0
   

MichelleObama: Black and White Culture Not The Same

 
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2008 08:36 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Cindy McCain fell in love at 19 years old with a man ...


The hottest fires in hell are reserved for those who remain neutral in times of moral crisis.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
(Edmund Burke)

While the "good man" dispenses tawdry bits of gossip,

Quote:
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2008 08:41 pm
eoe wrote:
yeah. they as in "the media".


Seems like firefly is numbered among the group know as "they," and if an article on the subject can be posted, the process has already "started."

Why is it "the media" when nasty things are published about Republicans but "The Republican Sleaze Machine," when the stories are about Democrats?

"They" have already "started," and "they" will continue.

Whether or not Cindy McCain ever takes an overt political stance during the campaign the stories about her drug problem and her apparent prior willingness to have an affair with a married man will be repeated again and again. No smear of course, just reportage.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2008 09:34 pm
Quote:

McCain: I 'Didn't Love America' Until Held Prisoner (VIDEO)

Republicans have hammered Michelle Obama for her remarks in February that she was proud of America "for the first time in my adult life." Tonight, however, Dan Abrams showed footage he uncovered of a Fox News interview with John McCain on March 13, 2008, in which McCain said, "I didn't really love America until I was deprived of her company."

Abrams thinks McCain's comments could undermine the "right wing's steady attacks against Michelle Obama."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/19/watch-mccain-didnt-love-a_n_108191.html




Ya think?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2008 09:40 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Mrs. Obama exaggerated in the vein of "I never laughed so hard in my life". Nothing to see here. Pounding it in is ridiculous and will backfire because no one but the opposite choir will be interested in the twisting of it.

That being said; there is an equally important point, which some hypocrites are grasping just as ridiculously.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
If "they" "start?"


Cindy McCain fell in love at 19 years old with a man who was clearly, at that point, married in a most dysfunctional way (this, of course, is no one's business but the McCain's). She has subsequently spent 28 years a loyal, loving wife to a true American Patriot. Bashing her is every bit as uncalled for as bashing Mrs. Obama. Partisan hypocrisy is as equally present as it is equally foolish from both sides.


If Michelle Obama says something of a clearly political nature, on a microphone to a regional or national audience, in furtherance of her husband's campaign are pundits and voters supposed to think

"Gee isn't she cute, but no need to take her seriously?"

Quote:
"It's the first time in my adult life that I've been proud of my country."


Although it's pretty straight forward, perhaps she misspoke.

Viewed in the context of these other statements though, and a fairly clear picture develops that can't easily be dismissed as clumsy rhetorical flourish.

Quote:
"We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we're asking young people to do. Don't go into corporate America."


Quote:
we're a divided country, we're a country that is "just downright mean," we are "guided by fear," we're a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents.


Not to mention all of her whining about how much summer camps and piano lessons cost. (Which her $300,000 a year "corporate" salary just doesn't seem enough to cover.)

I'm not suggesting she is a bad person, a criminal or a jezebel (see comments about Cindy McCain). She's obviously smart and talented and from all signs she's a fine mother and wife.

I don't, however, think it constitutes unfair bashing to suggest that her worldview, as the wife of someone who might easily be the next American president, actually matters.

Is it what matters most in making a decision on whether or not to vote for her husband? Absolutely not, but I give the Obama marriage a lot more credit than to buy into the notion that it doesn't matter what she thinks, because he, not her, will hold the office.

Once again the Victim Card is being played by Democrats. Those Big Bad Republicans are attacking poor little Princeton/Harvard Law educated little corporate Vice President Michelle!

If Obama and his campaign doesn't want her to be criticized for her comments then they need to do a better job of scripting them, or is anyone really suggesting we just shouldn't take Michelle seriously?
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2008 09:57 pm
Finn dAbuzz , Cindy McCain did not just have "a drug problem", she engaged in illegal, criminal behaviors. She stole large quantities of controlled prescription drugs, from her own charitable relief organization, for her own personal use, and she has admitted to doing this.

She was the subject of a federal investigation into the issue of the missing drugs. Under the terms of an "agreement" with the U.S. Attorney's office, she avoided being criminally charged by agreeing to do community service.

Needless to say, this is not the type of "punishment" the average citizen receives for similar offenses.

To smear someone would be to say something untrue about them in order to discredit them. This information about Cindy McCain is not untrue. She has admitted it.

And it was, in fact, the Tennessee GOP organization which used a video of Michelle Obama in a campaign ad. It was the GOP directly attacking the wife of the Democratic candidate.

The Democratic organizations have made no attacks on Mrs McCain, despite John McCain's false assertions that they have done so.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2008 10:24 pm
Laughing You two are behaving like perfect bookends. Yep, neither woman is perfect. Fortunately, neither will be their party's nominee for President in the foreseeable future. It would be terrific if we could get Presidential candidates with no sins on their records, let alone First Ladies. If such a candidate ever surfaces; please start a thread about it and throw me a PM so I can check it out. In the mean time; I'm quite content with the contenders we have today. The news people will continue to report the news (along with virtually everything else that may improve their ability to sell commercials). I'll continue to chuckle at the opposing choirs who only ever hear half of the BS.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 06:09 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
"It's the first time in my adult life that I've been proud of my country."


Although it's pretty straight forward, perhaps she misspoke.


Where'd you get that quote? It seems to be missing a "really".
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 06:50 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
"It's the first time in my adult life that I've been proud of my country."


Although it's pretty straight forward, perhaps she misspoke.


Where'd you get that quote? It seems to be missing a "really".


That's what I thought too. McCain was simply stating that being held prisoner made him love America more, not that he didn't before.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 07:37 am
I don't think there's anything wrong with what McCain said. Likewise, I don't think there's anything wrong with what Michelle said.
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:14 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
:lol:Yep, neither woman is perfect.


Show me one who is?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:23 am
eoe wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
:lol:Yep, neither woman is perfect.


Show me one who is?


I would, but people might get the wrong idea when they see the little locked room in the cellar where I keep her.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:28 am
eoe wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
:lol:Yep, neither woman is perfect.


Show me one who is?


You called?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:46 am
Mame wrote:
eoe wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
:lol:Yep, neither woman is perfect.


Show me one who is?


You called?


So, mame is actually three feet tall, with lips like Angelina Jolie, and a flat head to set my beer on? Who knew? Laughing
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:55 am
I'm waaaay too much woman for you, cjhsa.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 09:39 am
I am proud of my country precisely because I can criticize my government, protest that which is wrong or unfair, and feel free to speak out about what there is not to be proud of in America.

Just as one can love a parent one is not necessarilly proud of, one can love a country that espouses high ideals but often falls quite short of the mark in the harsh light of reality. I would argue that the more one loves their country, the more often they would point out where we are wrong, where we are are failing to live up to our values and goals, and what we have to change.

When did we start equating patriotism with self-congratulatory flag-waving, flag-pin wearing, and stifling of dissent? When did national arrogance replace our awareness that America is still very much a work in progress, with a short but spotty history, and a long way to go? When did complacency with our sense of "might and right" supplant our need to be vigilant in ensuring that our government promotes, rather than erodes, opportunity, equality, and protection of law, to all of her citizens--before we can assume a posture of moral righteousness before the rest of the world?

I may not agree with Michelle Obama's particular perceptions of America, and I'm not sure that I do agree with her, but I would defend to the death her right to her opinions, and I would not brand her as unpatriotic or disloyal, for anything she might say. Nor do I care if her husband wears a flag pin, or not, or even puts his hand over his heart during the national anthem. That is not how I judge true patriotism.

I realize I have grown up with the advantage of being White in America. Those, of different skin tones, have been shaped by experiences in my country which may well generate considerably more ambivalence in their perception of the state of our union. I need to hear their grievances, in order to open my own eyes, in order to understand where America must change, so that we can move toward greater unity despite our diversity. In that unity is our strength.

I grew up in a time when public schools, and even water fountains and restrooms, were segregated by race. I lived to see a man walk on the moon, and I have now lived to see an African-American, of mixed racial heritage, run for President. This should be a very proud moment for all Americans, whether or not one supports Barack Obama. We can see that we have come a long way in the past 50 years, a long way from the civil rights struggles of the 60's.

But, what should be a moment of some national pride, is being terribly tarnished by the malignant nature of the attacks on both Barack and Michelle Obama which question their patriotism and loyalty to our country. I cannot remember such charges even being seriously hinted at with White Presidential candidates, or their wives, although attacks on Kerry, in the last election, had definite whiffs of that same aroma. The McCarthy era was not one of our finest national episodes, and it is not something we should revisit. It is hard to ignore the racial undertones in the patriotism questioing that is going on now, and they should not make us feel particularly proud of America.

So, what were the terrible, unpatriotic things that Michelle Obama said?

Quote:


She sees people as more hopeful. Is that bad? She sees people as wanting change. Is that bad? She sees people as wanting to be unified around basic issues. Is that bad? Does it really matter how proud Michelle Obama felt about her country before? Should any of us feel proud about poverty, homelessness, lack of health care, poor inner city schools, our rising unemployment rates, or the number of people we have incarcerated, in this great country of ours?

Quote:
U.S. Voter Turnout Up in 2004, Census Bureau Reports


Sixty-four percent of U.S. citizens age 18 and over voted in the 2004 presidential election, up from 60 percent in 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau reported today. Tables from a November survey also show that of 197 million citizens, 72 percent (142 million) reported they were registered to vote. Among those registered, 89 percent (126 million) said they voted. In the 2000 election, 70 percent of citizens were registered; and among them, 86 percent voted.

Citizens age 65 and older had the highest registration rate (79 percent) while those age 18 to 24 had the lowest (58 percent). The youngest group also had the lowest voting rate (47 percent), while those age 45 and older had the highest turnout (about 70 percent).


Only 64% of our citizens bothered to vote in the last Presidential election--not something to be very proud of.

Only 58% of those 18-24 bothered to register to vote. Not something to be proud of.

If we are truly concerned with patriotism, we should all be happy that the recent primaries showed strong increases in voter registration and turnout. Michelle Obama is right--that is a sign of hope and wanting change. Now, if we are all true patriots, we will exercise our obligaton and responsibilty to our democracy by voting, in record numbers, this November. That would be my idea of real patriotism.

I will now yield the soapbox. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 10:22 am
And 75% of those 18-24 cannot find Washington D.C. on a map. In fact they get angry because there is no "You are here" arrow.
0 Replies
 
Diane
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 02:33 pm
Firefly, that was one of the most intelligent, clear responses I have read on a2k, all of a2k.

So glad you are here, except I really wish you were an analyst on a major news program.

To me, Michelle Obama represents the best of both worlds, she is not afraid to express her true opinions and she also has the intelligence and motivation to do something aobut those parts of our society that everyone should be complaining about.

Rather than complain and sit back feeling righteous, she went out there and did something about it. How many people, on both sides of the fence, have made such a contribution to society by taking action and making a real difference?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 05:01 pm
firefly wrote:
Finn dAbuzz , Cindy McCain did not just have "a drug problem", she engaged in illegal, criminal behaviors. She stole large quantities of controlled prescription drugs, from her own charitable relief organization, for her own personal use, and she has admitted to doing this.

She was the subject of a federal investigation into the issue of the missing drugs. Under the terms of an "agreement" with the U.S. Attorney's office, she avoided being criminally charged by agreeing to do community service.

Needless to say, this is not the type of "punishment" the average citizen receives for similar offenses.

To smear someone would be to say something untrue about them in order to discredit them. This information about Cindy McCain is not untrue. She has admitted it.

And it was, in fact, the Tennessee GOP organization which used a video of Michelle Obama in a campaign ad. It was the GOP directly attacking the wife of the Democratic candidate.

The Democratic organizations have made no attacks on Mrs McCain, despite John McCain's false assertions that they have done so.


Sounds like a drug problem to me.

Drug abusers are rearly able to conduct their abuse within the confines of the law. People who are addicted to drugs (aka having a drug problem) almost always have to obtain them through illegal means --- even millionaires!

It is one thing to be a slave to drugs and a peddler of them, and you seem to want, in this case, to include the former under the truly noxious cloud of the latter.

Perhaps you don't distinquish between user and seller, and if so that's your perogative, but I do, and so her drug problem doesn't outrage me.

I don't know that under similar circumstances many other people have not received similar leniency, but if that's not the case I won't defend it. I also won't hold it against McCain unless there is evidence that he used his influence to arrange for the disparate treatment. Do you have such evidence?

The point is that even if we assume that Cindy McCain in guilty of having had terrible character flaws in her past, there is no way one can make a serious argument that these past sins will influence her husband should he be elected president.

Focusing on them in this entirely disingenuous way is an attempt to smear. Factual truth doesn't rule out smear. Obama admits to using illegal drugs during his youth. Chances are pretty good that he procured them in an illegal fashion. His drug use is fact. It would be smear, however, to attempt to claim that this fact disqualifies him from being president. And this is a fact about the candidate, not his wife!

Although it seems that Michelle Obama has not veered too far from the mindset that produced her Princeton treatise she has addressed that document, in part, as being the product of a much younger person. That's good enough for me. It's ridiculous to hold someone to something they wrote it college.

The comments that concern me, however, were not uttered during her college days, they are contemporary, and associated with her husbands political career.

As I've already indicated, these comments don't necessarily reflect a bad person. I think, based on what I know about her, that she is a good person, but this doesn't mean she's not a dangerous person if her husband becomes president and she has the level of influence with him that I believe she does.

Most Liberals are "good people," but this doesn't mean that I want their hare-brained notions to control my life.

Its ironic that Obama supporters want to put a stop to taking Michelle Obama's thoughts and opinions seriously.

PS: Using a video of Michelle Obama making a contemporary political comment is not an "attack."

As for smears against Cindy McCain not being associated with the Democratic Party, I guess you're one of those rare Democrats who don't believe the "Swift Boaters" were in league with the RNC.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:13 pm
Diane, thank you for your nice comments about my post.


Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
. I think, based on what I know about her, that she is a good person, but this doesn't mean she's not a dangerous person if her husband becomes president and she has the level of influence with him that I believe she does.


Finn dAbuzz, how is Michelle Obama a dangerous person if her husband becomes President? Precisely what has she said or done that indicates she will be a dangerous influence as the wife of the President? To whom does she pose a danger? What dangerous or dire things could she cause to happen?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 08:29 pm
firefly wrote:
Diane, thank you for your nice comments about my post.


Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
. I think, based on what I know about her, that she is a good person, but this doesn't mean she's not a dangerous person if her husband becomes president and she has the level of influence with him that I believe she does.


Finn dAbuzz, how is Michelle Obama a dangerous person if her husband becomes President? Precisely what has she said or done that indicates she will be a dangerous influence as the wife of the President? To whom does she pose a danger? What dangerous or dire things could she cause to happen?


That's easy.

Certainly she's not dangerous in some nefarius and seditious sense, but if one believes that a Liberal mindset holding sway over our government is, ultimately, a bad thing for our country (and I do), her ability to influence her husband is dangerous.
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 05/02/2024 at 10:25:36