The President recently met with the Japanese Emperor and--yet again--bowed deeply to another Foreign Monarch in greeting.

Now, while the President continues his inane bowing to these Foreign Monarchs (perhaps while mumbling an apology) as if he is the sole star of his own show, no doubt to be called "Bow Watch." We at Conservative Refocus—as well as many of our friends--began to wonder about the exact historical etiquette as it regards US Presidential deference in the form of the custom of bowing to others. We all seem to find it rather odd in our President, and yet We cannot put our finger on the exact reason. This is most likely due to the fact that within our history, no President has typically ever done it (with regard to other heads of state), and there is a reason for that fact and this reason can be found in the US Constitution.

Why all the hubbub? Well, if one were to look within the American Heritage Dictionary, one would find "bow" as a verb with the following words included within the definition—"to bend downward or to stoop"--along with the meanings which include "greeting, acknowledgment, veneration, submission, to yield in defeat, to yield out of courtesy and to submit." The definition of "bowing" includes seven signs of surrender or servility, and this, I suppose, is our reasoning for being so negatively picky about the President's obsequiousness in representing our Nation. Not to mention the fact that this, our most traveled President in American History, seems to be flying all over the world in order to strategically practice his Blasted Bow for goodness sake!

US History of Royal Distaste

In the early days of the Founding, the citizens of the colonies had endured quite enough mistreatment from monarchs who had abused them in myriad ways both in America and, in many cases, in their native countries. This not to mention the ill treatment and tyrannical practices from religious persecution and otherwise that often drove them to settle in the Americas. As a result, the Founders instituted a government which was intended to defeat deference to any monarchy or religious persuasion. This instinctive dislike of anything that even resembled royalty or forced religious submission is how our forefathers ultimately avoided repeating the mistake of installing a monarchy rather than the rule of law, or Republic, that was finally instated. Yet I should point out that some few among them seemed pensive for royalty despite the problems such an outdated system offered. This mindset can, even now, be seen among many of the liberals and personally challenged "innocents" that we find in office, if not in the populace, in the form of "figuratively" crowning our president "the Messiah" in his treatment, if not in their blindingly ideological universal acceptance of Him and his "ideas." I can even recall one mentally challenged liberal pundit referring to the Prez as "Godlike" in his dispassionate manner for Heaven's Sake, and let's not forget the "thrill up Chris Matthew's leg"--Egad!

In Article 1 Section 9 of the US Constitution one will find the following: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

Now some might argue that this would apply only to our Government; however, the reasoning seems very clear within the Freedom Charters that the US had the intent of universally rendering invalid any title of nobility as We believe that "All men are created equal." This does not mean that American Government did not recognize the authority of other monarchs to govern their own people--just that our Forefathers did not recognize any sort of silly individual supremacy over others which might be claimed by Royalty. In addition, as soon as the Founders wrote those powerful words concerning the "equality of all men," then slavery had to, imperatively, be on the way out as it flew in the face of our stated principles as so set forth by the Founder's own words. And so it was that slavery was eventually abolished, although it took 90 more years and a horrendous war (with regard to State's rights in conjunction with slavery) to finally and thankfully eradicate it from the land.

Well-Educated, Clueless and Sneaky

Now, as our "learned and well-educated" leaders might obviously know of all this history--one might think that the White House had learned its lesson when only back in April 2009 the Prez initiated a bow to the Saudi King that caused quite a bit of an uproar. The White House, in usual form, desperately--if not defensively--argued that "it was not a bow" despite video clearly showing that it was a bow or perhaps an extreme bout of "stomach cramps" that had obviously doubled the President over at the worst of all possible times (come on guys--at least try to be creative!). The Brits were probably in a snit that the President failed to bow to their Queen on his UK visit and yet would generously bow to "male" Saudi dictators. In addition, the Saudis, according to Saudi newspaper accounts, were also "pleasantly pleased" that the Prez proffered a zesty bow to their Glorious King, which had been figuratively overdue for some time...apparently.

We have also seen, in our research, several rather hysterical arguments that President Bush had also bowed to the Saudi King in the recent past--which we would have dutifully reported in this article if he actually had—however, in the CNN video we find that Bush had bowed his head to the rather short in stature Saudi king so that the King could place a "really cool medallion" around Bush's neck. Those liberals! While not very bright, they are cunning and sneaky and bear considerable watching, one must declare.

The Internet result of every bit of research that we have done concludes that NO US President has ever bowed to any foreign leadership on this earth for over 230 years (which is as it should be)--until now.

Entertaining the World and a New Hope for Aluminum Chlorohydrate

In our history, George Washington did initially hold Levees with US Men of Prominence (a holdover from the old English Court System) in which they initially bowed to the President while standing in a semi-circle (thus the oval office), and then the President would address each individual in person and bow in return to each (from the White House Historical Association website). Thomas Jefferson, my personal favorite, ended the etiquette of bowing by judiciously shaking hands with all, and thus the bow had forever been broken...well, at least--once again--until now.

With the gravity that the H1N1 has brought to the fore of Presidential politics, perhaps Obama should now blaze a new trail and start coughing beneath his armpit in greeting foreign dignitaries. He can then slow the tide of the terrible virulent onslaught while changing the Jeffersonian practice of handshaking to the "avant-garde arm-pit coughing" that his administration finds so endearing.

Arm Pit Coughing by way of Presidential Greeting. Now that's change we can actually believe in--in that is not harmful to the country beyond the goodwill engendering peals of laughter that we would most definitely receive from other nations.

But at least it beats bowing...

"I cannot teach you violence as I do not myself believe in it. I can only teach you not to bow your heads before anyone even at the cost of your life."

~Mahatma Gandhi

Barry Secrest