General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs the Churchill Bust Controversy A Total Bust?
Official White House Photo by Pete Souza
Jul 27, 2012 4:32pm
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/is-the-churchill-bust-controversy-a-total-bust/
dballance
(5,756 posts)First of all he's a British Prime Minister. Lincoln is a very distinguished US President who gave his life serving his country and freed the slaves. I think he's much more deserving of having his bust displayed in the oval office than Churchill (one of them foreigners Mitt seems worried about) and I bet if you poll that so will most Dems and Repugs.
Second, US citizens are so devoid of any real knowledge of history I'd bet you'd have to explain to many of them who Churchill even was.
The whole thing was Mitt pandering to the UK.
struggle4progress
(118,379 posts)Under W, there were at least two busts of Winnie on the White House; one, on loan, was returned; the other is still there, and the photo shows POTUS and Cameron inspecting it in 2010
dballance
(5,756 posts)I don't care if a bust of Churchill is displayed in the WH. I'm sure there are lots of paintings and busts/statues of other dignitaries displayed there. It's a big place.
The point I was making was that a kerfuffle over displaying Churchill in the Oval Office is silly and that it is more than appropriate for one our best president's bust to be displayed in the President's office instead of a British Prime Minister.
struggle4progress
(118,379 posts)nolabear
(42,001 posts)Nobody cares if the bust isn't in the Oval Office. The fact that it's in the residence is respectful and lovely.
noel711
(2,185 posts)not working.