0
   

Michelle Obama has hated America for over 40 years?

 
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 03:41 pm
snood wrote:
So, according to you, I suppose I'm not a good American for saying I haven't been proud of my country every day of my life?


I didn't say that, and I'm not sure how you extrapolated that from what I did say.

But if you were running for first lady, you'd be a flippin embarrassment ... that I did say.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 03:43 pm
And again to clarify, she didn't say she hadn't been proud of her country "every day" of her life ... she said she was proud of her country "for the first time in her adult lifetime," because some folks had decided to vote for her husband.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 04:02 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
And again to clarify, she didn't say she hadn't been proud of her country "every day" of her life ... she said she was proud of her country "for the first time in her adult lifetime," because some folks had decided to vote for her husband.


Nice try Tico.. Why don't you post her actual words instead of your interpretation of some of them.


Rolling Eyes

For someone that wanted to "clarify" why did you just do what you did?
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 04:19 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
snood wrote:
So, according to you, I suppose I'm not a good American for saying I haven't been proud of my country every day of my life?


I didn't say that, and I'm not sure how you extrapolated that from what I did say.

But if you were running for first lady, you'd be a flippin embarrassment ... that I did say.


And no suprise you're good with an enabling Stepford wife like Laura, but would have problems with a dynamic outspoken woman like Michelle.

You think she's an embarrassment for what she said. I think she got "gotcha'd" by those who had no use for her or her husband. C'est la vie.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 04:39 pm
parados wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
And again to clarify, she didn't say she hadn't been proud of her country "every day" of her life ... she said she was proud of her country "for the first time in her adult lifetime," because some folks had decided to vote for her husband.


Nice try Tico.. Why don't you post her actual words instead of your interpretation of some of them.


Rolling Eyes

For someone that wanted to "clarify" why did you just do what you did?


I previously posted her relevant words ... HERE

But here's the full quote, just for you, parados.

Quote:
"What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something -- for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I've seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it's made me proud."
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 04:46 pm
1`
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 04:49 pm
So. Tico..

Is there a difference between being really proud for the first time in your adult life and being proud for the first time in your adult life?

Can someone be proud without ever being "really" proud?

Is there a difference? If there is a difference then why did you leave out the word "really"?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 05:25 pm
The only ones making a big to do over this is the same crowd who goes crazy over Obama not wearing a pin on his lapel and never would have voted for him in the first place.

But in any case; she was not proud for the first time in her adult life because he husband is doing well; in fact she said that was not reason; but she was proud for the first time in her life because she sees people coming together in unity for a change in government. It is a proud moment to see people of both black and white coming together because we all want the same thing. Blacks have come together in unity but until now poor white or white young people have not really embraced causes together with blacks since the civil rights movement. She was probably a child then.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 05:50 pm
parados wrote:
So. Tico..

Is there a difference between being really proud for the first time in your adult life and being proud for the first time in your adult life?


Yes, but in terms of the damage she did to her husband's campaign, I don't think it's that big of a distinction.

Quote:
Is there a difference? If there is a difference then why did you leave out the word "really"?


I didn't leave it out previously, as you can see from my earlier link. But I'd like to hear your spin on her words, parados. Tell me what she really meant ... and, btw ... I hope you can do a better job than she did in her effort to "clarify." Apparently, she's proud of her husband ... and the bar moves ... "It moves!" ... but she didn't really explain what she meant to a degree that would alter my take.

So spin away ...


Revel has provided her spin ... and I think she did a better job than Ms. Obama ... who, when she clarified, didn't say anything about blacks and whites coming together ... but just basically said her husband has won a lot of states (Idaho, Missouri, Washington, Georgia, Maine, Hawaii) ... and "we haven't seen that before ... in a while."
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 07:03 pm
I really want to see that paper she wrote in college.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 08:50 pm
What she was saying I think (now seeing the full quote) is that up to now she has felt that America has been a country without a soul, that our public life has been superficial and empty. Very many thoughtful people agree with this. The problem is when your husband is running for office it is not politically smart to tell the people that you think that the country has been soulless for decades. Kinda makes people feel like you are telling them that they suck. Kinda puts off the practicing Christians as well, they thinking that they have plenty of soul.

Give the woman a break, she got emotional and blurted out the truth. She made a political mistake.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 09:00 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
. Kinda puts off the practicing Christians as well, they thinking that they have plenty of soul.


Huh?

Quote:
Give the woman a break, ...


No.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 09:22 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
hawkeye10 wrote:
. Kinda puts off the practicing Christians as well, they thinking that they have plenty of soul.


Huh?

Talking to Christians about soul in the public space is very dicey, because they think this is a matter for the church. Politicians are supposed to stick to promoting Christian values (AKA pushing Christian values onto the rest of us).

B Obama talks about hope all of the time, B Clinton used to do it as well, that's usually fine. But when you start talking about the American spirit you, if you are running for office, need to be very careful. This is too close to talking about soul. M Obama got too close to talking about soul. The reaction from practicing Christians will be "stay in your lane, that is not your area" The commentators who are talking about obama playing the Messiah shows how close to the edge he is running. People who are already on guard for Obama talking about soul caught M Obama going over the line and jumped all over her. She then pulled back.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sun 24 Feb, 2008 09:37 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
hawkeye10 wrote:
. Kinda puts off the practicing Christians as well, they thinking that they have plenty of soul.


Huh?

Talking to Christians about soul in the public space is very dicey, because they think this is a matter for the church. Politicians are supposed to stick to promoting Christian values (AKA pushing Christian values onto the rest of us).

B Obama talks about hope all of the time, B Clinton used to do it as well, that's usually fine. But when you start talking about the American spirit you, if you are running for office, need to be very careful. This is too close to talking about soul. M Obama got too close to talking about soul. The reaction from practicing Christians will be "stay in your lane, that is not your area" The commentators who are talking about obama playing the Messiah shows how close to the edge he is running. People who are already on guard for Obama talking about soul caught M Obama going over the line and jumped all over her. She then pulled back.


I appreciate your view, I just don't think you're correct. I don't think this has anything to do with Christian values or "soul."
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 03:07 am
Ticomaya wrote:

I appreciate your view, I just don't think you're correct. I don't think this has anything to do with Christian values or "soul."


Let's take it from the horses mouth then....William Kristol Speaking derisively about M Obama's comments
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25kristol.html?hp

Kristol is not by chance using this line, he is using it because he knows that the Christians are bothered by M Obama going outside of her lane with the comment that we are talking about, taking about soul. It does not matter that she backed away from it and lied about what she meant at the time, Kristol and a whole lot of other people know exactly what she meant.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 05:59 am
Roxxxanne wrote:
What does this have to do with Michelle Obama?


Anyone familiar with Rex knows that what the thread was about, as he intended it, was his hysterical rant against anyone who disagrees with his warped world-view, whom he will instantly condemn as hating America.

I don't apologize for a huge digression, and would never apologize for making a hash of any of Rex's screaming, ranting threads, political or religious. The digression was interesting to me and it seems, to FM, and had the advantage that it appears to have driven Rex away (at least for the nonce). Now go look up nonce, and leave me alone.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 06:31 am
grouch
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 07:47 am
hawkeye10 wrote:
Let's take it from the horses mouth then....William Kristol Speaking derisively about M Obama's comments


Okay, if Bill Kristol is the horse, then I don't think Kristol is correct either.


I understand Obama himself has now tried to clarify what his wife meant to say:

Quote:
"She simply misspoke," he said. "What she was referring to was [that] this was the first time she has been proud of politics in America.


LINK
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 07:49 am
Ticomaya wrote:
parados wrote:
So. Tico..

Is there a difference between being really proud for the first time in your adult life and being proud for the first time in your adult life?


Yes, but in terms of the damage she did to her husband's campaign, I don't think it's that big of a distinction.
It isn't a big distinction for those willing to ignore her actual words so they can attack her. By promoting that spin you are no better than they are.
Quote:

Quote:
Is there a difference? If there is a difference then why did you leave out the word "really"?


I didn't leave it out previously, as you can see from my earlier link.
Oh, so your defense is, "I didn't spin it every time" Just the time you were called on it. It doesn't change the fact that you left out an important word in finding meaning when you related what she had said.

Quote:

But I'd like to hear your spin on her words, parados. Tell me what she really meant ... and, btw ... I hope you can do a better job than she did in her effort to "clarify." Apparently, she's proud of her husband ... and the bar moves ... "It moves!" ... but she didn't really explain what she meant to a degree that would alter my take.
What spin?

Can someone ever be proud without being "really proud"? Yes, you agree that is possible. Anyone that simply applies the English language would say "yes."

If someone is NOT "really proud" does it mean they hate the object of their lack of being "really proud?" No. Yet you want to come on a thread using the word "hate" and leave out relevent words when discussing what she actually said. I would say such action does damage to your reputation but then your reputation isn't really stellar to begin with.

Quote:

So spin away ...
Using her words is hardly spin. One only needs to look at ALL her words to find meaning. Leaving out some of her words in some instances would be spin. You are the one spinning Tico. Not me.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Feb, 2008 07:59 am
parados wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
parados wrote:
So. Tico..

Is there a difference between being really proud for the first time in your adult life and being proud for the first time in your adult life?


Yes, but in terms of the damage she did to her husband's campaign, I don't think it's that big of a distinction.
It isn't a big distinction for those willing to ignore her actual words so they can attack her. By promoting that spin you are no better than they are.


I don't care.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Is there a difference? If there is a difference then why did you leave out the word "really"?


I didn't leave it out previously, as you can see from my earlier link.
Oh, so your defense is, "I didn't spin it every time" Just the time you were called on it. It doesn't change the fact that you left out an important word in finding meaning when you related what she had said.


I don't need to defend anything. I didn't feel the need to type out her exact words just in the oft chance your panties might bunch up if I didn't.

Quote:
Quote:
But I'd like to hear your spin on her words, parados. Tell me what she really meant ... and, btw ... I hope you can do a better job than she did in her effort to "clarify." Apparently, she's proud of her husband ... and the bar moves ... "It moves!" ... but she didn't really explain what she meant to a degree that would alter my take.
What spin?

Can someone ever be proud without being "really proud"? Yes, you agree that is possible. Anyone that simply applies the English language would say "yes."

If someone is NOT "really proud" does it mean they hate the object of their lack of being "really proud?" No. Yet you want to come on a thread using the word "hate" and leave out relevent words when discussing what she actually said. I would say such action does damage to your reputation but then your reputation isn't really stellar to begin with.


I didn't say anything about "hate." You are tying to put words in my mouth, and only making yourself look foolish -- more foolish than you did before, I should clarify.

Quote:
Quote:
So spin away ...
Using her words is hardly spin. One only needs to look at ALL her words to find meaning. Leaving out some of her words in some instances would be spin. You are the one spinning Tico. Not me.


Her husband's patriotism is being questioned during this campaign, for various reasons, and she breaks out with "for the first time in my adult lifetime I've been really proud of my country because people are voting for my husband"? (Yeah, a paraphrase ... deal with it.)

That's pretty stupid on her part. I'm just pointing out how stupid it was.

And now her husband is having to do damage control.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 10:29:16