Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Published Letters: 329 Editor's Choice: 37
You know, there was a time when an article like this would have worked me up into a righteous rage.
Now? Not so much.
See, this is what marriage is.
Look, when your spouse has an impossible dream and even the glimmer of a chance of achieving it, and you believe in him *or* her, you support them. As it becomes more and more likely, you make sacrifices for that dream, trusting, of course, that he or she won't fuck it up and throw those sacrifices back in your face, a la Eliot Spitzer.
That's what you do when your husband or wife gets that tenure-track offer at that first-tier university. That's what you do when your spouse has a shot at Congress, or the Senate, or the White House.
While Bill Clinton probably got quite a bit of ego gratification out of his wife's run for office, he put everything he had behind her--even risked tarnishing his image by going after her chief rival. I still maintain, whatever people say, that that is a solid marriage.
And the same thing with the Obamas. If I were in Michelle's shoes, I'd do the same thing. That's what you do when you love someone and have committed your life to them. Someday, eight years from now, maybe even sooner, he'll start to make it up to her. That's just what couples in healthy marriages do. One gives, and then the other gives back. I'm sorry if this sounds retro, but, well, maybe marriage is retro.
Anyways, I'm happy to see all the gushing over her taste in clothing and her elegance and grace. Like him, she's playing it cool. No angry outbursts about baking cookies and giving teas, understandable though that might be (and I sympathized mightily with Hillary back in 1992, believe me). She's not giving the press, particularly the right wing press, any ammunition, and it's driving them batshit that those children are beautiful and bright and happy and perfect and thoroughly unlikely ever to partake in drunken shenanigans like the children of the previous occupant. I say, more power to her.
On the Wolf Blitzer show? When she was talking about helping Obama, was she actually angling for an administration position--something to do with special ed babies (on which she is apparently an authority in the same way she is on energy and foreign policy)?
Just before she started in on William Ayers again?
You can't make this stuff up.
My suggestion, which I may or may not have made before: take Elizabeth Hasselbeck off the View and put Palin on. Oh, that would be a trainwreck worth watching.
That might be a good place for McCain. It would give him a chance to contribute some genuine public service on an issue about which he seems to care deeply, and it would give him a chance to go into that good night in a dignified manner.
I'm not going to scrutinize every word and gesture of the Obamas' interview for hidden meanings, but my husband turned to me after watching it and said, "I just don't believe this." What a concept, having a president who seems more concerned with making sure Americans understand things clearly than with spinning them, and someone who--for all the talk about his arrogance from the blowhards--actually sounds humbled by the office. I don't know if we're ever going to get used to it.
But we laughed aloud to hear him mention Harold's Chicken Shack. Man, I miss Hyde Park, and I worry that it will never be the same now that it's suddenly being described as hip and trendy, rather than where hell freezes over.
1. ZOMG!!! Lieberman!!! Much as I'd like to see that man and his shit-eating grin out of the Capitol altogether, do you people really want the kind of ideological witch hunt that went on during the Republican reign? How'd that work out for you?
2. Let's see. Obama could do a George Bush and put a bunch of cronies from Chicago (machine politics or the appearance thereof) in office, or he could go with seasoned veterans of a successful administration. Which would cut down on the Keystone Kops factor? I'm going with the Clintonites for $400.
Like someone else said: this guy ran a flawless campaign. He beat the Republicans. Every time he opens his mouth, he sounds like a grownup talking to other grownups. HE HAS NOT BEEN SWORN INTO OFFICE YET. I'm going to give him until April before I even start making judgments.
Go outside and play, people. The election's over. Get a life! At least until January 21. We'll be fine, with or without Lieberman.
Oh, and to whomever wants to blame the Clinton DOJ for Waco, it sure as hell wasn't federal agents who incinerated those children, and the Elian Gonzales affair was ultimately a screechingly melodramatic family feud that happened to involve the INS. And you know, after living with an enormous federal blind spot eight years in the making, I will sleep safer at night knowing that the Attorney General is a veteran of aggressive campaigns against domestic terrorists.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
