“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas

Monday, May 11, 2009

The media's embarrassing infatuation with the Obamas continues unabated

For Mother's Day, the Washington Post's Sally Quinn wrote an essay about Michelle Obama's arms and what they mean to America.....no, seriously. Here are a couple of groan-worthy exerpts.....

-Michelle Obama's arms, we determined, were transformational. Her arms are representative of a new kind of woman: young, strong, vigorous, intelligent, accomplished, sexual, powerful, embracing and, most of all, loving.

-Today is Mother's Day. Today we should celebrate Michelle Obama's arms as the arms of a mother.

Am I mistaken, or does the media have a serious job to do when it comes to it's watchdog responsibilities regarding the excesses of an over-reaching government? Sally needs to get over her slightly creepy, homo-erotic infatuation with Michelle's arms, and start reporting honestly, on this administration's push toward a fascist state.

If you have the stomach for it, go here and read the whole article.


Angie Lee said...

A "new" kind of woman? That "young, strong, vigorous, intelligent, accomplished, sexual, powerful, embracing and, most of all, loving" never existed until Michelle Obama, huh?

Just because she shows her arms.

Um, yeah. Whatever.

Ed said...

It is ridiculous! Also, traditionally First Ladies generally wear clothes designed by American designers, specifically to highlight our home-grown designers. Why then does Michelle Obama insist on wearing UK-made J.Crew threads to every single event? Are sleeveless sweaters only made in Great Britain?

It just shows that the Obama's believe that they are bigger and more historic than silly long-held traditions.

Angie Lee said...

They prove that it really IS "all about me." They remind me of my "husband." The whole world is ALL ABOUT HIM; any evidence presented to the contrary (or to show how much of a ****k he is 99.98% of the time), gets me accused of "audism." Kind of like when I say anything about the O's gets me accused of "racism."

People need to just grow up, remove their craniums from their rectums, and get real. This media worship is making me sick to my stomach. I have enough problems without adding 100% nausea to the mix. OH, HER ARMS, HER STYLE, HER GRACE. *GASP AND SWOON* OH, HIS ORATORICAL SKILLS, HIS PECTORAL MUSCLES, HIS CHARISMA. *GASP AND SWOON*

*Gag me with a spoon* is more like it.

Ed said...

"Audism"? Are you against Audi's? Or is your husband's name Audie, like Audie Murphy?

And don't worry about swearing in the comments thread. I get that all the time, only not in a friendly way like you wrote it.

Angie Lee said...

Audism is discrimination against Deafies by Hearies. It's classic victim mentality on the outward expression but with an underlying superiority complex, if you want to know the truth, since some Deaf seem far more apt to discriminate against Hearing (often quite brutally) than I think even can be said of white/black (if you're black/white/brown/purple, as long as you're Deaf, you're part of the club and color makes not a bit of difference; but if you're Hearing of any size, shape, color, or form, you're a pile of dung).

I have to put those *'s in once in a while, to keep people guessing what's really on my mind. LOL

Ed said...

Interesting. I had not ever heard of that. Your avatar takes on more meaning now.

So, do deaf people play the "audism" card as much as some black people play the "racism" card...I mean unfairly?

Angie Lee said...

Some do use it unfairly, while others do it justifiably, much like some aspects of the black/white issue - but not always toward the appropriate target or in a constructive manner, again, much like the black/white issue.

I've seen it with my own eyes in some cases, and there have been times when MY rights have been violated as a type of "collateral damage" to that audism effect.

But... to accuse *ME* of it is what really pisses me off, when the "problem" was no more than a target being needed when his sister jumped all over in his shit about my being pregnant again. We didn't plan it, really didn't expect to have it happen, but we have accepted our later-life blessing... at least, until she started flapping her stupidity flag all around... Now, I'm a bad mother because I work 3 jobs to support our family - because he can't get a job 1. Because there ARE NO JOBS here in our area in Michigan (that he is qualified for, anyhow, a long story about Deaf-school education), 2. Those he has applied to pass him over regularly for hearing workers because they don't want to deal with the expense of paying an interpreter for training, meetings, etc. And somehow, his lack of employment opportunity is MY fault (just like my suffering from MS is my fault, like I asked for it or something).

Just like racial discrimination, there is Deaf discrimination - but they need to learn to focus their efforts on the right targets, not the EASY ones that have nothing to do with it and can do little about it anyhow.

Tracie said...

About the article - eeww - can you say fetish?

About the audism - interesting.
Three jobs, MS, and pregnant?! Makes me tired thinking about it.

Angie Lee said...

Tracie: That's totally what I think, too. EWWWW. Gag me with a spoon and all.

And yeah, it's tiring, to say the least.... What SUCKS like a big old Hoover is not being able to take my Provigil while pregnant.... *sniff*