An important part of what Michelle Obama said is being ignored

The focus has been thus: "For the first time in my adult life I'm proud of my country."

I think the Democracts should be shifting the focus to this: "For the first time in my adult life I'm proud of my country."

She should embrace the concept, she has been ashamed of her country her dult life, in other words, since the Raygun revolution - and haven't we all? That is precisely what this election is all about - fixing the things that have shamed us. We are where we are on energy because Raygun pissed away to initiative Carter laid into law in order to return to easy and very profitable path of increasing dependence on petroleum

Starting with the destruction of the middle class with union busting and ending in the Reign of Terror under "The Mule" (from Asimov's Foundtion series)and his puppet George. This country has had a series of planned cultural shifts that have us on a path directly to third world status. Screw these phoney loyalty oaths - they are the problem. They are manipulating everyone into loyalty oeths to the shit that has been happening in The Current Era!!!
The loyalty I feel is to the America that is codified in the Constitution and with it's spirit embodied in other principal documents such as the Declaration of Independence. I find neither fascism nor the desire for fascism in any of those documents.

Smack them in the head with that next time, Michelle. We are here to end the Era of Raygun Ronnie.

I hope she DOES try to explain how she's never been proud of America for the past 25 years.

Do you guys REALLY think that's a winning campaign strategy? Mind-boggling.

Our world standing, and standards of living are on the decline.

Guess its all a-ok to those who love the status quo.

...THEN you will see what there is to be proud of.

And I've seen the country I love raped by corrupt politicians that used fear and hatred to scare people into voting against their self interests in order ro plunder the treasury without fear; a divide and conquer strategy that causes the type of factionalization that characterizes third world poverty. We aren't there yet but every year for the past 28 years we have seen an entity of huge inertia - our culture - shake itself more steadily into a new direction that is leading us inexorably to third world status. A place where there is a worldwide aristocracy, a technical class, and a peasant class.
The middle class isn't a part of the natural order - it is the fruit that is fought for in the democratic process.

B.O. knows that and the goals he's stated - open government goals I haven't heard since Carter, alternative energy focus ala Carter, and foreign policy insight that I think (judging by his evaluations of the Middle east situation) is dead on.

I also see where we, you and I, differ-
I measnure what we are against what we believe, and ask how we can be better.

You look at what we are and then find someone worse off than yourself to make you feel good.

That's too bad.

Pride is subjective -- it necessarily depends on one's experience - it is born from experience as "reasonable or justifiable; delight or elation arising from some act" (--Websters).

Patriotism and loyalty to one's country is like an oath or commitment. It is a love for one's country - not pride.

Michelle Obama did not say, "For the first time in my adult life I can feel loyalty to my country. She did not say, "For the first time in my adult life I can feel patriotic." No, Michelle Obama said that for the first time in her life she felt really proud about her country.

How different must Michelle's experience have been from, say, Cindy McCain's? I can't even imagine Michelle's experience, let alone judge her. Who among us is qualified to judge Michelle Obama's pride, or lack thereof, in her country?

at every speech. Make it part of their platform.

If you think it's a smart thing to say, let 'em keep pushing it.

If you agree with her and think it needs to be said, then encourage her to keep saying it!

Of course, it might be more difficult now that she and her husband have both come out to "clarify" and explain that gosh no, that's not at all what she meant.

Pride and patriotism are not synonymous. It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing.

Is pride being confused with patriotism in this case?

but you'll have no success trying to explain that repeatedly to the American public.

I don't know why everybody gets so offended at my argument. I'm not saying what she said was morally, ethically or in any other way wrong. It was a POLITICAL mistake to say it the way she did, as evidenced by the attention it's already gotten, and the fact that they've had to clarify it.

situation itself that I see as invalid, because it's no one's call as to how you or I or Michelle feel concerning pride in our country; we have all had different experiences that would shape that feeling. I don't know when pride in country became a patriotic test.

I absolutely agree that it was a mistake to have said it from a political standpoint, because her statement is being seized upon, twisted into something other than it is by making it a measurement of her patriotism - (which is what I was trying to convey in my first post to you).

I see what you mean, and I'm sorry I misunderstood you. I think you make a valuable point. I hope that MO will be more careful in how she expresses herself. Her husband is running for President of the United States.

I think it's important to remember that the "validity" of an attack has little to do with its effectiveness, and ALL our candidates and their surrogates need to keep that in mind at all times.

I can argue for weeks that the right-wing attacks against Bill Clinton weren't valid, but nonetheless, they all came together to create a public perception of him that's not right. The tactic seems to be the scattershot approach: If you make a hundred charges, people start to believe there's SOMETHING there, even if you can go through each and every single charge and debunk it. It's the sheer volume of them that get people to start to think differently.

:hi:

When a candidate explains a misstep, the job of the supporter is to support. Throwing in 100 different discombobulated rationalizations does not help. She meant this was the first time in her adult life that she had seen people become willing to take a stand for hope, to come out and do the hard work for political change, and that made her really proud. Either help her correct the record every chance you get, or shut up. Those are really the only two options, unless you're a Clinton supporter trying to beat her down.

I can't believe how many Obamites believe Obama has some mystic monopoly on "hope". "Hope" is a stupid Axlerod campaign gimmick. It means nothing substantive.

Maybe you're proud of the direction this country has been taken, but I'm not.

You're talking pablum, I'm speaking about where the rubber meets the road. The turnover of policymaking oversight to the corporations began with Reagan and has continued unabated to this day.

I know what she said, and I hate to tell you this chuckles, I have every right in the world to analyze her words.

And you'd better take something for that paranoia, my journal shows clearly my positions. http://journals.democraticunderground.com/kristopher

Just remember what Timothy Leary said: "If you don't like what you're doing, you can always pick up your needle and move to another groove".

If that's not your objective, carry on. I watched to many "concerned Democrats" blather on in 1,000 different directions with Gore and Kerry. I'm not about to stand by and watch it happen again. If you can't support the candidate, shut up. And yes, it does matter what gets said on this little board because these stupid things get passed on in the real world too.

in your case I'll make an exception. Twice you've made the mistake of assuming you have the right to tell me to shut up. So, please, piss off.

I'm a supporter of the candidate I'm discussing, and because you don't agree with me I'm supposed to "shut up"?

Yeah, I was right, I ended up at the right place the first time. That rates a "Piss off".

I didn't want to make a mistake.

you're a Clinton supporter trying to beat her down.

peace, the longest economic expansion in American history during the Democratic Clinton years?

They were a result of deploying a new technology. Period.

Concurrently the labor protections of the country were gutted in favor allowing capital to flow without restriction to the cheapest labor markets with no action to mitigate the transition. He dramatically increased our dependence on fossil fuels and made only token efforts on energy independence and conservation.

Things were good because he got lucky with the tech boom. But we haven't had a good big-picture policy president since Carter, IMO.

But they were good...

Wonder how many will buy into this multitude of baloney. I guess Harvard didn't teach her NOT to put her foot in her mouth.

everyone puts their foot in their mouth sometimes - especially people who have to speak a lot

I haven't been proud of our country since I learned all of the terrible things it has done. There are very few, if any countries that have a right to be proud. We have a lot to be downright ashamed of. And those of you who claim we should be proud should remember that, "pride cometh before the fall."

Let's do away with false pride.

Michelle Obama clarifies `proud' remark

Michelle Obama Says Her 'Proud' Remark Referred to Greater Participation in Politics

Staff
AP News

Feb 20, 2008 21:00 EST



"What I was clearly talking about was that I'm proud in how Americans are engaging in the political process," she said.

"For the first time in my lifetime, I'm seeing people rolling up their sleeves in a way that I haven't seen and really trying to figure this out — and that's the source of pride that I was talking about," she added.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/mochila/Michelle_Obama_clarifies_proud_rema_02202008.html


She never said she was not proud

I wouldn't expect her to respond like that tomorrow, but after the election if confronted with a similar attempt at that sort of manipulation, I want to see her nip it in the bud; I want her to do the verbal equivalent of reaching out immediately and smacking the those attempting the manipulation right up beside the head. A quick verbal smackdown! Those damn fools are responsible for the situation we are in.

We're not talking bout the regular people here, this crap is always a product of an RW opinion leader; a pol or a RW talking head. She won't alienate anyone that voted for Obama; in fact, I'm confident they would gain supporters.

she said "really proud".

But in the afternoon of the same day she repeated the speech, that time she used really.

say "really".

She said nothing wrong and needed no apology or explanation. I'm sure she was horrified by the shitstorm and did it anyway but basically she got ambushed by the Clinton posse. I doubt if it will happen again.

she's just piling on a little. No the people who need the smackdown are the Wingnuts. I guess we should let McCain's wife off easy today, though considering what's in the news today, she probably wouldn't be in the right frame of mind to fully appreciate it.. hehe.

"for the first time" to "proud of my country AGAIN." Then she can back it up as you suggested, especially with the illegal and criminal actions (including war crimes) by the Bush criminal administration.

Your point is well taken.

I hate what the DUbamas have done to DU.

Not for Obama and not for Clinton. And those jingoistic dim bulbs don't fool me for one second with "wull I wuz gunna vote fer Barack Osama til I heared Michelle ain't proud of Murka" They're the same people who believed the Swift Boaters.

These things DO matter - not necessarily as standalone issues, but as part of a big lie. The republicans seem to want to portray Obama as not sufficiently "American". The hand-over-heart thing, the lapel flag-pin, the madrassa, the "muslim" middle name, and now this.

Yes, these things DO change people's minds - even liberals. Look how effective the 15-year campaign to portray Hillary Clinton as a power-hungry, meanspirited bitch has been, even here on this board. By all accounts she's a warm, funny, competetent, hard-working woman. But most of the people here have bought into the Big Lie about her. Same for Bill - they've portrayed him as a corrupt slickster. He ran one of the least corrupt adminmistrations in US History, but the Big Lie worked. Even people here believe it.

John Kerry was portrayed as weak, vacillating, wimpy. A war hero and one of the toughest Senators we have, yet even people here fell for it.

Yes, her statement matters, as it fits in perfectly with the Big Lie they're pushing. That's how it works. Every little thing that supports the lie is magnified and expanded - everything counter to it is ignored or minimized.

I defended them vigorously, assuming that they were unfairly smeared by the media and the GOP. Now I'm not so sure. And that's Bill and Hillary's fault, not anyone else's.

Your statement about John Kerry in that post troubles me. Are you suggesting that he did or said something to bring the Swiftboat smear upon himself? Because that's what you're doing with Michelle Obama's comment.

and it was easily avoided. She could've said "I've never been more proud of my country..." and this would never have made the news, McCain wouldn't have used it, and she and her husband wouldn't have had to "clarify" what she meant.

As for Kerry, no he didn't do anything to invite the swiftboaters. He didn't respond to them quickly and forcefully enough, though. And windsurfing on vacation was an error. There's nothing wrong with windsurfing, but it played into the smear that he was an elitist. That was a mistake - again, not because there's anything wrong with windsurfing, but because he should've been more aware of the images that would be used.

Deny it all you want, but these things actually matter in elections, and I think it's wiser to be aware of that and to be more careful about what gifts you give your enemies.

Hillary handed them a gift on a silver platter when she said "we may go after people's wages". John Edwards did it with the $400 haircut.

Good examples.

So it's better not to say such things, right?

Which is why someone in the spotlight needs to be careful at times. I can't tell you how many times someone I supported made me cringe over something they said or did, because I knew the right wing would jump all over it. That's just the way it works. We jump on their missteps, too.

I don't think that the poster said they were "justified", they said that's the way the GOP works in creating a "big lie". That's true. They used the Clintons being trashed to no end for years as an example. Again, it's true.

But you said this:


So, unless your point is that the attacks on the Clintons were justified, and now you see, I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make here.

It leads me to believe that some of the unsavory things I've heard about them are true. No, not the Scaife/Arkansas Project bullshit, but the stuff I heard about them being nasty and vindictive to those they perceived to be "disloyal".

Obama not only embraced Republicans, but his supporters are also embracing their tactics and talking points. What a wonderful change for our party!

:eyes:

I don't think that most Americans agree with her that there is nothing to be "PROUD" of in America without Obama coming to the rescue. If Obama gets the nod, the RW will bring this back to bite them on the ass.

She should have said "I've never been so proud of my country". If she had, this would be a non-issue.

But she didn't, so expect to see this soundbite in GOP ads.

we saw this back in '92 during Bill Clinton's campaign. Hillary made a comment about "not baking cookies" and was tarred and feathered for it.

Teresa Heinz came across as a strong woman and was beaten for it

Michelle Obama expressed her opinion and is now being dragged through the streets

GOPer spouses - pretty much fem-bots programmed to sit pretty in the background and give the impression of happily and blissfully being pregnant and barefoot in the kitchen.

sorry, but I'm 52 years old, I have yet to feel much pride in our country. Eisenhower was president when I was born, followed by JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Smirk-boy

in that time there was Viet Nam, Civil Rights, protests, riots, recessions, oil crunches and embargos, bombings, terrorist attacks and the slow erosion of what once made America great.

Please, just let go? We can find confidence that Cindy McCain is going to be too busy supporting her whore hopping husband than to attack Michelle Obama.

Michelle Obama's NOT running for office!

Further, unlike her predecessor HRC, she has no ambitions to chair any policy committees. The BEST advice and that not to be minimized is to keep him "in touch" (empathetic instead of over intellectual) with The American People.

Haven't we dissected this inane gaffe enough without whirling it up into another sh*t storm today?

Please at least reflect on why you wish to breath NEW life into this topic? Then *consider* cutting bait?

The media covered it for 2 days non-stop and Clinton supporters are still complaining about it. Barack is running for president. Barack did not say that. Also, the Clinton supporters know that Michelle did not mean it like that. They are just grasping on every last thing to try to turn the direction of this election around. They will have to find something else because I don't think this one is going to fly...