1
   

Michele Obama's Big Mouth

 
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 01:41 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
O'Bill, you should read what our lovely Brooke told hawkeye in Linkat's
thread about her weight issue. Hawkeye has gotten flog from just about
every woman here on a2k, but he still insists of being right.
Could you please link to it? I was unable to find any such exchange.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 01:46 pm
ossobuco wrote:
I'm not sure Hawkeye is as misogynist as he seems (which I agree with, misogyny seems to be in near every post). I think he thinks of people, as I said once before, mechanistically, and/or contractually, first, and that his pronouncements based on that come out misogynistic, not least because of his language.

She says, running her mouth.


I am in part a provocateur, and you are the only one who figured that out, so you get points.

Unless you have decided that I am lying about being a Zen mystic your take on how I view people can not possibly be true....you need to go back to the drawing board on that one.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 01:47 pm
My mistake, Bill, it was the household chore thread. Here is the link
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3134704#3134704
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 01:51 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
CalamityJane wrote:
O'Bill, you should read what our lovely Brooke told hawkeye in Linkat's
thread about her weight issue. Hawkeye has gotten flog from just about
every woman here on a2k, but he still insists of being right.
Could you please link to it? I was unable to find any such exchange.


http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=113085&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=80

If you should decide that you are capable of anything more than being a cheer leader for male bashing you know where to find me.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 01:58 pm
zen mystic, mechanistic, misogynistic, I call what I see. Perhaps a unique combo.

On this thread, I'm interested in an answer to butrflynet's question about specifics on what it was that Michelle Obama said that set you to posting the thread.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:01 pm
I am never into male bashing, hawkeye. Male chauvinists on the other hand,
will receive what they have coming to them, and it seems, I am not the
only one who has the same opinion of you. Almost everyone is opposing
your point of views and your way of thinking, hawkeye. Doesn't that
make you stop and re-think that you might be wrong if the majority of
people are telling you so?

Think of this cartoon: a busy one-way street jammed with cars going in
one direction. You're sitting in a little car facing them in the other direction.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:03 pm
I should add I don't see the zen part. but perhaps I haven't read enough.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:07 pm
osso, there is no zen part in his posts, none whatsover.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:11 pm
I don't think it has anything at all to do with anything Michelle said. I think his point is that Bill spoke his mind and got his head handed to him. He's asking why the rule isn't the same for Michelle. Unfortunately, he's going about the asking in an awkward way that puts everyone immediately on the defensive rather than willing to discuss the issue.


My answer would be that in most cases cited in that article, Michelle is talking about herself and/or her relationship with her husband, while Bill was talking outside himself and his relationship to Hillary and was denigrating Obama. I'll admit I only skimmed the article so there could be more substance to it than I noticed. For the most part it was just a bunch of rehashed quotes and soundbites obtained from other articles mashed together to construct a strawman.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:13 pm
ossobuco wrote:
zen mystic, mechanistic, I call what I see.

On this thread, I'm interested in an answer to butrflynet's question about specifics on what it was that Michelle Obama said that set you to posting the thread.


Go back to the original piece, it was about how Michelle refuses to tone down her personality. Overall it is not the words it is the tone and message behind the words. SOme have taken offense because they assume that I am apposed to strong women, after all so far as Michelle is concerend all she is doing is being herself, which is a strong woman. I have argued that this race is about her husband not her, that her role is to support him, that she does not have a good political radar, and thus she needs to tone it down. SHe needs to put as much of herself into the public space that she needs to to accomplish the goal of helping him, but no more.

What as Calamity and the rest in a tizzy is that they can't get their minds around the reality that some times (in 2008-oh my!) the roll of the wife is to to support and assist the husband, full stop. This should not be such a difficult concept... sometimes the wife helps the husband get what he wants, sometimes the husband helps the wife get what she wants. That's marriage, you know, teamwork.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:20 pm
Yes, I read the original piece. I don't agree she needs to tone down her personality, at least to date, since I haven't read of any words/behavior of hers that I find questionable.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:24 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
ossobuco wrote:
zen mystic, mechanistic, I call what I see.

On this thread, I'm interested in an answer to butrflynet's question about specifics on what it was that Michelle Obama said that set you to posting the thread.


Go back to the original piece, it was about how Michelle refuses to tone down her personality. Overall it is not the words it is the tone and message behind the words. SOme have taken offense because they assume that I am apposed to strong women, after all so far as Michelle is concerend all she is doing is being herself, which is a strong woman. I have argued that this race is about her husband not her, that her role is to support him, that she does not have a good political radar, and thus she needs to tone it down. SHe needs to put as much of herself into the public space that she needs to to accomplish the goal of helping him, but no more.

What as Calamity and the rest in a tizzy is that they can't get their minds around the reality that some times (in 2008-oh my!) the roll of the wife is to to support and assist the husband, full stop. This should not be such a difficult concept... sometimes the wife helps the husband get what he wants, sometimes the husband helps the wife get what she wants. That's marriage, you know, teamwork.


And my point to you, which you never answered, was who are YOU to decide she needs to tone it down? Maybe Barack is delighted with her performance. Maybe he ASKED her to get this outspoken. What the heck do YOU know?

Yes, you still haven't answered these questions.

What you have stated is only YOUR opinion, and unless you're intimately involved in their campaign strategy and have inside knowledge that we don't, it's just an opinion, one which, as CJ pointed out, is in the minority on this thread.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:28 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:
Go back to the original piece, it was about how Michelle refuses to tone down her personality. Overall it is not the words it is the tone and message behind the words. SOme have taken offense because they assume that I am apposed to strong women, after all so far as Michelle is concerend all she is doing is being herself, which is a strong woman. I have argued that this race is about her husband not her, that her role is to support him, that she does not have a good political radar, and thus she needs to tone it down. SHe needs to put as much of herself into the public space that she needs to to accomplish the goal of helping him, but no more.

What as Calamity and the rest in a tizzy is that they can't get their minds around the reality that some times (in 2008-oh my!) the roll of the wife is to to support and assist the husband, full stop. This should not be such adifficult concept... sometimes the wife helps the husband get what he wants, sometimes the husband helps the wife get what she wants. That's marriage, you know, teamwork.


Please don't play all innocent here. Let's rehash what you said:

Quote:
Michelle seriously needs to wise up. Her job is to be supportive and help her husband can get elected and do good work, what she thinks about anything is irrelevant, and being mouthy makes her husband look bad.


Quote:
M Obama needs to show that she is willing to play the "good wife" by shutting her mouth...


Quote:
If so then Barack picked poorly, for that would make her an unsuitable wife for a politician. Politics is a game with rules, if the wife is not willing to play those rules then that candidate needs to either get a new wife or play a different game.


Quote:
....her husband's political needs come before her desire to do good work and run her mouth in public. ....


Quote:
The fact that he never had a chance does not alter the reality that his wife hurt him, and that his inability or unwillingness to control her hurt him.


Quote:
If Barack can't convince his wife to do the right thing how is he going to convince other world leaders of anything, especially after Bush has done all of the damage he has done??


Quote:
ut if she continues to put her desire to speak out ahead of her husbands mission she will hurt him much more than she helps. It strikes me a selfishness.


Quote:
Barack is the candidate, Michelle is not. Her role is to support him, period.


Quote:
I also agree that a good dose of Michelle serves to humanize Barack....she can be very good for him if she stays in her lane.


There is plenty of more statements like these coming from you, hawkeye, they prove that you're meaning of marriage and teamwork is quite different from the norm.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:29 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
. Almost everyone is opposing
your point of views and your way of thinking, hawkeye. Doesn't that
make you stop and re-think that you might be wrong if the majority of
people are telling you so?
.


No, a few people have had an emotional reaction. I do pay attention to emotional reaction, but I am holding out for you to move beyond emotion and to support your point of view.

I have been alive for 46 years, you act like I have been in a cave for most of it and have no clue. At some point you are going to need to question that assumption, for not only do I have a very firm understanding of who I am, I also have a wide range of experience in life and have a well thought out and a well felt out perspective on what my experience in this world has shown me to be true. The Idea that I would take a few posts from a few people at able2know and then realize "Oh my, my views are all f*cked up" is more than a little conceited on your part I think.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:34 pm
No emotional reactions anywhere, hawkeye. Just rational thinking on our
part, irrational on your part.

Now you are having emotional outbursts, assuming me living in a cave,
when I've hailed all the way over from Europe and have traveled the US
extensively too Laughing Being 46 years of age, doesn't give you experience
and wisdom automatically, as you have proven here, actually there are
far older fools around, trust me.

And yes, your views are pretty much yours alone. No one seems to share
them....
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:37 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
There is plenty of more statements like these coming from you, hawkeye, they prove that you're meaning of marriage and teamwork is quite different from the norm.


Not a whole lot of people run for the office of President, that is what is far from the norm. I stand by everything I said, my statements support my position about what she is called to do but says nothing about a woman's roll in marriage. It speaks to a spouses roll in a presidential campaign.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:42 pm
If Hawkeye is opposed to strong women then I share his views.

Women have quite enough shots in their locker without adding strength in. Strength is all we men have and it has been found wanting on too many occasions to relate.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:44 pm
What do you want Cal--a complete walkover?
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:48 pm
Mame wrote:
And my point to you, which you never answered, was who are YOU to decide she needs to tone it down? Maybe Barack is delighted with her performance. Maybe he ASKED her to get this outspoken. What the heck do YOU know?

Yes, you still haven't answered these questions.

What you have stated is only YOUR opinion, and unless you're intimately involved in their campaign strategy and have inside knowledge that we don't, it's just an opinion, one which, as CJ pointed out, is in the minority on this thread.


Yes, it is my opinion, backed with arguments and examples. I don't know what Barack asked of his wife, I don't know who's idea it was for her to fill up the public space with her personality, what I have said is that it is a mistake, and hurts him. It could be that neither one agrees, it may be that barack knows it but can not or will not get her to knock it off.

It might be that this year will prove my wrong, it might me that the point does not matter because Hillary is the candidate not him. I am arguing a position, which people have said that they disagree with, but which no one has made any case against. So I stick to my position.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Mar, 2008 02:50 pm
Oy spendius. I'm no missionary and have not the time and patience
to explain to you an equal relationship between man and women, especially
when you haven't got any experience in it Smile
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 0.04 seconds on 10/08/2024 at 12:25:44