Obama tethers an American iPad to his Canadian BlackBerry

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 67
    sacto joesacto joe Posts: 895member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by shadow415 View Post


    As opposed to the left that can seem to rationalize EVERYTHING that BO does, even if it is the EXACT same thing that they derided GWB for.



    As was already pointed out, it's not the exact same thing. I know it's tough, but do try to keep up....
  • Reply 42 of 67
    noirdesirnoirdesir Posts: 1,027member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post


    Even I know that it should be President of the United States, not president of the United States.

    And the proper honorific is not "Obama" but President Obama. Jeez, I hated President Bush's insides, but I still called him President. It's called respect for the office.



    In Europe, most media (and politicians speaking publicly) use both the name without and with the job title of their heads of governments, state or cabinet ministers. If you want to be formal you use the job title or you might use the academic title, ie, Dr. Merkel to refer to the German chancellor. Otherwise you often just alternate between the Chancellor, Chancellor Merkel, Mrs. Merkel or just Merkel, just to be not repetitive.



    Only the royals are basically never addressed by their name only (not least because they have no real last name and using the first name publicly for anybody is very, very rare).
  • Reply 43 of 67
    I think he's not too bad but Sarah's much better!



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzyT9-9lUyE
  • Reply 44 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sacto Joe View Post


    Even I know that it should be President of the United States, not president of the United States.

    And the proper honorific is not "Obama" but President Obama. Jeez, I hated President Bush's insides, but I still called him President. It's called respect for the office.



    "Acting-President Obama"... or maybe "Acting-President Soetoro"
  • Reply 45 of 67
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,500member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by island hermit View Post


    They can't say it but it's the newest version of the football...



    Shhhhhh! Now they have to kill you!
  • Reply 46 of 67
    mactacmactac Posts: 315member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    The president of the United States continues to use a RIM BlackBerry,



    Right after he took office we heard about how he and Michelle enjoy fisting. You mean he enjoys rimming too?
  • Reply 47 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mactac View Post


    right after he took office we heard about how he and michelle enjoy fisting. You mean he enjoys rimming too?



    lol!!
  • Reply 48 of 67
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,500member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post


    In Europe, most media (and politicians speaking publicly) use both the name without and with the job title of their heads of governments, state or cabinet ministers. If you want to be formal you use the job title or you might use the academic title, ie, Dr. Merkel to refer to the German chancellor. Otherwise you often just alternate between the Chancellor, Chancellor Merkel, Mrs. Merkel or just Merkel, just to be not repetitive.



    Only the royals are basically never addressed by their name only (not least because they have no real last name and using the first name publicly for anybody is very, very rare).





    That's just what I was telling Charlie and Camilla in the pub in Windsor a few weeks ago.
  • Reply 49 of 67
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,500member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    To be fair to Obama, he probably wouldn't be allowed to use a regular 3G iPad. His blackberry is a special version that is more secure.



    I am sure you are correct.
  • Reply 50 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archos View Post


    Hypocrisy is when right wingers insist that the US is weak for not storming Libya while also insisting that Obama is out of line for acting to stop a mass murder.



    But the difference between Bush's Iraq invasion is that it was knowingly based on bad information, aimed primarily at gaining access to the nation's oil, left a destabilized bunch of warlords and terrorists in control, and cost America $4 trillion usd, with no support from the rest of the world.



    In Libya, Obama had the UN run the show, acted only to stop mass murder by the Libyan military without illegally invading and assassinating a leader who the right wing of America had long plied with weapons and favors and overlooked as a mass murderer of his people, didn't attempt to seize the nations oil, didn't leave the country in chaotic shambles as priceless historical treasures were destroyed and hundreds of thousands of innocent people ( and thousands of ameican forces) were needlessly killed in a massive clusterfuck of bad planning and incompetence that made the world much more dangerous and inflamed Arab hate for the US as it created the largest US deficit ever.



    So no, not really the same thing.



    Well, you forgot one thing. UN is just a toy here to make it look legal and the goal is the same: OIL. So called "Libyan opposition" that is assisted by USA & NATO in "dethroning the Gaddafi" are nobody else but former members of Gaddafi government backed up by all radicals seeking to take the power to satisfy their own desires... the same people who actively assisted him in the past to kill those innocent citizens.... so at the end it will just replace one mass killer with another one along with allowing radicals to take part in new government. And unfortunately in this case WEST and AL-Quaeda are surprisingly on the same side. It reminds me of supporting the rebels in Afghanistan against Soviets... the same people then later turned against US and the result was 9/11. Any support for the radicals will sooner or later turn against you.



    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...same-side.html



    citation from the article

    "The military chief (of the opposition), though, is Abdul Fattah Younis al-Obeidi, a former leader of Col Gaddafi's special forces who was his public security, or interior, minister until he went over to the rebels.



    He has described Col Gaddafi as "not completely sane", and worked with the SAS during the now curtailed thaw in British-Libyan relations. But it is still ironic that the West is taking sides in a battle between the leader of a much hated regime and his former effective deputy. "
  • Reply 51 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post


    In Europe, most media (and politicians speaking publicly) use both the name without and with the job title of their heads of governments, state or cabinet ministers. If you want to be formal you use the job title or you might use the academic title, ie, Dr. Merkel to refer to the German chancellor. Otherwise you often just alternate between the Chancellor, Chancellor Merkel, Mrs. Merkel or just Merkel, just to be not repetitive.



    Only the royals are basically never addressed by their name only (not least because they have no real last name and using the first name publicly for anybody is very, very rare).



    I always liked the way the Germans referred to someone who had multiple degrees:



    Herr Doktor, Doktor, Doktor Hans Schwartz...



    .
  • Reply 52 of 67
    nkalunkalu Posts: 315member
    Mr. President, it is time to do away with the Blackberry and jump ship to iPhone. I bet you like the iPad. Admit it. It is superior technology.
  • Reply 53 of 67
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    His point seems valid. Most people use such devices as a distraction and get caught up in absorbing meaningless and often times incorrect information. The devices aren't productive in nature. I spend way too much time on my iPhone, iPad, and Mac. The time is spend watching Netflix, playing games, checking email, reading uninformed rumor sites, and the list goes on. Most of this qualifies as entertainment. The same I suspect is true for most people. Sure, I can find useful information and be productive on the devices as well, but in all honesty I goof off way more because it has become easier to do so.



    That isn't to say you can't use such devices for purposes that enrich both your lives and others. People are doing incredible things with such technology, like the medical imaging and music creation tools. On balance though, I guess most people use the devices to waste time on some form of entertainment.









    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    That sounds like Obama alright. Saying one thing and then doing the exact opposite himself. I doubt that he bought the iPad for his own money. Maybe Steve Jobs gave him one for free when they had that little dinner get together recently.



    The president says the "distraction" created by technologies like Apple's iPad is hurting America. Is he on point — or just out of touch?



    http://theweek.com/article/index/202...ma-vs-the-ipad



  • Reply 54 of 67
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    He might but he couldn't even if he wanted to do so. His device has to be blessed by the NSA so that his communications are secure. The government moves slow, so the iPhone hasn't yet received the NSA's stamp of approval. Doesn't necessary mean it is less secure. It just probably doesn't run the security programs the NSA requires.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nkalu View Post


    Mr. President, it is time to do away with the Blackberry and jump ship to iPhone. I bet you like the iPad. Admit it. It is superior technology.



  • Reply 55 of 67
    nkalunkalu Posts: 315member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBell View Post


    He might but he couldn't even if he wanted to do so. His device has to be blessed by the NSA so that his communications are secure. The government moves slow, so the iPhone hasn't yet received the NSA's stamp of approval. Doesn't necessary mean it is less secure. It just probably doesn't run the security programs the NSA requires.



    Thanks a lot for clearing this up.
  • Reply 56 of 67
    bushman4bushman4 Posts: 843member
    More interesting would have been to have asked him what he uses it for.
  • Reply 57 of 67
    Post disappeared. I guess the AppleInsider moderators are Obama fans.
  • Reply 58 of 67
    ericblrericblr Posts: 172member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archos View Post


    Hypocrisy is when right wingers insist that the US is weak for not storming Libya while also insisting that Obama is out of line for acting to stop a mass murder.



    But the difference between Bush's Iraq invasion is that it was knowingly based on bad information, aimed primarily at gaining access to the nation's oil, left a destabilized bunch of warlords and terrorists in control, and cost America $4 trillion usd, with no support from the rest of the world.



    In Libya, Obama had the UN run the show, acted only to stop mass murder by the Libyan military without illegally invading and assassinating a leader who the right wing of America had long plied with weapons and favors and overlooked as a mass murderer of his people, didn't attempt to seize the nations oil, didn't leave the country in chaotic shambles as priceless historical treasures were destroyed and hundreds of thousands of innocent people ( and thousands of ameican forces) were needlessly killed in a massive clusterfuck of bad planning and incompetence that made the world much more dangerous and inflamed Arab hate for the US as it created the largest US deficit ever.



    So no, not really the same thing.



    Albania, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Romania, South Korea, and the United Kingdom were countries that contributed forces to aid the US in Iraq. Saddam Hussein was also a mass murderer.



    However, I dont think we need to be the worlds policemen, and I find it rather predictable that the left has all of the sudden gone from anti-war to "Its ok if a Democrat does it".
  • Reply 59 of 67
    Any chance we could lock this thread? It's gotten stupid all ready on both sides.



    You're all idiots and this is not the forum for discussing politics that don't directly relate to Apple. Take it to an Off-topic forum or another web site, please, you cantankerous, whining dorks!
  • Reply 60 of 67
    Attention people of Earth. Obama using an iPad is "news." That is all.
Sign In or Register to comment.