NationStates Jolt Archive

So, there've been articles today about how Bush messed up the protocol when meeting with the Queen. Naturally, these articles have taken the opportunity to make fun of Bush for being a moron.

While I agree with that sentiment, I have to say that requiring all those pointless formalities is pretty stupid itself. Even if they were for someone who had actually achieved something more than just being born into a certain family.

So, there've been articles today about how Bush messed up the protocol when meeting with the Queen. Naturally, these articles have taken the opportunity to make fun of Bush for being a moron.

While I agree with that sentiment, I have to say that requiring all those pointless formalities is pretty stupid itself. Even if they were for someone who had actually achieved something more than just being born into a certain family.

If you think Queen Elizabeth has not achieved anything other than being born into a certain family, your knowledge of history is severely lacking.

So, what did Bush do exactly?

So, what did Bush do exactly?

"You've dined with 10 U.S. presidents," Bush began, safely enough. "You helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 -- in 1976."


http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=285e2cfe-b00d-4160-a67c-50fb04c38ada

If you think Queen Elizabeth has not achieved anything other than being born into a certain family, your knowledge of history is severely lacking.

So, what in your opinion, makes her worthy of such honours?

and then he joked about his folly. Also, he mentioned something about the monarch being around 300 years or so.

"You've dined with 10 U.S. presidents," Bush began, safely enough. "You helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 -- in 1976."


http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=285e2cfe-b00d-4160-a67c-50fb04c38ada

and how is this news? Honestly, Bush has done this more than once...

"You've dined with 10 U.S. presidents," Bush began, safely enough. "You helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 -- in 1976."


http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=285e2cfe-b00d-4160-a67c-50fb04c38ada

He needs to study his history.

don't he gets media-training and stuff like that? why did he get reelected when everytime he comes in public he looks retarded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0e9_BFUV-g)?

"You've dined with 10 U.S. presidents," Bush began, safely enough. "You helped our nation celebrate its bicentennial in 17 -- in 1976."


http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=285e2cfe-b00d-4160-a67c-50fb04c38ada

Is that it? Thats not that bad at all.

don't he gets media-training and stuff like that? why did he get reelected when everytime he comes in public he looks retarded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0e9_BFUV-g)?

LOL, that's funny.

So, what in your opinion, makes her worthy of such honours?

For starters, she is perhaps the world's longest serving diplomant

Second, she helped broker the Canadian constitution

Third she helped negotiate peace with northern ireland

Fourth, she has been a political advisor for the british government for about 50 years.

She has probably been the most useful monarch this world has had in about 100 years, at least the equal of any ambassador, representative, or advisor.

don't he gets media-training and stuff like that? why did he get reelected when everytime he comes in public he looks retarded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0e9_BFUV-g)?
That's nothing. Have you ever seen a picture of Bush where he didn't look like he belonged in a dunce hat?

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/4966/deedeedee6tz.jpg

For starters, she is perhaps the world's longest serving diplomant

Second, she helped broker the Canadian constitution

Third she helped negotiate peace with northern ireland

Fourth, she has been a political advisor for the british government for about 50 years.

She has probably been the most useful monarch this world has had in about 100 years, at least the equal of any ambassador, representative, or advisor.
You do realize more than half of your reasons just involve her being old, right?

You do realize more than half of your reasons just involve her being old, right?

Um, no.

It's not THAT she's old. It's that she's DONE things during her age.

It's not just that she's been queen for 50 years. It's that she's actually DONE things in those 50 years. That's the point, she's an active ambassador, an advisor to every PM since churchill, helped bring about peace with ireland, helped progress the canadian government.

The woman has done a lot, more so than most, if not all other, political ambassadors.

She seems pretty hip, to me. I'm betting she shaves ;)

You do realize more than half of your reasons just involve her being old, right?

Leave 'ol Lizzie alone.

Um, no.

It's not THAT she's old. It's that she's DONE things during her age.
For starters, she is perhaps the world's longest serving diplomant
...
Fourth, she has been a political advisor for the british government for about 50 years.

That's half of your reasons right there. Has nothing to do with what she has done, just that she is old.

That's half of your reasons right there. Has nothing to do with what she has done, just that she is old.

let me highlight the key phrases.

diplomat

advisor

those are, in case you haven't realized, active rolls, which she has undertaken, for a VERY long time.

let me highlight the key phrases.

diplomat

advisor
Which mean what by themselves or with relation to the length some one held the position? Nothing.
John Bolton is a diplomat.
Condoleeza Rice is an advisor.

Which mean what by themselves or with relation to the length some one held the position? Nothing.
John Bolton is a diplomat.
Condoleeza Rice is an advisor.

consistency is the key here. The fact she has been able to do this for so long, without screwing up, shows us that she is a good diplomat. The fact that she is old is what supports the fact that she is a good diplomat/advisor. It's not just merely that shes old in itself.

Which mean what by themselves or with relation to the length some one held the position? Nothing.

Who has done more? Someone out of college in the first year of their job, or someone who has worked 30 years? Obviously someone who works more in the job is going ot accomplish more in that time.

John Bolton is a diplomat.

Was.

Condoleeza Rice is an advisor.

Right. And would you say they have done nothing with their lives? Would you say they have accomplished nothing of value?

Because that's exactly what you just said about a woman who has done BOTH of their jobs, and for decades longer than they have. If Bolton and Rice can be said to be accomplished because they did their jobs for 5 or 6 years, how can you in any way say a woman who has done BOTH of their jobs for FIFTY years is not equally, if not far moreso, accomplished?

consistency is the key here. The fact she has been able to do this for so long, without screwing up, shows us that she is a good diplomat.
Or that she has a lifelong position :rolleyes:

Or that she has a lifelong position :rolleyes:

keyword here: without screwing up

Or that she has a lifelong position :rolleyes:

or you could just admit that you know nothing about the woman you chose to criticize and back out now while you still have some face to save.

Or that she has a lifelong position :rolleyes:

a queen is not AUTOMATICALLY an advisor. A queen is not AUTOMATICALLY a diplomat.

In this day and age, a prime minister doesn't consult a monarch because he has to. He does so because he chooses to.

He chooses to because the woman he consults has shown herself to be a skilled negotiator and shrewd advisor, constantly, and consistantly, for FIFTY YEARS

Is that it? Thats not that bad at all.

Yeah-worth a chuckle-almost-if you saw it.

Not worth relaying to anyone who didnt.

Wait, how does slipping up and almost saying "1776" instead of "1976" make him some kind of idiot?

Really now, American schoolchildren have "1776" drilled into their heads from first grade; making a little mistake like that isn't really anything to get up in arms about.

At his meeting with Queen Elizabeth last night, George W. Bush turned to the Queen and said: "As I'm the president, I'm thinking of changing the way in which my great country is referred to, and I'm thinking that it should be a Kingdom.”

The Queen replied "I'm sorry Mr Bush, but kingdoms have kings as Head of State - and you are not a King."

George Bush thought a while and then said: "How about a principality then?"

To which the Queen replied "No, principalities have princes- and you are not a prince, Mr Bush.”

George thought long and hard and came up with "How about an empire then?"

The Queen, getting a little annoyed by now, replied, “I am terribly sorry again, Mr Bush, but the Head of State of an empire is an emperor - and you are not an emperor."

Before George W could utter another word, the Queen smiled sweetly and said, "However, one *does* think you're doing rather nicely as a country."

keyword here: without screwing up
And what would she have to do to qualify as having "screwed up"? The past handful of decades haven't exactly been Britain's crowning glory (the loss of most of its territory, a steady descent into international irrelevance), and you can't say that simply surviving that long is an accomplishment because the Queen is Head of State for Britain regardless of what the people want.

Yeah-worth a chuckle-almost-if you saw it.

Not worth relaying to anyone who didnt.

Pretty much.

I think though it was his ad libbed comment afterwards that raised eyebrows....along the lines of 'Queen looked at me like a mother would a wayward child'...

I don't like Bush at all, but honestly, that was pretty cute.

keyword here: without screwing up

didn't her empire kind of collapse?

In this day and age, a prime minister doesn't consult a monarch because he has to. He does so because he chooses to.
Yes, the PM also chooses to consult Bush.

Pretty much.

I think though it was his ad libbed comment afterwards that raised eyebrows....along the lines of 'Queen looked at me like a mother would a wayward child'...

I guess thats far more polite than what most people that see her grimace think.
More along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Grinch.jpg

I don't like Bush at all, but honestly, that was pretty cute.

That was actually one of his better gaffes.

or you could just admit that you know nothing about the woman you chose to criticize and back out now while you still have some face to save.
Oh sorry sir, I apologize for pointing out the stupidity of saying how awesome of a diplomat and adviser she is just because she has lived so long in a position no one can remove her from.

For starters, she is perhaps the world's longest serving diplomant
And? She could die tomorrow and someone else will be the longest serving 'diplomat'. It might be the King of Nepal. Does that make him any good too?

Second, she helped broker the Canadian constitution
Can't have done a particularly good job if Quebec still won't sign up to it.

Third she helped negotiate peace with northern ireland
I have to say, following the recent developments in Northern Ireland, I haven't heard the Queen mentioned once. She might have been involved in a capacity as head of state, but it would have been ceremonial only, based on the office, not the person.

Fourth, she has been a political advisor for the british government for about 50 years.
I have a few problems with this:

1. She isn't. The government advises her, which is the complete basis of our constitutional conventions. If she is an adviser, though, she isn't doing a very good job.

2. I don't want her to be either. She isn't accountable at all to the electorate, and that's not her constitutional job or role. I dislike my government intensely, but not enough to replace elected government with the potential for aristocratic dictatorship.

She has probably been the most useful monarch this world has had in about 100 years, at least the equal of any ambassador, representative, or advisor.
Really? Depends on who you ask. The Bhutanese would probably say their King abticating so his country can have a fresh start for Democracy after absolute monarchism would count theirs as the most useful.


Don't get me wrong. I'm sympathetic to the idea of a republic, but would prefer a modernised, bicycle monarchy first. Strangely, I don't think Charles will give us that, though.

Wonder how long the British will keep the monarchy around...

Perhaps when Harry becomes king he will abolish the monarchy and we won't have to hear about all the stupid things the princes and such do ALL the time.

Perhaps when Harry becomes king he will abolish the monarchy and we won't have to hear about all the stupid things the princes and such do ALL the time.

Who killed William?

Hmmm, seems i was off with that :P

Charles is next after the queen dies though, then william, then harry :P

I guess thats far more polite than what most people that see her grimace think.
More along the lines of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Grinch.jpg

Everyone gets old.

Who killed William?

Jack the Ripper. The Count of St Germain and Jack the Ripper are the same person.

Oh my envious whiner creeps are just coming out of the woodwork in this thread.

I wonder why Bush hasn't had more state dinners, I know if I were president I would have as many as possible.

Maybe he isn't able to comport himself like a gentleman long enough?

I still don't have a very high opinion of royalty...Monarchy, even symbolic monarchy, just rubs me the wrong way for some reason...

Pretty much.

I think though it was his ad libbed comment afterwards that raised eyebrows....along the lines of 'Queen looked at me like a mother would a wayward child'...

Your the first on here to recognize what the situation really was. Everyone else just jumped in with the typical "Bush is stupid" bit.

Your the first on here to recognize what the situation really was. Everyone else just jumped in with the typical "Bush is stupid" bit.

Yeah...call me balanced and fair ;)

....Even if they were for someone who had actually achieved something more than just being born into a certain family.

Is "they" the Queen or GWB?

Is "they" the Queen or GWB?

Considering the history of the Bush family and politics, you have a fair point. Prescott Bush should have been neutered.

Bush and the Queen?

She seems pretty hip, to me. I'm betting she shaves ;)

:D Nice.

There have been plenty of "black tie" state dinners, this was "white tie" which is WAY different.

Black tie is a dress code for formal evening events that are not formal enough to require white tie. Its primary component is the dinner jacket (or "D.J.") as it is known in the United Kingdom, the north-eastern United States, and Canada. The jacket and matching trousers are typically called a tuxedo in the United States and Canada.

Black tie is today worn at a wide variety of functions, and the corresponding female attire can range from a short cocktail dress to a long gown, depending on fashion, local custom and the hour at which the function takes place.

It will be the Bushes' fifth state dinner in six years, but the white-tie designation will make it the fanciest. State dinners typically are black-tie events. White tie is the most formal of evening attire, requiring men to wear a long black dinner jacket with tails. Women typically wear a long evening gown.

President Bush is a very plain spoken man, and in private etc he is eloquent and capable,..in public at times. he's a klutz :)

Hmmm, seems i was off with that :P

Charles is next after the queen dies though, then william, then harry :P

And that's if William doesn't have any children. If he does they are infront of Harry.

Second, she helped broker the Canadian constitution

Third she helped negotiate peace with northern ireland



peace in NI. That aside, do you have any references or sources for these claims.

She has probably been the most useful monarch this world has had in about 100 years, at least the equal of any ambassador, representative, or advisor.I'd rather go for Bhumibol.

don't he gets media-training and stuff like that? why did he get reelected when everytime he comes in public he looks retarded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0e9_BFUV-g)?
Is that the African drum dance thing?

Before George W could utter another word, the Queen smiled sweetly and said, "However, one *does* think you're doing rather nicely as a country."

lol!

It had to read that a couple of times before I got it. :p

You've gotta feel sorry for the poor guy, he just isnt very good at public speaking. He always looks so terrified when he actually has to speak, poor love.

And if that was his only mistake (and consiquent flub with him attempts to rescue it) he actually did pretty well for someone who obviosuly wasnt brought up in or suited to that type of lifestyle.

You've gotta feel sorry for the poor guy, .

Nope.


And if that was his only mistake (and consiquent flub with him attempts to rescue it) he actually did pretty well for someone who obviosuly wasnt brought up in or suited to that type of lifestyle.

If he can't cut it, he can always grow the fur back and get back up the tree with his friends.

President Bush is a very plain spoken man, and in private etc he is eloquent and capable,..in public at times. he's a klutz :)
You realize "eloquent" and "plain-spoken" are mortal opposites.

For starters, she is perhaps the world's longest serving diplomant

Heads of State are not diplomats. Diplomats are civil servants. She might have a fine grasp of diplomacy but she is not a diplomat.

Second, she helped broker the Canadian constitution

In the capacity as Head of State. I suspect the grunt work was done by civil servants and elected politicians.

Third she helped negotiate peace with northern ireland

errr....ok....I really need to have a source for this as I am not aware of any involvement beyond her being Head of State.

Fourth, she has been a political advisor for the british government for about 50 years.

Hmmmm....yes and no. Its more to do with the relationship between the PM and Queen. She might comment on legislation but have little or no power to change government policy.

She has probably been the most useful monarch this world has had in about 100 years, at least the equal of any ambassador, representative, or advisor.

Well that Nepalese king might be better....really depends if you are a republican or not.

One thing I do admire her for was the service she gave during WWII. She did not need to but she volunteered.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6637429.stm
I have seen George Bush fumble for grammar, cringe in front of the cameras and shrug off insults from world leaders.

I have seen him joust gamely with opponents and stare down enemies with a cold eye.

But I have never, ever seen the commander-in-chief of the mightiest nation on earth look utterly terrified.

I think this one was the cutest description of the whole thing, and maybe the most correct.