|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| jkelly80 wrote: |
| I wouldn't say that Gopher is raising these questions hysterically, I was referring more towards the general right wing 'blogosphere', news site message boards, Glen Beck, Ann Coulter, Hannity etc. |
Very well. Point taken. Not everyone with concerns about Michelle Obama stands with these idiots, however, as you yourself demonstrate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Pligganease wrote: |
| ...the reality of being a minority and a woman in a country long dominated by white men. |
I will comment on this stupidity in direct language, however. Because on this kind of simplistic allegation, I do have concrete and well-defined views.
The United States, and American society at large, have changed between the 1600s and the twenty-first century, Pligganease. I regret that you and others embrace this unchanging view re: African-American women and their neverending minority status and domination by white men, etc.
|
Does saying that Michelle Obama recognizes "the reality of being a minority and a woman in a country long dominated by white men" neccessarily imply believing that things haven't changed in the USA since the 1600s? I would think that one can acknowledge change in society, while at the same time realizing that things in the past affect the way we live in the present.
Otherwise, why would people such as yourself bother with the formal study of history? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When was this the reality, again? And how are you not furthering the notion that Michelle Obama and many of Obama's supporters are focused on white men as a special problem in American society who need to be dealt with once she and her husband take the Oval Office?
According to Wikipedia, Michelle Obama was born in 1964. That would place her in college and law school -- at Princeton and Harvard -- from the very late-1970s through the mid- to late-1980s or so.
Does she strike you as existing in a United States where white men dominate black women?
How long would you propose is appropriate for playing the slavery-and-its-heritage card, On the Other Hand?
I have pointed out elsewhere that many believe that studying race history is certainly about emphasizing past injustices in order to further reify divisiveness. I get the idea that you lean in their direction, based on your rhetorical question. There are other visions, however. And if I am wrong here, please expand on your vision for "the formal study of history."
Finally, reviewing the Wikipedia entry, I am more than ever convinced that understanding Michelle Obama's worldview and politics are important in understanding a possible Barack Obama presidency...
| Quote: |
On a conference call to prepare for a recent debate, Barack Obama brainstormed with his top advisers on the fine points of his positions. Michelle Obama had dialed in to listen, but finally couldn't stay silent any longer.
"Barack," she interjected, "Feel -- don't think!" Telling her husband his "over-thinking" during past debates had tripped him up with rival Hillary Clinton, she said: "Don't get caught in the weeds. Be visceral. Use your heart -- and your head."
The campaign veterans shut up. They knew that Mrs. Obama's opinion and advice mattered more to their candidate than anything they could say.
With the Democratic presidential race wide open, Mrs. Obama, a 44-year-old Princeton- and Harvard Law-educated hospital executive, is assuming the same dominant role in Sen. Obama's public life that she has in his private life... |
Wall Street Journal
I simply want to know where exactly "the [alleged] reality of being a minority and a woman in a country long dominated by white men" sits in her consciousness with respect to whatever else occupies the highest levels in her thinking on "America."
And, again, I do not think it unreasonable to ask such questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
If I did all those things, I'd be satisfied with my life. But I'm not a potential first lady. Now, stack Michelle up against Elizabeth Edwards or Bill Clinton.
Now can you understand the lack of enthusiasm? |
Ummm, of all the First Ladies, how many of them had actual careers before they entered the White House? Well, Nancy Reagan was an actress. Hillary Clinton was a lawyer in addition to being First Lady of Arkansas. Laura Bush taught school, but I don't remember how long she did that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nancy Reagan was the first. 1980. Before that, none of them had careers. I'm pretty sure Barbara Bush and Tipper Gore didn't. I personally don't think it's necessary for the spouse of a presidential candidate to have had a career, and if she did have one, I don't see how it's important or relevant. Laura Bush has done just fine as First Lady and she was 'only' a school librarian or something.
PS: What did Wiki leave out of Elizabeth Edward's profile that impressed you? It doesn't look different than Michelle Obama's. From what is on Wiki, her career has been less socially active than Obama's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
If I did all those things, I'd be satisfied with my life. But I'm not a potential first lady. Now, stack Michelle up against Elizabeth Edwards or Bill Clinton.
Now can you understand the lack of enthusiasm? |
Ummm, of all the First Ladies, how many of them had actual careers before they entered the White House? Well, Nancy Reagan was an actress. Hillary Clinton was a lawyer in addition to being First Lady of Arkansas. Laura Bush taught school, but I don't remember how long she did that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Nancy Reagan was the first. 1980. Before that, none of them had careers. I'm pretty sure Barbara Bush and Tipper Gore didn't. I personally don't think it's necessary for the spouse of a presidential candidate to have had a career, and if she did have one, I don't see how it's important or relevant. Laura Bush has done just fine as First Lady and she was 'only' a school librarian or something.
PS: What did Wiki leave out of Elizabeth Edward's profile that impressed you? It doesn't look different than Michelle Obama's. From what is on Wiki, her career has been less socially active than Obama's. |
Well, in terms of character development, I think Elizabeth's bout with cancer is quite relevant. As for what you said about the dubious relevance of having a career, I must agree. But Elizabeth's presentation and the things she has said have revealed things about her that I like (I like her FAR more than her husband). Michelle's presentation and the things she has said has revealed very little about her except that she's really proud of her country now that her husband has a chance. Oh, yes, and she understands the plight of working people because she experiences the rising cost of summer programs for her children.
I mean, c'mon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Oh, yes, and she understands the plight of working people because she experiences the rising cost of summer programs for her children.
|
 I'll grant Michelle does not have the common touch. A lot of people making $300,000 a year struggle with that. I remember Bush I got embarrassed when he had no clue what anything cost--the next week his aides arranged a trip for him through a grocery store.
I still say Betty Ford was the class act of modern First Ladies. Oh. Did I say class act? I meant class clown. She was a hoot. Only a few times in my life have I laughed as hard as I did the week after she said she didn't doubt her kids had tried dope and sex. I thought the entire Republican Party leadership was going to die of apoplexy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Was it right to hold it against Bush that he visited Bob Jones University?
Then why is not okay to hold it against Michelle Obama for taking pictures with the wife of Farakahan?
Actually what Bush did is a little worse but not so much so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It seems like the media read too much into her comment about being proud to be American 'for the first time in her life' when running the Obama campaign. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Well, in terms of character development, I think Elizabeth's bout with cancer is quite relevant. As for what you said about the dubious relevance of having a career, I must agree. But Elizabeth's presentation and the things she has said have revealed things about her that I like (I like her FAR more than her husband). Michelle's presentation and the things she has said has revealed very little about her except that she's really proud of her country now that her husband has a chance. Oh, yes, and she understands the plight of working people because she experiences the rising cost of summer programs for her children.
|
Christ almighty, what is it with you Americans and your obsession with the presidential family?! Is this a recent thing, some sublimated longing for monarchy rearing its scaly head out of the mists? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Was it right to hold it against Bush that he visited Bob Jones University?
Then why is not okay to hold it against Michelle Obama for taking pictures with the wife of Farakahan?
Actually what Bush did is a little worse but not so much so. |
Well, if Obama had spoken at a NOI university that had the rules that BJU does then I would take my fake Canadian vote and pass it over to John McCain. As it stands, my fake vote is still up in the air. ...the Americans wait with held breath, I'm sure...
Since we are discussing things totally unrelated to policy, I think Michelle Obama is sexy as all hell.
http://www.chicagomag.com/images/Archive%202001-2004/1004obama.jpg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Then why is not okay to hold it against Michelle Obama for taking pictures with the wife of Farakahan?
|
Doesn't it depend on the circumstances? No one has told us what the occasion was for that photo. Suppose it was taken at a charity thing for battered women? Should Mrs. Obama ask beforehand for a list of people invited and refuse to attend if Mrs. Farakhan was invited? No, I don't think she is obligated to do that. If the photo was taken at the annual ball to buy rope to lynch whitey, then I'd feel differently.
As it stands at the moment, I think its cynical and cheap to criticize Mrs. Obama for attending a function that we know absolutely nothing about.
| Quote: |
| It seems like the media read too much into her comment about being proud to be American 'for the first time in her life' when running the Obama campaign. |
Laura Bush agrees with you. She said Michelle's words were misconstrued. It seems that way to me, too. Who hasn't said something that lends itself to misinterpretation? The old "I didn't mean that the way it sounded". That's why politicians and people in the public eye try to speak as little as possible off the cuff.
I also object to the idea that if she wasn't proud then she had to have been ashamed. I lived through the same years as her adult life and there were times I was not feeling proud of my government...I was feeling angry, frustrated, disappointed, disgusted.
But if people are determined to be cynical about a line in a speech, there is nothing much you can do about it.
| Quote: |
| Christ almighty, what is it with you Americans and your obsession with the presidential family?! Is this a recent thing, some sublimated longing for monarchy rearing its scaly head out of the mists? |
It can be pretty peculiar, can't it? In recent administrations we've been spared the full brunt of it. If you're old enough, you'll remember the constant barrage of stuff about Jackie, Caroline and John-John. It was pathetic. I think presidential families learned from it and have protected their children--and us--from the worst of it. (It isn't necessary to go to the monarchy comparison, though. It's just typical celebrity nonsense.)
In this present situation, there is a legitimate reason to look at the candidate's wives. I personally don't think we need to know much about them. They do end up representing the country in an official capacity, so it is important that they didn't 'entertain' the entire football team in high school one night.
I am surprised at the intensity of feeling against Michelle Obama. If there were something specific about her to discuss, it would make sense. As it is, I can't help thinking there is some fear-mongering going on. The Republicans know that Obama is leading right now and that all campaign season long their base has been rather discouraged. The news from Iraq has been good lately, so that issue isn't working in their favor right now. The present administration used fear tactics to great advantage earlier on. I don't think that lesson went unnoticed. One way to stir up the base is through fear.
Last edited by Ya-ta Boy on Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:55 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Christ almighty, what is it with you Americans and your obsession with the presidential family?! Is this a recent thing, some sublimated longing for monarchy rearing its scaly head out of the mists? |
No.
First ladies wield influence and power in the White House. Start at least as early as Eleanor Roosevelt and work your way forward to Nancy Reagan and Hillary Clinton.
Were Barack Obama to win this November, Michelle Obama would wield comparable influence and power. Some of us have not leaped onto the Obama Bandwagon and are not falling all over ourselves to serve as the Obamas' public-relations spokespeople. Some of us, in fact, would like to know exactly what -- or at least more or less what, especially its tone -- Michelle Obama would whisper into Barack Obama's ear were they to win power.
I doubt that even the worst case scenario would be all that bad, however. And as I believe I have clarifed before, although I will not likely vote for Obama, I could live with an Obama presidency (just as I have lived with the W. Bush presidency). Win some, lose some. Shrug. Life goes on. Await the next election. Just two years away.
In any case, it is not unreasonable to ask these questions of Michelle Obama. What does she really think about "America?" And, no, not a fetish with family members, either. Just politics. If you can understand that, great. If not, not.
Last edited by Gopher on Wed Jun 25, 2008 4:15 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Huh? If the Republican committee was so worried about Harding's mistress, doesn't that show she was considered relevant, and that there was a chance that at least some of the press would see it as their business?
|
In a way, but not exactly.
In those days, the media was much more circumspect about what they reported about politicians, being careful to protect their privacy. Did you know that FDR was never shown moving from his wheelchair to standing up? He was president from 1933 to early '45, and many people did not know he was paralyzed. It just wasn't shown.
Allegedly, members of the media knew about Wilbur Mills and Fanny Fox for quite some time before they ended up in the Tidal Basin and the story couldn't be hidden any more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
Well, in terms of character development, I think Elizabeth's bout with cancer is quite relevant. As for what you said about the dubious relevance of having a career, I must agree. But Elizabeth's presentation and the things she has said have revealed things about her that I like (I like her FAR more than her husband). Michelle's presentation and the things she has said has revealed very little about her except that she's really proud of her country now that her husband has a chance. Oh, yes, and she understands the plight of working people because she experiences the rising cost of summer programs for her children.
|
Christ almighty, what is it with you Americans and your obsession with the presidential family?! Is this a recent thing, some sublimated longing for monarchy rearing its scaly head out of the mists? |
No. The wife of the President is extremely influential if she wants to be. You think Hillary Clinton didn't influence Bill? Its like a cabinet position, except you sleep with the President, and have the President's full trust. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
