Bush "gropes" German Chancellor Merkel


12 comments posted
Bush is simply a disaster, the media compliant

It is simply atrocious that the head of state would act like such a jackass in front of the world. The only thing that acts as a salve against his utter stupidity is an apologetic media that doesn't even comment on his transgressions. When he curses on an open mike, the enabling media reports that "it'll play well to the heartland," when the Moron talks about eating pig when asked about conflagrations in the Middle East, the media doesn't talk about it, when the Moron gropes a woman (a head of state, no less) the compliant media ignores it.

When the US goes down the toilet, the compliant media talks about Brad Pitt and Angela Jolie's little baby. The nation in five years has truly gone down the shitter, and the Moron's petal to the metal idiocy has driven us there.

Stop by weazlsrevenge.blogspot.com if I have made even a shard of sense.

Weazl's picture
Posted by Weazl (not verified) on 19 July 2006 - 9:28am
Fraulein Merkel

President Bush made a mistake--he thought he was dealing with a woman--but Fraulein Merkel could have handled the situation more gracefully. After all, Pres. Bush's show of affection toward Fraulein Merkel was probably the first she's received in many years.

alan alda's picture
Posted by alan alda (not verified) on 19 July 2006 - 10:01am
Such curious sexism

The misogyny in your comment is notable. What is it about "a woman" in your eyes that means she must accept such invasions of her space and person?

What is it about "Chancellor" that you don't get, such that you believe that she should be treated as an object of affection rather than a head of state?

What is it about your childhood that leads you to believe that any and all rejection by a woman of male advances points to some problem on the woman's part?

I pity you, poor man.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 19 July 2006 - 10:45am
There is a time and place

The mature--and appropriate--way for Chancellor Merkel to express her disapproval over "the massage" should have been in private directly to the "offending party"--not create a distracting, humilating, public spectacle. Her agenda is--or should be--to represent her country--not women's rights groups.

alan alda's picture
Posted by alan alda (not verified) on 20 July 2006 - 2:22pm
Why in private

Why 'in private'? Bush's gesture was public, and she had a public response. Deal.

- Sour Duck

Sour Duck's picture
Posted by Sour Duck on 20 July 2006 - 4:26pm
If there was an "agenda"

...it was Bush's. All she did was react.

Of course, how typical of you to blame the victim. While the incident is probably already forgotten by the persons involved, it's interesting the stridency of apologia coming from defenders of male privilege and/or all things Bush.

(Hint: Crying "victim" to women who would dare to claim personhood is not very sexy.)

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 20 July 2006 - 5:33pm
Would he do it to the Queen of England??

Some of these apologists should replace "Bush" with "Clinton" and see if they change their tune!

Typical double standard-wielding conservatives.

chana's picture
Posted by chana (not verified) on 19 July 2006 - 5:11pm
Contrary to what you may have been told...

...President Bush is not a necrophiliac, so no--he would not massage Queen Elizabeth's shoulders.

As for Clinton...there are women all over the country with tales to tell about liberties he took with them. The thing you gals need to understand, is that politicians--particularly those at the top of the pyramid--have egos that are in the stratosphere, and women are just part of the spoils. This has been true since the beginning of time. Many many women are drawn to them, but a few aren't.

alan alda's picture
Posted by alan alda (not verified) on 20 July 2006 - 2:41pm
Wake up, "alan"

The Queen of England lives.

And it's not about the women drawn to men of power, but the men of power who take it upon themselves to claim women as somehow their own, even if they're not part of the fan club.

Ann Coulter is not a role model.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 20 July 2006 - 5:22pm

Guys. This was not a grope. Groping implies feeling up another person's private parts or breasts. You don't 'feel up' a person's shoulders.

Get over it. Would that you were so offended by Clinton's actual groping of women he encountered.

Was it inappropriate for Bush to do that? Yes. A felony? No.

Dee's picture
Posted by Dee (not verified) on 22 July 2006 - 12:40pm
What on earth are you talking about

Again with the Clinton fixations! When will you folks come to accept that Clinton is not President any more?

I'm not aware of Clinton groping anybody. As far as I know, his affair with Monica was between mutually consenting adults. I have heard a lot, though, about Arnold groping women.

I'd say you, Dee, are the one who needs to "get over it." There seems to be an awful lot of anxiety expressed about criticizing the president of the United States for any reason. Here's a news flash: He's the president. Presidents get criticized.

I will also point out that I put "gropes" in quotation marks. And I never made any assertion of this being a felony.

But go ahead. Play the victim. We're used to it by now.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 22 July 2006 - 8:23pm
But we shouldn't be used to it

I'm 58. I came of age in an era in which women who were inappropriately touched by men usually didn't say a word, because if they did they were ignored, not believed, or told to tolerate it. I was groped for five years by a neighbor and my own mother called me a liar! I won't tell you how negatively I was impacted by the whole business, for many years.

What Bush did was inappropriate and demeaning. It would have been so if the woman had been a family friend sitting down to a formal dinner. It was immensely more so in that Bush was doing this to a woman with whom he is not personally familiar, who is from a more formal culture, and Lord of All, is the Chancellor of Germany! She is equal in stature to him politcally speaking. He was degrading a fellow head of state to inflate his own importance; e.g., "I can do this to you because I'm more powerful", which is a continuation of the bullying he has done for the past five years and a typical rationalization of a molester.

Her responses--both in throwing up her arms and then in trying to smooth things over with a smile--were completely natural and understandable. He is a boor.

My secret ambition is to get a pass to stand in line to shake Bush's hand, and then to turn my back to him when he extends his hand. Yep. But then, maybe that is a dangerous thing to do....

spinymountain's picture
Posted by spinymountain (not verified) on 23 July 2006 - 6:09pm