Postmodern President

Postmodernist President and gifts to the Queen

I just cannot not talk about this: Obama gives the Queen of England an iPod as his gift for her hospitality. This after giving the Prime Minister a gift of favorite films that had the wrong country code, so they cannot be watched in the PM’s home country.

I have to say that Obama is the quintessential Postmodernist. I did a short search and found an article on ABC.com from two years ago (listed below). The salient parts are below:

During their visit to Saudi Arabia alone, the royal couple received a variety of presents, including a white Arabian stallion and a pair of swords given to the prince by the Saudi royal family.

And Obama gives an iPod. An iPod loaded with “Show Tunes”? Seems who ever thought this would be appropriate misunderstood the true meaning of “queen”… .

Oh, but wait (Billy Mays reference), Obama (his people actually) also put on video of her recent visit. Whaaaa???? Do we not think that the Queen of England has her own videography people and sources? If she wanted to watch herself all she would have to do is request or demand it. This is the stupidest of stupid head of state gift I can think of. I actually though it was an April Fools joke when I first heard it.

But none of the other gifts came close to matching the value of three jewelry sets (known as parures) bestowed upon the duchess by her Saudi hosts. Together, the three sets -- one emerald, one ruby and one sapphire -- are estimated to be worth nearly $3 million.

This is what other heads of state do when they exchange gifts, and the Obama administration decides that a $400.00 electronic device. http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_ipod/family/ipod_touch?mco=MTI3Njg Okay, lets be generous and say that it was the top of the line unit and had several hours of upload time. It was personalizes with engraving and maybe a rhinestone or two super glued on it (another Billy Mays reference). Then it is worth what? $1,500.00? Oh, Wow!

Indeed, gifts from foreign heads of state as well as private individuals form a good part of the royal collection.

I am certain that the Obama iPod will be center in the collection at Buckingham Palace. I can imagine in a couple hundred years historians will be inventorying the collection and find the dust covered iPod and say: “What was he thinking?” Who knows this could be the very thing that makes the American Revolution look like a picnic.

Although the gifts are usually cultural in nature -- representing the arts and crafts of the country in question --

So we give the Queen of England an item that was hecho en China… . What does that say about the culture of the United States of America. We have to farm our culture out? We have a video/electronic culture. We don’t do arts and crafts in the USA. We just do magnetically stored media. What a sad, sad truth about out culture. I am embarrassed as a citizen.

When the duchess wore the ruby and diamond necklace during her U.S. tour, she made sure that all eyes would be on her. As the blogger behind the royalist Web site commented: "How better, then, to catch the eyes of the British press than turn out in a striking necklace which has raised the hackles of some and the intrigue of others."

Oooh, can’t you see it now? The next time the Queen of England visits, she is walking down Pennsylvania Avenue with her ear buds in place listening to show tunes. The press will follow her around speculating on which show tune she is listening to at the moment! “All eyes will be on her…”

And while there is nothing untoward about the royal family receiving gifts, our journalist source described such lavish gifts as "an eye-opener," adding that "although this was quite common in the 1970s, these days it is less so. It shows the extent of the prince's links with the Saudis."

I am wondering what kind of link does the gift of an iPod show with the USA. The gift certainly was not what one would call “lavish”. Every 14 year old has an iPod along with their sagged pants and surly attitude. An 8 year old with an iPod might be an “eye opener”, but the Queen of England with an iPod is just silly.


These gifts are considered official and are regarded as gifts to the nation, not to the individual. They may be used, but cannot be sold or exchanged, eventually forming part of the royal collection.

To the people of England (our Mother Country), I truly apologize for the “gift” we gave your Queen. See we have a wannabe as a President and he has no concept of what decorum is in the world theater. If the iPod does not find its way to the Royal Collection, I will understand. If it shows up in some flea market, that is much more appropriate. Maybe it can be used to steady the royal table or one of the glass showcases in the collection.

I as an American an embarrassed by this obvious show of disrespect. I credit it with the whole postmodern movement. There is no decorum. There is no respect. There is no “right way”. There is no reference point in anything that is done by postmodernists.


But for some this does not go far enough. "I have no objection about the royal family receiving these kinds of gifts. But I think that the public should know all the details, including the value of the jewels," Lacey said.

I doubt that there will be such a hue and cry about the iPod gift from Obama. Direct from Apple, it is $400.00 (plus shipping and uploading costs). I guess this does bring the Queen down to “our level”. What would I expect from a Community Organizer poser who pulled off the largest scam and deceit ever.

All of this in just his first 70 or so days. I can hardly wait for the next 1,200 days to reveal the rest of the story.

To think that people said that George W. Bush was an amateur… !

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Gifts Fit for a Queen?
Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles Disclose Their Recently Recived Royal Gifts.
By AMMU KANNAMPILLY
LONDON, Feb. 26, 2007

"Treat your guest as if he were God" so runs an ancient Sanskrit saying.
Well, some people seem to have taken those words to heart, as Camilla Parker-Bowles (the Duchess of Cornwall and wife of Prince Charles), found out during her March 2006 visit to Saudi Arabia.

Today, for the first time, the British public learned about the incredible variety (not to mention the sheer number) of gifts the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall received on their recent overseas tours.

In an apparent bid for transparency in this sensitive area, officials at Clarence House, the royal couple's London residence, released the list of gifts received, not just from the Saudi Arabia trip but from all travel between 2003 and 2006.

During their visit to Saudi Arabia alone, the royal couple received a variety of presents, including a white Arabian stallion and a pair of swords given to the prince by the Saudi royal family.

But none of the other gifts came close to matching the value of three jewelry sets (known as parures) bestowed upon the duchess by her Saudi hosts. Together, the three sets -- one emerald, one ruby and one sapphire -- are estimated to be worth nearly $3 million.

The existence of these three parures came to light when the duchess attended a white-tie gala in Philadelphia earlier this year and wore a glittering ruby and diamond necklace, one of three the Saudis gave her.

A journalist who specializes in covering the royal family spoke to ABCNEWS.com on the condition of anonymity, saying that "there is no controversy as such about gifts, the royal family can accept gifts and often does."

Indeed, gifts from foreign heads of state as well as private individuals form a good part of the royal collection.

Although the gifts are usually cultural in nature -- representing the arts and crafts of the country in question -- sometimes they are just plain weird -- as was the case with the huge yak presented to the prince by the village of Altit, Pakistan. It was a rare instance when a royal gift was returned to its owners, presumably because yaks don't travel well.

And sometimes, they are more than just a little bling. Leslie Field's book on the royal jewelry collection, "The Queen's Jewels," recounts an anecdote about a gift made to the queen when she was a young girl -- a diamond necklace and bracelet that she grew to love and later called "my best diamonds."

Charles' first wife, the late Princess Diana, was no different when it came to her love of glittering gifts. When she visited Saudi Arabia with the prince in the 1980s, her hosts treated the couple with characteristic generosity, sending Diana off with a priceless jewelry set.

But never before have such gifts of jewelry received the press coverage they now get, which may have been the idea all along, as far as Camilla Parker Bowles was concerned.

When the duchess wore the ruby and diamond necklace during her U.S. tour, she made sure that all eyes would be on her. As the blogger behind the royalist Web site commented: "How better, then, to catch the eyes of the British press than turn out in a striking necklace which has raised the hackles of some and the intrigue of others."

Far from being hidden in the international pages, the visit and the royal couple made it to the front pages of most British tabloids and broadsheets that morning -- all on the strength of one shiny, glamorous piece of jewelry.

Of course, the resulting publicity also brought the provenance of the necklace into question.

And while there is nothing untoward about the royal family receiving gifts, our journalist source described such lavish gifts as "an eye-opener," adding that "although this was quite common in the 1970s, these days it is less so. It shows the extent of the prince's links with the Saudis."

Perhaps it is with a view to discouraging such speculation about the prince's links to the Saudis that Clarence House today released a list of recently received gifts on its Web site.
These gifts are considered official and are regarded as gifts to the nation, not to the individual. They may be used, but cannot be sold or exchanged, eventually forming part of the royal collection.

In recent years, however, controversy has erupted over the prince's decisions to either approve the sale of several unwanted gifts for charitable purposes or give such items away to staff, who later go on to sell them.

Royal historian Robert Lacey told ABC news, "This is an area of protocol that has still got to be resolved. There are very strict rules about politicians [receiving gifts]. When it comes to the royal family, it has never been resolved."

Clarence House therefore seems keen to keep up an impression of transparency.
But for some this does not go far enough. "I have no objection about the royal family receiving these kinds of gifts. But I think that the public should know all the details, including the value of the jewels," Lacey said.

When asked about the value of the jewelry given to the duchess, a royal spokeswoman said only that "We never inquire about the value of gifts, because we don't need to for tax reasons," as all gifts to the royal family are tax-free, "and, second, it could cause offense to the giver."

She added, however, that the "gifts from the Saudi royal family are not typical of the gifts given to the prince and the duchess."

Typical or not, they certainly seem to attract the most attention. And the generosity shows no signs of abating just yet.

At present, the royal couple are midway through a 10-day tour of the Gulf states. Yesterday, they were jointly presented with a gold Arabian sword by the King of Bahrain.

And last night, the duchess wore a large gold pendant and shiny, dangling earrings to stunning effect. Both pieces looked vaguely Middle-Eastern, but when asked if they were gifts, her aides refused to comment.
Casey Schwartz contributed to this report

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2905397&page=1