Special Treatment For The Royal Lady

Any mention of “For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country.” is ‘low class’. The candidate for change is planning an end-run around Dem primary voters this week. A 41% whipping in West Virginia, a close race in a former stronghold, and sure defeat in Kentucky, probably by double-digits, has the candidate for change spooked.  

 Eight years of George Bush taught me that America is strong enough to survive nearly a decade of inexperience and incompetence. I’m less convinced America can survive another four years of foolishness, and that’s precisely what I see from the Dems.

Eight years too late, the scales have finally fallen from the eyes of many Americans when it comes to the Republican Party. I don’t believe that the current gang is any more ineffective than the last gang. Richard Luger impressed me with his work on non-proliferation. But for the most part Republicans are bums, hypocrites and thieves.

Which brings me to the current crop of Dems. I was thrilled when Jim Webb beat George Allen, but I still think his plan to improve recruiting is second best to that of John McCain. Military families prefer the Webb plan for a variety of reasons, but that doesn’t make the Webb plan better.

Eight years ago I found all talk of a ‘dangerous world’ farcical. After eight years of George Bush, however, the world is indeed much more dangerous. Which is why I and all the folks I know are hoping that Americans do not elect anyone with less management experience than the current clown.

The notion that quoting anti-American statements by the nominee’s wife is somehow ‘off-limits’ is absurd. The candidate for change has been running a campaign against the spouse of his opponent, as much as he has against the candidate herself. How often do we see headlines  screaming about ‘Bill Clinton’ in the press and on blogs?

Michelle Obama campaigns on behalf of her husband every chance she gets. She’s pitching for the job of first lady, yet somehow the candidate wants a press black-out on Michelle’s bizarre remarks.

Frankly, I find Michelle Obama even more cynical and manipulative than her husband. Her statements on camera are not ‘off-limits’ to the media, to the press or to her political opponents. How could they be?

I fully expect to see every McCain blooper and idiotic remark plastered all over the airwaves. Why not? It’s called free speech.

Bill Clinton is fair game; so is Cindy McCain. Suggesting that Michelle Obama isn’t capable of standing up to the scrutiny of the campaign is both insulting and condescending; it speaks volumes about the double-standards the Obama folks are going to demand for themselves in the future.

There’s a mighty shit-storm waiting out there. Many unable to vote in US elections very much hope that you folks will elect someone who doesn’t demand special treatment from the press or opponents. Experience would be a real asset, too.

21 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. Sorry, if others don’t feel the same way. But if you do, don’t suggest to me for a minute I’m doing something wrong by letting others know what you’ve said on camera.

  2. … I have no problem with Michelle Obama being covered by the press … well, at least no more problem than the lousy way the press covers just about everyone.

    The rest of your essay … oh, kidneystones, you are a pill.

    The military families prefer Webb’s plan.  You prefer McCain’s.  Yep.

  3. said was a matter of free speech as far as I am concerned.

    It was politically “tone deaf” Americans need and like more than anything to be constantly told over and over how fantastic their country is and by extension how fantastic they are.

    Might also be true of every other nation in the universe.

    When I lived in Canada and my fellow Canuckians got all sensitive about anything that questioned their self image as the “nice guys” of North America I had the same response as I do when Americans get defensive about being critiqued. Get over yourselves/ourselves and go beyond infantile notions about patriotism. Surely the greatness of this country can with stand a few barbed comments tossed in its direction.

  4. examining Michelle’s words. And if you and the media were to actually take a deep look, rather than pick one statement and hound it, I think you’d find her to be pretty intelligent and perceptive in her views.

    I haven’t watched her alot, but I did listen to one fairly long speech that was carried on c-span. My impression was that she is overall a pretty strong smart lady!!! I’m afraid Cindy does NOT match up well.  

    • pico on May 19, 2008 at 7:29 pm

    On one level, I’m totally fine with her cynicism.  As a woman of color living in the United States, she probably has a lot to be cynical about.  Conservatives who threw a fit over it are playing the usual expectations game: treat people of color as if they live in an ahistorical, ideal United States and refuse to acknowledge that their experience is any different.  Well, that’d be nice if it were the case, but it’s not.

    But on another level, I find it a bit arrogant to say you’re proud of your country only when you are becoming successful.  If other people not named Obama want to say that they’re proud of the fact that a person of color is poised to become the next president, that’s their right: but coming from the person who stands to profit from it, it comes across as amazingly self-centered.

Comments have been disabled.