For the first time in her adult life, Michelle Obama, aspiring first lady, felt pride in her country--and lo, this was even before Wisconsin!!!!!
Because until this moment in time, until this generation came along, until this glorious Leader emerged, there was only darkness and meaningless Party affiliations.
13 comments:
Non issue. Or does Michelle Hate America Rush?
She said she was really proud...
This means she could have been proud before but not as proud. Do you need to judge her psychological state for all statements throughout her life?
Isn't that much?
Of course Rush is having a field day with this, they all are.
It was a boneheaded comment, she surely did not mean literally, this is the first time as an adult she has been proud of her country? Yet, that is what she said.
But forget dittoheads for a moment. She has said, unsure whether she could support Hillary Clinton should she carry the Demo banner. Now she says this.
It isn't just dittoheads and other assorted flag-wavers who would be disgusted with such utterances, you know. Also annoyed might be people long invested in American politics.
the struggles of a farmer in iowa are no different than what's happening on the south side of chicago? um. wow.
anastasia:
Why yes, didn't you know? Just like there was no substantive difference between the Clinton and Bush administrations, each represented the 'old way.'
Now, we are past all banal distintions. A new Demoratic Party, yea a new nation, all trivial socioeconomic and political matters swept aside by a great Transcendent wave of people feeling really, really good about whatever it is that one particular human being, and his wife, happen to be talking about at the time.
Durn it, yer right. Based on that comment alone, I vow not to vote for Michelle Obama in the election
But seriously, is it a mistake yes. It is as bad as the Clinton and McCains are making it out to be. No.
I am MUCH more troubled by hearing Clinton this morning on the radio calling for the restoration of the Florida and Michigan delegates. Gimme a break.
As every schoolyard kickball player knows, it no fair to change the rules when you start losing.
"It is as bad as the Clinton and McCains are making it out to be. No."
It's emblematic of the narcissism on which Obama's entire campaign Rhetorically rests.
This guy, and his wife, have come, finally, to speak for Change. We have all been waiting for this moment.
As for the complaints about Michigan and Florida, it was totally ignorant for them to sign the pledge in the first place and this does corrupt the process.
Harrogate loves how people channel this, don't change the rules in mid-game stuff, without even offering the courtesy acknowledgment that the rules screwed up the nomination process. Now you have huge electorates being treated as though they do not matter.
To add insult to injury, in the case of Florida it was a Republican state legislature that moved up the date.
Does Harrogate advocate changing the rules and seating the delegates? No. But neither does he advocate proudly sticking to the rules. What is needed is an acknowledgement by Dean, Clinton, and yes--Heaven fordid--the Great Barack Obama--that they mightily messed things up and that they need to find a way to address it, if theypossibly can.
There is still a lot of time left between now and the convention. Perhaps a do-over would be best.
But in any case, spare us the canard about playing by ignorant rules ignorantly concocted.
Sure, Obama is an egomaniac, but so are both Clintons and so is McCain. And, as much as he guffaws in self-depreciating humor, Huckabee has got to be a wild narcissist. Otherwise, he'd be out of this damned race already!
As we've discussed, it takes a power-hungry crowd-lover to enter into the public realm in the way that is necessary in a high-profile political race.
How does name-calling forward the debate?
I don't see how that comment is emblematic of the narcissism that you suggest it is.
As far as the rest, I agree %100 with a do-over in those states. I also agree that it was a problematic decision on the part of the DNC and one I personally don't agree with. As a Texan, I have rarely gotten excited about primaries b/c they didn't matter by March.
But, to believe or even suggest that Clinton's REVERSAL from supporting the decision to questioning it is based on her concern over them getting their say is naive at best and malicious at worst.
It is perhaps accurate to say that she was willing to give the DNC their way because she thought she wouldn't need them. Now, she does and all of the sudden their voice is very important.
Your constant and repeated defenses of all things Clinton is bordering on Obaman.
Stop the presses. Someone is WRONG on the internet again. VERY WRONG.
When did Harrogate ever deny that Clinton's motives were self-serving in this manner?
Of course her concern is intertwined with the fact that she has wins in those places.
Harrogate's point was, this is a clusterfuck, and for either Clinton OR Obama OR their supporters to be saying anything else, is simply silly.
And it is of course true that one of the clusterfuck elements is, these two very important swing states are being shut of of the process because of Demo incompetence, combined with a Nation's overblown level of respect for three states getting to go before everyone else.
That you do not see the narcissism of her comments does surprise Harrogate, given your usual quickness to point this quality out in others.
Wither that, or it's the biggest freakin coincidence in the history of politics, that Her Man's spectacular political rise dovetails with her first adult experience, being really proud of America.
maybe she is proud not of what her husband is doing but for the fact that, as Megs pointed out, very few of our Representatives are African Americans. Very few in the country's history has been. There have been even fewer African American governors. Most African Americans could not vote until the middle of the 1960s.
Maybe it is not about his campaign but that idea that a campaign by an African American can run and run by transcending race. This has not happened before.
The history of the right to vote is not a very happy history.
This is not narcissism. This may be redemption.
solon:
That is beautifully said, and very persuasive. Harrogate confesses he did not read her comments along racial lines, at all, until reading your post. This is to Harrogate's own discredit, of course--a blind spot especially grievous in light of how charged up he has been over gendered language, of late.
And, if this is indeed what Michelle Obama is saying between the lines, Harrogate knows it would be a Rhetorical pitfall for her to actually say it more explicitly. Unfortunately, on the one hand the "redemption" Appeal would be a wholly reasonable point to be making, but on the other, if she said what you have just written, she would be banally accused of "playing the race card."
Ah, I thought you meant MY comment about the Clintons and McCains was narcissistic not hers. Yes, I can see how hers is, although I too like Solon and Meg's point.
Post a Comment