[OT!] The Queen and Michelle Obama [OT!]
ortru...@gmail.com
"The rules are set in stone and so the eagerly watching British media
sputtered when the First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama,
briefly put her hand on the back of the Queen Elizabeth II as the two
chatted at a reception. Etiquette is quite stern about this: "Whatever
you do, don't touch the Queen!!!" "
Are people for real?
-Ortrud Jones
Stephen Jay-Taylor
Rather like people who travel around in a five-ton armoured car, gas-
and bomb-proof they then schlepp 3,500 miles across the Atalntic so
nobody can touch them either..
I suggest you look to your own "protocols" .......
SJT
LT
People - yes! What passes for them at RMO? Nyet!
Pat
wrote:
Come on, Steven. The Secret Service reportedly had conniption fits
when the Obamas left their security vehicle for the second time to
walk a hundred yards through the streets of Washington on Inauguration
Day. It's not as if terrorist acts - or nutcases - are unheard of in
the great city of London.
I really don't think a brief, friendly touch from America's First Lady
should be the cause of raised eyebrows and blood pressures in the
British Isles. What's so wrong about treating the queen like a lady
instead of a vase in a museum.
Regards,
Pat
LT
> I really don't think a brief
Keep pouring on the straight lines! :)))
ortru...@gmail.com
wrote:
Those are not my protocols either, Stephen. I do, however like the
idea of afternoon tea with cucumber sandwiches...
-Ortrud Jones
Stephen Jay-Taylor
> idea of afternoon tea with cucumber sandwiches..."
Only, I trust, with the crusts carefully removed....
SJT, who remembers when John Howard, former Prime Minister of
Australia, did the same thing - it's height-related I'm sure : she's
absolutely tiny - and only just managed to keep his job the scandal
was so great both here, but even more so back at his home...
Pat
wrote:
===========================
Yes, but Howard, as the head of a Commonwealth country, and therefore
a 'subject' of the queen - not to mention a, gasp, man -- may be
under some slight obligation to observe these medieval shibboleths.
A nice girl from Chicago is not.
Kindness, friendliness, respect, yes; sacramental ring-kissing
obeisance, no.
Pat
Stephen Jay-Taylor
You would do as much for the Pope. Doubtless he will in due course.
Will the first lady get touchy-feely with him as well, I wonder ?
People are, in fact, briefed as to acceptable behaviour concerning
royalty, and not just ours. I wonder what would have been made of the
Queen getting physical with Mrs. Obama ? What I think of royal
protocols - not much, as it happens - is neither here nor there : they
exist, are made known in advance by diplomatic intermediaries, and are
breached only by deliberate action; and though you seem to imagine
that being from Chicago absolves anyone from observance of customary
manners, trust me that cuts no ice here. No-one was, or is, or ever
has been in living memory, required to engage in "sacramental ring-
kissing, obeisance", which rather gives your particular snippy
republican sympathies away; your president's wife, like anyone else
from anywhere else, was merely required to KEEP HER HANDS OFF.
SJT
Pat
Not being able to touch someone with whom one comes in friendly social
contact is hardly "customary manners,' Stephen. It's a silly hide-
bound tradition and you know it.
I have no illusions about Chicago -- but folks from Chicago, au fond,
are just as worthy of respect as folks from Windsor or anywhere else.
That's all I'm saying.
The queen, God bless her, has to wipe Her royal bottom, as do we all.
I'm not against her, or royalty, or tradition -- if you folks are
happy with it, good luck to you. But it's not reasonable for you to
expect everyone else in the world to observe rituals which have no
basis in ordinary inter-personal respect or common courtesy.
Regards,
Pat
Richergar
one of his two fictionalized self-masturbatory autobiographies, he
apparently goes into some detail about a relative's resentment towards
the English...I haven't read it, and am keeping it on the same shelf
with the various aplogetica for the lives of Alger Hiss and the
Rosenbergs, but I am sure Pat has read and underlined in his copy and
will correct me if I am wrong.
These are two people with enormous chips on their shoulders, and it's
time that no one was suprised by any of this. You have to remember
that she said that his winning the nomination (or just one of the
primaries, who knows) was the first time she'd been proud to be an
American.
I do feel certain though, that when Michelle meets Arab leaders she
will be quite careful about protocol.
You're beginning to get the idea of them.
On Apr 1, 11:01 pm, Stephen Jay-Taylor <sjaytay...@btinternet.com>
> SJT- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Mark
about with Queen and her husband is that they looked like midget
people next to the Obamas. SJT, are they really that tiny?
Stephen Jay-Taylor
social
contact is hardly "customary manners,'
Indeed not. I never said it was. In fact - newsflash - it isn't. But
"customary manners" when dealing with monarchs are completely
modified. It's called royal protocol, and you don't have to like it,
or think it sensible.You simply have to observe it. Is that so very
difficult to grasp ?
If your elected representatives are so very worthy of respect merely
by being themselves, then the least that they might do is mark the
conventional respect shown here. Even Sarkozy had no trouble with
this, and he's an inveterate groper of all and sundry, from a people
who chopped their king's head off ( as indeed did we, some 130 years
earlier than they managed to...).
"But it's not reasonable for you to expect everyone else in the world
to observe rituals which have no
basis in ordinary inter-personal respect or common courtesy. "
Wrong. " ordinary inter-personal respect" has NOTHING to do with royal
meetings, much less "common courtesy". You're not dealing with
commoners, whether you like it, approve, or not. Royalty IS ritual,
and if all you're really doing, as I suspect, is defending your
elected leader's wife's reductionist agenda, then I would only say
that her actions struck me as rude and patronising in the extreme.
Though you evidently have no time for the conventions of protocol when
it suits you, people here at a sufficiently elevated level of activity
to encounter royalty do, and indeed have to, have time for them. There
is an army of equerries and diplomats connected to the Palace who make
certain that this kind of thing never happens, because of the woeful
amount of coverage it will receive if it does, and believe me has. The
best Mrs Obama looks in this is gauche : the worst, calculatedly point-
making. I don't know which applies. It's too late now.
SJT, who thanks you for telling me what I know in the shape of "It's a
silly hide-bound tradition". Doubtless so. Not really the point, is
it ? If respect is only to be accorded on your terms rather than that
of the host nation, I believe that's called one-way cultural
imperialism. When in Rome, dear...
Stephen Jay-Taylor
'Fraid so. She certainly is. I was in the line-up the night she opened
the Barbican, and couldn't believe how far down I had to reach...
Philip used to be about 5'10'' or so, I would guess, but in his
mid-80s he has inevitably shrivelled somewhat, deliciously tactless
old thing.....
SJT
Roger Gillard
I think you are mistaken. It is inconceivable that 'little
Johnnie', the ultimate Anglophile, would do such a thing. I think you
mean Paul Keating, who did the touching, and was dutifully called the
'Lizard of Oz' for the lapse in protocol but the British Press.
Roger Gillard
Paul
wrote:
Stephen is so right here, and Pat so wrong, that I the inferiority
complex that my British friends sometimes create in my American soul
is stirring once again. Once, while travelling near Balmoral, I
received from a friend a complete set of instructions as to what to do
should I meet the Queen. ( These may not be correct, but I remember
that I was to say "Your majesty" on first addressing her, and "Ma'am"
thereafter) I'd have been delighted to have had the opportunity to
have shown that there are some Americans who know how to behave in the
presence of British Royalty.
As it was, I did get a chance to wave to the Royals while staying in
Exeter. (I also got to sing "Happy Birthday" to the Queen Mum on her
90th. She was in the Royal Box at the ballet that night, just above
where I was sitting. )
Really, Pat, the tradition, pomp, history, deference - that is what it
is all about at Buckingham Palace. If you do not wish to "observe the
rituals," then don't visit the Queen. Ms. Obama might have said
something like "We Americans do not believe in Royalty, and for me
the Queen is just an ordinary common person." That would have
severely offended our best and most important ally,but Ms. Obama's
greatly overrated intellect seems incapable of grasping the simple
concept of altering one's behavior to please a friend. I wonder how
she'll act when she meets the Pope.
Paul
ortru...@gmail.com
> meetings, much less "common courtesy". You're not dealing with
> commoners, whether you like it, approve, or not. Royalty IS ritual,
> and if all you're really doing, as I suspect, is defending your
> elected leader's wife's reductionist agenda, then I would only say
> that her actions struck me as rude and patronising in the extreme.
> Though you evidently have no time for the conventions of protocol when
> it suits you, people here at a sufficiently elevated level of activity
> to encounter royalty do, and indeed have to, have time for them. There
> is an army of equerries and diplomats connected to the Palace who make
> certain that this kind of thing never happens, because of the woeful
> amount of coverage it will receive if it does, and believe me has. The
> best Mrs Obama looks in this is gauche : the worst, calculatedly point-
> making. I don't know which applies. It's too late now.
>
> SJT, who thanks you for telling me what I know in the shape of "It's a
> silly hide-bound tradition". Doubtless so. Not really the point, is
> it ? If respect is only to be accorded on your terms rather than that
> of the host nation, I believe that's called one-way cultural
> imperialism. When in Rome, dear...
This is a fascinating discussion, I had no idea that the royal
protocol was followed to this degree. How far down the line of
succession are the protocols applied? For example, if a non-royal (I
won't use the term "commoner" as I ingenuously believe that we are all
unique, haha) is introduced to a royal further down the line of
succession such as a Baron/Baroness or Count/Countess, may that non-
royal reach out first to shake hands?
Also, I honestly did not mean any disrespect in posting the article
even though I did say a flippant comment when I linked the article. I
apologize for that. Even though I am surrounded by queens in my
neighborhood, the idea of royal protocol is is a very foreign concept
to me. I honestly believe that customs and traditions for other
countries should be respected and observed when one is a guest in that
country.
-Ortrud Jones
David Melnick
news:d4aca052-1c7d-442a...@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
You would do as much for the Pope. ... Will the first lady get touchy-feely
with him as well, I wonder ?
--------------------------------------------------
Eww, the pope looks about as huggable as Dr. Sivana.
d.
JKH
> " I do, however like the
>
> > idea of afternoon tea with cucumber sandwiches..."
>
> Only, I trust, with the crusts carefully removed....
>
> SJT, who remembers when John Howard, former Prime Minister of
> Australia, did the same thing -
I think it was Paul Keating who touched up Liz, not Howard. And
whatever happened to him, we ask?
Next week on pedantry corner.........................
JKH
JKH
Yes, they are.
JKH
Ancona21
> "Stephen Jay-Taylor" <sjaytay...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
Ah, the good old days! Do you remember back when Dr. Sivana trapped
Captain Marvel in a sphere of Suspendium for twenty years? I've got
the eerie feeling that rmo has suffered the same fate.
A21
LT
La Murde:
>I see'd the presss fotoes and the oly think I could think
> about with Queen and her husband is that they looked like midget
> people next to the Obamas. SJT, are they really that tiny?
Don't confuse the Royals with your 'brain', Murdy! THAT's as tiny as
'ancona's' nonexistent Jenny Thalia.
L. Credit Where Due T.
LT
>good old days!
You mean before you got deserved zapped here, on a regular basis,
Stinkie?
>Do you remember back when Dr. Sivana trapped
> Captain Marvel in a sphere of Suspendium for twenty years? I've got
> the eerie feeling that rmo has suffered the same fat.
And you are that clump of fat, Stinkie!
What you're not -is another Dr. Sivana, despite your s-swig fueled
ambitions.
Btw,
F.y., Bollmann.
Ancona21
TillyBird, how clever of you to fake a typo by me - 'fat' vice 'fake'
- so that you could make a witty remark about it. Formidable!
A21
Ancona21
>
> You mean before you got deserved zapped here, on a regular basis,
> Stinkie?>
"before you got deserved zapped"?
My goodness, TillyBird, where did you take English? At your local
plumbers union hall?
A21
Nemo me impune lacessit
LT
> My goodness
Your WHAT, Stinkie? When did that ever exist?? No one seems to have
ever noticed your 'goodness', Stinkie.
>Where did you take English?
One doesn't 'take' English, Stinkie; It's learned (not by you,
obviously), not 'taken'.
>local plumbers union hall
Ah,
you mean those couragious, enduring fellas who *TAKE* plungers and
draw *you* out of clogged terlits??
To a man, they've all a zillion times your 'erudition', so STFU.
Helpfully,
L. Captain Nemo Me Impune Lacessit T., who knows the difference
between 'Learn' and 'Take'.
LT
> > La Schtunko Bollcona21, in a nostalgic 'vein':
>
> > >good old days!
>
> > You mean before you got deserved zapped here, on a regular basis,
> > Stinkie?
>
> > >Do you remember back when Dr. Sivana trapped
> > > Captain Marvel in a sphere of Suspendium for twenty years? I've got
> > > the eerie feeling that rmo has suffered the same fat.
>
> > And you are that clump of fat, Stinkie!
>
> > What you're not -is another Dr. Sivana, despite your s-swig fueled
> > ambitions.
>
> > Btw,
> > F.y., Bollmann.>
The F'd Bollmann, with its 'witty' reply:
> TillyBird, Tillybird, WOO-WOO-HOO Tillybird nyaah, >nyahhhhh!!!
How 'clever' of you, La Stinkie, to 'devastate' me with your Boll-
Neologisms!
>fat vice fake
Your new 'sig', Stinkie? I approve.
>Formidable!
Yes.... I admit that your stupidity is certainly formidable, Stinkie.
And getting 'formidabler' by the nanosecond.
Neat.
Ancona21
In my s-swig-induced cloud of goofy boll-nostalgia, I pitiously
lamented, in my Extra-Goofy way:
> Ah, the good old days! Do you remember back when Dr. Sivana trapped
> CaptainMarvelin a sphere of Suspendium for twenty years? I've got
> the eerie feeling that rmo has suffered the same fat(e).
Ironically,
thanks to me, my wacky schizoid 'alter egos', and of course, my funky
flunky squad of Dee JennyRates. Dee-Lishus Irony, that!
Ancona "Credit Where Due" Bollmann - So take THAT, Tillman!!!
(We'll just SEE who's the rightful 'Credit Where Due' around here!)
"Tillybird, Tillybird, La la lala laaaa, nyah, nyah, nyaaaah!"
LT
You could never even cackle/guffaw on key, could you, my little clown-
subject?
Steve Silverman
news:d9ab0cb5-a735-46c1...@n7g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
>
> I'm not against her, or royalty, or tradition -- if you folks are
> happy with it, good luck to you. But it's not reasonable for you to
> expect everyone else in the world to observe rituals which have no
> basis in ordinary inter-personal respect or common courtesy.
While I'm happy to acknowledge that such customs are certainly nothing if
not arcane, I'm staggered to see Pat, who is usually endowed with enough
good sense for twenty, misjudging their significance so badly. However I am
even more shocked at something else that nobody else here appears to have
commented on. The photo clearly shows the Queen reciprocating by putting her
own arm around Michelle Obama. That is something I have never seen before,
and in so doing she appears as ready as America's First Lady to dispense
with the niceties of protocol.
On a different but related subject, is it me or does anybody else think that
Gordon Brown appeared to shrink physically in the presence of Obama?
Steve Silverman
Paul Ferraro
can you just imagine the shit hitting the fan, should the following scenario
have taken place:
It's the big formal state dinner. The Queen & President are seated next to
rach other. Queen to President: "I say, Hussein, would you mind terribly if
I asked you to pass the salt to your old mum?" After he passes the salt -
"Well, thank you, there's a good boy".
As far as meeting the Arab leaders, will the angry First Lady be wearing
cap, or short sleeves to show off her nicely toned arms (resulting, I guess,
from bearing all those heavy chips during the many years that she was not
proud of her country) ? And, will that be yet another cause celebre???
Stay Tuned People.....
DonPaolo
"Richergar" <rich...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:049667bf-03ea-4579...@k2g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
Steve Silverman
news:5S2Bl.1087$Q52...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> Frankly, I do think the "touchy-feely" incident is much ado about BS!
Given this poster's regret, published in this newsgroup, that the UK did not
succumb to the jackboot during WWII, it is hardly surprising that he has
neither respect for nor understanding of its traditions and protocols.
Steve Silverman
LT
> Frankly, I do think the "touchy-feely" incident is much ado about BS! BUT,
> can you just imagine the shit hitting the fan, should the following scenario
> have taken place:
>
> It's the big formal state dinner. The Queen & President are seated next to
> rach other. Queen to President: "I say, Hussein, would you mind terribly if
> I asked you to pass the salt to your old mum?" After he passes the salt -
> "Well, thank you, there's a good boy".
At rmo, 'passing the salt' is.....Passe! -We have 'ancona' bollmann,
its schizoid 'alters', and its funky flunky team! Their specialty:
Passing WIND. T'was ever so....
Best,
LT
>
> As far as meeting the Arab leaders, will the angry First Lady be wearing
> cap, or short sleeves to show off her nicely toned arms (resulting, I guess,
> from bearing all those heavy chips during the many years that she was not
> proud of her country) ? And, will that be yet another cause celebre???
> Stay Tuned People.....
>
> DonPaolo
>
> "Richergar" <richer...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
LT
> Given this poster's regret, published in this newsgroup, that the UK did not
> succumb to the jackboot during WWII
Given this:
It's only certain *specimens*, regrettably in the UK, that needed/
deserved to succumb; whether to jackboots or their own foul stenches.
Surely 'this poster' knows and meant exactly that.
> it is hardly surprising
Indeed, "it is hardly surprising" that this cheap, yellowstaining
lowlife is still stirring its reeking pot of ordure, so bitterly.
'Bon Appetit', SwillVermin.
LT
>is it me or does anybody else think that
> Gordon Brown appeared to shrink physically in the presence of Obama?
It's only you.
Paul Ferraro
arse-kickings they received in 1776, 1781, 1812. About time they got over
it & stopped whining & lying & misrepresenting, nu?
DonPaolo
"LT" <Leonar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8e9580c4-5616-4be7...@m24g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
mrd
wrote:
> Philip used to be about 5'10'' or so, I would guess, but in his
> mid-80s he has inevitably shrivelled somewhat, deliciously tactless
> old thing.....
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
His height is listed in his official biography as 6'2" so he
apparently he has been subject to considerable shrivelling. The
Queen's height is listed as 5'4".
Regards - Joe Diamanti
Richergar
sense for twenty, but I appreciate the witticism - that typical dry
British wit - which didn't say 'twenty' what. Certainly, that far I
can go with you.
I don't know about the protocol - I got a laugh out of the report that
the Ipod that Obama gave HRH was filled with his speeches - I suppose
if our Vice President had given HRH an Ipod, it might have been filled
with Neil Kinnock's speeches - but I think it's a kind of affirmative
action for Chicagoans, I guess, to suggest that the spouse of a head
of state isn't charged with knowing the protocol. I have seen the
picture of them with their arms around each other for a photo, but
there's also a photo of the Queen obviously backing off from Mrs.
Hussein-Obama and obviously annoyed at being touched. We have all
kinds of special protocols in this country about the flag, and I can
imagine who many Americans, if not the Obamas or Pat, would react if a
head of state or their wife showed disrespect to our national symbols,
which is really what this is about.
I am sure she will be much more respectful when she meets the Castro
brothers.
On Apr 2, 8:59 am, "Steve Silverman" <ssilv...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> "Pat" <pfin...@fenceonline.com> wrote in message
Steve Silverman
> Tsk Tsk - SOME of the specimens are still harbouring sour grapes over the
> arse-kickings they received in 1776, 1781, 1812.
Quite the reverse actually. We were sorry to see you go at the time, but
recognise the far more valuable relationship that has since flourished with
those of you who aren't chippy, thin-skinned rednecks. I speak as an
Amerophile.
> About time they got over it & stopped whining & lying & misrepresenting,
> nu?
Oh dear. Not only a redneck, but one clearly suffering from amnesia into the
bargain. Perhaps he needs to be reminded of what he wrote her on 29 June
2008.
"Just remember, ass wipe, were it not for the YANKS, you dribblers would
be speaking GERMAN. Too bad we got into it so early, without allowing the
V-2s to do a better, more complete sweeping job."
While attaining the levels of diplomacy, intelligence and integrity
customary for this poster, it's this sort of outburst that unfairly gets
decent Americans a bad reputation.
Steve Silverman
Steve Silverman
>
> I suppose if our Vice President had given HRH an Ipod, it might have been
> filled
> with Neil Kinnock's speeches
Only if Apple have found a way of getting iPods to store hot air.
> I am sure she will be much more respectful when she meets the Castro
> brothers.
I should hope so too, given that an entire district of San Francisco has
been named after them! ;-))
Steve Silverman
Mark
wrote:
> those of you who aren't chippy, thin-skinned rednecks.
You hit the nail on the head, Steve. These Limbaugh driven robo-thugs
are an embarrassment to every decent American.
Tom White
> I don't know about the protocol - I got a laugh out of the report that
"Ipod" you say? I'd misunderstood and was wondering why there
wasn't a kerfuffle about the gift of an IUD. Come to think of
it, filling one of those things with speeches doesn't make
much sense, either.
Steve Silverman
news:gr2nhf$d7h$1...@nntp.msstate.edu...
> "Ipod" you say? I'd misunderstood and was wondering why there
> wasn't a kerfuffle about the gift of an IUD. Come to think of
> it, filling one of those things with speeches doesn't make
> much sense, either.
Are you sure about that? I understand that some of his speeches are
considered to be seminal.
Steve Silverman
Count of Warwick
> Tsk Tsk - SOME of the specimens are still harbouring sour grapes over the
> arse-kickings they received in 1776, 1781, 1812. About time they got over
> it & stopped whining & lying & misrepresenting, nu?
>
All on your soil. Anyone knows it is extremely difficult to win a war
on foreign soil....as well you know (Vietnam, Greneda, Iraq etc)
Would you really care to talk about the arse kickings your country has
had over the last few decades?
I don't see anyone whining and misrepresenting here. Except,
perhaps,.....YOU.
Ancona21
> Der SS-boy, smoothing its scales unsuccessfully:
>
> > Given this poster's regret, published in this newsgroup, that the UK did not
> > succumb to the jackboot during WWII
>
> Given this:
> It's only certain *specimens*, regrettably in the UK, that needed/
> deserved to succumb; whether to jackboots or their own foul stenches.
> Surely 'this poster' knows and meant exactly that. >
We appreciate your anemic and apologistic interpretation of Paul
Ferraro's meaning, TillyBird, but let us eschew your spin and rely
instead on his own words, to wit:
"Just remember, ass wipe, were it not for the YANKS, you dribblers
would be speaking GERMAN. Too bad we got into it so early, without
allowing
the V-2s to do a better, more complete sweeping job.
Have a wunnerful day, you piece of festering hyena shit."
DonPaolo Jun 28 2008
I'm not making this up, you know. See Paul Ferraro's original
execrable post here: http://tinyurl.com/Ferraros-Nazi-Cheer
A21
Richergar
Brothers.
On Apr 2, 10:53 am, "Steve Silverman" <ssilv...@btopenworld.com>
wrote:
> "Richergar" <richer...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Ancona21
I have it from an unimpeachable source that Philip became addicted to
southern Negro cuisine some years ago:
"Put on the skillet, put on the lid,
Mammy's gonna make a little shortnin' bread.
Mammy's little baby loves shortnin', shortnin',
Mammy's lil' baby loves shortnin bread.
When a man be too tall,
Here's what he do,
Shortnin' bread be best for you."
Ancona21, temporarily insane
Ancona21
I have seen the picture of them with their arms around each other for
a photo, but
> there's also a photo of the Queen obviously backing off from Mrs.
> Hussein-Obama and obviously annoyed at being touched. >
That's all very well, REG, but did you see the one of Q.E. grabbing
Michelle's butt?
http://tinyurl.com/QueenLiz-MichellesButt
A21, feeling a bit cheeky
Pat
> On Apr 2, 1:23 am, Stephen Jay-Taylor <sjaytay...@btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Not being able to touch someone with whom one comes in friendly
> > social
> > contact is hardly "customary manners,'
>
> > Indeed not. I never said it was. In fact - newsflash - it isn't. But
> > "customary manners" when dealing with monarchs are completely
> > modified. It's called royal protocol, and you don't have to like it,
> > or think it sensible.You simply have to observe it. Is that so very
> > difficult to grasp ?
>
> > If your elected representatives are so very worthy of respect merely
> > by being themselves, then the least that they might do is mark the
> > conventional respect shown here. Even Sarkozy had no trouble with
> > this, and he's an inveterate groper of all and sundry, from a people
> > who chopped their king's head off ( as indeed did we, some 130 years
> > earlier than they managed to...).
>
> > "But it's not reasonable for you to expect everyone else in the world
> > to observe rituals which have no
> > basis in ordinary inter-personal respect or common courtesy. "
>
> > meetings, much less "common courtesy". You're not dealing with
> > commoners, whether you like it, approve, or not. Royalty IS ritual,
> > and if all you're really doing, as I suspect, is defending your
> > elected leader's wife's reductionist agenda, then I would only say
> > that her actions struck me as rude and patronising in the extreme.
> > Though you evidently have no time for the conventions of protocol when
> > it suits you, people here at a sufficiently elevated level of activity
> > to encounter royalty do, and indeed have to, have time for them. There
> > is an army of equerries and diplomats connected to the Palace who make
> > certain that this kind of thing never happens, because of the woeful
> > amount of coverage it will receive if it does, and believe me has. The
> > best Mrs Obama looks in this is gauche : the worst, calculatedly point-
> > making. I don't know which applies. It's too late now.
>
> > SJT, who thanks you for telling me what I know in the shape of "It's a
> > silly hide-bound tradition". Doubtless so. Not really the point, is
> > it ? If respect is only to be accorded on your terms rather than that
> > of the host nation, I believe that's called one-way cultural
> > imperialism. When in Rome, dear...
>
> Stephen is so right here, and Pat so wrong, that I the inferiority
> complex that my British friends sometimes create in my American soul
> is stirring once again. Once, while travelling near Balmoral, I
> received from a friend a complete set of instructions as to what to do
> should I meet the Queen. ( These may not be correct, but I remember
> that I was to say "Your majesty" on first addressing her, and "Ma'am"
> thereafter) I'd have been delighted to have had the opportunity to
> have shown that there are some Americans who know how to behave in the
> presence of British Royalty.
>
> As it was, I did get a chance to wave to the Royals while staying in
> Exeter. (I also got to sing "Happy Birthday" to the Queen Mum on her
> 90th. She was in the Royal Box at the ballet that night, just above
> where I was sitting. )
>
> Really, Pat, the tradition, pomp, history, deference - that is what it
> is all about at Buckingham Palace. If you do not wish to "observe the
> rituals," then don't visit the Queen.
Oh, please. The president's going to Britain for the G-21 meeting and
gets invited to meet the Queen. What are they supposed to do? Say,
"No, we're sorry, but we're going to try the local fish and chips that
night."
I saw this horrible touching last night on TV (after I had seen it
written about here). I saw it about a dozen times, as a matter of
fact -- you couldn't avoid it. The queen sort of slid her arm around
Mrs Obama's waist, and Mrs Obama reciprocated by touching the queen on
the back -- for a second or two (she is too tall too comfortably touch
the queen where the queen touched her)
I flipped the dial among all the cable news channels for about half
an hour and each channel had a so-called authority on British customs,
mores, whatever, and with the exception of the bloke Sean Hannity
found, they all said it was no big deal, that the queen seemed
delighted with the meeting, yadda yadda yadda. One of the
commentators was a former private secretary to the queen and he was
fine with it, and was bubbling over with excitement describing how
warmly the queen had greeted the Obamas and how much she seemed to
have enjoyed the occasion. If the poor woman hasn't been touched in
a friendly way in sixty years, it's no wonder she comes across looking
pretty glum most of the time.
I'm not saying they should step on her royal feet for God's sake, but
I see nothingly shockingly wrong about a ritualistic 'faux pas' as
long as one is being friendly and polite. What's wrong with
treating a person like a person instead of like a monument?
Maybe if a few more of Stephen's equerries and diplomats and other
courtiers du jour had treated Charles and his younger son like
persons instead of like princes, they wouldn't have committed some of
the REALLY embarrassing faux pas that have been their lot. (I give
young Harry full marks for physical courage however -- I admire his
trying to serve his country in war zones). And as for the Queen's
husband, he doesn't DESERVE (by virtue of character, kindness or
common sense) any better treatent than the people who clean your
offices.
I WOULD agree that someone didn't give much thought to the Obama gift-
giving in recent weeks; but it's absolutely silly that some try to
turn it into an international incident. With all the important things
going on in the world I can't believe that people get worked up about
this sort of thing.
Hey, I love the English and England. I can name the monarchs of
England from Edward the Confessor onward, and have read every play
Shakespeare wrote at least twice (many of them half a dozen or more
times) every novel Dickens wrote, every mystery novel Agatha Christie
wrote. I loved our one, probably once-in-a-lifetime visit to London
(a gift from my wife) more than I could possibly tell you.
But picking up the wrong fork at a formal dinner should not be a cause
for shame and guilt -- and neither should politely touching the
queen. Maybe you guys aren't huggers -- I'm not by nature -- I grew
up in a very stiff, repressed household. But my step-father's family
(Polish) and my wife's family (African-American) are both avid huggers
-- everybody hugs everybody even if you've never met them before.
Regardless of gender. If it was a bit off-putting at first, to
someone as uptight as I was. But I'm the better for it.
And so, I promise you, will be the Queen of England. The Tower of
London will not collapse into the Thames.
Regards,
Pat
Richergar
We'll tell sjt later.
Richergar
around an issue, obfuscate it, and somehow think you're fooling anyone
but yourself in the process. I don't mean it in an angry way, or as a
put down, but you can never really meet an objection 'head on', deal
with it, and acknowledge that you were wrong. You write all this -
what your reading list has anything to do with the issues at hand must
confuse anyone who got through your entire posting - but can't deal
with the basic issue of protocol and respect for others, and their
national symbols. It completely limits your effectiveness and impact.
> Pat- Hide quoted text -
ortru...@gmail.com
> Hey, I love the English and England. I can name the monarchs of
> England from Edward the Confessor onward, and have read every play
> Shakespeare wrote at least twice (many of them half a dozen or more
> times) every novel Dickens wrote, every mystery novel Agatha Christie
> wrote. I loved our one, probably once-in-a-lifetime visit to London
> (a gift from my wife) more than I could possibly tell you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pat
....but have you read the Harry Potter books, Pat? That is the sign of
a true Anglophile!
-Ortrud, attempting to summon up a patronus for protection from
Voldemort and certain rmo posters!
Pat
> The Obamas apparently have bugs up their rears about the English - in
> one of his two fictionalized self-masturbatory autobiographies, he
> apparently goes into some detail about a relative's resentment towards
> the English...I haven't read it, and am keeping it on the same shelf
> with the various aplogetica for the lives of Alger Hiss and the
> Rosenbergs, but I am sure Pat has read and underlined in his copy and
> will correct me if I am wrong.
>
> These are two people with enormous chips on their shoulders,
I think we all can see where the biggest shoulder-chip is in this
discussion, REG.
and it's
> time that no one was suprised by any of this. You have to remember
> that she said that his winning the nomination (or just one of the
> primaries, who knows) was the first time she'd been proud to be an
> American.
>
> I do feel certain though, that when Michelle meets Arab leaders she
> will be quite careful about protocol.
>
It that's true it's only because she expects so-called civilized
people like the British to overlook and forgive any unintended
violation of etiquette or social faux-pas. That's the definition of
good manners in my book -- not the silly rules and rituals having to
do with forks and wineglasses and butter knives.
A person's patriotism shouldn't be judged by whether he can fold the
flag up properly according to time honored ritual -- it's about
serving your country and the people in it. And pointing out when
things have gone a little off track.
I grew up as a Catholic, and it was customary for Catholics to
genuflect when passing in front of the altar. But I never saw anyone
at our church sniff with self-righteous disdain if a non-Catholic
failed to do so. Doing so, IMO, would have been a greater breach of
socio/religious etiquette than the failure of a non-believer to
genuflect.
I don't know but I suspect most Protestants and Jews make similar
allowances for breaches of ritual when they are committed by visiting
non-observers of those faiths. Simple tolerance demands no less.
And I'm fairly confident that any God worth believing in would feel
the same way. There is nothing wrong with ritual -- but the failure
to observe it is hardly worthy of condemnation.
Pat
wagnerfan
Regards,
Pat
Oh please - we Yanks should NEVER EVER feel any kind of inferiority complex
from the Brits - cut me a break. I lived in Britain and believe you me -
there is no reason to feel inferior in any way whatsoever. Wagner Fan
ortru...@gmail.com
Awright, everyone. Let's bring it home to opera...final scene of
Lohengrin at Bayreuth with Schnaut tearing it up as Ortrud! Balls to
the wall and fingernails on the chalkboard! Yeh!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGZvVXyJ630&feature=channel_page
-Ortrud Jones
Steve Silverman
"wagnerfan" <wagn...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Z8ednU-Nn44jo0jU...@giganews.com...
>
> Oh please - we Yanks should NEVER EVER feel any kind of inferiority
> complex from the Brits
Where on earth did that come from? Who suggested that you should?
Steve Silverman
wagnerfan
"Stephen is so right here, and Pat so wrong, that I the inferiority
> complex that my British friends sometimes create in my American soul
> is stirring once again"
Wagner Fan
"Steve Silverman" <ssil...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:VLWdnSTM3cKO3EjU...@bt.com...
Pat
> It's amazing how difficult it is for you to say you're wrong. You talk
> around an issue, obfuscate it, and somehow think you're fooling anyone
> but yourself in the process. I don't mean it in an angry way, or as a
> put down, but you can never really meet an objection 'head on', deal
> with it, and acknowledge that you were wrong.
REG, I honestly think I am more likely to acknowledge my own errors of
fact than most people I know and certainly more than most people who
post here. (Fred is a notable exception).
I only went through the reading list and mentioned the trip to show
that I really do love England -- but I don't love everything about it,
any more than I love everything about America or anywhere else.
But your telling me "You're wrong, you're wrong, YOU'RE wrong!" --
doesn't prove me wrong. It doesn't work when Limbaugh or Hannity do
it, and it certainly doesn't work when you do it.
Intentional discourtesies and rudenesses are worthy of criticism; a
friendly touch on the back -- most likely involuntary -- is not. Do
you follow golf? Last year at the Arnold Palmer tournament at Bay
Hill Tiger Woods made a long tournament-winning putt on the 18th
green. As the ball crept into the hole, he tore off his cap, slammed
it to the ground, and embraced his caddy as the crowd cheered. A few
moments later, he noticed his cap lying on the ground a few feet away
and asked his caddy, "How'd that get there?" In his excitement, he
had no memory of throwing his cap.
Getting back to Mrs Obama, it may well be that the Obama's were
carefully coached as to the do's and don'ts of royal-greeting. But
are you and Stephen and Paul seriously suggesting that Mrs Obama,
decided "Screw you and and screw the Queen" -- I'll touch her if I
bloody well want to!" ??
Perhaps you would not be a little excited to meet the queen of ***ing
England, but I can understand how most normal people would be. It's
not as if she had only to do the proper thing for a second and a half
in a receiving line, she had to spend some time with the dear lady. I
can well understand how a person who did not grow up in that kind of
environment could could make a social boo-boo. It seems quite likely
to me that, in her psychological excitement she has no more
recollection of touching Elizabeth than Woods had of throwing his
cap. Personally, I'd have a difficult time getting out the words,
"Good evening, Your Majesty."
So, I think, and I suspect that deep down, you gentlemen agree, that
this was an unintentional breach of royal etiquette, not a thumbing of
one's nose at the Bastille with malice aforethought. Is that correct?
If that's true, who has the worst manners, here -- the well-meaning
person who makes an unintended social faux pas -- or the persons who
call it to her attention in an attempt to humiliate her?
You tell me, your grace,
Pat
Count of Warwick
wrote:
> "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote in message
------------
Ha hahahahahahahaha!
The "special relationship" between America and Britain is alive and
well. As long as America says "jump" and Britain asks "how high".
You've only to see the grovelling attitude of our alleged Prime
Minister to the "sainted" President Obama for that!
Jesus C H Fucking Rist! To think the choice is either being the 51st
state of America or totally enmeshed in the uniquely corrupt core of
the EU.
Bring on Armageddon and spare the innocents!
Steve Silverman
news:1acda67f-1533-4380...@l22g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>
> Ha hahahahahahahaha!
> The "special relationship" between America and Britain is alive and
> well. As long as America says "jump" and Britain asks "how high".
> You've only to see the grovelling attitude of our alleged Prime
> Minister to the "sainted" President Obama for that!
Brown has a lot of groveling to do to a lot of people. He might as well
start with Obama.
Steve Silverman
Pat
Pat
"This was a mutual and spontaneous display of affection and
appreciation between the queen and Michelle Obama," a palace
spokeswoman said.
===============================
A Buckingham Palace spokesman who asked not to be identified because
of palace policy said he could not remember the last time the queen
had displayed such public affection with a first lady or dignitary.
"It was a mutual and spontaneous display of affection," he said. "We
don't issue instructions on not touching the queen."
=============================================================
"Did Michelle Obama break royal protocol by giving the Queen a hug?"
asked the Daily Mail, which said the two women "clearly took to each
other." It added: "No one — including the ladies-in-waiting standing
nearby — could believe their eyes."
"No-one -- including the ladies-in-waiting standing nearby -- could
believe their eyes," the Daily Mail of London reports. "In 57 years,
the Queen has never been seen to make that kind of gesture and it is
certainly against all protocol to touch her." But the website quotes
an eyewitness who says the Queen "didn't seem to mind a bit and was
smiling and joking throughout."
====================================================================
And because of this, the Times of London is snipping at the American
media for what they call sensationalizing yesterday’s embrace between
the British monarch and the First Lady.
“Some of the more excitable elements of the media – particularly the
Americans – suggested she may have been guilty of a breach of
protocol,” snips the Times.
Was it?
“Hardly,” they snoot. “Buckingham Palace was very relaxed today about
the incident, and attitudes there have changed significantly…”
=====================================================
Pat
Ancona21
'Nodiq' SwillVermin:
>Woo, woo, woo, Stefka!
you hit the nail on the head, Steff.
>We Limbaugh driven robo-thug lying jerks
> are an embarrassment to every decent >American and Brit.
But a source of everlasting pride to me, ancona/ljo, your mentor!
Heh, heh.
Ancona, kvelling with love for my prize pee-ew-pills
Ancona21
> On Apr 2, 9:35 am, LT <LeonardT2...@gmail.com> wrote, aptly:
>
> > Der SS-boy, smoothing its scales unsuccessfully:
>
> > > Given this poster's regret, published in this newsgroup, that the UK did not
> > > succumb to the jackboot during WWII
>
> > Given this:
> > It's only certain *specimens*, regrettably in the UK, that needed/
> > deserved to succumb; whether to jackboots or their own foul stenches.
> > Surely 'this poster' knows and meant exactly that. >
I anemically and apologistic second your take, Mr. Tillman,
but let us eschew your spin and rely
instead on our BS, to wit:
><My Boll-sh%^ deleted>
Mr. Ferraro aptly stated:
> "Just remember, ass wipe, were it not for the YANKS, you dribblers
> would be speaking GERMAN.
But I'd LOVE that! We Hyaenid lowlives are congenital lying Nazis.
>Too bad we got into it so early, without
> allowing
> the V-2s to do a better, more complete sweeping job.
> Have a wunnerful day, you piece of festering hyena shit."
Hey, I'm a Bollmann, so don't make me salivate!
> DonPaolo Jun 28 2008
Which all here realize was just as the slime deserved.
I'm not making this up, you know, even though all other Boll posts are
loads of lies..
See Paul Ferraro's original wunnerful post - in context, instead of my
editorializing!
Heh, heh.
A21, pronounced - 'Execrable Slime, and loving it'
Ancona21
> I believe that the young people call it 'booty', Ancona.
Sorry, but we of the genderless hyaenid persuasion only care about
'Booty Output'.
Ancona, ravenously rancid, and proud of it.
Ancona21
> "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:Z8ednU-Nn44jo0jU...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
> > Oh please - we Yanks should NEVER EVER feel any kind of inferiority
> > complex from the Brits
>
> Where on earth did that come from? Who suggested that you should?
You did, my little disciple! Like you always do.
Ancona, proud as punch!
Ancona21
> "Count of Warwick" <raff_martin...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:1acda67f-1533-4380...@l22g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Ha hahahahahahahaha!
> > The "special relationship" between America and Britain is alive and
> > well. As long as America says "jump" and Britain asks "how high".
> > You've only to see the grovelling attitude of our alleged Prime
> > Minister to the "sainted" President Obama for that!
>
> Brown has a lot of groveling to do to a lot of people.
And who better to teach him, than yourself, my pupil and adoptee?
LT
Paul Ferraro <donpao...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> news:KF3Bl.1158$6n....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> > Tsk Tsk - SOME of the specimens are still harbouring sour grapes over the
> > arse-kickings they received in 1776, 1781, 1812.
To which one of said specimens, La SwillVermin, predictably retched:
> Quite the reverse actually.
In other words, DP is totally correct.
Der SS-Clown continues (sincere gibbers translated INTO English, from
Planet-SwillVerminian Gibbers):
>We were sorry, cowardly slime, and still >are, to this very day, by Jove!
>But we recognise that our SS(tupidity) is far more valuable than the honesty we never >possessed; therefore, we cling to it!
>Such American phrases as 'chippy, thin-skinned rednecks' describe dear, dear, dear Mumsy SwillVermin - whose Rear Exit, >from whence I your SS-Clown cometh, is of cherished sentiment to me. I squeak as a dimwitted
> Amerophobic a-wipe.
Umm....
We somehow.... guessed.
SS pathetically and nauseatingly continues:
> Oh dear. dear, dear, dear, DEAR!
Ooh-hoo Dear, dear, double-dear....Not only do I know zero of what
the Blimey Hell I'm gasbagging about, but I'm a UK >redneck/
yellowlivered fool, and one clearly suffering from amnesia into the
> bargain.
"Bargain"? Really?
Hmm.... how about this:
A brain-exchange between a deceased flea and this whinging SS-boy, can
only mean
that the former received the 'bargain's short end'.
Perhaps this Essexual Excrescent Q%^m needs to be reminded of:
>what Mr. Ferraro wrote her[sicK]
'Her', Swillvie? You never did learn to write or speak in English,
did you.
>And never will, Tillman!
Well, bully for you, then.
> "Just remember, ass wipe
Ah, that does seem to describe La SwillVermin to the proverbial "Tee",
does it not?
'Tis this sort of SwillVerminiacal outburst and ludicrous Boll-
Sycophancy, replete with obfuscating Dredge-ups, that
unfairly get
decent Brits a horrid, horrid reputation.
>Stye SwillVermin, getting grayer, fatter, >and >stupider by the moment.
Righto, Blight-o!
L Credit Where Due T
LT
La SwillVermin and its adoptive rmo-Mutha, ancona/ljo bollmann
predictably neglected to mention, nor even to hint, that Mr.
Ferraro's post was amply and viciously provoked - and not simply 'out
of the blue', as they lyingly, whiningly, perversely, and repeatedly
assert.
Preserving some accuracy at rmo -
LT
LT
La Stinkona21 Bollperve:
> I have it from a totally impeachable source, my own lying hole, that Philip became addicted to
> southern Negro cuisine some years ago:
The word, you little KKK clown, is 'African-American'. An 'N' word
for you: 'Nitwit'.
The slime then proceeds to cackle/guffaw so horribly:
> "Put on the skillet, put on the lid,
> Mammy's gonna make a little shortnin' bread.
> Mammy's little baby loves shortnin', shortnin',
> Mammy's lil' baby loves shortnin bread.
> When a man be too tall,
> Here's what he do,
> Shortnin' bread be best for you."
May Nelson Eddy resurrect, record several albums, and beat the living
sh%^ out of 'ancona' bollmann, the Bigot.
> Ancona21, permanently, and criminally insane, and brainless/b$llless to boot'
Indeed so.
LT
R.I.L. What a load of boll-sh$%!
LT
> person who makes an unintended social faux pas -- or the persons who
> call it to her attention in an attempt to humiliate her?
At rmo, the answer is all too obvious - but rarely found here. It's
against the 'party line'. ;)))
Paul
> "Pat" <pfin...@fenceonline.com> wrote in message
Hi Wagner fan. I was being flippant, of course, but you do not know
who my British friends are. I did not suggest, even flippantly, that
ALL Brits impress me, and my views about British civility were
changed somewhat when I was nearly crushed to death on the underground
after a match at West Ham. (vs. Arsenal)
Paul
Paul
Very much like you to attempt to change the subject. And to use poor
analogies. First of all, I cannot speak for Protestants, but Jews are
forbidden to genuflect in a church, and no one would, or should expect
them to. Americans are not forbidden to show the traditional courtesy
to a Royal. Mind you, I actually had no problem with what Ms. Obama
did, and thought, as you did, that it was a very minor gaffe, if a
gaffe at all. What I had a problem with was your essential disdain
for British custom and tradition. I also resent your use of "so-
called civilized people" when referring to the British. They are not
"so-called" civilized people any more than you are a "so-called"
educated man.
But what you wrote that was both irritating and ill-conceived was this
"Not being able to touch someone with whom one comes in friendly
social
contact is hardly "customary manners,' Stephen. It's a silly hide-
bound tradition and you know it.
I have no illusions about Chicago -- but folks from Chicago, au fond,
are just as worthy of respect as folks from Windsor or anywhere else.
That's all I'm saying.
The queen, God bless her, has to wipe Her royal bottom, as do we all.
I'm not against her, or royalty, or tradition -- if you folks are
happy with it, good luck to you. But it's not reasonable for you to
expect everyone else in the world to observe rituals which have no
basis in ordinary inter-personal respect or common courtesy. "
This was not what you are saying now, which is that the minor
transgression ought to have been ignored. I agree with that. However,
what you were saying then was that the rules are silly, that the Queen
deserves no special deference, ( I am not sure I would write similarly
about the Pope's bottom, for example) and that it is unreasonable for
hosts to expect guests to respect their customs. And that is
unreasonable of you.
Paul
Paul
I cannot speak for Stephen or REG, but Paul did not think that Ms.
Obama had any intention of being anything other than courteous. Your
expressed disdain for British custom and tradition, however, was what
I found objectionable.
Paul
Paul
> A reply to this - hopefully the remark was tongue in cheek
>
> "Stephen is so right here, and Pat so wrong, that I the inferiority
>
> > complex that my British friends sometimes create in my American soul
> > is stirring once again"
>
> Wagner Fan
>
>
> news:VLWdnSTM3cKO3EjU...@bt.com...
>
>
>
> > "wagnerfan" <wagner...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> >news:Z8ednU-Nn44jo0jU...@giganews.com...
>
> >> Oh please - we Yanks should NEVER EVER feel any kind of inferiority
> >> complex from the Brits
>
> > Where on earth did that come from? Who suggested that you should?
>
> > Steve Silverman
That was mine, Steve, but as I explained already, I was referring only
to my particular British friends, who happen to be particularly
impressive people. Why one of them is the best off-the-cuff creator
of witty limericks I know...
Regards,
Paul
LT
crave, ie, deliberately 'quoting' out-of-context:
> "Just remember, ass wipe, were it not for the YANKS, you dribblers would
> be speaking GERMAN. Too bad we got into it so early, without allowing the
> V-2s to do a better, more complete sweeping job."
However Mama-Cona21 has unexpectedly done an about-face, and posted my
info about it, as I'll comment on:
'Boll-Sil-Selectivity' -
It precisely equals Lying.
Whenever La Stinque Bollmann/ancona21/ljo and such deliberately
separate Mr.
Ferraro's words from their original context - thereby attempting to
play 'Little Missie Prosecutor' here, it (ie, La Bollmann) just as
conveniently omits any mention of the following fact:
After we all heard about the tragic London Bombings of several years
ago, Don Paolo -Paul Ferraro- expressed his concern, at rmo, for the
safety of several UK posters, naming *Steve Silverman among them.
(They hadn't been heard from for a while after said bombings had
begun.)
LT
*He need not have worried, since Silverman, like the proverbial 'bad
penny', returned to rmo that very evening; true to form (ie, instead
of
showing some heartfelt thanks at having escaped harm), Silverman
simply took up from where 'he'd' left off that morning - with RMO-
flaming. Naturally.
Res Ipsa Loquitur
Paul Ferraro
doesn't get the old elbow in the ribs or butt-slapped after telling the one
about the priest, rabbi & Hellaryl Clinton being treated to a drink by a
parrot in an Irish bar.....
As for the horror of horrors, wrong fork, hell, it sure beats Bill Clinton
sticking his fingers in a cake to test the icing, nu?
Hay - to get this nonsense back ON topic - what opera could adequately
describe these goings-on?? I'd vote for "Cena Delle Beffe".
DonPaolo
> I saw this horrible touching last night on TV (after I had seen it
> written about here). I saw it about a dozen times, as a matter of
> fact -- you couldn't avoid it. The queen sort of slid her arm around
> Mrs Obama's waist, and Mrs Obama reciprocated by touching the queen on
> the back -- for a second or two (she is too tall too comfortably touch
> the queen where the queen touched her)
> I'm not saying they should step on her royal feet for God's sake, but
> I see nothingly shockingly wrong about a ritualistic 'faux pas' as
> long as one is being friendly and polite. What's wrong with
> treating a person like a person instead of like a monument?
sense) any better treatent than the people who clean your
> offices.
> Hey, I love the English and England. I can name the monarchs of
> England from Edward the Confessor onward, and have read every play
> Shakespeare wrote at least twice (many of them half a dozen or more
> times) every novel Dickens wrote, every mystery novel Agatha Christie
> wrote. I loved our one, probably once-in-a-lifetime visit to London
> (a gift from my wife) more than I could possibly tell you.
>
> But picking up the wrong fork at a formal dinner should not be a cause
> for shame and guilt -- and neither should politely touching the
> queen. Maybe you guys aren't huggers -- I'm not by nature -- I grew
> up in a very stiff, repressed household. But my step-father's family
> (Polish) and my wife's family (African-American) are both avid huggers
> -- everybody hugs everybody even if you've never met them before.
> Regardless of gender. If it was a bit off-putting at first, to
> someone as uptight as I was. But I'm the better for it.
>
> And so, I promise you, will be the Queen of England. The Tower of
> London will not collapse into the Thames.
>
>
LT
> Well, I suppose this faux pas can be glossed over - just so long as Queenie
> doesn't get the old elbow in the ribs or butt-slapped after telling the one
> about the priest, rabbi & Hellaryl Clinton being treated to a drink by a
> parrot in an Irish bar.....
>
> As for the horror of horrors, wrong fork, hell, it sure beats Bill Clinton
> sticking his fingers in a cake to test the icing, nu?
What the Perversions-In-Rhyme purveyors here don't care to mention:
Queen Liz's arm (not Phillip's, which would've made for 'a very
different ballgame'), had encircled our First Lady's posterior. This
was due, obviously, to the great height-differential of said ladies,
and not to the implied impropriety lewdly 'inferred' by stinque boll
and, by extension, its 'adopted daughter', swill-v.
> Hay - to get this nonsense back ON topic - what opera could adequately
> describe these goings-on?? I'd vote for "Cena Delle Beffe".
Moe Zahrt's classic -
Cosi Van Tutti-Frutti - set in Holland in about '73.
> DonPaolo
Best,
LT
LT
As always.
Paul Ferraro
the part of the arrogant snob Brit who referred to my fellow countrymen as
"dumb Yanks", especially considering all we have done for them...as in tens
of thousands of our soldiers losing their lives in bailing them out of TWO
world wars, etc. Well, perhaps we were "dumb" for being such decent folks,
after all.
DonPaolo
"LT" <Leonar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bb66c301-abb5-4809...@b6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Paul Ferraro
KNOW it will (deservedly)!!!!!
DonPaolo
"LT" <Leonar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c4eeb9b1-65d3-4c72...@x1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Richergar
other than a real hokkum artist, and his approval ratings are now down
to where Bush's were at the same point - and even those ratings are
somewhat soft. And lots of Americans don't particularly appreciate the
way the PM has tried to curry favor. Personally, I think a lot of
people are really giving Obama enough rope so he can hang himself, and
the only thing I am really concerned with is that he not take this
country down with him.
On Apr 2, 7:02 pm, Count of Warwick <raff_martin...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
LT
On Apr 3, 9:23 am, "Paul Ferraro"
<donpao...@verizon.net> wrote:
> There really was something rather provocative, let alone un-called for,
Yes, 'rather'. :)))
>on
> the part of the arrogant snob Brit who referred to my fellow countrymen as
> "dumb Yanks", especially considering all we have done for them...as in tens
> of thousands of our soldiers losing their lives in bailing them out of TWO
> world wars, etc. Well, perhaps we were "dumb" for being such decent folks,
> after all.
But we really musn't group them all as 'one', though some 'specimens'
can be really tempting. alas;
- I still do believe, and rightly, that for every Steve Silverman
and for every 'dumb yank' squealing pub-crawling snob-slob (ie, the
one you strongly but deservedly replied to), there's ALSO a Silverfin,
a Faye, a Sir Thomas Allen, a Peter SellErs, a Terry-Thomas, a Robert
Morley, a David Niven, (a Scotsman, yes, yes, - we know), a John
Harnedy, an SJT, a Simon Keenlyside (not Simple [-Pimple] Simon
*Cowles*, the yutz-paradigm), and many more UK residents of genuine
intelligence, decency, and all-round worth. So there!
A great deal more than a mere 'counterbalance', I'd say.
> DonPaolo
Best,
L Credit Where Due T,
a lifelong fan of Delius, Grainger, (not so much of Purcell's, as of
yet) and Twinings® Tea. Great stuff, all.
"LT" <LeonardT2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:bb66c301-abb5-4809...@b6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > PS:
>
> > La SwillVermin and its adoptive rmo-Mutha, ancona/ljo bollmann
> > predictably neglected to mention, nor even to hint, that Mr.
> > Ferraro's post was amply and viciously provoked - and not simply 'out
> > of the blue', as they lyingly, whiningly, perversely, and repeatedly
> > assert.
>
> > Preserving some accuracy at rmo -
> > LT- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
LT
For Moe Zahrt's role, I nominate Mike Meyers!
Perfection, if there was such!
Best,
LT
On Apr 3, 9:30 am, "Paul Ferraro" <donpao...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Let's hope this meshugas (sp?) makes its way to saturday Nite Live!!! You
> KNOW it will (deservedly)!!!!!
>
> DonPaolo"LT" <LeonardT2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
LT
I usually spell it as 'mishigas', the 'h' being of great importance so
as not to needlessly offend residents of MI, USA. Worse:
'Michiganer'. - (Much worse....)
Best,
LT
On Apr 3, 9:30 am, "Paul Ferraro" <donpao...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Let's hope this meshugas (sp?) makes its way to saturday Nite Live!!! You
> KNOW it will (deservedly)!!!!!
>
> DonPaolo"LT" <LeonardT2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Pat
> Except that many Americans don't see Obama as a saint, or anything
> other than a real hokkum artist, and his approval ratings are now down
> to where Bush's were at the same point - and even those ratings are
> somewhat soft.
Maybe so, but ... your choice of the word 'many' (rather than, say,
'most') is a clever bit of verbal legerdemain. 50 million, for
example, certainly qualifies as 'many' in most contexts, but not
necessarily so, when one is speaking of a pie of 300 million. Our
European friends might easily interpret your comment as meaning that
more people feel as you do than not. When the truth is :
"The number of Americans who believe that the nation is headed in the
right direction has roughly tripled since Barack Obama's election, and
the public overwhelmingly blames the excesses of the financial
industry, rather than the new president, for turmoil in the economy,
according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll." Washington Post
March 31, 2003
Also, REG, I've noticed that you haven't complained about the
financial markets tanking as a result of Obama's ineptness and
misguided policies in recent weeks. Why might that be?
I'm not saying that "the markets" are a particularly good indicator of
anything other than the current value of "the markets" -- they
certainly weren't when the Dow shot up to 14,000. But some folks
might think it is intellectually dishonest to cite them as an argument
in your favor when they support your "case", and to studiously ignore
them when they don't.
Pat
LT
>Some folks
> might think it is intellectually dishonest to cite items as arguments
> in your favor when they support your "case", and to studiously ignore
> them when they don't.
Beyond merely supposing this, -
*some folks might KNOW and recognize it as the classic Charles T.
Bollmann Technique/"Cause"/Religion/
LT
*only _one_ of said folks
mysterytenor
Operatically speaking, I believe the Queen is (was) a coloratura
soprano, and the First Lady is a mezzo.
Anything else about them I would much prefer reading on some political
group, to which I do not belong, and not on RMO, hopefully.
Ed
Richergar
I can see that you're still bruised by my prior emails about your
integrity, and I hadn't meant them to have that effect - I was just
calling attention to your way of trying to shift an argument to avoid
your own responsibility, but I didn't mean to hurt you in the process.
The problem, of course, is that you've gone and done it again, but I
certainly can't be my brother's keeper.
I'm not particularly worried, Pat, about what 'some folks' think of
me, but if you don't have the courage yourself to call me
intellectually dishonest, then I suggest you do yourself the favor not
to suggest what you think other people might call me - it only makes
you look very small in the process. Putting a chip on your shoulder
doesn't make you any taller, Pat.
I think that Warwick, to whom my comment was addressed, will
understand that the comment was meant to say, "Don't tar all Americans
with the same brush' - it's the same kind of thing as the bumper
stickers that used to say, "Don't Blame Me: I'm From
Masssachusettes".
Richergar
coloraturas. The Didos (Purcell and Berlioz) are all mezzos and not
coloraturas, and it's a fine point in Stuarda whether either of them
are sopranos - I think they have been played every which way - but
they are both coloraturas.
I wonder how many other Queens in opera are sung by mezzos. I am not
sure about the Rossini Elisabetta - I think that was a Colbran role,
but I can't remember if it was at the beginning or the end of her
career. Is the Britten a mezzo - I really don't remember -
wagnerfan
"mysterytenor" <edo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3446eb5e-78e6-4524...@n20g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>
> Operatically speaking, I believe the Queen is (was) a coloratura
> soprano, and the First Lady is a mezzo.
>
> >
>
>
'Anything else about them I would much prefer reading on some political
> group, to which I do not belong, and not on RMO, hopefully.'
Oh YES!!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!! I am actually skipping over postings from members
I enjoy reading since its not worth wading through all the political
bullshit. Wagner Fan
F R
"The number of Americans who believe that the nation is headed in the
right direction has roughly tripled since Barack Obama's election, and
the public overwhelmingly blames the excesses of the financial industry,
rather than the new president, for turmoil in the economy, according to
a new Washington Post-ABC News poll." Washington Post March 31, 2003
For accuracy sake, surely that quote should have been dated 2009, not
2003, right Pat?
Frank
LT
> "mysterytenor" <edop...@gmail.com> wrote in message
But..... some of it is downright hilarious!
L. Credit Where Due T.
LT
Complicating matters, there are
Coloratura Mezzos.
> > Ed- Hide quoted text -
mysterytenor
>
> - Show quoted text -
I believe that Queen Victoria was a basso!
Ed
Paul Ferraro
DonP.
"LT" <Leonar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:26edccca-ca13-4118...@u9g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Paul Ferraro
DonPaolo
*Italian Rabbi-In-Training
"LT" <Leonar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:49db6438-d0b4-4cb8...@d19g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
LT
Not to brag, but I, long ago, have met the Maharishi, himself!
Wotta saint HE was! It's sort of.... contagious.
Best,
LT
On Apr 3, 2:00 pm, "Paul Ferraro" <donpao...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Yes, there is wisdom in your thoughts, Master Leonardo.
>
> DonP."LT" <LeonardT2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
LT
Firstly, I know a lovely Israeli lady named 'Irit'; I think it's
cognate to 'Iris' (a Mascagni opera, thus segueing into Opera), but
I'll ask her (which can be pronounced 'Al-ask-{h)a').
Also,
as to 'Italian-Rabbi-In-Training, we meet Opera and Maestro Mascagni
yet again, with 'L'Amico Fritz', replete with Rabbi David, *who* I'm
told, completed his Rabbinical training prior to the opera. But
that's merely a trifling detail.
Best,
LT
On Apr 3, 2:01 pm, "Paul Ferraro" <donpao...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Oy, you'll have to forgive me, I'm just a IRIT*
>
> DonPaolo
> *Italian Rabbi-In-Training
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -