What I’m Missing: Obama at the UN, Moammar Gadhafi Ripping Up Things, Talking Forever

While on my trip I don’t have as much time to blog 🙁

I know. It blows. Mostly because I’m trying to keep an eye on the news while doing my job covering events here at the CBC conference here in Washington, D.C. So I missed Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi in his finest of Gadhfi-esque couture ripping up part of the UN charter and speaking for more than an hour and 36 minutes. I also missed President Obama’s address to the UN (which I’ve read was well-received and even Gadhafi clapped at the end, but maybe only because he was getting to speak next.) Did anyone get the full UN experience? If so, what was the best part? Worst part? Do you like the UN or do you think the whole exercise is an act in futility? Feel free to engage below.

21 thoughts on “What I’m Missing: Obama at the UN, Moammar Gadhafi Ripping Up Things, Talking Forever

  1. The UN, both futile and naive. Obama made a show of talking about nukes at the UN and the Security Council voted unanimously for a nonbinding resolution that Obama will undoubtedly pronounce as a triumph of his foreign policy but means nothing. If Obama thinks that this means that the other countries on the Council will voter for tougher sanction on Iran he is kidding.What else did you miss:The Mass. legislature in a pathetic show of partisanship even for them, changed their laws to allow the Gov. to appoint a Kennedy sycophant to his seat. This should please Obama as he needs every vote.Obama seems to be back stepping from supporting his hand picked general in Afghanistan now that Gen. Stanley McChrystal is expected to ask for more troops.Pelosi seems to trying to liberal up the heath care billhttp://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/23/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5331747.shtml

  2. I can’t believe no one at this UN meeting is talking about Darfur.On another topic; How is it that Joy Behar of The View got a show on CNN Headline News? I actually like Joy but were there no Black people available?Also the kids that were turned away at that pool in PHL won a court settlement of $50,000. I hope the use that as a down payment on their own pool.

  3. I love the UN building. I went there on my class trip in ’72. I still have the pictures. I wore my favorite shirt (Mighty Mouse). The UN still looks the same.

  4. Man, just give your boring behind speech just like everyone else and stop with all of the anti-semetic lecturing crap. For 3 billion a year in U.S. tax dollars, you better find something better to talk about, like the cure for AIDS or something. "…Have an uncanny way of making the victim the victimizer" – Don King. This is what "I" heard so far.

  5. I was only able to see and hear the speeches of President Obama and "King of King" Moammar El-Gadhafi. As usual I found the president’s speech quite good. But everyone complained about Gadhafi. He went on for 96 minutes and I listened to every word. He had to make up for the 40 year absence and his experience this time to the UN. He said many things that happened over the course of time since UN has been together. There were a few things which I strongly agreed. He talked so long they had to change interpreters. I saw the headlines in one Newpaper STILL CRAZY AFTER ALL THESE YEARS. May I say, his speech was better than any I have heard by Sarah Palin. LOL

  6. Whether you are disappointed by the UN depends on what you expect out of it. It is inefficient, irrational, self-serving, vain, and corrupt because most of the world is, at times including us. To expect the UN to be better than its component states is unreasonable. When the bulk of the world cleans up its act, the UN will be a wonderful institution, but not before then.

  7. "May I say, his speech was better than any I have heard by Sarah Palin. LOL"-Khrish Co-signed!"When the bulk of the world cleans up its act, the UN will be a wonderful institution, but not before then."-Aabaakawad Valid point!

  8. Here’s something else you missed – The Obama Administration wants to make unlimited taxpayer bailouts for banks permanent, so they don’t have to ask congress for the money anymore:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~http://thehill.com/special-reports/finance-sept-2009/60067-geithner-rejects-1-trillion-limit-on-bailout-powerGeithner rejects $1 trillion limit on bailout powerBy Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) – 09/23/09 06:10 PM ETIn my questioning of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner before the Financial Services Committee on Wednesday, I focused on the new bailout authority included in the 618-page legislative proposal submitted by the Treasury Department.In my opinion, Geithner’s proposal is “TARP on steroids.” Section 1204 of the proposal allows the executive branch to use taxpayer money to make loans to, or invest in, the largest financial institutions to avoid a systemic risk to the economy.Geithner’s proposal reminds me of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), the $700 billion Wall Street bailout adopted last year, but the TARP was limited to two years, and to a maximum of $700 billion. Section 1204 is unlimited in dollar amount and is a permanent grant of power to the executive branch. TARP contained some limits on executive compensation and an array of special oversight authorities. Section 1204 contains absolutely no limits on executive compensation and no special oversight.When I asked Geithner whether he would accept a $1 trillion limit on the new bailout authority (if the executive branch wanted to spend more, it would have to come back to Congress), he rejected a $1 trillion limit, insisting that the executive branch be able to respond without coming back to Congress.Both TARP and the Treasury proposal have vague provisions under which taxpayers might possibly recover any money lost through a special tax on the financial services industry. Under the Treasury proposal, only the very largest institutions could benefit from a bailout, but the special tax, if ever collected, would fall chiefly on medium-sized institutions.Thus, the medium-sized institutions will be at a competitive disadvantage for two reasons. First, the largest institutions will be able to borrow money more cheaply because their creditors will believe that if the institution is unable to pay, the taxpayers will. Second, if there ever is a bailout benefitting a very large financial institution, the tax will be imposed on the medium-sized institutions. Sherman, a C.P.A., is a senior member of the House Financial Services Committee.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I glad that Congressman Brad Sherman is my House Representative. I don’t know what’s wrong with President Obama. This doesn’t make any sense, nor does it track with what I believe are President Obama’s morals and values. My beliefs about him must be wrong, I have to go by his behavior and stop listening to his great speeches I guess (Obama is just powerless against the banks?) I called the White House a couple of days ago and said that I want to support the President but his policies regarding the banking sector is making it impossible to do so. Fraud has become the job where banking is concerned and they’re not doing anything to fix it.

  9. Maggie Knowles, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Sr. and whoever else is elected or placed in the White House is powerless against the Banks. A certain group of people got this country in "economic locks"; a term created by the Honorable Elijah Muhammad and preached by Malcom X. Let’s just say they own all of the banks and we’ll be stuck in the middel east for the next 99 years as part of the payoff. "Iran better come clean" – America better wake up!

  10. Ace – I think we could be headed for disaster. I thought this guy said it well:"We are stuck in a perpetual scam – everything too big to fail and not enough money on the planet to prop up all the zombie companies with their opaque bookkeeping being the alternative fuel they survive on as opposed to real profits or sustainable growth."http://dailybail.com/home/the-financial-frontier-of-ignorance-kiss-your-ass-et-class-g.htmlThe Financial Frontier Of Ignorance: Kiss Your ASS-et Class GoodbyeGreg Simmons of Reality Arbiter, and Scope Labs

  11. I almost forgot about the arrest of the alleged child molester Roman Polanski. It made my day to hear the the law finally caught up to him.

  12. "May I say, his speech was better than any I have heard by Sarah Palin. LOL"Truth! That woman ranks ONE slot above GWB on the level of atrocity with which he treated the english language with! LOL!!’Is our children learning?’But I have to give Mr. Maher his props when he commented concerning conservatives and pitching tents, "If you’re looking for a big empty tent, try the GOP"LMAO!!!!

  13. I’m sure if you gave Palin access to Obama’s speech writers and his teleprompter she could give a better speech.

  14. @ ScottActually, you are too kind. Polanski is not an alleged molester, because he pleaded guilty.Currently Palin is somewhat on her own, but she didn’t do that great when she did have access to speech writers, teleprompters, and handlers. Perhaps it is a myth, but I believe Obama is Obama’s chief speechwriter.————————————-@ ALLJust to be helpful, I’ve hotlinked the four links mentioned so far in this comment thread, in order. This does not imply support or opposition on my part.from Scott:http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/23/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5331747.shtmlfrom Maggie Knowles:http://thehill.com/special-reports/finance-sept-2009/60067-geithner-rejects-1-trillion-limit-on-bailout-powerfrom Maggie Knowles:http://dailybail.com/home/the-financial-frontier-of-ignorance-kiss-your-ass-et-class-g.htmlfrom Scott:http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/27/liberals-seek-health-care-access-illegals/

  15. Bill Clinton is still out there touting the existence of the "vast right wing conspiracy" but this time for Obama.http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/27/clinton.conspiracy/index.html?iref=mpstoryviewWhat I find so interesting about the continued use of this worn out phrase is that Hillary first used it in her defense of Bill with respect to the accusations of his affair with Lewinsky. Charges that were in fact true despite her use of the phase to caste their legitimacy into doubt. I would have thought that the fact that the charges were true would have ended the use of the phrase but I guess not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top
%d bloggers like this: