Michelle Obama Tells CNN 'Fortunately We Have Help From The Media'
By Noel Sheppard | June 25, 2011 | 10:13
In today's "Truer Words Might Never Have Been Spoken" segment, Michelle Obama told CNN's Robyn Curnow Friday, "Fortunately we have help from the media."
Such came during an interview with the First Lady in Botswana aired on the 6PM installment of "The Situation Room" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
ROBYN CURNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The long view, obviously, the bigger picture is what you're talking about. You're going on safari here. When you go back home, you're going to walk into also a pretty dangerous environment, a political presidential campaign, a new presidential campaign. How is the family ready for this? It's going to be quite vicious, isn't it? How do you prepare for that?
M. OBAMA: You know, it's -- we're -- we're ready. You know, our children, you know, could care less about what we're doing. We work hard to do that. And...
CURNOW: How do you do it?
M. OBAMA: Well, we -- fortunately we have help from the media. And I -- I have to say this, that I'm very grateful for the support and kindness that we've gotten, and people have respected their privacy. And in that way, I think, you know, no matter what people may feel about my husband's policies or what have you, they care about children. And that's been good -- good to see.
But when it comes to the campaign, you know, we're ready to work hard. We did it before, and we'll do it again. So we're rolling up our sleeves and getting on with it.
Truer words might never have been spoken.
Now, in fairness, she was talking about how the media handle her children.
Even so, could you imagine a Republican president's wife saying, "Fortunately we have help from the media?"
On the other hand, you have to respect her for not only recognizing it, but actually saying it during an interview with CNN.
Makes you wonder how this didn't end up on the cutting room floor.
(H/T RCP via @conservagrl)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Media collaborating with Obama for power & gain
Submitted by Slyrr on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:30am.
Duh. If it weren't for the media carrying their water, covering their backsides and lying for them, they'd still be hosting terrorist parties with Bill Ayers, dandling at Jeremiah Wright's knee, and stealing money from Chicago by giving each other 'show up' jobs at hospitals.
When a liberal media bigwig leaves thier job, it's recently meant they're joining the Obama cabinet. And when an Obama cabinet member leaves, they get jobs in the liberal media. Revolving door, incestuous, whatever you want to call it. All they're doing is job swapping between the Obama admin and the liberal media.
We've got tape and evidence of Obama inviting liberal media figures to his office to 'advise' each other.
It's time to call the Democrat media what they really are - collaborators with the Democrat party.
Stop the presses!!
Submitted by filioscotia on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:56am.
Rip the front page.
OMG ! First Lady admits they get help from the media in shielding the Obama children from a lot of what's going on outside the fishbowl they live in.
"Well, we -- fortunately we have help from the media. And I -- I have to say this, that I'm very grateful for the support and kindness that we've gotten, and people have respected their privacy."
Well hush my puppies !! Is she talking about the same media that never misses an opportunity to attack and embarrass Sarah Palin's family and children? The same media that never missed a chance to embarrass GW Bush's daughters when they were in college?
She must be talking about a different media. Did a new, kind and supportive media creep in and take over while we were asleep? One that respects politicians' rights to privacy and leaves their children alone?
Nah. The MSM only does that for Democrats. Republicans and their families have to put up with unending attacks and invasions of privacy from creeps who're determined to destroy anybody with the letter "R" after their name. That's been an obvious fact of political life for a long time, but it's revealing and refreshing to hear a high level Lib actually admit that it really does go on.
How did the Obama family's keepers in the state-controlled media allow that gaffe to get out?
I can't believe I'm defending Michelle Obama
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:56am.
but, seen in context, she was talking about the willingness of the media to respect the privacy of her children.
You know, our children, you know, could care less about what we're doing. We work hard to do that. And... [ ]
Well, we -- fortunately we have help from the media. And I -- I have to say this, that I'm very grateful for the support and kindness that we've gotten, and people have respected their privacy.
Sorry, even though they ARE doing it, I just don't see THIS as claiming that the media are helping her husband's presidency.
It's appropriate that they do this; it's just too bad their consideration doesn't carry over to the families of people they don't like.
→ Somewhat agree, mb
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:01am.
Fortunately, Obama won't get voted into a second term in which his kids will mature and get the Bush daughters treatment.
his kids will mature and get
Submitted by motherbelt on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:18am.
his kids will mature and get the Bush daughters treatment.
AS IF!!
→ Won't happen
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:23am.
And certainly David Letterman won't go there even though he thinks Piper Palin is fair game.
Exactly, motherbelt
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:03am.
Take the quote out context and it appears to be of political significance. Listen to the video or read the entire transcript and there just ain't any there there.
We've got to very careful to avoid pettiness in our dueling with the Left. They will use examples such as this to convince their minions and others that genuine discoveries of media bias are nothing more than twisting facts.
There are plenty of examples of media bias everyday. This story is a nothing-burger.
I agree with both of you.
Submitted by dydx on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:57am.
This was clearly her talking about the media not treating her kids like they treated Sarah Palin's kids. Well, that's not exactly what she said, but that's essentially what it's all about.
But this story, if it weren't about Michele Obama talking about her kids, would have been significant. Alas, like what you said...it's a nothing-burger.
Agree, mb
Submitted by bkeyser on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:43am.
Although I'd say she left out Conservatives and the Tea Party since not one attack, joke, or insult from the right has been levied toward the children - which is nothing more than good manners and appropriate respect.
I'd venture a guess that the same can't be said about her side of the aisle, however.
I agree that the headline is
Submitted by killa37 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 12:36pm.
I agree that the headline is deceiving..................but I also think that there is a lot of truth to what she said that goes much deeper than laying off of her kids - who the Obamas don't hesitate to use occasionally for PR displays.
But I gotta say that this dope is as clueless as her dopey husband when it comes to saying things 'off the cuff'..............do these people need a teleprompter for EVERYTHING that comes out of their mouths??? I was just reading her 'French Fries' remark yesterday, and there is no shortage of brainless and clueless remarks that come from her mouth - dating back for as long as anybody cares to pay attention...................just like Boy O'Blunder.
So, yeah, maybe they DO have the media on their side???
Total lack of empathy
Submitted by ThisnThat on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:47pm.
MB, Michelle obama was implying that the MSM is all honey and sugar, and was only doing their job -- as the nation expects -- to protect children from rough and tumble politics. But Michelle -- nor her husband Barack -- have ever come out and scolded the media for totally trashing Sarah Palin's kids. Not once.
So I can't defend her. She knows the treatment Palin is getting, and instead of making it all about "the obamas", she could have taken a moment to ask that the media treat all politician's kids the same way. But she didn't. And I have to assume that she didn't because (a) she doesn't have a clue, or (b) she likes the current setup, and agrees with the Palin-trashing. Either case, she doesn't have my respect.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
Mrs. o'dumbass
Submitted by jessieH on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:18am.
And the truth shines through the B.S.!
Yeah, I remember
Submitted by misterbee241 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 11:36am.
I remember all the "respect" the media showed the Bush girls. Spit.
Off-topic but urgent
Submitted by StarAZ on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 12:35pm.
What is UP with her hair lately?
Or WHAT HAVE YOU?
Submitted by StarAZ on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 12:36pm.
my husband's policies or what have you
His policies or "what have you"? The policies, vacillation, lying, constant blabbering, etc that is just about ruining our lives and the country? Those?
Straw Man
Submitted by PunditPariah77 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:20pm.
I agree with the NewsB's about 97% of the time, but in this instance, two words come to mind: non. issue. As Noel allowed, the first lady was CLEARLY talking about the media's handling of her kids. To spin this into something more sinister is simply a waste of space. I know, I know - that one sound bite ("Fortunately we have help from the media") is hard to resist, and makes for a great headline, but if we're gonna have integrity in going after Leftists who routinely spin stuff out of context for their own purposes, shouldn't we resist the temptation to set up such an obvious straw man?
Just my opinion, for what it's worth.
Peace,
Rob
Agreed but - although she
Submitted by krendler on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:31pm.
Agreed but - although she didn't intend it that way - her comment can easily be applied to HER and her husband. The media is there - it is their JOB, as Chris Matthews points out - to protect them.
Responding to krendler:
Submitted by PunditPariah77 on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:53pm.
I do not dispute anything you have said w/respect to the priorities of the MSM ... my point is that, by misappropriating her comment, turning it into a sound bite with no context, and then parading it around like its some kind of "gotcha" is disingenuous, and we on the Right ought to be above that.
above that, really?
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 2:16pm.
You honestly think that "we on the Right" ought to be above that?
Kinda like Huntsman?
No thanks.
With so much at stake for this country, anything and EVERYTHING is fair game.
This is about our country's survival. This isn't about being "nice" anymore. "Nice" doesn't stop our country's downward spiral into the abyss.
-Jon
EVERYTHING is fair game...
Submitted by beauxdog on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 3:43pm.
Yep... let's tear those kiddies apart... limb by limb. I heard Malia was sleeping with David Letterman and that Sasha wants to come out of the closet! So, it ain't true... it makes great gossip! And EVERYTHING is fair game.
I hear more and more "conservatives" who are frustrated by the left having success with their willful dishonesty and vulgarity in dealing with rivals. The answer is NOT to lower ourselves to their level. The answer is to fight with the truth and facts. If you are just as misleading and dishonest as they are... then you ARE NO BETTER THAN THEY ARE and it doesn't matter who wins because we are all screwed.
Stop and think of WHO our audience is and should be. 20% of the folk out there are hardcore liberals. These are the folks you want to be nasty to... but nice or nasty, nothing you ever say will persuade them. Then there is the 20% who are hardcore conservative. You can say nothing wrong that will dissuade them from their course. They might not approve of you, but it will not side track them... preaching to the choir. The remainder are the independents... the moderates... those split between social conservatism and fiscal conservatism... oh, and don't forget the libertarians. These are the people who we need to convince to join our side in this fight. To gain their trust, their vote... we need to be informative, honest and above board. If they perceive us as no better than the liberals, then we have lost the war.
The bottom line is that "nice" doesn't mean weak. You can be firm without being insulting or vulgar. We can present our case that shows the uncommitted where they should throw their support without lowering ourselves to the liberals standards.
It's not a matter of lowering standards to "their" levels...
Submitted by ontheright on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 4:32pm.
...I don't believe for a second that anyone would advocate lampooning and/or maliciously "attacking" a politicians child (unless of course you are a media elite and the politician is a Republican). However, what's good for the goose is damn sure good for the gander - if "kid gloves" are not used proportionately and across the board, what good are they?
We as conservative Republicans (or whatever political stripe) should demand "equal protection" under the media microscope - to do anything less is to succumb to the liberal rott that is our 21st century mainstream media; hopefully new digital media will save us all.
So, the Obama girls should be spared the media scrutiny, why? Oh, that's right, because they are black and dimocrats...makes perfect sense.
Affirmative action at its finest.
Only the truth
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 5:50pm.
I never said anything about making up rumors and stories and etc. I just get tired of the Republicans who will have lies tossed about them all day long and they just DON'T respond at all. It's like they'll turn the other cheek and then turn the other cheek again!
One example, take any one of those morning talk shows, I've seen it several times where a Republican and a Democrat will be responding or saying something posed by a moderator and the Democrat (Chuckie Schumer is a good example, he's done this before) will just say an outright outrageous lie that the Republican, sitting less than 2 feet away, SHOULD have refudiated or at least said something, but he doesn't and it's like Schumer(or other) didn't say a thing at all. That's the kind of "nice" we don't need. That's what I see in Huntsman and that's what the libs like.
That's where I was going with that.
-Jon
Thank you, Jon...
Submitted by beauxdog on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:49am.
I am sorry I misjudged you. When people come out and say we should "do WHATEVER is necessary to win" or "EVERYTHING is fair game"... it shows they have surrendered to playing the liberals game. WE are in the right. WE have truth on our side.
"I just get tired of the Republicans who will have lies tossed about them all day long and they just DON'T respond at all. It's like they'll turn the other cheek and then turn the other cheek again!"
Bingo. Right on. I am frustrated with that too. Bush was the worst. That is because not all "Republicans" are "conservative". They are politicians not statesmen. They are more worried about retaining power than doing what is right... just like the liberals.
And your Schumer example is not exactly fair (but isn't far off for different reasons). I don't consider myself the sharpest knife in the drawer and neither are our elected officials. Schumer had his remark planned, but our guys didn't have the wit to respond effectively. Elect my wife and she will clean their clocks. Our guys weren't prepared and didn't know what to say... how to respond effectively That is bad, but not criminal. Get enough down home folks who don't speak congressese in office... and Schumer will not have such an easy time.
Regardless, we can win this battle without resorting to using the enemy's tactics.
Being "nice" in the world of politics---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 10:56pm.
may well be perceived as a weakness.
People who are busy laying out the rules to others about "what" to say and "how" to say it, generally end up getting their asses kicked before they even finish up with listing "the rules".
You want to win a fight?
Strike first if at all possible, but regardless, always hit back harder than you are hit.
Be prepared to do whatever is necessary to win, and if required, do it.
Anyone who is willing to commiserate with fellow losers by saying, "Well, we may have lost, but we were most honorable while doing so." is not only a loser, but likely a foreordained one, as well.
MD
Matthew...
Submitted by beauxdog on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 1:31am.
We have discussed this before. I agree with you 100% on winning the fight. I agree with you 100% on hitting hard and fast. However, I do disagree on the attitude of "doing WHATEVER is necessary to win". We have the tools... we have the intelligence, we have the history, we have the facts... we DON'T need to resort to insults or incivility to win.
"Anyone who is willing to commiserate with fellow losers by saying, "Well, we may have lost, but we were most honorable while doing so." is not only a loser, but likely a foreordained one, as well." I am sorry you feel that way, but you are wrong. We have the tools to win without resorting to bull crap. I am sorry you don't feel you can win without being insulting and a low life.
No beauxdog, we didn't discuss this before---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 5:11am.
in actuality you sent me a PM raking me over the coals for not being nicer to trolls; saying I build strawmen and use them to attack liberals, and on and on with your opinions and preference on how I should conduct myself so as to avoid making conservatives look bad.
The upshot was that I said you were entitled to your opinion; mine was different than yours, but no harm, no foul.
Maybe I should have been a tad more specific in my recent post, but I did say that one should "be prepared to do whatever is necessary to win". I do not advocate being insulting right out of the box or for no reason whatsoever just for some type of shock effect.
If, however, I am insulted or my beliefs are attacked, by whatever means; I will return that same action as strongly as I possibly can.
I was not put on this planet to take shit from man nor beast, and I will not do so.
If you truly believe your way is correct, proper, and a sure winner, more power to you.
It is my intention to give as good as I get and if that means being insulting back to the face of someone who has insulted me, so be it.
Along that line, if you were implying that I am a low life because of my outlook or opinion, you can kiss my rosy red ass, munchkin.
MD
Matthew
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:57am.
You need to be running a campaign. We are dealing with people who bring a gun to a knife fight. If anyone bothers to look at Obama's tactics in being elected to the legislature in Illinois they'll find out fairness and goodness won't win this battle, let alone the war.
Truth isn't winning the fight. The media accepts and promotes the lies of the left. I'm not going to lay down and take this anymore.
Left and Right at opposite ends of the same tunnel...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:55pm.
with no light in sight. Discussions and debates precisely like the present one have dominated both liberal and conservative blogs for the past decade or so, employing the same arguments, accusations, terminology and metaphors--moral high ground, turning the other cheek, stooping to their level, time to fight back, bringing a knife to a gun fight, adopting their tactics, "they" started it, time to stop being nice, etc.
Most of the more politically-oriented, partisan [and popular] blogs promote this ever-spiraling rhetorical arms race. Headlines are designed to grab attention and, frankly, to inflame rather than merely inform. Cable news networks and talk radio play a prominent role in perpetuating this--in my opinion unhealthy--'good vs evil' phenomenon, and, unfortunately one which is unlikely to dissipate in the foreseeable future.
Jer
Matthew...
Submitted by beauxdog on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 12:21pm.
I recall our exchange well... similar to this one... you generally attacked anyone who you thought was "nice" and I emailed you privately to discuss my point of view. You responded with a generally "nice" email.
I really don't think you are low-life... I tossed that in there to make a point... which appears to have worked. I actually have a lot of respect for you because you are usually "nice", but firm. The only times I have seen you not be "nice" is when we are discussing people being "nice". Hmmmm.
And in the end... we tend to agree more than disagree. I have no problems with you standing up to someone who is being arrogant and insulting, but I prefer that you smack them down with intelligence and wit... which you have demonstrated an ability to do.
It really isn't fair for you to accuse me of trying to tell you how to behave and speak, especially since I was responding to you telling me how I should behave and speak. I have merely expressed my opinions on how we should behave in general. I was hoping to persuade you... not direct you.
We also need to look at scope. My opinions expressed here are based on how we should interact with peers on our own level... in our daily discussions with ordinary people. Taking the battle to the national political level or the MSM level is a different discussion with different rules of engagement. There is no "nice" at this level, but there should be truth.
beauxdog---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:51pm.
Though I do not recall our original "exchange" quite the way you do, I must ask, that while the first sentence in your fourth paragraph wins the day, you recognize that I, too, was merely expressing MY opinion on how 'we' should act.
I admit to having a pathological hatred of being told what to do, and being aware of that fact, should go to great pains personally to ensure I do not come across as giving either orders or direction, but rather that I am only stating my opinion, at best, or giving advice,(sometimes at worst).
Scope:
I believe you to be absolutely correct that the 20% at each end of the political spectrum, "far" left, and "far" right, are indeed, unpersuadable.
I am further convinced that they are unconvincable because they are unwavering in their beliefs, undaunted in their certainty that they are in the right, or better said, that they seem to be inherently assured that they are on the proper side reference being judged by history, and are unlikely to ever change.
The 60% median, the independents, who do indeed factor so prominently in the elective process, are, I am sure, more conducive to being wooed to the conservative side through intelligent, thoughtful, considerate, and fact-filled discourse, as opposed to vitriol laden name calling.
I count on conservatives such as yourself to do just that; conduct a reasonable head to head, and to do it well.
Sad fact is, though, you will have to do it far, far better than well, because neanderthals like myself will be busily distracting and subtracting from your respectful back and forth with the median set while we are giving the loony left doses of their own medicine.
I am not being flippant; I know my attitude and actions make your interplay with independents more difficult; but consider that I see my part as battling the 20 percentage points of hate spewing forces of darkness coming at us from the far left by way of throwing equal amounts of the same type of verbal ammunition right back at them.
Hopeful scenario - the twenty percentile at each of the far ends cancel each other out.
The worst case scenario actually results in the overall best case scenario:
If the independents look at far right conservative "meanies" as a reason to swing left, without taking into consideration that those very meanies exist as a contrapuntal force to the hate mongers of the left, then said independents are too damned stupid to have on your side anyway.
The last paragraph is my opinion, obviously, but I believe it to be true, as well.
MD
I'm on the side of Gen. John Jumper on this one
Submitted by falcon on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:21am.
Even though he was talking about air dominance and the F-22 Raptor, I think what he said can apply to politics as well. "We don't want to win 50-49...we want to win 100-0."
If you're in politics, you're obviously not there to be nice. If you want to win, then WIN! Don't just eke out a victory, demolish your opponent. Yes, the truth is important, and if you have the truth on your side, you shouldn't lose - however, the other side has proven that it doesn't believe truth is relevant, so don't just sit there and repudiate their attacks - attack them as well!
100-0. That's what it's all about.
“I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership, that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose.” – Ronald Reagan, July 17, 1980.
Hear, Hear!
Submitted by PunditPariah77 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:25am.
@ beauxdog: Well said! Truth is our best weapon, and we OUGHT to "strike hard and strike first" ... but with TRUTH, not with insinuation, half-truths, out-of-context sound bites, and other familiar tools of the Left. We have to believe that in the end, the casual voter will gravitate toward the perspective that has TRUTH on its side, rather than to a**hats with their cheap shots and pretzel logic (great album, BTW). "The TRUTH shall set you free ..."
Pundit
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:58am.
How's that truth thing working out for ya? Because from where I sit, our side is losing.
Tools
Submitted by PunditPariah77 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:01pm.
Whenever we attempt to use the tools of the Left that I cited in my post above against them, we simply give them more ammunition with which to credibly paint the Right as backward and ignorant hypocrites ... or worse, as NO DIFFERENT than them. And for the record, I NEVER said anything about "being nice." Attack them (and their morally bankrupt policies) relentlessly ... but do so with integrity.
Tactics
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 7:52am.
So Sasha and Malia themselves may be off target, but the fact that they go to private school and BO ended vouchers for other kids in DC shouldn't be. We can't just say kids are off limits and then ignore the behavior of the parents when it comes to the kids.
Besides, we are at a point of no return, if we haven't already passed it. Being noble won't save the future.
Radical...
Submitted by beauxdog on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 12:40pm.
All political children, except adult children involved in politics, should be off target, period. End of statement. The MSM treatment of the Palin children is a travesty, but it is not the fault of Sasha and Malia. They are blameless and should be treated that way.
Parents, as well as politicians, are proud of the offspring... and will show them off given the opportunity. The children are still blameless and should be treated that way.
I have to disagree with you on the schooling.
I cannot fault people, even people with who I so adamantly disagree, with wanting the best for their children. This is especially true for the President. Having a presidential child at a school is also a security nightmare. Sidwell has been dealing with it for decades and knows how to deal with it.
In fact, I would accuse any President who didn't send his child to private DC schools of playing politics with his children.
"Being noble won't save the future." Giving up won't save the future. Is that with this is all about? All of you brave, in your face, insult the liberals have simply given up? How sad.
It Ain't About "Nice" ...
Submitted by PunditPariah77 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:22am.
@ jon_torlin: Dude ... "anything and EVERYTHING is fair game" is a reprehensible position if it includes quoting our political opponents out of context to score a cheap shot. That's the methodology of MSNBC, CNN, Media Matters, etc. Are we really so utilitarian that we're willing to dive into the sewage with them? If we give up the moral high ground, we're no better than the Dems/Leftists.
Pundit...
Submitted by dydx on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 3:21pm.
....I agree. I don't post here much, but when I do it's mostly to point out the petty things that are being pointed out. I love Newsbusters and recommend it frequently to conservative customers, but I do hate it when it has the occasional ticky-tacky whiny post. I don't want us to sink to the level of Daily Kos or Democratic Underground. Although there are people over there like us that try to be more grounded in their critique and point out to their denizens when they are being trite, unfair, and disingenuous. The bell curve is alive and well on both sides of the aisle, eh?
Worse, is when people here get bent out of shape when you point out that we should "be above that." I understand the frustration and passion that many of us have in regards to how the Right gets the shaft in the media...but in the vast majority of the cases the ends don't justify the means.
Thanks For That, dydx ...
Submitted by PunditPariah77 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 4:12am.
Glad to know I'm not the only one who believes that the Right ought to lead rather than follow, to act rather than REact ...
Sort of stopped paying attention to this woman...
Submitted by krendler on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:30pm.
after her comment about never having been proud of her country - EVER- *until* her husband ran for president. Finally, from her perspective, there was reason to be proud of the United States of America.
And, as the media reminds us incessantly, Michelle is SO beautiful, elegant, and intelligent (see the video above for proof, right?).
Funny, I can't recall the media ever going out of their way to say anything nice about Laura Bush.
Man is she
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:39pm.
butt ugly.
Michelle Obama
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:41pm.
If she's going for the Sheila Jackson Lee look, she's succeeding.
Obama doesn't agree...
Submitted by Slyrr on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 1:46pm.
It's got to be news to her man-child husband. When the king of China came to party, he said to him, 'I wish I could be president of YOUR country because you can force the media to shut up!'
Shut up
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 2:00pm.
Hey lady, no one elected you to anything, so iron your husbands shirt.
→ More soft bigotry
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 2:13pm.
If Laura Bush had said "Fortunately we have help from the Press" you can bet The Press would have been all over her for her choice of words!
But inasmuch as it's Michelle Obama, she gets a pass for not grasping the significance of her comment versus "The Press has been gracious in keeping children off-limits"
The Press, it seems, have decided Michelle Obama doesn't know any better.
Obama's children fair game
Submitted by ChrisNH on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 2:36pm.
The people who would shriek the loudest if volleys were lobbed at Obama's girls would be the leftist media hacks who have feasted on lobbing volleys of their own at Palin's kids. Hypocritical much? You Betcha!
Noel is correct.
Submitted by CobraMan on Sat, 06/25/2011 - 3:00pm.
Noel's article is correct, the kids do have help from the press in avoiding negative coverage (although they do tend to show the kids in the best possible light, like in a photograph of them standing next to Nelson Mandela. Where's this supposed press shield in that instance? So much for protecting their privacy.) and Mrs. Obama has admitted that. Contrary to many claims here, there's nothing in the article about the press helping Obama's presidency.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Agree on two points with her one sided affirmation of how
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 9:43am.
the lamestream media handles liberal politicians. Yes they are in the tank for the Obama's and yes they have respect for HER children.
It would be nice if they would quit being misogynistic and perverted towards Sarah Palin and her daughters. But what do you expect from a group of people who across the board make comments about kidneys failing, daughters being raped by baseball players, and disabled children being aborted when you merely disagree with them!
If Sarah Palins kids could
Submitted by psammy on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 8:10pm.
If Sarah Palins kids could get the same respect from the"media"