It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In Control or Out of Touch?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, participate in a reception in La Moneda Palace in Santiago, Chile, last night.

Am I the only one who looks at this picture and wonders in the context of world events what the hell is he thinking?



edit on 22-3-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


a face with a lot of secrets



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


I guess I'm having a hard time picking up on what you may be trying to portray. Are you somehow alleging he planned/funded his own reception instead of the Chilean government? Should he not act gracious towards the kindness they've displayed in welcoming him?
edit on 3/22/11 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 



Originally posted by redmage
I guess I'm having a hard time picking up on what you may be trying to portray. Are you somehow alleging he planned/funded his own reception instead of the Chilean government? Should he not act gracious towards the kindness they've displayed in welcoming him?]




I have no clue how you got there.

No.

My point is this....

Anyone in a position of leadership quickly realizes that image is very often as important, if not more so in certain situations, than substance.

So my question is this:

While the US economy rests in shambles, Japan is in the middle of a horrific crisis, and Westerners bomb Lybia into the next century, why is Obama choosing these trips and photo ops as his image for the world stage during these events?

Certainly he or someone on his team has been thinking about that...

So what is the calculus? Anyone willing to offer a theory?


edit on 22-3-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Don't get me wrong; it's just that I'm quite familiar with your contributions, and I've greatly appreciated them over the years we've been members here. A reactionary one-line thread starter isn't what I've come to expect when I see the familiar green mini-background that I've admired so often.


Originally posted by loam
While the US economy rests in shambles, Japan is in the middle of a horrific crisis, and Westerners bomb Lybia into the next century, why is Obama choosing these trips and photo ops as his image for the world stage during these events?


It's reported that his South American visit is focused on trade and other aspects to help the U.S. economy. He's already committed the U.S. military to helping Japan, and they're doing what they can. He's also committed the U.S. military to the allied U.N. "humanitarian" effort in Libya.

While you may choose to believe he is choosing these "photo ops as his image for the world stage", my pragmatism leans me towards the notion that it was the Chilean government who "chose" this photo op in an effort to promote themselves on the world stage. They can cater to, and garner the attention of world powers with "the best of 'em".
edit on 3/22/11 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


For Obama the NWO Puppet , WAR is GOOD it Seems............



www.youtube.com...
edit on 22-3-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 



Originally posted by redmage
Don't get me wrong; it's just that I'm quite familiar with your contributions, and I've greatly appreciated them over the years we've been members here. A reactionary one-line thread starter isn't what I've come to expect when I see that familiar green mini-background that's I've admired so often.


I'll accept both the compliment and the criticism.


The picture and one-liner were all that I felt were required for this topic.

I'm not baiting, I'm just asking.

While it's no secret I do not like this president, I don't generally assume the guy is stupid. In fact, I operate under the assumption he knows EXACTLY what he is doing.

So when I see this image, I have to ask myself, what is he thinking?


Originally posted by redmage
While you may choose to believe he is choosing these "photo ops as his image for the world stage", my pragmatism leans me towards the notion that it was the Chilean government who "chose" this photo op in an effort to promote themselves on the world stage. They can cater to, and garner the attention of world powers with "the best of 'em".


I'm sorry. That explanation does not make sense to me.

Obama chose these trips- with his family no less.

He consciously made the decision to present this image to the world, during these times.

I'm asking, why?
edit on 22-3-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 





posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam






Obama chose these trips- with his family no less.

He consciously has made the decision to present this image to the world, during these times.

I'm asking, why?


I'm betting that the plans for those trips were made 6 months ago. Did you complain when Bush was in Crawford cutting brush during the wars he started? I did!

I didn't like that image and I don't like the image of Obama living it up either especially with over 20,000 people dead in Japan and nuclear catastrophe on the horizion.

I agree with redmage...this does seem a bit snarky when compared to your usual first class threads.
edit on 22-3-2011 by whaaa because: vvi



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
As my posts show, I am no Obama fan. With that being said, he was invited to attend a dinner and I'm sure that Chile insisted on many photo-ops that show our countries looking as chummy as possible.

I don't expect him to look miserable all the time despite how dire the circumstances are.

I do expect him to put off a few golf outings...
Perhaps cancel / postpone some upcoming vacations....

that kind of thing.

But do I expect him to not smile during a photo shoot in another country?
Nope. Not even I would ask him to do that.

Now, whether or not he should have gone on this trip at all is another issue entirely.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 



Originally posted by whaaa
Did you complain when Bush was in Crawford cutting brush during the wars he started? I did!


Of course, I did-- and more loudly than most.


I challenge anyone to demonstrate I did otherwise.

I was no friend to Bush or his administration.


Originally posted by whaaa
I agree with redmage...this does seem a bit snarky when compared to your usual first class threads.


Sorry to disappoint. I'm not trying to be snarky and not all of my threads can be home runs.

I am genuinely curious why Obama either chose to proceed with these engagements, given world events, or why he decided they would not otherwise pose a problem.

There is a "let them eat cake" quality to this picture that surely someone must have foreseen.

So again, my question is why were these opportunities for such photos permitted?

What was the calculus????



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


Alright, I get what you're saying. Also, I'm not particularly fond of him either. Personally, neither Obama, nor McCain received my vote (based largely on the fact that they both voted in favor of the Bush/Bernanke bailout plan), but that's best saved for another thread...

I guess the issue here boils down to public perception, and it's another situation where a he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. Dignitary receptions have always been less about "welcoming the guest", and more about the host's capability to "show off". After they've rolled out the red carpet, it would be viewed as an insult for the guest of honor not to show up and participate. Michelle appears to be enjoying herself; however, the President looks much more reserved (not even showing his pearly whites). If the picture showed him dancing on a table with his tie up around his forehead, then I could easily side with your opening sentiments; however, I simply see this as a situation where he's there trying to appear appreciative of the efforts the Chilean government went through in setting up the event.


Originally posted by loam
Of course, I did-- and more loudly than most.


You did, and I remember it well. Your's isn't an issue of simple partisan bickering.

edit on 3/22/11 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by lpowell0627
 



Originally posted by lpowell0627
...to attend a dinner...photo-ops that show our countries looking as chummy as possible.

Now, whether or not he should have gone on this trip at all is another issue entirely.


That is essentially my point.

They chose to go, knowing they would have to pose looking all happy...

Moreover, he brought his family.


So given world events, my question is why the decision to proceed?

What was the calculus of that decision?

And if some believe there was no calculus in that decision, isn't that in the least bit disturbing to anyone?
edit on 22-3-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by redmage
 



Originally posted by redmage

Originally posted by loam
Of course, I did-- and more loudly than most.


You did, and I remember it well. Your's isn't an issue of simple partisan bickering.


Thank you for that.



Originally posted by redmage
...If the picture showed him dancing on a table with his tie up around his forehead, then I could easily side with your original sentiments; however, I simply see this as a situation where he's there trying to appear appreciative of the efforts the Chilean government went through in setting up the event.


I dunno...the whole thing smacks of callousness and relaxed informality.

It looks like quite the family vacation...















...even down to the "no-tie" decision.

Odd way to handle some of the most notable events in human history in quite some time, don't you think?


edit on 22-3-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 


Don't know why the video wont embed.

Here is the direct link:

www.youtube.com...

The comment at the end of the video is somewhat ironic in the context of this thread...sad too.
edit on 22-3-2011 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by redmage
It's reported that his South American visit is focused on trade and other aspects to help the U.S. economy. He's already committed the U.S. military to helping Japan, and they're doing what they can. He's also committed the U.S. military to the allied U.N. "humanitarian" effort in Libya.


"It's reported ... "

By who?

Answer: The obama administration and the MSM shills that help elect, support and protect him.

Reason: They read the news. They take their snap polls. They understand that obama's image is taking a big hit due to his actions - really inactions.

So what else would they say? What else would they ask the MSM to print? It would be exactly what you've reported seeing - this this was about trade and not a vacation or junket like his other trips. Trouble is, all we see are pictures of are the parties. And we hear how he's cancelled his speeches - the "work" part of the trip.

Come on. You can figure this out on your own ...

To the OP, another good catch



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
"It's reported ... "

By who?


Of course it's reported by the MSM, they're the "reporters". Hell, even Fox reported the pre-planned trip being in relation to trade.


Some prefer to view this simply as a vacation, and that's certainly their prerogative. It's an opportunity for free partisan pot-shots (with enough spin... anything and everything is), and that's something you, specifically, would never pass up. You love being a pawn in the partisan game, have made it abundantly clear over the years, and I get it. Unlike Loam, who has a long history of not succumbing to simple partisan bickering, you've continually shown a long history of little more than partisan hackery. Frankly, I'm a bit surprised your kudos, to Laom, weren't higher up in the thread. Been slacking?

Personally, I tend to lean towards the notion that he actually has been discussing trade with South American leaders. As for those discussions actually helping the U.S. economy... I certainly have my doubts. I'm sure any agreements he comes to will likely benefit his multi-national corporate donors, the same as Bush's "trade talks", and have little overall benefit for the U.S. economy as a whole. He's really no worse than any other "republicrat" President we've endured over the past 30 years. Come on. You can figure this out on your own...
edit on 3/23/11 by redmage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join