In The Blogs
- ‹ previous
- 1090 of 2041
- next ›
Snubbing Obama?
SNUBBING OBAMA?....Last month, Barack Obama asked the White House if he could move into Blair House a couple of weeks early so that his daughters Malia and Sasha could start school. They turned him down, saying there were guests already booked to stay there, and at the time I assumed this was legitimate. George Bush is many things, but turning down the request just out of personal pettiness didn't seem like his style.
But as so often happens, whenever I give Bush the benefit of the doubt, I turn out to be wrong. ThinkProgress has the dope. It's still possible that bureaucratic bungling or miscommunication might be the culprit here, but it doesn't really look like it.
Digg
Reddit
Twitter
Facebook
Buzz Up!
StumbleUpon
MySpace
LinkedIn
Delicious
Furl
Google
Yahoo
ISTM that that if anything deserves criticism, it was Obama's request rather than Bush's refusal. Try this thought experiment: Suppose Bush had asked if his family could use Blair House for 2 weeks following Obama's inauguration. I think we would consider such a requesto on Bush's part to be impolite.
Maybe Obama will remember this when, in a few years, Bush tries to do something that rehabilitates his reputation, like Herbert Hoover did in Europe.
"Suppose Bush had asked if his family could use Blair House for 2 weeks following Obama's inauguration. I think we would consider such a requesto on Bush's part to be impolite."
Posted by: David on 01/07/09 at 12:53 PM Respond
If Bush had school age children who were in the middle of a semester, it wouldn't seem like all that much of an imposition. But hey, after everything else we've seen out of these two (Bush/Cheney), do you really think harassing children is beneath them.
My guess is that had bush asked for a couple of weeks in Blair House to "ease the transition," the request might have been given a bit more serious consideration than, apparently, Obama's was. Bush hasn't really struck me as someone who is particularly petty on his own, so I guess that this episode merely demonstrates that "Dickness" is contagious.
Au contrare, mon ami.
The first two adjectives which come to mind when I think of George W. Bush (along with a severe case of nausea) are "trite" and "petty".
Name me one...just ONE...thing, if you will, that GWB has EVER done which are above the entry level of the category of "bastard" !!
Oh, well, maybe John McCain can think of one; after all, he does have George's sweat on the tip of his tongue.
They turned him down, saying there were guests already booked to stay there, and at the time I assumed this was legitimate. George Bush is many things, but turning down the request just out of personal pettiness didn't seem like his style.
Funny. I wouldn't expect anything else from a guy who assigns demeaning nicknames for sport, and casually mocks the woman he's about to execute. He's absolutely nothing if not petty.
it was Obama's request rather than Bush's refusal.
Yes, there Obama goes again, bein' all uppity.
Even in the waning hours of his disastrous administration, Bush has the capacity to astonish us with what a mean, petty bastard he is. Bush is going to ride off into the sunset with his reputation as the Worst.American.President.Ever completely intact.
When I first heard about this I was annoyed at Obama for asking. Bush is precisely the sort of petty dick who would say no just because he could.
Ron, you ask for something nice Bush did. When he was first elected he appointed 2 Democratic judges whose nominations had been held up by a Republican Senate. That seemed to me like an olive branch.
Turning down the request out of personal pettiness seemed *exactly* like Bush's style. Where have you been, Kevin?
Yes, there Obama goes again, bein' all uppity.
Glenn, please! People of refinement use the word "presumptuous," not "uppity."
Uh, and we're basing our indignation on Margaret Carlson's "I have a feeling"? Did anybody actually read the piece?
Let's see if this gets half the media time as the lies about Clinton trashing the White House before leaving.
I'm often wrong about how one should frame these slights (and the Blair House incident strikes me as an under-reported blunder for the outgoing administration).
But it would be helpful, first, to establish just a few more facts.
Did Blair and Uribe, who like Howard are receiving presidential awards, decline Blair House accommodations? If so, when?
In addition, I assume the Presidential Suite at the Hay-Adams had long been reserved for a muckety-muck. Who reserved it? More important, who relinquished the reservation out of deference to the incoming president and to the academic schedule of his daughters?
I don't suppose Blair, Uribe, or even the pre-Obama holder of the Hay-Adams suite would want to be very forthcoming on these matters of presidential hospitality (and the lack of it).
But my feeling is that the weight of questions would embarrass if not 43, then at least Mrs. 43. Why not some good questions at a WH briefing?
More intrepid reporting, please, on these mysteriously mean goings-on. Then just let the facts speak for themselves. And get a Villager like Sally Quinn or Doris Kearns Goodwin or a White House etiquette maven to weigh in.
I'm just curious if anyone has considered the possibility that Obama deliberately made the request with two goals in mind. The obvious (and legitimate) one, to ease the transition of his children in the upcoming move (which would have to be difficult for any kids under those circumstances). And the more subtle one, to take another opportunity at making crystal clear (again, one more time) the uncivilized and meanminded ethics/behaviour of the previous administration. Obama is nothing if not very, very clever at assessing human nature. I think he probably expected that such a potential outcome was a possibility, and he wanted to expose the Bush crowd's "pseudo-friendliness" for what it really is.... just that, a total fake. I think the Obamas would have checked beforehand about the availability of Blair House (and anyway, what's the problem with offering "shared accommodation" with a house that big?). So for Obama it would have been a no-lose proposition. Refused, he shows Bush up for what he really is. Or accepted, he could ease his family's transition to the White House.
Any thoughts on this?
Arguing against most of the other comments, I lay it on the simple altar of protocol. The past protocol is that new Presidents get a maximum of five days in Blair house - not six days, not a couple of weeks, but five days. Here comes some young whippersnapper who wants to turn protocol on its head with an outrageous request of three weeks(!?), they were asking to be turned down. The White House utilizes the Chief of Protocol of the United States on such questions, and I wouldn't be surprised that she advised against it. If you saw 'The Queen' or 'The Madness of King George', I'm sure you get a feeling of the more entrenched protocol rules related to the English monarchy. Sure, Bush could have easily over-turned protocol on this one, but the White House does have established rules to maintain - not completely a bad thing. Although Bush is a dick, I don't feel that he was merely being a dick on this question.
Yes, Lesslie, @3:22. I think what you propose is plausible. Could be that the Obamas' legitimate and quiet inquiry was met with unkind stonewalling, and the incoming communications staff thought to out the outgoing, and superficially friendly, Bushes.
On MSNBC (1:45 mountain time), Norah and her guest, Michelle from the IWF, are batting this around in a yuk-yuk way, building only a little on Margaret Carson's reporting yesterday.
George is hiding his spite behind Laura's voluminous skirts, and the press is playing along, framing the unpleasantness, subtly, as a "ladies" issue.
Meanwhile, news alert: Laura unveils something bright and shiny: the new White House china.
"George Bush is many things, but turning down the request just out of personal pettiness didn't seem like his style."
Kevin, where have you been for the last 8 years? Pettiness is the hallmark of the Bush style.
"If you saw 'The Queen' or 'The Madness of King George', I'm sure you get a feeling of the more entrenched protocol rules related to the English monarchy."
The English monarchy would never do such a thing because it would be 'rude', and they don't do rude.
If we think it's reasonable for the Obama's to want to be in DC for the start of school we might want to look at this from a Secret Service perspective. It's my understanding that Blair House is already inside the White House SS perimeter, which is probably why it's used for this purpose. Having the Obama's stay anywhere else in DC requires disruptive, and expensive, Secret Service arrangements.
""If you saw 'The Queen' or 'The Madness of King George', I'm sure you get a feeling of the more entrenched protocol rules related to the English monarchy.""
"The English monarchy would never do such a thing because it would be 'rude', and they don't do rude."
Sure - just ask the Irish about the good manners of the English monarchy. Didn't they use to eat Irish children for breakfast? [Sorry - couldn't resist ;) ]
Auster, you may be right about the 'protocol' but both the Reagans and the Clintons spent longer than 5 days in Blair House prior to their January 20th date with destiny. Bush is just a rude, inconsiderate twit.
Echoing Auster:
"A gentleman is never unintentionally rude.''
Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde
Folks in Texas know the Bushes as a no-class bunch. It's not just W.
If Blair and Ulribe were able to make other arrangements, then John Howard and wife could have, too.
As an Australian with over two decades of watching John Howard and wife, I detect two factors operating: Firstly, the Bushies taking a last opportunity to use Howard for a minor win against Obama- the line being "he declined to change his accommodation arrangements".
But another reason may be the Howards themselves- ex Australian Prime Minister John Howard's antagonism towards Obama and his policies, and just as important, Janette Howard's relentless and shameless status-seeking. It's probably one of her last opportunities to stay at an Official Residence, and so she's unlikely to back down for ANYONE. They're not friends of Obama, and not likely to be, so they've got nothing to lose by not moving accommodation- and that would suit the Bushies just fine.
...personal pettiness didn't seem like his style.
Yeah, please tell Valerie Plame that Bush doesn't have a petty style of dealing with people.
"If you saw 'The Queen' or 'The Madness of King George', I'm sure you get a feeling of the more entrenched protocol rules related to the English monarchy."
I think Bush has pretty much sealed his "legacy."
Blair House has been reserved for ex-Australian PM, John Howard, who not only lost government a year ago, but lost his own formerly safe seat to Labour. Howard is a bitter, old, sycophantic, vindictive, war-loving, hater of the 1st order. He slurred Obama's candidacy as soon as it was announced (saying al Qeda would applaud it) and earned himself an elegantly trenchant rebuke from Obama in the process. He and his equally loathsome wife Jeanette would have been positively, maliciously delighted to have inconvenienced the President-elect and his young family by their selfish appropriation of the mansion. That's just the kind of despicable people they are.
On behalf of my fellow Australians I sincerely appeal to all DC residents to greet Mr & Mrs Howard with a cascade of well-aimed shoes. We'd be forever in your debt.
Sorry, the above comment was from me...
Margaret Carlson's idea of reporting: "I have a feeling."
Kevin's factual premise is inaccurate: Back in December, the White House specifically said that there weren't any guests already booked; they said that some events had been booked in the Blair House (receptions and such). I don't know why such events would preclude the Obamas staying there, but no one has tried to ask or find out, including the egregious Carlson.
I have seen no serious attempts to report the facts about this, and frankly, it's complete total trivia. KeithO, of course, has been running the rubes about the topic, with Carlson's help. It's how he makes his $5 million a year.
Carlson as a prime guest on a "liberal" program! (Following Fineman!) Truly, we are the dumbest people who ever drew breath on this earth.
Bush is just a rude, inconsiderate twit.
I take total issue with this statement. Bush is NOT just a rude, inconsiderate twit. Bush is the epitome of a rude, inconsiderate twit.