|
||
Reading The Pictures: Obama Lover, Michael Powell
Conservative columnists accuse her of being unpatriotic and say she simmers with undigested racial anger. A blogger who supported Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton circulates unfounded claims that Mrs. Obama gave an accusatory speech in her church about the sins of "whitey."
--From second paragraph of Michael Powell's NYT feature on Michelle Obama
Seeming to formalize a problem where there isn't one, today's NYT piece on Michelle Obama (penned, yes, by "Obama lover," Michael Powell) frames Michelle -- because, I assume, she's been adding staff and is about to host "The View" -- as being embattled and in need of a relaunch.
I guess with Hillary out, Powell needs some pot to stir, subtlety reinforcing "the angry Michelle" meme by describing her as a "less mutable" black woman who "burns hot."
With the photo framed under the title: "After Attacks, Michelle Obama Looks for a New Introduction," the clapping reinforces the idea of introduction, but the complex facial expression -- with Michelle distanced from the viewer behind the shoulder of the man in front of her -- only raises more questions about where she is coming from. On top of that, the first line of the story -- although addressing an unrelated circumstance -- ends up editorializing on the image by describing Michelle as sporting a "trained smile" as she is asked to consider her "complicated public image."
In point of fact, the photograph was taken back in March while Michelle Obama was listening to BHO's speech on race, a bold and politically risky effort in the midst of the unrelenting media storm over Jeremiah Wright. Given those circumstances, it makes perfect sense that Michelle's complex of emotions emanates from the heat of the moment, not some alleged personality issue or supposed present-day public relations problem.
After Attacks, Michelle Obama Looks for a New Introduction (Michael Powell - NYT)
For more of the visual, visit BAGnewsNotes.com.
(image: Jessica Kourkounis for The New York Times. Philadelphia. March, 2008. nytimes.com)
Follow Michael Shaw on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bagnewsnotes
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
A lot of people in the pundit class are really revealing how little they know about Michelle Obama and black people in general.
It is going to be a very interesting political season as white people begin to really see black people and learn what they are about
I'm not sure if it's a general lack of knowledge about black people but the media sure is proving day after day how little they know about the Obamas and the campaign Barack has run so far. So many times I've heard them make a big deal about something, e.g. Barack's Father's Day speech. If any of them had bothered to do any research at all, or had been paying attention to the multitude of speeches he'd given before, they'd know that he's often talked about fathers taking more responsibility or how the whole family can make life better for the kids. They're so amazed at some of the things Michelle is saying. Did none of them ever bother to attend one of her speeches before? She's told the same stories multiple times and people who've heard her speak come away enchanted and enthralled with Michelle. She doesn't need any stupid makeover. The media does. But what do I know? I watch a little bit of tv and waste too much time reading blogs but I'm far more knowledgeable about these things than the highly paid pundits are.
Leave Michelle ALONE!!
She will be the BRIGHTEST, most accomplished, most capable etc., and DEFINITELY the Sexiest First Lady EVER>
We LOVE YOU MICHELLE!!
Don't study the racist Republican Right Wing Attack Dogs.
you would think that the same voters who picked the guy they could have a beer with
would embrace the mom who loves to shop at Target
Hah! You'd think so, wouldn't you?
According to the new WaPo poll, Michelle Obama has higher favorability ratings than Cindy McCain. Thus, why does her more prominent role in the campaign have to be about a makeover rather than capitalizing on an asset? On this morning's 'Morning Joe', David Axelrod’s took obvious offense to the claim she was being “made over”. His tone mirrored the reaction of many African American like me, “made over to what?”
Could it be that most of the pundit class, mostly white men with limited to no interaction with African American women, projecting their own negative opinions or fear of Michelle Obama?
The pundit class is clueless - completely out of touch - and possibly WILLINGLY so! What's their motive? Profit.
Where are all the Hillary Clinton supporters? Shouldn't they be defending Michelle Obama against any sexist crap she has thrown at her? Honestly, MO is clearly being attacked because she is a strong, plain spoken woman who isn't planning on hiding any thoughts or feelings she has just because her husband might be president. And of course their is a huge amount of racism involved.
But as far as the media using her strengths as a woman against her.... hello???? Anyone out there? Hillary? Ferraro?
Damn, it's those crickets again.
Ah, but Michelle isn't a privileged white woman!
I'm a HRC supporter and I think it's total crap, it bites sexism sucks but I tell you after months of getting my head bit off, or told that I'm whinnying every time I open my mouth and cry sexism well it gets old .
I',m curious though were you defending Hillary when this stuff happen to her probably not.
Privileged white woman please you all seem to forget the what Hillary went through during Bill's campaign. Granted racism not an issue but the fact that she was a strong woman with and opion was a huge problem, they hated her remember. Good lord a woman who could think for herself lord knows they don't like that.
Repubs which in turn control much of the media like their women to stand their with that blank look in their eye and say nothing.
Seriously do want Ferraro saying anything she did'nt do much for HIllary.
I have a bet on with my husband that they will endorse McCain for the general.
Who? The NYT? I couldn't agree more. They are another organization who will never admit that they were wrong, and I thought the piece HuffPo had on a day or two ago in which the NYT padded McCain's Navy career showed how dedicated to the truth they are, NOT.
I find it interesting that the MSM never really addresses McCain's 1st marriage or the fact he and Cindy were having an affair before marriage. Or Cindy's stealing of prescription drugs -- for all of the labels of the media as being liberal it seems like the misdeeds are always kept hidden - except on political sites or publications. It's interesting there hasn't been alot of attention paid to Bill Clinton's questionable business dealings either. To me it confirms that the press, like the rest of our country is controlled by big corporations - and they are wigging out at the idea of a candidate not currently on their payroll. That's been evident during the Bush administration - why aren't the networks all over Bush? The MSM reported ad naseum about Swift Boaters, but very little about Bush's past - heck Rather got fired for doing it. Just makes you wonder. . .
In that picture Michelle looks as though she is thinking.
Though to MSM commentators with a neocon agenda to push through, it may be they're not used to the facial expression of someone actually thinking about what someone else is saying.
Thank you for this post. I was horrified this morning to see this front-page "story"; I would expect to see this kind of crap on Fox News. Not long ago I read a piece about how Michelle Obama's roommate at Princeton felt when she found that her roommate was black, and this is only one example of what she has encountered in her lifetime. Ms. Obama is entitled to some 'tude and I'm glad to see it. That she should have to reinvent herself, or have someone else do it, because some white people choose to be offended by her response to racism is a crying shame. And that the NYT should join in the discussion makes me very sad. Ms. Obama is going to make a dynamite First Lady and I cannot WAIT to see what she will accomplish in that position. The Obamas are obviously devoted to each other and to their kids -- what a novelty to have such a family at the helm.
For MIchelle Obama...............every knock is a boost......
I like Michelle just fine the way she is. Insecure people are the only one's taking a shot at her. She has accomplished a lot in her life and I doubt she has time to sit on blogs all day like most of us.
One more reason I hate the MSM. There is no reason anyone should not like Mrs. O. Everything they keep bringing up to show her as angry or unpatriotic is based on something manufactured by the media. I hope Obama wins, which I think he will, and I give her a lot of credit for keeping her cool. This is also another sign of how weak the repugnants know their candidate is. They literally have nothing to go on.
"There is no reason anyone should not like Mrs. O."
Of course there is a reason, SHE'S BLACK!!
That's what this is all about and that is the message they're trying to send, but of course that's not something they can say out loud.
What we on the left should start to realize is that Republican voters are essentially cowards. Every message that comes out of the Republican leadership to their followers is that there is something that you should be afraid of. Whether it's Rev Wright (A Preacher), Mexican immigrants, Gay people or black people, central to their message is always, You Should be Afraid!!
I'm honestly starting to believe that cowardice is a central ingredient to the republican voter. They're really good at pretending to be tough (kind of like a bully), but at the end of the day they are just more susceptible to fear mongering than the rest of us.
She is smart too, they don't like women to be smart.
Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs have been far angrier than Michelle has the capacity to become. What makes right wing white males so angry?
Man, what you said, and furthermore, if you look at the hateful faces of E.D. Hill, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Laura Schlesinger, Condi Rice, Mary Matalin, Bay Buchanan, the several horrid Melanies and Michelle Malkin, well...jeez...it's Republican women who have the anger problem.
Compared to these women, Michelle Obama is about as angry as mom's vanilla pudding.
I don't think it's so much an issue of re-defining Michelle Obama as it is not allowing others to define her by their own terms, which is what happens when you leave a vacuum for others to step into. I don't think she needs to change anything. And I'm not sure she could, even if she wanted to. She's a strong, accomplished, capable woman. If some people don't like her, so what? The only people liked by everyone are usually those who bring nothing to the table. Even Tim Russert had his detractors. I'd much rather deal with an intelligent, opinionated woman than some Barbie Doll whose only purpose is to show up for photo ops. If Michelle's intensity scares folks a little, if she make people angry from time to time, good! We could benefit from being a little uncomfortable every now and again.
Exactly right, OBX. Don't let *them* frame the character and the issues for Michelle or Barack either for that matter. You hit the nail on its head.
What a shame that Michelle Obama is now the focus instead of Obama. But of course if you have nothing to criticize him for then you go for the next best thing..his wife. What's next..scrutinizing his daughters facial expressions? Gawd...this is a disgusting article!!
Sorry, but you Obambots here at HuffPo are seriously detatched from reality. The average american doesn't seem to like her. Others who have taken time to try and get to know a bit about her... still don't find very much to like.
She has accomplished a few things, sure, but that does not make a person attractive (not physically) or likable per se. They need a bit more than that. And, once again, I refer to the New Yorker article on her. A piece in which she was given more than ample opportunity to show herself in a different light, to demonstrate to a small audience who she really is. She failed at that task.
So yeah, people don't like her. Accept it. All of you complaining about dislike for her are seriously hypocritical considering most of you are part of a group of people who flat out hate (not just dislike) an accomplished woman for reason beyond those which others have for disliking Michelle.
good god! speak for yourself. I'm an average American and I like her.
Also, why didn't you initial cap the word "American" in your second sentence? how profoundly un-American of you to leave it lowercase. A true American always caps the word.
They hated Hillary during bills campaign too. They don't like strong women it scares them.
I'm not trying to make this about Hillary, but I remember them saying really negative stuff about her back then that was really unfair it was like oh she said something intelligent. Isnt she supposed to just stand their and shut up.
Yeah, and the average American seemed to really like George W. Bush a few years ago. Just goes to show that the average American is a racist AND and moron. All of us non-average Americans think that Michelle Obama is intelligent, accomplished, and an asset to her husband's campaign.
Well, unfortunately for you and I, all americans have the right to vote... no matter how average they are. I mean, we just witnessed a primary in which millions of people decided to take part and back an inferior candidate... having never been interested in politics before. Great.
What is your point? Everyone has the right to vote, and so you can't just ignore their opinions... otherwise you end up with bad leaders.
The New Yorker article is somehow relevant in determining whether MO is liked or not? I have never heard such nonsense! These writers have no more standing (or sense) than you or I. These are people who are seeking to get national attention so they write about people in the most sensationalized way and hope that they will be noticed.
What? I don't think too many writers write for the New Yorker in the hopes of gaining widespread attention. And there was nothing sensationalized at all about the article. The author was constantly looking for something... constantly giving Michele an opening to demonstrate something to the reader (all positive I might add), but it just didn't happen.
And it wasn't the writer's opinion of her. The writer simply did the best job they could of brining us some insight into Ms. Obama. I don't think the writer tried to have any influence one way or another over the reader's opinion of her. That is to say, it was well written.
Fine though. She can be boring and average... but people just need to accept that as the reality.
I like her. I really like her. She is highly intelligent, cool, down to earth and a good mother. Most of all, I love the way Barack loves her. It is nice to see a couple in love. Maybe they can help teach America how to have a positive healthy relationship/marriage.
Michelle Obama....taking women to a new level
Question for you, and all the others parroting the same nonsense... how do you know she is down to earth, cool, and a good mother? Do you really know her that well? And if so, why does that matter?
And what of her intelligence? Who do people allways call her intelligent? Cause she went to a good school? Cause she has a law degree? Sorry, but there are plenty out there who can say both... and I wouldn't classify them as intelligent. But I'm sure you can all tell just from the media coverage.
Right, except that she has never said or done anything particularly intelligent. She hasn't undressed a supposedly intelligent man, like say... B. Obama, in a serious of nationally televised debates has she?
Are you sure about those average people? Maybe it's just the below average Americans who don't like her. But if you have proof that it's the average ones, I'd be interested in seeing it. Please provide a link or cite the source for your claim.
Thank you.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
