Last night, Barack Obama’s wife, said she was really proud of America and American politics right now. But, she said it in a way that’s easy to deliberately misconstrue if one is so inclined. Abandoning basic rules of logic, we are getting folks who conclude that if it’s only now that she’s *really* proud of America, that must mean she despised America before now — really proud and hate being the only option, obviously. So, we’re getting a chorus of “OMG! Michelle Obama hates America!” And, now you have Bill O’Reilly letting lose with:
I don’t want to go on a lynching party against Michelle Obama unless there’s evidence, hard facts, that say this is how the woman really feels. If that’s how she really feels — that America is a bad country or a flawed nation, whatever — then that’s legit. We’ll track it down.
A “lynching party”? Really?
Even John McCain’s wife, Cindy McCain got in on the action. The McCain campaign really doesn’t want Ms. McCain to become the story. She has some fairly prominent skeletons buried in shallow graves. And, the story of how St. John came to marry his second wife doesn’t exactly square with the narrative that he’s a Straight Talking Man of Principles.
I suggest we all just back off and leave the wives out of this.
The full Michelle Obama quote:
What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something — for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I’ve seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it’s made me proud.
Clearly the words of an anti-American America hater. Start the lynching, Bill.
tim zank says
-Doug, did you listen to the clip? He was more than fair and actually defends her (Ms. Obama).
Don’t play the Media Matters “out of context” game, you are certainly above that.
Hate O’reilly or not, he went out of his way to give her the benefit of the doubt.
Brenda says
And he *did* suggest we wait for evidence before killing a potential First Lady of the United States in a historically-approved method (with pointy white party hats!).
Lou says
But having a debate,as balanced and fair as it may be set up, based on one misconstrued,awkward statement by Michelle Obama questioning her patriotism, seems to be in itself not keeping with patriotic american values .
Shouldn’t we have pictures of her stomping and spitting on the American flag,or similar?
Brenda says
Lou, I can’t agree more. It is a complete non-issue except… the fact that people are making an issue of it is an issue in and of itself.
It holds up to the light the things people give weight to when selecting a president.
Appalling.
As was O’Reilly’s comment, BTW.
(and… with the President’s approval rating where it is… who are all these people feeling REALLY proud of our nation right now?)
Parker says
Um, Brenda?
The President is not the country. The President is also not the economy.
Neither is the President the philosophy or the morality.
Nor the urbanity or ecology (o.k., now I’m losing the thread of whatever point I had…)
Doug says
Oh, that’s no fair. You are making a good faith effort at trying to understand the sentiment Mrs. Obama intended to communicate. No fair trying to understand why she is proud now. You are supposed to studiously avoid context and intent on your way to getting the vapors about Mrs. Obama’s America hatred.
Doug says
Oops, Parker slipped in there.
Buzzcut says
That is only one of the quotes from her. She actually said the same thing twice in one day. You chose the quote that was slightly more flattering to her.
I think that she needs to articulate what things she is “frustrated and disappointed by”.
My biggest beef with the Obamas is that they don’t show… respect? for where they came from and where they now are. By all rights, speaking in probability terms, a man with Obama’s pedigree (single mother, multiple divorces) is more likley to be in jail than running for the Presidency. The Obamas have 4 degrees from Ivy League institutions, they make over a million dollars a year. Would it kill them to talk a little bit about what an amazing country this is that they are where they are?
Doug says
I think he does talk about that in a very poignant way. Take this from his post-Maryland/VA/DC speech:
I think he’s expressing exactly what you suggested here.
Buzzcut says
He talks more about the “burden” of his and Michelle’s student loans than gratitude for the lives that they have.
And really he can’t talk too much about that, because it wasn’t government that gave the Obama’s their success. It was their own hard work and willingness to get an education, no matter what the price.
Buzzcut says
Doug, I have another Michelle Obama quote that’s going to blow your mind even more than my interpretation of the last one.
Brenda says
Parker,
No, but I think it can be a valid indicator.
Let’s see…
economy
philosophy
morality
urbanity
ecology
Nope, still not feeling REALLY proud of recent. Guess I won’t be running for office any time soon (or heaven forfend, marrying someone who is running).
Buzzcut says
Keep in mind that Michelle Obama’s adult life started in 1985.
Can you really say that NOTHING good has happened since 1985?
What about the best albumn ever? The Cure’s Disintegration? Huh? What about that?
If nothing else.
To even say that there is nothing to be proud of since Dubya became President is asinine. Seriously. You might not like politics, but there’s a lot that’s happened outside of politics. If you allow politics to determine how you feel (and pride is a feeling), you really ought to be on medication.
Of course, the clinically depressed make up a large number of Democratic ranks. Nothing new there.
There you go, Michelle. You should be proud because Prozac became available during your adult life. Look into it.
Brenda says
Has someone claimed that? I thought we were talking about a claim of being “REALLY proud of my country.”
Buzzcut says
Damn, you got me.
I’m really proud of the iPhone and iTunes. Broadband is peachy, too.
Jason says
I think her words can be read to mean “I have not been very proud of my country since 1985, but now I am”. You can read her words that way, and I can see where people would make games with that.
However, what I think she should have said (if I understand correctly), would have been something like:
“This is the most pride I have ever felt for my country in my adult life”
or
“I have never felt this so much pride in my country than I do now”.
Living in a world where people in a blog about Indiana can debate a single paragraph spoken by the wife of a man running for his party’s nomination can be a pain. I don’t envy her chore of watching every word she says.
However, I don’t feel bad for Bill. He’s used to it.
T says
What’s not to be proud of? Between the unjustified war, the mistreatment of veterans, the scrapping of previous rules against torture, the spending by individuals and our government as if we’re all children with our first credit card, our government insisting on securing the right to spy on us without an oversight, the stupid boyish swagger of our incompetent president who we as a people elected twice, and, well hell I know I’m just leaving so many highpoints out because most of my brainpower is occupied by the task of thinking about how awesome my country is all day long. Yeah, we’re collectively kicking major ass. There isn’t a flag big enough to absorb all my joyous tears. I think loving the country more the more it screws up is the highest form of patriotism. And the thing I love most about my country is how many people are willing to proclaim that they love it even more than I ever thought was possible.
Doug says
These colors do *not* run.
Buzzcut says
T, as a doctor, can’t you write yourself a perscription for Prozac?
Come on, dude, get HAPPY!
Thanks for getting me in the head of the people Michelle Obama was talking to. I… understand now.
I think that you need to divorce AMERICA your country from BUSH your President. The failures of Bush, such as they are, in no way diminish the accomplishments and simple awesomeness of this country.
T says
Our country actually accomplished all of the above. The torture and renditions are done in our country’s name, not Bush’s. If that’s ok with you, then that’s cool. I disagree. I’d rather not take a pill to make it feel better.
Individuals, groups, and often our country as a whole does awesome things. But I wouldn’t say that this particular moment in our history is a particularly high one. A lot of people don’t have much of a problem with our being in the torture business, or the unilateral (is it still “preemption if you didn’t really preempt anything?”) warmaking, or the surrender of civil liberties. I guess if you include those people in “the country”, then the awesomeness level goes down a few clicks, too.
I love my country. I do the things people who love it should do. I served in the Army, pay my taxes, never miss an election, and try to hold my government to some high standards. I guess that just saying, “I’m proud of my country no matter what it does, and if I start to feel unproud then I’m willing to take a pill until the feeling passes” would qualify as some kind of love, too. I suppose everyone has to love it in their own way.
Parker says
Sending aircraft carriers for tsunami relief is kind of cool, isn’t it?
tim zank says
There was that “little” eartquake in Iran in 2003 we helped a tad with too.
http://www.usaid.gov/iran/
Probably just a cover for Bushitler & Halliburton.
Bottom line is, people like T see the worst in everything, a glass half empty kind of guy, if you will. Nothing, and I mean nothing will ever make people like that believe anything good. I don’t know if you can attribute it to upbringing or a chemical imbalance, but I know you can’t make them happy.
My dad used to call that optirectosis. Your optic nerve becomes crossed with your rectal nerve thus giving you a shitty outlook on life.
No country in the history of mankind has done more FOR others than ours has. That’s a fact.
Doug says
That’s kind of funny since it was the polar opposite of how I described T when I was giving a toast at his wedding.
I recounted a trip a few years back where he dragged me up a tough trail while I was pissing and moaning much of the way. There was a ghost town of sorts at the top about which I wasn’t particularly interested. But damned if T didn’t get so animated about it and see exactly what was interesting about the whole thing. I advised his bride that if she stuck with him, not only would he get her to the top of that mountain, he’d help her understand why it was a great place to be.
T says
And then Doug made a nice little Jim Jones reference before asking everyone to drink the toast. And everyone happily complied.
It was nice when we helped out tsunami and earthquake victims. But isn’t that what we’ve always done? That’s kind of baseline good behavior that we’ve always been noted for, and definitely something to be proud of. But it doesn’t offset the items I’ve noted above that we’ve just started doing lately. When discussing whether our violating the Geneva Conventions should affect our pride in our government or country in general, is “we’ve helped earthquake victims” really a credible answer to that? I never thought setting the bar low was the key to our greatness.
Sure no country in the history of mankind has done more for others. So let’s just sit back and rest on our laurels a bit.
Pila says
Tim Zank and Buzzcut: Have you even met T? I haven’t and sometimes don’t agree with him, but he hardly deserves the assessment you’ve made of his personality.
Is it really fair to make conclusions about a person’s outlook on life or mental health based upon a few posts on a blog? If so, take a good hard look at your own posts. What are you telling the world about yourselves?
Lou says
I disagree with one statement above,at least in a qualified way. The President is indeed the living symbol of the USA.The other widely known symbol of the USA is the Statue of Liberty. The former is what we are and the latter is what we have been.Both are valid evaluations. Bush is a disaster for us in Europe, and that’s noteworthy because in Europe are our mother countries for so many of us,and we have the same western cultural roots historically. Whenever I go to Paris ,I see the small duplicate Statute of Liberty setting on the Seine River and am reminded that French thinking inspired the writing our own Bill of Rights to the our Constitution.For me still, the term ‘freedom Fries’ replacing ‘French fries’ in the Congressional cafeteria stands out as the one immediate symbol of the Bush legacy.If I were capable of writing a comprehensive book on the Bush administration I’d call it ‘Freedom Fries’.Maybe someone else will plagarize my title.I won’t care.
One thing that is striking about Obama is that he doesn’t attack personally. He sticks to the point of the debate, and that’s why he deflects attack.Reagan was also like that. Imo, I think all of us are judged more on how we fight back then how we are attacked,and Obama has kept the high ground.
An Obama presidency would immediately enhance our imagine everywhere,and I’m in no way predicting Obama would be a great president,but that’s not the point. A typical comment in Germany or France would be that finally the USA has made great strides in solving our deeply embedded cultural race problem,and that would be an indication of higher thinking to come.It’s looking that H.Clinton cannot win the Democrat nomination and I do regret that we will not have a first woman president, but if Obama is wise beyond what we would normally expect of a politician,he would appoint her to a high place in his administration ( assuming he’s elected), or ask her to be VP on the ticket.Clinton and Edwards deserve to be in a place of high profile in any new administartion.
Brenda says
I think a spacial shift just took place in my brain. Lou’s comment regarding an Obama presidency enhancing our image is a concept that hadn’t occurred to me. We have lost a lot of our political equity (clout) in the international community in recent years. Obama might be enough of a radical divergence that we could make a fresh start. Thanks Lou.
tim zank says
I honestly think you guys sound like a bunch of 9th graders trying to decide who’s gonna be the student council president.
If you honestly want to elect a President so that Europeans will think better of us and not call us names, explain to me how you even find your way home at night? It’s as though you are living in a dream land.
Doug says
Yeah, diplomacy is for sissies.
tim zank says
It’s not about diplomacy, it’s about this euphoric groundswell of “feeling good” about ourselves and our image as the sole basis for turning over the reigns of our nation to a junior senator just because he comes across as a nice guy.
I’d be all for “new blood” in Washington, but i think it would be wise to have a little substance and experience too.
Brenda says
Tim,
Let’s say we have two guys.
Guy 1 is a calm, rational, intentional, individual who thinks things through, listens to what others say, and processes their arguments. His responses are eloquent and elegant, and on point.
Guy 2 is a blusterer, a drama queen who resorts to name calling when he has nothing constructive to say, and puts a “way out in left field” spin on both the facts of the case and the arguments of others instead of debating the issues at hand. People don’t want to be around him, let alone work with him. They certainly aren’t willing to listen to him.
Guy 1 is the position the United States used to hold in the international arena. When he spoke, even if others disagreed with him, they were willing to listen and think about what he said because of their past record with him, and yes, their high opionion of him.
Guy 2 is where we are stand now.
Branden Robinson says
Heh,
And here I was afraid the world was turning upside down because tim zank said something sensible back in the home mortgage foreclosure thread.
Fly your freak flag high, and let it wave, man.
Branden Robinson says
Doug,
To answer the question you raised in your post title.
Yes, yes, I think they do. Bill O’Reilly and the other “independents” who are so objective that they take a stance opposite the Democratic Party on any issue, are united with the paleocons and neocons on this issue.
Obama and his wife are a big black nail sticking up from the oriented-strand board of American politics, and these guys can hardly contain their glee as they proceed to hammer that shit down in the guise of political debate.
As they spend a lot of time telling us how “blind to race” they are, they’d better not stand up from behind the desk with the cameras running after talking about “lynching parties” for Michelle Obama.
They don’t want everyone noticing their erections, after all.
Buzzcut says
I thank T for his honest comments to mine. I think Michelle Obama and T have a lot in common. Maybe I was being a trite flippant in the Prozac comments. But I just can’t help but think that people who are so negative about their own country, and who take the “glass half empty” side in EVERY situation, might have some bigger issues.
And I think that T and Michelle speak for A LOT of Democrats.
Again, I thank him for his honesty as well as his articulateness, if that is a word.