It's A Whole New Ballgame, Michelle
This is the second time Michelle Obama has said something really dumb (the first being her quote that she'd "have to think about it" when asked if she could see herself working to support Clinton if she won the nomination). [Ed. note: Corrected quote.]
This one's a lot more serious.
This will really turn a lot of people off. For somebody who held a highly-paid PR job, she doesn't seem to have a clue about how things sound. Someone has to tell her this is a whole new ballgame, especially when the famously sharp Sasha Issenberg is covering her on the campaign trail. Look what he caught her saying today:
MILWAUKEE -- So what did Michelle Obama think of the United States before her husband decided he wanted to run the place?
"For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country," she told a Milwaukee crowd today, "because it feels like hope is making a comeback."
Those words will come back to haunt her.
It's almost impossible to control the surrogates on the campaign trail, because they always seem to think the candidate isn't aggressive enough and decide to throw a few bombs. It's even more difficult when the person shooting off his or her mouth is the candidate's spouse. (As Hillary Clinton can tell you.)
Voters aren't into nuance. They just know when it sounds like someone's attacking their country, and the Republicans will take every opportunity to remind them.
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
I guess this is what it looks like when a campaign falls apart in the Internet age: A desperate, feeble attempt to find a way to avoid the inevitable. A willingness to redefine anything, say anything, spin anything, to just stay in the game for one more day. Pretty pathetic.
Yeah, its sad to see Hillary's campaign acting like this isn't it.
The Hillary campaign is the one I was talking about. When I posted that, I didn't even consider that someone would think I was referring to Obama's. His seems to be in pretty good health.
This shows the complete insanity of Obamamania.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Hillary's campaign.
It's a news story about Michelle.
This is an example of the demonizing that you guys do daily.
It's why people view you as zealots.
It's irrational.
Madrak: every time I travel to Canada, I think twice about coming back across the border. Our President and his shredding of the Constitution, use of torture, gutting of the Justice Dept, etc... has made me ashamed of this country. Do we even need to get into his Cowboy Diplomacy and iraq/Iran stupidity?
What did Michelle say that was wrong? It is time we stop playing by the rules of the Rethug-licans. Stop being afraid of them and living in fear. It is a new era. We can criticize again with the new sheriff in town--Obama has your back!
Ms. Madak, get it right. Context says "really proud" and "my adult life." On Hill, Michelle said she'd have to think about "campaigning" for Hillary. You know, the way we have been critical of McCain for sucking up to Bush after he had been smeared by him and then went out and campaigned on his behalf. The idea of an honest presence in politics and the WH can be scary because it's new, but think of how that would change our expectations. Or would you prefer a plastic first lady, like we have now?
3 words: old boy network. McCain will maintain the staus quo: 100 more years in Iraq and nuking Iran. For the country to buy into this- horrifying.
The exact question was: "Could you see yourself WORKING to support Hillary Clinton if she were to become the nominee."
She said she'd have to think about that. I'd have to think about her policies, her approach, her tone."
She is not the candidate, nor has she ever held an elective office. What she says shouldn't be that important, but it will be very important to the majority of Americans who are nationalistic idiots and still believe that "america, love it or leave it" is a sensible statement.
The Obama camp needs to clean this up quickly. They better have her in front of the cameras tonight or tomorrow backpedalling from this statement.
While I don't think she should be villified, she will be. Hell, it's already started.
Someone get this woman a script...immediately.
great, so michelle is not a nationalist.
another plus.
I think that's her authentic self coming through.
They are both highly arrogant.
and you and your candidate are not? I've read your posts!
your comment about the obama's being arrogant is laughable.
I don't take personal attacks seriously. Save the bandwidth. It reflects on the writer more than on me.
BTW, the press has reported that he is highly arrogant and aloof. (From Off the Bus)
His friends commented that is his trait, too, that he has "to watch."
So I'm not calling him that simply because I spot it.
If arrogance is the measurement, the Clinton's cup runnith over.
off with her head!
there -- feel better?
See Susan Madrak's Profile
I'm actually shocked at how many of you say you haven't been proud of your country for anything, either. What about 9/11? Yeah, I hate some of the stupid stuff that went with it like yellow ribbon magnets and that it was used as an excuse for this war, but our country did pull together there for a while and yes, I was proud of that.
As to me "pulling her words apart" - I worked on a large campaign last year and I know this is just the kind of thing Republicans will use in an attack ad. (It's also the kind of thing that has little old ladies ringing the phones off the hook.) It was just dumb.
susan, do you realize that you are making the case for continuing politics as usual? you are essentially saying that since what she will say will be used against her, she should choose her words so that they can't be. this is letting someone else control your actions. this is letting someone else define you.
and if the people are that damn dumb that they won't move beyond it, well then so be it. it doesn't mean that dumbness or pettiness should be accomodated. calculating phrases is a big reason why a lot of people don't like hillary. it's old politics. and how will it change if people keep accepting it and advocating for it?
No, she should be herself. Let it rip.
I know, for me, anyway...I'm not interested any longer in some kind of big Democratic win in the Fall.
After all, partisan politics is dead!
That's passe! Even Michelle would agree. She, too, isn't sure she'd support the party if Obama doesn't win.
So my "hope" that we'd see a great contest between two highly respected candidates was shot down. I think I peaked at the great CA debate.
I realized soon after that Obama had no real positive platform. He couldn't do much other than attack Hillary.
And we were going to end up divided and angry.
So much for hope for a differnt 4 years.
Again Ms. Madrak, "really proud." For the first time I'm "really" proud. Look at the number of people turning out to vote in a primary! Check out the political message boards, blogs and independent small donation for Barack. I believe the debate between Obama & Clinton was the highest rated ever. The American people are paying attention and hoping for not only better days and people in charge but are planning on holding these folks accountable. It shouldn't take a natural disaster or terrorist attack to bring people together or make them active in government. For once, this is happening for positive reasons. Change indeed!
What about 9/11? I am a NYer who has a nephew who worked at the WTC and I frequently attended meetings there. I was very proud of the way that citizens responded to the attacks. But I am disgusted by the way our government reacted, and that includes Rudy Giuliani's wish to postpone elections, and Christine Todd Whitman's assurances that ground zero workers were safe.
What is your point about 9/11?
And of course you will make sure it comes to their attention! ( having worked on a campaign)
No, what happened after 9/11 is for a few days everyone was speechless. Then, for a moment, we were asking the question: "What have we done to make the middle east hate us so much?" And then out came the flags and BUY AMERICA banners and we retreated back into our arrogant, insular view of the world. No, I was not proud of that.
One other thing - a lot of people are spending way too much time microanalyzing what politicians say. They're just people. None of them are perfect and all of them have flaws. Choose the one that best represents your point of view about the country, and be happy you found your answer. If you feel like America needs a new start and you think America needs to find itself again, pick Barack. If you think America is doing just fine and really just needs a better technocrat running it; if you think it really just needs a tune-up and you don't have too much heartburn about Bill Clinton, pick Hillary. Either way, be thankful you're not a Republican, it doesn't sound like ANY of them have what they want. Be thankful you have good, clear choices and you can find someone you believe in.
I don't see why it's such a big deal. In her "adult life" (depending on your definition), she's had 3 presidents: Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43. Is there some part of that time period that you look back and see as a time of universal pride in our country? I'm a lot older than she is, and I've seen two great presidents - Kennedy and Reagan. I liked Bush 41 pretty well, but Clinton was only OK and Bush 43 was a disaster. Obviously, pride in your country shouldn't be so dependent on the president, but the fact is, I don't think it's reasonable to say the country is in a great place unless it has a great president. Sometimes the country makes the president better than he is by himself; sometimes it's the other way around; but it's very tough to find a period of American greatness that didn't involve a great president. If you disagree, name one.
I like your attitude about how the country makes the president sometimes. True.
I think the attitude goes deeper.
I think she's very cynical and critical of everyone but her and Obama.
That is an attitude that I find leads to other statements she's made that are alot like ultimatums to voters.
She made horrible, undignified remarks about Hillary.
Frankly, you can't just pop those things out. They come from deep within.
SHe's got a real streak of negativity going.
She's got an edge to her, no doubt about it. She's not kidding around. I don't know that I'd want to be married to her, but that's OK because my wife won't even let me date.
Ms. Madrak:
Your commentary is shallow, condescending, and self-defeatingly cynical.
Ms. Obama no doubt allowed herself to become distracted by some random impulse toward honesty and made the momentary error of actually listening to a question and answering it directly and sincerely. Not to worry. I'm sure the shark tank created by commentators such as yourself will transform her into the perfect Stepford wife in no time. In an environment where how people sound receives far more attention than what they say, statement of any discomfiting fact can never be more than blood in the water.
It's not voters who aren't into nuance, Ms. Madrak. It's journalists such as yourself.
-Bryan Harrison
"Politics ain't beanbag" said Dooley. This past 24 hours the Obama campaign has imploded. Going to see a lot of damage control coming. My advice is denial is not going to fly.
Perhaps he's just "down." :)
I admit it is not the most sensible thing for the wife of a Senator and Presidential candidate to say, but I'll bet there are a LOT of voters who feel the same way.
The bigger long range problem is that Obama is only a politician. Though we can take hope from the examples and responses to some politicians (for example, Al Gore's decades long commitment to the environment and the response of at long last the past couple of years is heartening), there is no way, especially given the one collasal error after another of the past seven years, that one person, however popular, can turn the tide, especially one who has to play the political game that leads to the most powerful elected office in the history of the world. There were great hopes for Bill Clinton too, don't stop thinking about tomorrow. And though a portion of our populace has seen behind the curtain upon where Ronald Reagan flashed his smoke and mirrors, the Ozmania that attends him speaks more about ourselves than his ability to sell the world Boraxo on Death Valley Days with a winning smile. Deeds not words will be the issue; no one person could or really should be the repository of all our political hope, and both Obamas, fellow Obamacistas, are human and limited. Period. In a democracy such as ours, all our citizens have to take responsibility, whether we like or dislike our President and his/her first lady or husband.
Like Ms. Madrak's concern for Michelle Obama's sentence composition in re Michelle's loyalty, I'm beginning to worry that most voters will find Sen. Clinton's misuse of semicolons in her speeches might well make voters question her Americanism.
I'm not altogether clear whether Sen. Clinton is using too many semicolons, or too few, but I know I'm feeling very uncomfortable on this semicolon issue.
Most Americans are not comfortable using semicolons, so maybe that is the issue.
Or maybe not. If Sen. Clinton could give us a day or two of blessed silence, perhaps we all could sort this out.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
