There seems to be a bit of controversy surrounding president Obama's South African visit to commemorate the life of Nelson Mandela.
For starters Obama shook hands with mass murderer Raul Castro who resides in a country where they have a rule that if you kill a lot of people and you happen to be related to the countries leader and then become a leader yourself, it's all legal or "all good" as they say here in the states.
Former president Jimmy Carter thought that was grand and even called it "significant" and then said he hoped it would be an "omen for the future" which tells us that Carter doesn't know the definition of the word "omen" nor how to use it in a sentence. Or maybe he was thinking the opposite as in "uh oh, this can't be good".
But that controversy didn't have much of a shelf life because at the solemn memorial service Obama was having a grand old time yuking it up with Denmark's stunning prime minister and actually taking selfies with her, laughing, flirting. It was enough for FLOTUS to make the president switch seats with her. She was aaaaangry.
Then it was time for Obama to give a speech and more controversy ensured but this time I'm not buying it. It seems there was a hand signing interpreter. It turns out that experts in sign language could not make heads or tails of what the interpreter was conveying in that it looked like it was all made up nonsense that was incomprehensible and in no way resembled any hand signing they had ever seen. The interpreter was even called a "fake".
I'm going to give our sign language hero the benefit of a doubt and say that if he is interpreting an Obama speech in sign language and it appears to be all nonsense and even fraudulent we just can't readily blame the interpreter, it just isn't fair. Did it ever occur to some of these experts that the interpreter did a splendid job with few if any mistakes? Come on. Some people have to criticize everything.