Video: Michelle Obama: “I’ve got a loud mouth.”
posted at 4:21 pm on May 22, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
That line comes early in this clip, and it’s not the most interesting line she delivers. The most interesting line comes later, long after she says her husband Barack Obama can be president because he deals with her, at the :53 mark when she says that people have voted “against their personal best interest” in supporting Republicans. Where that comes from and what that means after the clip.
So Mrs. Obama riffs on the “fear mongers” (meaning the Bush administration and anyone who supports the war) before deriding voters for voting against their own “personal best interest.” That line about voters (voters who vote Republican, not Democrat, of course) voting against their own self-interest dates back to the Howard Dean campaign in 2004:
As much as Dean would like to focus the election on jobs, healthcare and education instead of “guns, God, and gays,” Lakoff says trying to appeal to practical issues is no way to beat George Bush.
“The conservatives understand that poor conservatives are going to Bush not because it’s in their self-interest,” he says. “People vote their identity much more than their self interest.”
That’s George Lakoff talking. He’s the author of Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, which judging by the ways politicians like Dean and Mrs. Obama use it, must be one of the sillier political tracts of recent years. Lakoff and therefore Dean and Obama argue, with a straight face, that voters who support tax cuts, robust economic growth, smaller government and a strong fight against the global jihad are all voting against their own self-interest. They argue further that such voters should realize that their self-interests are better preserved by progressives implementing policies like high taxation, weak defense, burdensome regulation and all the rest that goes along with progressive politics. It’s nonsense, but it sounds good to liberals like Mrs. Obama because it makes it sound like they’re appealing to some high moral purpose.
How about just making the government competent to perform the actual, stated purposes it is supposed to fulfill, and leave the high moral purposes to religion and religious figures or non-governmental things like reading a book or pursuing a hobby? Well, for liberals government is a form of worship and faith in government approaches religious zeal, so they naturally fuse high moral purpose with government bureaucracy. It’s in their spiritual DNA. Lakoff is their Rick Warren: He gives liberals a purpose-driven politics.
As we get closer to the ‘08 election, expect more of this nonsense to come dripping out from all the Democrat candidates and their surrogates. Just because Dean flamed out in 2004 spewing garbage like this won’t stop others from trying to appropriate it. It sounds high-minded to talk about voters voting against their own self-interest when voting Republican, but it’s actually an appeal to cognitive dissonance: We support a strong national defense because it’s both in our national interest and in our self-interest to do so. We would rather kill jihadis overseas than have another 9-11 here that might harm our own families and hurt our country. We like personal freedom and reject dhimmitude. We support tax cuts because we would rather spend our own money than trust it to government.
Now, these same liberals who’ll argue that voting for liberalism is a vote for your own self-interest won’t hesitate for a second to deride “the rich” for supporting Republican tax cuts. And they’re the same people who support intervention in Darfur, where there’s no obvious national interest involved, but want us out of Iraq, the central front in the war against the jihad. Well, aren’t those rich people just doing what Lakoff and Mrs. Obama would have them do, and vote for their own self-interest? Of course they are. And as I said above, support for the war makes perfect sense from a self-interest point of view. The problem is, rich voters who support tax cuts aren’t voting in ways that help liberals’ self-interest, and that’s what really matters to the liberals. Likewise, Darfur fulfills their government/spiritual needs precisely because it doesn’t intersect with any obvious national interests. Iraq is a dirty war to them in part because it’s all about national interest and has been predicated as a fight for our national defense and survival. That’s not high-minded enough for them.
But getting beyond all that, it was Democrat John F. Kennedy who argued that we should ask not what our country can do for us, but what we can do for our country. Today’s Lakoff Democrats don’t say anything like that and don’t believe in it. Their misguided appeal to self-interest to promote collectivist progressive politics is a repudiation, conscious or not, of the JFK ideal. With his broad-based tax cuts, strong stand against the USSR and appeal to idealism, it’s unlikely that JFK would even be welcome in the Democrat party if he were alive today. JFK would stand alongside Joseph Lieberman and now Bob Kerrey, branded heretics for breaching the progressive faith.
(clip via Beyond the News)
More: Reader Gabriel suggests that Thomas Frank’s What’s the Matter with Kansas is another source of the “Republicans vote against their self-interest” meme. And he’s right.
The largely blue collar citizens of Kansas can be counted upon to be a “red” state in any election, voting solidly Republican and possessing a deep animosity toward the left. This, according to author Thomas Frank, is a pretty self-defeating phenomenon, given that the policies of the Republican Party benefit the wealthy and powerful at the great expense of the average worker. According to Frank, the conservative establishment has tricked Kansans, playing up the emotional touchstones of conservatism and perpetuating a sense of a vast liberal empire out to crush traditional values while barely ever discussing the Republicans’ actual economic policies and what they mean to the working class. Thus the pro-life Kansas factory worker who listens to Rush Limbaugh will repeatedly vote for the party that is less likely to protect his safety, less likely to protect his job, and less likely to benefit him economically.
And so forth, according to the blurb at Amazon. Boiled down, it’s a liberal sneer: They’re just too stupid to know what’s good for them and vote for us!
More: Our mole at the Yearly Kos fest last year ran into a Lakoff session. Said mole was unimpressed, though the Kossacks were evidently inspired.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Of course you can get this
Obama’s celebrity hard to sustain
Obama spin
William Amos on May 22, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Hmmmm…I’m thinking of a word…hmmm…oh yeah!
LOCKBOX!
ronsfi on May 22, 2007 at 4:31 PM
She makes a valid point in that family values have truly fallen short due to the fear-mongering of those who tell us to beware of the dangers of families.
Oh wait, that doesn’t make any sense at all.
Citizen Duck on May 22, 2007 at 4:34 PM
No thanks!
JayHaw Phrenzie on May 22, 2007 at 4:35 PM
I turned it off the moment she said “lax’ed”.
The word is “lax”, somewhat like your attitude toward the pronunciation and definitions of words.
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 4:42 PM
The self-annointed “big mouth” doesn’t know that the swearing in is in ‘09
One-world, two-Americas, multi-culti, on the dole and victimhood - the leftie platform.
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Well said, as always, Entelechy.
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Doesn’t seem like she’s very polished. Could embarrass her hubby.
mikeyboss on May 22, 2007 at 4:48 PM
I think I smell a bit of desperation from the Obama camp.
Lawrence on May 22, 2007 at 4:51 PM
National interest may be part of why some libs see Iraq as a dirty war but I would have to say that for the uninformed libs, Iraq is a dirty war because of one thing. Bush.
Well I guess uninformed libs kind of covers all of them. ;:- )
abinitioadinfinitum on May 22, 2007 at 4:55 PM
Well, Mrs. Obama is clearly pounding the pavement for her own personal best interest.
BTW, isn’t denigrating a person’s freedom to choose what’s in their own personal best interest the mark of a socialist, not a liberal?
Dusty on May 22, 2007 at 4:56 PM
What are the Libs progressive on? Why honor them with this term, ever, without deriding it? I really am seeking samples to justify their self-absorbing adjective.
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 5:03 PM
tickle, are you just jealous that she is bilingual? Maybe you should brush up on your ebonics :-P
abinitioadinfinitum on May 22, 2007 at 5:13 PM
Ha, abinitioadinfinitum…nope I can actually read, speak and understand ebonics too…but my intelligence prohibits it actually taking place. ;)
I also speak piglatin, Cockney rhyming slang, British street slang, some French, some German and some Spanish (which I’m currently trying to forget out of spite to our illegal interlopers). Used to know that crazy Zoom language too, but have, since I was a child, forgotten it.
I’m a linguistic child of the world… SNARK!
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 5:24 PM
Oh..and ahm totally fluuuent in Suthun…proudly.
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 5:25 PM
abinitioadinfinitum, you made me holler :) Thanks for that.
“This country is ready for a multilingual president (shhhh just let it be me God, please, not Barack)” - - Hillary Clinton
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 5:26 PM
LOL
abinitioadinfinitum on May 22, 2007 at 5:30 PM
If you want to have fun with a liberal just simply ask them what is the difference between a liberal and a progressive? Watch them struggle for a minute and then they will finally come to the conclusion that there is no difference. Once they say this then ask them why is it that they felt the need to re-name themselves?
This really is such a fun game to play.
Zetterson on May 22, 2007 at 5:30 PM
tickleddragon, my e-buddy, never, please, never (no matter how upset) confuse the amnesty issues with speaking other languages, which is so much fun, and encouraged for many Americans.
Yes, they get by with English because it is now, no doubt, the world business language. But all ambassadors and foreign relations staff should at a minimum speak the conversational language of where they are sent to work. Only then would they really know, and discern what to do with, what goes on in the world, to the benefit of this country.
Plus, life is just more interesting and provides lots of surprises.
Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 5:31 PM
But, but, but she graduated from Princeton and Harvard. Isn’t affirmative action wonderful?!?!? Now our top universities can give degrees to complete ignoramuses. And those unworthy to be there in the first place. *SPIT*
Andy in Agoura Hills on May 22, 2007 at 5:35 PM
My dear Entelechy…No worries…I was being somewhat facetious. Thus, the “SNARK”. I love learning other languages, and completely agree with you on the value and entertainment of it.
If I had my druthers, I’d be fluent in French, Spanish, Japanese and Scotsman…oh, wait I am fluent in Scotsman. Any Scotsmen want to converse? (preferably single) ;)
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 5:40 PM
Hehe…shouldn’t that be “ignoramI”? jk.
Does she really have an Ivy Snooty League degree?? What a waste of cash that was.
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 5:41 PM
I saw some of this video this morning on Good Morning America. I thought, “She hasn’t learned from Hillary’s problems on the 1992 campaign trail.”
When will she have her “I could have stayed home and baked cookies, but..” moment? Sooner rather than later, I’d guess.
Does America really want a first lady who openly declares that she has a big mouth? Somebody in Team Obama needs to send her to finishing school, despite her Princeton and Harvard credentials.
Anton on May 22, 2007 at 5:42 PM
She needs more than “finishing”…she needs a “beginning” and “middle” too. ;)
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Yeah, a full ride Ivy league affirmative action education on the taxpayers nickel. Simply because she is a Negro. And she still can’t put together a grammatically correct sentence.
Andy in Agoura Hills on May 22, 2007 at 5:50 PM
Let’s do a thought experiment. Imagine a woman we all like and admire — for example, a prominent journalist, TV personality, firecracker, and political essayist — decides to run for high office. Let us further imagine that her husband, a person previously out of the public view, steps up to a high-profile TV interview and declares himself to be “strong willed,” have “a big mouth,” and be “the candidate’s closest advisor.”
Stay with me. I don’t imply that he would do such a thing. It’s just a thought experiment.
Who thinks this would work? Or would he make his wife look like a really weak and foolish candidate? Who would be faster to heap scorn on the guy — his wife’s partisans, or the opposition?
Since the reaction to Mrs Obama’s actions would be so clearly negative if the gender roles where reversed, why do feminist wives in politics keep thinking that the public cares about their accomplishments or their big fat mouths?
Anton on May 22, 2007 at 5:52 PM
After reading the captioned bit by Thomas Frank, I’m forced to remember what life in California was like in 1979, and then what it was like in 1985. Oh yeah, Reagan destroyed the middle class, didn’t he?
The only thing that hurts is that there are working class people without the common sense to realize that conservative capitalism is in their “best personal interest”. I’m not calling them stupid, just subjected to long-term indoctrination. Many of them have never heard or read a real opposing view.
The thing that angers me is a mouthpiece like Mrs. Obama telling America that they don’t know what’s good for them, that they are too stupid to do the right thing and support the “progressive” agenda.
Freelancer on May 22, 2007 at 5:55 PM
She needs to take some lessons from Mrs. Bush who is one classy lady that knows where she fits into the Presidency.
Already when her and her husband give interviews, she overbowls it with her attitude…leaving one to believe..does he have balls enough to be a man? She comes across as a bitch and he comes across as an incompetent immature whiny baby. Neither fitting to be in the white house.
It didn’t help his case when he cried about someone who made fun of his ears. Moron.
Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 6:01 PM
*sings* “Sistahs are doin’ it for themselves!”
Who has the tighter grip:
Michelle on B. Hussein’s ‘nads?
or
Insanity on Rosie’s mind?
I.CAN’T.DECIDE
SouthernGent on May 22, 2007 at 6:37 PM
Wait a minute, she thinks her husband will make a good president because he can deal with her and she’s a strong woman?! What an idiot. It’s not like he’s got it tough or anything, dealing with a wife who’s got a mental illness, drug addiction or debilitating disease,,, oh wait a minute, she’s a loud mouth… ok, maybe I should vote for him…..NOT!
4shoes on May 22, 2007 at 6:38 PM
Kip yapping loud mouth! Your perfect for Barry’s demise! Mistaking “Fear mongers” for people who understand their is a real Islamic Fascist threat and that we are too stupid to know who to vote for! Keep it coming!
Drtuddle on May 22, 2007 at 6:43 PM
I ain’t never heard no ebonics wid da word “lax’d.” /ebonics
Must be Michelle Obama-speak.
baldilocks on May 22, 2007 at 6:44 PM
I guess that would be Obamics.
mikeyboss on May 22, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Love it…will use it.
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 7:01 PM
I cannot see this person as First Lady.
CrimsonFisted on May 22, 2007 at 7:22 PM
I noticed that too and I felt the same way. Maybe some more basic grassroots education is what certain supposedly educated people need.
Glynn on May 22, 2007 at 7:37 PM
I have no idea why the Republican party is having trouble attracting black members. It’s almost embarrassing to see the attitude of many of the posters here thinking a “proper” wife should fall in line behind her husband and not say what she wants.
Ten paces behind the man and silent, right? A woman announces she has a “loud mouth” and we’ve got people here acting like she’s killed someone on film.
But onto the topic. Republicans constantly tell Democrats that they aren’t voting in their self-interest, either fiscally, or (in a very racist sense) that black people are being conned by whites to vote for Democrats or that the black people who vote for Democrats can’t think for themselves. Democrats do it too, but they don’t come close to the level the Republicans do it. Democrats will say people aren’t voting in their self-interest, but they won’t say that those people are too stupid to know their self-interests in the first place. Seeing Bryan acting immune to the “self-interest” shtick of politicians is pathetically funny.
Nonfactor on May 22, 2007 at 7:52 PM
Well I’m glad I could amuse you.
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 8:09 PM
M.O. has it all figured out. She knows whats best for us. Just like the rest of the left. The problem is this doctrine is geared toward the helpless Katrina types. I am a strong American male. I don’t need or want my government to take care of me. I owe it to my fellow citizens to be fully self supporting, and for that matter out of gratitude do more than my share. Qn another note I noticed the Clinton campaign has done a little PR consultation on marketing. Clenus has taken center stage to take the heat off HC due to all the criticisim she garnered at her speaking engagements. Now she is running a pick the campaign theme song contest. These people depend on the ignorance and emotions of their constituency. I heard exerps of her speech where she wondered what was under the carpet in the Oval Office. Man she is the equevelant of a supervisor working at a food stamp office, all attitude no substance. Also there is speculation whether she worked on litigation for the black panther party while she was in college.
sonnyspats1 on May 22, 2007 at 8:11 PM
So it is okay to drop the abortion, euthanasia, stem cell, and gay marriage stuff out of the Republican talking points?
Bradky on May 22, 2007 at 9:37 PM
I called her his Achilles heel on this board when he announced. And, I’ll say it again… folks love him because he is Bill Cosby black, he is Sugar Ray Leonard black, he is Will Smith black…she frightens and or repulses folks because she is Al Sharpton black, she is chuck d, flavor flav, terminator x, professor griff black, she is in yo face black where he is warm and approachable.
Her latest remarks hint at a delicious show once the media attention and rival leaks start to get real hot and her temper fuse shortens.
You can take the girl outta the hood, but you’ll never take the hood outta the girl.
Alden Pyle on May 22, 2007 at 9:40 PM
Nice try, but they’re not just talking points pal. Abortion=civil rights issue, govt has to be involved because we’re talking about the most fundamental right, the right to life. Euthanasia, same thing–absent clear guidelines there will be murder in the name of convenience. Stem cells–keep federal funds out of it. Gay marriage–the gays are the aggressors, pushing it through the courts rather than through the legislative process where it belongs. You ought to direct your ire at them for being so undemocratic in their approach, but it’s always more fun to slam fundy Christers. Roe v Wade was thrust upon the country similarly and it’s been a fight ever since. Do you want that again over another issue? Should the majority who oppose gay marriage just shut up and take it, or should they pursue legitimate democratic means to make themselves heard? That’s not a trick question, and it’s not just a talking point.
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 9:55 PM
HAHA!
American culture being what it is Obama lost a few percentage points nationwide. White middle America loves Oprah, but Michelle’s head rocking neck cocking attitude is exactly what they do not want the first lady to represent. Good job locking in the voters you already had and alienating votes that may have gone your way. Brilliant!
And like all Democrats she is long on hyperbole, short on specifics. When it comes to specifics in an open Presidential debate Obama would get owned.
Theworldisnotenough on May 22, 2007 at 9:55 PM
Succinct and well stated yet again, Bryan. I’d say “we’re not worthy”, but truly, it’s Bradky that’s not.
tickleddragon on May 22, 2007 at 10:05 PM
They’re marching! They’re MARCHING!!!
The fetus and blastocyst are not a human lives. It’s not a right to life issue. You are right, however, it is a civil rights issue, the right of a woman to choose what she does with her body so long as nobody else is harmed (fetus and blastocyst aren’t people, they aren’t harmed). Pigs will fly before the government or any other person or organization forces a woman to have a child once she’s pregnant; that’s the stuff of the third world.
Euthanasia, physician-assisted suicide, or suicide in any form is simply the freedom to control your life. For a government or person to take that right away from someone is to deny that person of their humanity. But I guess you’re also a proponent of marijuana prohibition or governmental restrictions on what foods people can eat as well.
The majority isn’t always right (as I’m sure you’d be quick to point out in a thread on support for the Iraq war).
Quoted for hilarity.
Nonfactor on May 22, 2007 at 10:08 PM
Slamming fundy christers? no…. didn’t see that in what I wrote. Although, on a personal level I’ve seen my kids subjected to the “hell, fire and brimstone” admonitions and taunts of classmates because they were not southern baptists. But that is a whole different debate for another time.
States rights and letting the citizens decide the moral/ethical issues is my preference. Roe v Wade has been exploited by both sides rather shamelessly. I don’t want nine SC justices making those calls .. period.
Just out of curiosity: If Roe were overturned do you see it being turned back to the states as a good thing and what opinion do you have regarding how citizens would respond at the state level?
I ask because it seems to me that the pro life and the pro choice vocal proponents are afraid of putting this back to the states. Maybe because it takes it out of the national political planks or maybe because they are worried the majority of citizens may not agree with them….
Bradky on May 22, 2007 at 10:09 PM
You can find me as hilarious as you please. But go see who started marrying gays against the law in San Fran and who brought the lawsuits that led to legalizing gay marriage in Mass and then come back to reality. That kind of action creates a backlash. Chide your leftist friends for it, not me.
As for abortion, check your science, and note that the proliferation of ultrasound technology has moved the country slowly toward a pro-life position. Ponder why that might be.
As for food restrictions from the govt, no way. That’s what people like Morgan Sperlock are into, and they’re on the left. Righties like me fight that stuff.
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 10:13 PM
By the way, you’re hijacking the thread away from Obama’s inane comments. Don’t think I’m not aware of that.
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 10:14 PM
auspatriotman, don’t do that again…
Bryan on May 22, 2007 at 10:27 PM
blockquote>The fetus and blastocyst are not a human lives.
Nonfactor on May 22, 2007 at 10:08 PM
They are human and they are alive Nonfactor, that makes them “human lives”.
The endorsement of euthanasia by the government is the beginning of the slippery slope. Once the sanctity of human life of tossed out the window you don’t get it back. Today the fight from the left is to allow people to kill themselves but tomorrow the fight for everyone will be avoiding euthanasia once you are seriously ill.
The majority may not always be right, but they are always the majority. And in a republic the majority rules.
Maxx on May 22, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Maxx you beat me to it.
Since ALL of us started out as fetuses(”little one” in latin)and since none of us are now crickets, or bunnies, or martians…that proves that fetuses are VERY human.
I’m still working on my associates degree after 20 years-and even I know that.
annoyinglittletwerp on May 22, 2007 at 11:37 PM
The majority may not always be right, but they are always the majority. And in a republic the majority rules.
Maxx on May 22, 2007 at 11:20 PM
Ha Ha Good one. Thats got to be carved in stone somewhere. Who’s quote is that?
sonnyspats1 on May 22, 2007 at 11:52 PM
Sort of on topic:
We moved to St.Louis County last year-I had lived all but my first 2 1/2 years in the “Chicago Southland”-and we’re moving up to the Western suburbs next week.
Husband got a job ‘up north’.
Though I live within sight of the “Peoples Republic”(and though Carnahan is my rep)I like the freedom one has in MO.
Chicago calls the shots for most of northern Ill-Annoyz.
siiigh.
Having your vote actually count is sooo over-rated anyway.
*sneer*
annoyinglittletwerp on May 22, 2007 at 11:59 PM
“I think we as a country have been a little laxed (?) in our concern for these issues…”
Anybody know what “laxed” means? I mean, I don’t have a sociology degree from Princeton “cum laude”, or a JD from Harvard Law. I am but a modest midwesterner.
But if Princeton and Harvard can’t teach this chick to speak English, how the f*ck is anyone going to teach 12 million Mexicans to speak it?
Jaibones on May 23, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I guess I should have read the other comments first; nice smackdown, tickleddragon, Andy, and that other name that I can’t type.
Jaibones on May 23, 2007 at 12:21 AM
I was simply responding to your statements, if anyone is guilty of “hijacking” it’s you. You brought up morality in the start of this thread, Bradky responded as a joke, and you responded back.
May I remind you that we don’t live in a direct democracy and that our Constitution was designed to protect the minority from the majority.
Well lax means careless or negligent, and one can safely assume that Ms. Obama made a grammatical mistake–something we are all capable of. To see it be made such a big deal about here is pathetic.
How dare this “chick” not speak proper English! For crying out loud, can your nose get any higher?
Nonfactor on May 23, 2007 at 2:35 AM
My goodness! Michelle Obama is about as dumb as her husband, Barry Hussein, The Magic Negro, as the Limbaugh parody calls him.
georgej on May 23, 2007 at 4:29 AM
Actually we don’t live in a democracy at all, we live in a Republic, which was defined by Abraham Lincoln as government of the people, for the people by the people. It was FDR that first started referring to America as a Democracy and it caught on, but that is not correct, see Article 4, section 4 of the U.S Constitution. And the Constitution does protect minority rights, any minority citizen has exactly the same rights under the Constitution as anyone else. So what’s the problem.
Maxx on May 23, 2007 at 9:20 AM
The nonfactor types want “special” rights.
csdeven on May 23, 2007 at 9:31 AM
Hillary drags out slick willie and obama drags out “The Mouth”.
Me thinks these two are in trouble if they have to use their spouses to bolster their image.
“Hey, Michelle Obama!”
“What?”
“Do that again!”
“Do what again?”
“Open your mouth and dissapear!”
csdeven on May 23, 2007 at 9:35 AM
Michelle is pandering to black women. The image of the strong black women is very powerful in the black community. But so is misogyny. So, she panders to the black woman, while assuring black men that she is not going to be able to demasculinize him.
She’s playing blacks the way ¿fred? played the Tennessee voters with his pickup truck fakery.
csdeven on May 23, 2007 at 9:42 AM
I understand that, but he doesn’t.
Maxx on May 23, 2007 at 9:46 AM
And, conversely, limiting these “freedoms” the moonbat want does not lead us to the slippery slope of a dictatorship. Misguided types like nonfactor are in love with making strawman arguments.
csdeven on May 23, 2007 at 10:00 AM
1) Why should visiting heads of states have to learn ebonics just to converse at a dinner party? Should the White House provide Snoopity diggity doggy to translate for visiting heads of state?
2) Since she has injected herself into this, she opens herself up for some questions.
_________A) What kind of person is she? Is she a black sepratist?
_________B) Will she redecorate the White House in whatever motif a black seperatist would use?
_________C) Will she talk back to other countries presidents and first ladies because she is a big mouth and has to uphold the image she is running on?
_________D) She has already shown us that she is a classless race-baiter and doesn’t deserve the respect that a first lady earns.
csdeven on May 23, 2007 at 10:07 AM
Which is why you’re a nonfactor.
Jaibones on May 23, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Bradky on May 23, 2007 at 12:22 PM
How in the heck did I censor myself??!! LOL
Bradky on May 23, 2007 at 12:23 PM
Uhm, my original comment seems to have been put into limbo, but I don’t think I used any controversial words. Anyone offer me a clue here?
Fatal on May 23, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Okay, I’ll try re-posting it, weird.
So I guess the soc*alist (was that the offending word??) no longer believe in the “greater good”? I would think that encouraging someone to vote in their own “self-interest” would mean votes for lower taxes, secure borders, english as an official language and a generally antipathy towards those who would work to undermine the system that we all grew up with.
To me this isn’t vote in your own interest, its vote as WE tell you too, because you are clearly too stupid/uneducated/biased to vote properly.
Nothing more than another group of elitist, stuck up, snobs thinking they know what is better for the “common” folk than the common folk themselves know.
Fatal on May 23, 2007 at 2:02 PM
This woman is an absolute fool. I say let her keep flapping her gums until she uses the phrase “white culture of power”.
csdeven on May 23, 2007 at 2:11 PM
Is that when you forget to axe a question?
James on May 23, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Having a “June gloom” weather condition in Calif. the sun is just trying to get out. To that csdeven says “it’s playing you the way ¿fred? played the Tennessee voters with his pickup truck fakery”.
Don’t know who you had in mind - sure hope it wasn’t Mrs. Bush, the young one. If you did, the Nonfactor will be demoted to the Subfactor.
Entelechy on May 23, 2007 at 3:51 PM
I suggest you look up Republicanism (as defined by Aristotle, not Lincoln) and Liberalism (as defined by Locke and later Madison) we used both in the founding of our country.
Isn’t that exactly what I said? But to pretend as if minorities are treated fairly under the law is a stretch. We’ve come very far since the Constitution was written, but we still don’t live in an equal society.
You do realize that “slippery slope” is a fallacy, whether it’s used in your favor or against. And I love how you accuse me of potentially making a straw man while you do the exact same thing (I’m “in love with making strawman” is a strawman in itself).
If “laxed” is Ebonics I’m married to Penelope Cruz. She added an “ed” to the end of a word! ALERT THE POLICE! “SNOOPITY DIGGITY DOGGY” IS COMING TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!
I know! How dare I make posts you apparently can’t refute! How “nonfactor” of me.
Nonfactor on May 23, 2007 at 10:26 PM
Amen Nonfactor!
Bradky on May 23, 2007 at 11:13 PM