Michelle Obama made this statement Saturday night:
“What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something — for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I’ve seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it’s made me proud.”
I really Michelle Obama she didn’t mean what she said in this statement. If she did, then she would be an embarrassment to this nation as the First Lady.
Yes, I mean that it would be an embarrassment because when I heard her statement the first thought that came to mind was how this nation came together to support the families of the firefighters and the police officers lost in the 9/11 attacks in New York. People came together across all political, racial and socio-economic lines to help the families of those brave men and women who died trying to save others trapped in the towers after the horrific attacks. If you cannot be really proud of this country when you see something like that then there is something seriously wrong with the way you look at the world. If you are that jaded that you cannot be moved by the country showing its heart in that manner then your views on this country need to be called into serious question.
If you didn’t think this country had hope at that point you’re foolish. We can’t look now through the filter of time to see what happened afterward and say that it wasn’t a time of hope and coming together for this country. At the time this happened Americans were united behind those families who lost their loved ones and our soldiers who were going to Afghanistan to remove the regime that helped kill over 3,000 of our citizens. If Michelle Obama wasn’t proud of our country at that time then something is seriously wrong with her and it makes you question the advice she’s giving to her husband. (Wikipedia says that she’s “perceived as Barack’s closest advisor.“)
Now, I know what people defending her will say about this…”she was talking about the political arena and not America in general”…but that’s not what she said in her statement. She didn’t say she was only talking about politics. She said it was the first time in her adult life. She was born in 1964 so that would mean she hit adulthood in 1982. Are we to honestly believe that in the 26 years since she’s been an adult people coming together to hope behind her husband and “be unified” is the first time she’s been proud of America? If you’re a strident anti-Bush hater and cannot give any positive notion to anything that is connected to President Bush then look at the outpouring of support from Americans after the Tsunami disaster of 2004. She wasn’t really proud of America then?
Regardless of your political affiliation it’s absurd to say that in the last 26 years the American people have done nothing to make someone really proud of this country and calls into question the statement maker’s judgment of the United States and it’s citizens. Right now, that person is Michelle Obama.
To those reading this who might want to support Michelle Obama in this I really would like you to first say if you agree with her that in the last 26 years there hasn’t been anything to draw more pride in our country than people wanting change in Washington and then if you agree tell me why because I just don’t see how you can look at the responses to 9/11 and the Tsunami disaster and say what she said is a cause of more pride in US citizens than either of those two items I mentioned.
Oh dear God! How can this woman not take pride in America and know that we Americans always come together. Her husband has one foot in Kenya and one foot in the USA and is literally an African American but so what. We all come together here and that is just the way it is.
Well we did get attacked on 9-11 when our Secretary of State who was supposed to be protecting us allowed terrorists who were on terrorist watch lists to come into our country thru public airports but never mind we still come together in pride.
Then P Bush told us he would get Bin Laden but then he forgot and attacked Iraq instead but still we are proud to come together which is very important.
Then we forgot about the people of New Orleans and Mississippi but so what we came together and helped with the Tseunami.
furthermore we have supported Bush even tho our borders, ports and nuclear sites are unprotected and because of Globalization by 2050 we will be overwhelmed with immigrants from Africa Asia and the middle east so that we can all come together with those people who have no clue about our Consitution, history, religion, culture, language or anything else but who cares as long as we come together in pride.
I disagree with you on some of this. The citizens of the US didn’t forget the people of New Orleans and Mississippi. The government may have dropped the ball but the people of the country poured out money, supplies and support to that region. It’s really disingenuous for you to say they were forgotten.
I assure you that she meant what she said, and that in the circles she moves (and of her husband’s base of supporters) what she said wouldn’t be even the slightest bit controversial. The only surprise here is that she failed to hide her actual beliefs, as her husband does quite well. Presumably his campaign will ensure that she doesn’t speak so off the cuff in the future.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that Michelle Obama is patriotic (would she have allowed her husband to run for President otherwise, if she’s not proud of this country? Why would she even bother to let her family go through all the major inconveniences they’re going through right now. Think, people!). She was proud of her country before, and now she’s really proud of it–prouder because change is on the way! If you’re a true Democrat and patriot you would understand this. This is all ado about nothing. I would think that Democratic voters are a alot smarter than this.
What Michelle Obama said was the stupidest thing I’ve heard an American political figure say all year. Granted, it’s only February. I also grant you that George W. Bush has been keeping (for whatever reason) an unusually low public profile. Still, her comments were so stupid they made my brain hurt.
I don’t have a hotline into the Obama campaign (unlike the previous poster apparently does), but I honestly don’t believe Michelle Obama meant to say she was, for the first time in her life, experiencing pride about being an American. If the Obamas - or the Clintons, McCains, Huckabees, Giulianis, Romneys, etc. - didn’t feel love for America and pride in America, they wouldn’t submit themselves to the strain of a presidential campaign. I do, however, have to agree with the previous poster that she will be rather more careful in her public remarks.
Interesting arguments people here are making, that no one would run for President (or ‘allow’ a family member to run for President) if they didn’t feel patriotic. Right, because being President/family member of a President is a role that comes with no fame, no perks, no power, no ego boost, no money, no immortality….etc. Only patriotism would make a person want to become President, there are no other incentives whatsoever.
The argument that being President consists solely of fame, perks, power, ego boost, money, and immortality is likewise interesting. Unless, of course, you are attempting to suggest that certain candidates and/or their spouses are in fact running to acquire fame, perks, power, ego boost, money, and immortality rather than out of patriotism. If you’re actually serious, you might recall that some Presidents got killed in the line of duty, some Presidents got wounded in the line of duty, and some, like James K. Polk and F.D. Roosevelt, worked themselves to a premature grave.
Who said “solely”? I merely pointed out that these incentives exist. Do they not?
The alternative is to imply (as you guys basically have) that every single person who has ever run for President did so only out of pure, selfless patriotism. From Nixon back through Andrew Johnson and so on. Go on, defend that proposition if you wish.
Jason, I am disappointed. I’m not going to say I always agree with you, but I always respect your opinion and on occasion you have changed my opinion. However, on this you are stepping into questionable territory. Going after a candidate’s wife? That’s low.
Not only is going after a candidate’s spouse out of bounds (save for Clinton because of obvious extenuating circumstances), but you aren’t even giving Ms. Obama a fair shake. You won’t give her leeway in saying it is just in the political arena (”that’s not what she said in her statement”), but you will add on things you think she isn’t proud of(”she’s not proud of outpouring of support from Americans after the Tsunami disaster of 2004?”). It certainly doesn’t seem fair to me.
“dirge”, I would disagree. I would say ignoring the reality of the situation and pretending this isn’t what it is would be considered low.
This is not a case of a “candidate’s wife” making a comment in passing to a friend or in a private conversation. This is someone leading a political rally that is trying to sway the opinions of hundreds, if not thousands, of voters. This is a public statement at a public rally. You can’t go out and make public speeches like this and then turn around and say you’re exempt from criticism or from having what you say examined in a critical manner.
Look at the real situation and don’t try to spin it to excuse her behavior. Look at what she actually said and then look at my response. I gave examples of times the American people have risen up and done great things that we should all be proud of including Michelle Obama. Her words say that she was not proud of America during those times. If she wants to come out and try to say she misspoke or that she was only referring to political matters then she should do that. As is, her statement says she wasn’t proud of anything in America for the last 26 years until people started rallying for “change.”
I never implied, even “basically,” that anyone ever ran for President out of what you call “pure, selfless patriotism.” In fact, I never used the word “patriotism.”
Not being able to read Michelle Obama’s innermost thoughts, I merely hazarded a guess that her idiotic remark was not in fact an actual representation of her true feelings about being an American, to judge from the love of her country and pride in her country she has demonstrated by willingly submitting to the challenges of a Presidential campaign.
What a tempest in a teapot! You chewed more than you bit off in this post, Jason. Give it a rest.
Come on.. I think it’s quite obvious what she’s referring to. She’s proud that for the first time ever a black presidential candidate is getting serious support across the country, of course she’s proud of that.
Don’t make this some kind of “they’re forgetting 9/11″ fiasco. Nobody forgets that day.
How very Rudy of you .
Let’s not forget the unity in this country after 9/11. Let’s not forget the global support that we had after 9/11. Let’s also not forget that it took the Bush Administration a few short years to squander every last bit of that unity and support.
Actually, person hiding behind a pseudonym, “And not just because Barack has done well” seems to say that it’s not the case.
You ignored the issue in an attempt to make a Bush and Rudy smear. There was nothing there that said she had forgotten 9/11. The question was if she was proud of the response of the US citizens after 9/11 and why she wasn’t proud of that if what she actually said was her real feelings.
Nice try spinning the post, though.
Well not being an American this whole discussion seems very strange. It seems bizarre that your leaders dare not criticise their nation lest they be accused of being unpatriotic. You seem to have a real problem with your nation being criticised. Come on, no nation is all good! And when it comes to the issue of race relations I think that any thinking American has a lot to be ashamed of. That’s not to say that such feeling can not be held alongside others of joy and love for your nation. You need to realise that nations are complex things and deserve a bit more of a rounded response than simple unquestioning pride.
Or is that to simple a criticism?
God bless America.
It’s an interesting comment, Gordon, but it really has nothing to do with this blog entry. Michelle Obama’s patriotism was never mentioned in the blog entry although it was raised by a few people in the comments. Is that what you were talking about in your response?
Also, race wasn’t brought up in the initial post either. Someone tried to bring race into the comments as a way to obfuscate the comments that were made by Mrs. Obama.
The comment Mrs. Obama made was that people wanting change in Washington was the first thing to give her pride in the US in 26 years. The initial blog mentioned instances of US citizens making a difference in that time period that should elicit pride in the country.
Obitman suggested this may be a tempest in a teapot. Alright, let’s talk about important stuff.
When do you think Dale Junior will win his first race? He always does pretty good at California, will it be there? Has the COT evened out the competion? Will this be Toyota’s year?
The unofficial slogan is “Go Fast, Turn Left”. Does this mean NASCAR is secretly supporting Obama? If they were supporting McCain, wouldn’t the unofficial slogan be “Go Fast, Turn Right”?
BTW Jason, Regina sends her thanks for tuning up her laptop computer.
Jason,
You have nitpicked a phrase out of a speech made on the campaign trail by Michelle Obama, and then you have made assumptions based on that nitpicking.
This is the same technique I hear used on right-wing hate radio shows. Your criticism has implied that she is not proud of her country, while being very emphatic in letting us know you are not a racist. Sorry, but I’m not convinced.
Jason, perhaps as an outsider I’m seeing pride in country and patriotism as the same thing when you don’t? I think that your analysis of her statement needs to look at what change and what sort of unity she is talking about. Perhaps I’m misreading her statement in implying it is refering to racial problems, but she was talking about a people from disparate positions seeing themselves as connected. Perhaps those divisions are more than race, but her comments to seem to be pointing to her sense of divisions within America.
dirge:
“but you will add on things you think she isn’t proud of(”she’s not proud of outpouring of support from Americans after the Tsunami disaster of 2004?”). It certainly doesn’t seem fair to me.”
Mrs. Obama is the one who said “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country”. 2004 was, it seems, within her adult lifetime. Therefore she was not proud of her country in 2004, about anything. This is simply a logical consequence of what she said. You can pretend she said something else to try to make it seem better, but she said what she said.
Bright Yellow Gun:
“I never implied, even “basically,” that anyone ever ran for President out of what you call “pure, selfless patriotism.””
You said this: “If the Obamas - or the Clintons, McCains, Huckabees, Giulianis, Romneys, etc. - didn’t feel love for America and pride in America, they wouldn’t submit themselves to the strain of a presidential campaign.” According to this argument, every single person (along with their families) who has ever run for President ‘feels love for America and pride in America’. Automatically, simply by virtue of the fact that they are running for President. This is your argument not mine, and based on this argument, you ‘hazard a guess’ that she didn’t mean what she says. Well, I’m just going by what she says. Anyway you have to admit the argument itself doesn’t quite stand up to scrutiny; surely “he’s running for President, therefore he and everyone in his family ‘feels love for America and pride in America’” is not a valid syllogism.
Especially in this case where we have a candidate’s wife specifically saying that she hasn’t felt pride in America in her adult lifetime until now. Of course, now she’s ‘proud’ of her country, because it seems like it might make her the First Lady. Well how generous of her; that’s like me never being proud of my country until I win the lottery and then suddenly saying “finally I can be proud of my country”. Apparently her country is only worthy of praise when it is in the process of showering her with privileges and adulation.
Gordon:
“It seems bizarre that your leaders dare not criticise their nation lest they be accused of being unpatriotic. You seem to have a real problem with your nation being criticised. Come on, no nation is all good! ”
“Criticizing” is one thing, saying “I’ve never been proud of my country, until now (when they’re about to put me in a position of privilege)” is quite another. Obviously no nation is ‘all good’ but Obama’s words, if taken seriously, imply that we’ve been all bad, which is an equally simplistic and cartoonish view. Also, no one called her “unpatriotic” initially; it’s the other way around, Mrs. Obama’s defenders are the ones who tried to make the silly argument that she’s letting Barack run for President, therefore she must be patriotic despite what she actually said.
It’s a shame we have people like Betty who cannot have a reasonable discussion of the issues but rather attempt to smear those she disagrees with by claiming they are racists. She is an example of the problem of trying to have political discussions. She cannot look at the actual words of Michelle Obama and the criticism asking why she said this was the only time she was proud of America…she has to try and smear myself and hide the real issue by claiming someone critical of her is a racist.
If you notice, Betty didn’t even try to justify Michelle Obama’s comments nor did she actually engage on the issues. Rather, “Betty” (if that’s her real name) made a personal attack on the author of the column. If you want to talk about the tactics of “right wing hate radio shows” you need to look no further than the comments made by “Betty” who attacked the person speaking instead of being critical of the comments they’ve made in their statements. As an example, my blog post asked why she wasn’t proud of America at those times. Betty tries to spin and say I was claiming she’s not proud of her country in general and that’s not what I stated in my post. Subtle, yes, and a typical technique used in today’s excuse for political discourse. Don’t answer the question…smear the messenger and distort what was said.
Jason said: Rather, “…Betty” (if that’s her real name) made a personal attack on the author of the column. …”
Jason–don’t people have to leave their email address in order to post on your column. Couldn’t you know if Betty’s real name is Betty by sending her an email and asking her?
If a person can get a comment published in your blog by using a fake email address, why even have the requirement to enter the address?
It’s a way to keep spambots out of the comments section.
As for e-mailing her, I suppose I could have done that. However, having seen her far-left wing blog and the way there’s no identifying information posted there along with a distorted personal attack that most people wouldn’t have the guts to post under their real name it seemed logical that Betty is not her real name.
Everyone’s not like you, Jim…they won’t put their name on their opinions.
You can’t deny she said it, the statement is out for all to hear or read. Words mean things and this is the true Mrs. Obama coming out of her shell. She can’t take it back, however she could say she didn’t mean it in that manner of which those people that are socialist leaning will try to define those words in another way.
Personally she said what she said and anyone that actually researches what Obama would like to do to this country can understand her statement. To put it mildly if elected to the presidency it would not only be a travesty to this country, but would be an obamanation to all the people who cast a ballot and those that didn’t.
Sonic Charmer, you *still* haven’t shown me where I used the word “patriotism.” If I had meant to say “patriotism,” I would have said “patriotism.”
My guess as to Mrs. Obama’s motives was presented as simply that, a guess. You, on the other hand, “assured” readers that what she said 1) was exactly what she meant (I should point out here that she has since offered a “clarification”) and 2) would not be “even the slightest bit controversial” to those “in the circles which she moves” *and* “her husband’s base of supporters.” Rather sweeping, no?
Everyone is entitled, of course, to his or her opinion. But I have yet to be shown any reason for attaching any special importance to your “assurance.”
Yeah, Sonic, I have to back up the Gun on this one. BYG would have said “patriotism” if that’s what the Gun was referring to in his statement.
I also can’t say that it’s definitive of Obama’s campaign or his advisers. You could build the case it’s what SHE thinks (pre-clarification, that is) but it’s a real stretch to paint the whole campaign with that wide a brush.
I would like Michelle to explain what she meant about how “for the first time she is proud of her Country”. I would also like Michelle to answer the question whether she and Bo felt betrayed by Jermiah Wright. She never answered, she said, “Let’s just move on”