Letters to the Editor
-
What Michelle Obama said in Chicago was...
"So our view was that, if you can’t run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House. So, so we've adjusted our schedules to make sure that our girls are first, so while he’s traveling around, I do day trips. That means I get up in the morning, I get the girls ready, I get them off, I go and do trips, I'm home before bedtime. So the girls know that I was gone somewhere, but they don’t care."
Sounds to me like she was talking about her own family. Of course, a few over-eager reporters (like the Chicago Sun-Times' Jennifer Hunter: http://www.suntimes.com/news/hunter/518408,CST-NWS-hunter21.article) immediately interpreted it as "a swipe" against the Clintons, because that makes a better story. Don't fall for it.
-
More Obama Bashing...
Does ANYONE doubt that Salon has a concerted, site-wide effort to trash Obama?
Carol, good grief, ever heard of Google?
Michelle Obama explained exactly what she meant about her "If you can't run your own house" comment, quite clearly, and it had nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.
And just in case you haven't read any of that, here is the FULL quote, in context.
"Our view was that, if you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House. So, so we've adjusted our schedules to make sure that our girls are first, so while he's traveling around, I do day trips. That means I get up in the morning, I get the girls ready, I get them off, I go and do trips, I'm home before bedtime."
So thanks for doing your part today as part in Salon's ongoing campaign to trash Obama.
-
Another Salon author projects their issues onto their subject
Carol ...
You have just embodied the polarizing feminism you speak of. Do you have an agenda here? I wonder. Seems others do as well.
I like your writing here more than most others in Broadsheet. Please consider re-writing this.
-
To All of You Miss Scarletts....
So sorry: Michelle Obama won't play Mammy to YOUR entitlement. Here's a secret (which you'd know if you enjoyed honest relationships with smart, accomplished, opinionated, and beautiful Black women like Michelle Obama): such women will NEVER TRULY respect YOUR TYPE of woman. Moreover, they won't give a care re: whether you respect them. They aren't interested in being your Oprah-on-the-Spot (even if THEY love Oprah). Such women reject the role of "sidekick subordinate" and were not put on the planet to make you feel better about them, as they meekly, toothily support YOUR reign as princess. Keep your long knives, backhanded compliments, passive-aggressiveness, and golf claps to yourself.
So, for the LAST time: Michelle Obama didn't refer to -- opaquely or directly -- Bill Clinton's affairs when speaking of keeping one's house in order. STOP THE LIES.
Why do you think your pettiness, jealously, and bitterness aren't obvious? You and your leader, Maureen Dowd, aka "Hater Extraordinaire" -- who, despite her dolling up her looks and rolling back her brains, can't find a man who'd tell the WORLD that she was "his rock" or "the love of his life," whereas "prickly" Michelle Obama found one who did exactly THAT on the night of his Iowa win -- need a huddle. The rest of us can't STAND your unresolved issues being passed off as objective commentary.
-
What's this "we" s**t, Kemosabe?.....
Dear Carol.....?
I just read "That's the sort of feminism we can do without."
Would you please let us know who/what exactly (or maybe just vaguely, to whatever extent you've bothered yourself to articulate the matter) this "WE" is?
A previous poster's instincts and critical faculties were quite on-the-money in referring to a certain sort of polarizing "feminism".
Many happy thanks in advance,
David Terry
www.davidterryart.com
-
@Totoro - You BET there's an agenda -- it's All Hillary Shilling, All the Time
Yup...she has an agenda. Just like Joan Walsh, and Shapiro, and Farhad Manjoo, and Debra Dickerson, et. al., ad nauseum.
They like Hillary, they don't like Obama or the other candidates, and they want you to know it. But they want to maintain the fiction of impartiality, so they've adopted a passive-aggressive style of communicating it.
EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE that mentions anything about Obama is passive aggressive.
From Debra Dickerson's Obama is not black enough article, to Michael Scherer's "Hillary is from Mars, Obama is from Venus" which suggested that Obama was the "woman" in that matchup, to Joan Walsh's steady drumbeat of Hillary-worship thinly disguised as political coverage, it all comes together to paint a very clear portrait of an online magazine that, try as it might to pretend that it is covering the political race from an unbiased "liberal" perspective, is actually shilling for Hillary.
My theory: I think Joan Walsh wants to follow a Stephanopolous trajectory -- if Hillary is elected, she sees herself in a West Wing job, and after that, TV pundit.
If not that direct, I think Joan favors Hillary, and feels that she can't come right out and say it -- why, I don't know, as an editorial endorsement would be more intellectually honest than all this dissembling and pretending to be impartial.
I'm just mystified -- mystified that a magazine that purports to be providing political coverage can have such an obvious, distorted bias in favor of one candidate, and yet continues to deny it, despite article after article after article of obvious evidence.
They must think we're stupid, or we can't read, and that too tells you what they really think of us, their readers.
As for Salon, I still read here sometimes, but I did not ante up this year, for the first time, after years of being a paid subscriber since they first started subscriptions. I wrote to Salon to explain why -- drivel from Dickerson, the illiberal horror that is Paglia, and most importantly, the continuing anti-Obama/pro-Hillary drumbeat. I kept getting the same "why haven't you renewed" letter -- I kept sending the same response explaining why...but no real person ever bothered to respond -- which tells you all you need to know. They'll must all off figuring out the next article to trash Obama and glorify Hillary.
-
Lies for Hillary
Sometimes it's no longer useful to put the same, old political automatons back into office.
Hillary is one of those.
Obama represents a new way to run this country, a refreshing change from the other tired Democrats now running for the ticket.
And you, Carol, can seem to help yourself in swiftboating Obama just because his wife isn't the same old tired feminist that you represent.
It's time for a change - thank God for Obama!