruce Springsteen, "Spirits In The Night"

    (although Manfred Mann's version is undeniably better... heh... )

    :-)

    -CW

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Secret Service would have had an absolute nervous breakdown if confronted with such a possibility.

    In days of yore, the USSS would have faded the heat for the POTUS..

    "We adamantly told the President that his security was impossible"

    But considering the morale of the Secret Service in the here and now, those days of covering the POTUS's PR ass are gone...

    I extend this challenge to you, personally. Can you find ONE instance of you commenting on this site where you had a kind word for France? Good luck on that search, pal.

    Sure...

    Right after you show me an incident that was comparable to the Hebdo massacre that happened on foreign soil that resulted in a 3 million person unity march.. :D

    Good luck on that search, pal... :D

    I mean, seriously, dude, you were a security type of guy -- there were over a MILLION people at that march. How secure an event was it, really?

    Secure enough for two of the most hated men on the planet to attend...

    I am not saying that Obama hisself should have gone.. Although it would have been ballsy for him to do so..

    But no one else??

    And yea, maybe an ambassador might be a good choice..

    But sure as hell not THIS ambassador whose ONLY accomplishment in life was being able to funnel over a half a million dollars to an Obama SuperPAC....

    It was a mistake not to send someone..

    Do you know how I know??

    Because the White House said so... :D

    And the White House is ALWAYS right... When they agree with me... :D

    -Bruce Springsteen, "Spirits In The Night"

    Bruce who???

    Michale

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    No scandal, agreed, but a lot of political hay could have been made if Hillary had shown up.

    Or Jeb or Christie or Romney..

    On the other hand, it would likely have been viewed as pure political machinations..

    It was a unity march for world LEADERS...

    Not world Leader wannabees...

    I think dsws said it best...

    One fifth of the world's leaders showed up..

    Our "world leader" stayed home to watch the NFL Playoffs...

    What does that say to Joe and Jane Sixpack??

    Forget reality..

    What's the perception not only here at home but around the world..

    {LACK OF} Power Perceived Is {LACK OF} Power Achieved

    Michale

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    I extend this challenge to you, personally. Can you find ONE instance of you commenting on this site where you had a kind word for France? Good luck on that search, pal.

    Sure...

    Right after you show me an incident that was comparable to the Hebdo massacre that happened on foreign soil that resulted in a 3 million person unity march.. :D

    DOH!!!

    Talk about projection... :D

    Sorry, I read what you wrote but completely convoluted the meaning.. :D

    Regardless, the French and France are unimportant...

    If this had happened in Cuba or Venezuela or Russia and there was a huge World Leader Unity March and our POTUS, stayed home to watch the NFL Playoffs, I would be saying the same thing...

    The nationality is not the relevant point..

    It's the message that Obama sent to the world that is paramount..

    And Obama sent completely the wrong message... He even admits it...

    Michale

  15. [15] 
    TheStig wrote:

    "The entire "scandal" was nothing more than Republicans making an attempt to score a cheap political point against a president they hate. That's all it was."

    and a clear signal that this is all that will be for the remaining 2 years. Republicans see no risk in obstruction and no benefit from trying to govern. Sabotage: a useful French term for tossing a wooden shoe into the gears of a machine.

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    and a clear signal that this is all that will be for the remaining 2 years. Republicans see no risk in obstruction and no benefit from trying to govern.

    Uhhh.. Democrats complained as well...

    Sabotage: a useful French term for tossing a wooden shoe into the gears of a machine.

    "400 years ago, on Earth, workers who felt their livelihood threatened by automation, flung their wooden shoes called 'sabots' into the machines to stop them. Hence the word 'sabotage'. "
    -Valeris, STAR TREK 6, The Undiscovered Country

    :D

    For some reason, I always thought it was the Dutch, not the French...

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    As for Joe and Jane Sixpack, seen Obama's polling recently? Hint: it's not down...

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

    Still waiting for you to take up the second part of my challenge, too. When has any Republican president joined in ANY march ANYwhere in the last 100 years?

    -CW

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    As for Joe and Jane Sixpack, seen Obama's polling recently? Hint: it's not down...

    I've given up trying to reconcile the RCP polls with reality..

    Still waiting for you to take up the second part of my challenge, too. When has any Republican president joined in ANY march ANYwhere in the last 100 years?

    There hasn't been a Hedbo style attack that resulted in a 3 million Unity March in the last 100 years...

    Michale

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    As for Joe and Jane Sixpack, seen Obama's polling recently? Hint: it's not down...

    I've given up trying to reconcile the RCP polls with reality..

    But you can bet yer bippy that I'll be there when the RCP poll goes below 40%!!! :D

    Michale

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    There hasn't been a Hedbo style attack that resulted in a 3 million Unity March in the last 100 years...

    But if there had been and a GOP POTUS didn't go, you know I would say the same...

    Michale

  21. [21] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale -

    Here's a short list:

    Did JFK or LBJ attend any of the massive civil rights marches? No.

    Did RMN attend any of the massive anti-war marches? No, not really (see below).

    Did JEC attend any of the massive anti-nuke marches? No.

    Did RWR attend any anti-abortion or "religious right" marches? No. Same answer for the anti-apartheid marches.

    Did WJC attend any gay pride marches? No.

    Did GWB attend any marches? No.

    No president has ever attended a protest march, at least that I know of. Ever. None. Zero. From either party. And that's just here at home -- internationally, it would be a different list of questions (Did RWR march with Lech Walesa in Poland?), but the answers would all still be "No."

    As for Charlie Hebdo being unique, there are plenty of examples I could cite from civil rights era that were equal or greater in outrage (the four girls dead in the bombed church springs immediately to mind, or maybe MLK's March On Washington). Presidents didn't attend any of them.

    The closest any president came to doing so was actually Nixon, as noted above. Nixon drove out to the Lincoln Memorial the night before (or maybe after or during) a massive anti-war march. He got out of his car, very late at night (past midnight?) and randomly talked to people in an effort to figure out why they were so angry at him. This sounds like a bizarre scene from a Hollywood movie, but it actually happened. But it doesn't really count as "attending a march", although I do have to give Tricky Dick credit for attempting to understand his opposition in such a personal fashion.

    In any case, my point is: presidents don't attend protest marches. They just don't. You are holding Obama up to an impossible standard that no other president has ever met.

    That's why the smear campaign is all so laughable. Because there simply are no other examples from history to point to. From EITHER party, I might add.

    -CW

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Just to be clear, the rally in Paris last Sunday wasn't a protest march, at least not in the sense that most Americans know.

    It was a massive demonstration of global support for the freedom of expression and of democratic values around the world - the blatant hypocrisy on display, notwithstanding.

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    What Liz said.. :D

    You have to admit.. It was HORRIBLE optics.. Worse than when Obama solemnly spoke of James Foley being murdered and then went to play golf laughing and joking..

    It, plain and simple, LOOKED bad..

    Even Obama admitted it..

    Michale

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Put another way..

    This was a march to support motherhood and apple pie and free speech and everything good and right in the world...

    How could our POTUS *NOT* attend??

    To put it into context, it would be as if there was a 3 million + demonstration against the excesses of Wall Street and Elizabeth Warren did not attend..

    It would simply look as bad as it possibly could...

    Michale

  25. [25] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Some times I hate my job....it makes me late to all of the fun parties

    To put it into context, it would be as if there was a 3 million + demonstration against the excesses of Wall Street and Elizabeth Warren did not attend..

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Whew. Nice dice into reducto ad absurdum. Moving on from all of the logical reason why ANY elected official would not attend this type of rally and moving on from the fact that 3 million pissed off angry people would not be allowed to gather in one spot in this country.

    Just accepting the above logic and looking at the "outrage" in congress, really Hitler had to be invoked? I have to ask where was the orangeman and his sidekick snappy the turtle? It is not as if they were surprised by the fact that the president or anyone else other than our ambassador attending the rally. If they really felt that this was that important they could have hopped on a plane and gone to the rally, granted it would be very un-GOP-like but still they coulda gone.....

    So why didn't the republicans put on the dog and pony show of governing by sending the super duper tag team of dysfunction Orangeman and Snappy the Turtle?

  26. [26] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Hey CW-

    I'm surprised you didn't supersize this by pointing out that this would most certainly have become a thing even if the pres had gone.

    Given that the DHS appropriation bill is getting debated and run through the spin cycle, I can easily see the natering nabobs raising a ruckus over the irresponsible secret service expenditure that a last minute trip costs an agency in danger of running out of money because it hasn't been appropriated and how this drain on the prescious resources has caused the DHS to run out of money before "congress" was ready to act thereby endangering the country. I am sure Hitler would be mentioned in this case as well.

    OR

    If he had appeared via video or had some other not in person method to address the rally he would have been castigated for being superficial and out of touch.

    At the end of the day the rally really handed the repubs the opportunity to make a political hay byproduct ....no matter how you slice or spread it.

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Goode,

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Whew. Nice dice into reducto ad absurdum. Moving on from all of the logical reason why ANY elected official would not attend this type of rally and moving on from the fact that 3 million pissed off angry people would not be allowed to gather in one spot in this country.

    Just accepting the above logic and looking at the "outrage" in congress, really Hitler had to be invoked? I have to ask where was the orangeman and his sidekick snappy the turtle? It is not as if they were surprised by the fact that the president or anyone else other than our ambassador attending the rally. If they really felt that this was that important they could have hopped on a plane and gone to the rally, granted it would be very un-GOP-like but still they coulda gone.....

    So why didn't the republicans put on the dog and pony show of governing by sending the super duper tag team of dysfunction Orangeman and Snappy the Turtle?

    I have read this three times and I STILL don't know what you are trying to say...

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    So why didn't the republicans put on the dog and pony show of governing by sending the super duper tag team of dysfunction Orangeman and Snappy the Turtle?

    For the same reason Hillary Clinton didn't go..

    It was for WORLD LEADERS.....

    Michale

  29. [29] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    It was for WORLD LEADERS.....

    I wasn't aware that the invite was that exclusive.

    I guess Canada, Brazil, China, India, Monaco and Serbia didn't understand that the invite was strictly for WORLD LEADERS.

    I guess the leaders of all of those opposition and political parties that participated just crashed the party.

Comments for this article are closed.