• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michelle Obama surprises Oscars by presenting Best Picture award

MMC said:
Oh not at all.....as they have no problem calling him or her out to answer up with what he or she says out of their mouths and with the actual way they was around here. One has to wonder why so many of his own people in Chicago talk Chit about him. Democrats, liberals, and Progressives. I mean we know those who are flat out against him will. But hearing all these people that supported him. Now that's another thing.
Click to expand...
I believe you and your black "friends" have every right to speak out against the president.

We are also able to speak out about the veracity of those comments.

I find black folks' criticism of Barack and Michelle Obama to be more racially tinged than those coming from white people. To me that is bizarre. What is your motivation and objective to inject racial overtones into your criticism?
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I think Hillary got a lot of hate too and, to be honest, I think it has a lot to do with the traditionalism and politics of the right. There are more people on the right who think women should fill more traditional roles. Hillary and Michelle are the exact opposite of that. Not only are they professional nontraditional, they are also outspoken and open about their opinions in a way that flies in the face of the traditional role women have played historically. I think that that genuinely rubs a lot of the conservative base the wrong way.

I also, in spite of how apparently untouchable this topic is, think race plays a factor. There are enough studies out there that show that internalized prejudice and racism is still pretty rampant in American society. While Democrats may have those same prejudices, their political support for the Obamas may override those sentiments, particularly when it comes to vocalizing those thoughts. Republicans don't support the Obamas politically so, just as some Democrats projected their prejudice against Southerners on Bush, I think quite a few Republicans are projecting their issues with race onto the the Obamas.

In sum, I think race and gender play a role in addition to some of the factors that Zyphlin mentioned.
Click to expand...

Michelle is not anti-traditional First Lady. She's doing a fairly typical job as First Lady. She just has more media attention and a developed fashion sense (which you can put to media bias if you want, I'm certainly not opposed to that....and the latter I care almost nothing about).
 
Last edited:
66gardeners said:
I believe you and your black "friends" have every right to speak out against the president.

We are also able to speak out about the veracity of those comments.

I find black folks' criticism of Barack and Michelle Obama to be more racially tinged than those coming from white people. To me that is bizarre. What is your motivation and objective to inject racial overtones into your criticism?
Click to expand...

It's not and has nothing to do with such nor me. Although it does have to do with that hypocrisy that the Obama's Embellish on. Which any ire they draw is from their own making.

You are the one that are looking at black people. I already mentioned those here that talk about him in any way they choose to do so. Although I didn't use any ethnicity. Just those that supported him. Course this really doesn't mean much. That they supported him that is. Plus just because they do talk Chit about him. Doesn't mean they will go out and vote for a Republican either.
 
Fiddytree said:
Michelle is not anti-traditional First Lady. She's doing a fairly typical job as First Lady. She just has more media attention and a developed fashion sense (which you can put to media bias if you want, I'm certainly not opposed to that....and the latter I care almost nothing about).
Click to expand...
As I said, she's non-traditional when it comes to the traditional role women have historically played in society in terms of her career and her outspokenness. This is undeniable. She is a lawyer and held several executive positions at the University of Chicago. She is also much more vocal and dominating than the traditional woman when it comes to expressing her opinions and advocating the cause she's taken up as First Lady. Like Hillary, she challenges the traditional role of women in a way that people like Laura and Barbra Bush did not and consider that much of the criticism directed at Michelle from conservatives is along the lines of "stop telling us what to do" and "shut up" and "go away" (the same type directed at the non-traditional Hillary Clinton), I would say that her non-traditionalism plays a role in such criticism.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
As I said, she's non-traditional when it comes to the traditional role women have historically played in society in terms of her career and her outspokenness. This is undeniable. She is a lawyer and held several executive positions at the University of Chicago. She is also much more vocal and dominating than the traditional woman when it comes to expressing her opinions and advocating the cause she's taken up as First Lady. Like Hillary, she challenges the traditional role of women in a way that people like Laura and Barbra Bush did not and consider that much of the criticism directed at Michelle from conservatives is along the lines of "stop telling us what to do" and "shut up" and "go away" (the same type directed at the non-traditional Hillary Clinton), I would say that her non-traditionalism plays a role in such criticism.
Click to expand...

I frankly do not think her lawyer background comes to the minds of her critics. I think it is the perceived overreach anytime a liberal makes Federal appeals for public policy...which gets worse when it comes to relatively benign but still contentious changes to school nutrition, for instance. When Laura was promoting literacy, that seemed less contentious than nutrition. When Hillary was charged with doing a lot of the leg work for a major public policy measure, that was when the traditionalism remark really made sense to bring up. Then there's the criticism of anyone connected to the administration. You'll see this with every administration. I do think that the criticism Michelle is getting is heavier than Laura, to be certain, but I don't think it is non-traditionalism.
 
Too Hot for the Mullahs… Iranian Regime Photoshops Michelle Obama’s Dress - See more at: Too Hot for the Mullahs… Iranian Regime Photoshops Michelle Obama’s Dress | The Gateway Pundit

453x258xmichelle-obama-hollywood.jpg.pagespeed.ic.mSZm6QZJOB.jpg


401x240xfars-mo-dress.jpg.pagespeed.ic.KtMwWcj5nQ.jpg


Too much skin. They had to cover her up.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
As I said, she's non-traditional when it comes to the traditional role women have historically played in society in terms of her career and her outspokenness. This is undeniable. She is a lawyer and held several executive positions at the University of Chicago. She is also much more vocal and dominating than the traditional woman when it comes to expressing her opinions and advocating the cause she's taken up as First Lady. Like Hillary, she challenges the traditional role of women in a way that people like Laura and Barbra Bush did not and consider that much of the criticism directed at Michelle from conservatives is along the lines of "stop telling us what to do" and "shut up" and "go away" (the same type directed at the non-traditional Hillary Clinton), I would say that her non-traditionalism plays a role in such criticism.
Click to expand...

Neither Obamas are attorneys anymore. Both gave up their licenses and in the Case of Michelle Obama. She did so to avoid prosecution for fraud. This you can get from the IARDB.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
As I said, she's non-traditional when it comes to the traditional role women have historically played in society in terms of her career and her outspokenness. This is undeniable. She is a lawyer and held several executive positions at the University of Chicago. She is also much more vocal and dominating than the traditional woman when it comes to expressing her opinions and advocating the cause she's taken up as First Lady. Like Hillary, she challenges the traditional role of women in a way that people like Laura and Barbra Bush did not and consider that much of the criticism directed at Michelle from conservatives is along the lines of "stop telling us what to do" and "shut up" and "go away" (the same type directed at the non-traditional Hillary Clinton), I would say that her non-traditionalism plays a role in such criticism.
Click to expand...

No, her supposed "non-traditionalism" has nothing to do with anything. In fact, she's been mostly traditional. Where some folks object to her is where they have always objected to any FLOTUS who got too loud. The FLOTUS is a show piece and folks complain when they get too vocal. Mostly because they are not elected and most folks don't see them as part of government.

If she wants to exercise her badass lawyering skills, she should run for an office on her own dime. As it is now, her position is just a perk we throw the elected POTUS.
 
Fiddytree said:
I frankly do not think her lawyer background comes to the minds of her critics. I think it is the perceived overreach anytime a liberal makes Federal appeals for public policy...which gets worse when it comes to relatively benign but still contentious changes to school nutrition, for instance. When Laura was promoting literacy, that seemed less contentious than nutrition. When Hillary was charged with doing a lot of the leg work for a major public policy measure, that was when the traditionalism remark really made sense to bring up. Then there's the criticism of anyone connected to the administration. You'll see this with every administration. I do think that the criticism Michelle is getting is heavier than Laura, to be certain, but I don't think it is non-traditionalism.
Click to expand...
I definitely think that her background and demeanor are in the minds of many her most fierce critics. The vast majority of people project the prejudices they have about careers, class, race, gender and so on onto other people to some extent. There's no reason to think Michelle Obama would be exempt from that. Even when people have non-prejudicial criticisms of others, their prejudices may still impact their judgement. Therefore, while people may be criticizing Michelle because of the genuine problem they have with actions in terms of how they perpetuate the liberal conception of government and reflect the tone of the current administration, they may also be projecting their conceptions of what the role of women ought to be onto her behavior. Considering the role that prejudice plays in the vast majority of interactions, I think that's a reasonable position.
 
clownboy said:
Where some folks object to her is where they have always objected to any FLOTUS who got too loud. The FLOTUS is a show piece and folks complain when they get too vocal.
Click to expand...
Just supported my point. Thank you.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I definitely think that her background and demeanor are in the minds of many her most fierce critics. The vast majority of people project the prejudices they have about careers, class, race, gender and so on onto other people to some extent. There's no reason to think Michelle Obama would be exempt from that. Even when people have non-prejudicial criticisms of others, their prejudices may still impact their judgement. Therefore, while people may be criticizing Michelle because of the genuine problem they have with actions in terms of how they perpetuate the liberal conception of government and reflect the tone of the current administration, they may also be projecting their conceptions of what the role of women ought to be onto her behavior. Considering the role that prejudice plays in the vast majority of interactions, I think that's a reasonable position.
Click to expand...

I say the reason that they don't have her lawyer background in mind is because it's not widely discussed, unlike her husband's academic career, which is.
 
Fiddytree said:
I say the reason that they don't have her lawyer background in mind is because it's not widely discussed, unlike her husband's academic career, which is.
Click to expand...
It's pretty widely known that she came from an "elite" background. Hell, her critics have even referred to her as "uppity" and elitist.
 
Fiddytree said:
I frankly do not think her lawyer background comes to the minds of her critics. I think it is the perceived overreach anytime a liberal makes Federal appeals for public policy...which gets worse when it comes to relatively benign but still contentious changes to school nutrition, for instance. When Laura was promoting literacy, that seemed less contentious than nutrition. When Hillary was charged with doing a lot of the leg work for a major public policy measure, that was when the traditionalism remark really made sense to bring up. Then there's the criticism of anyone connected to the administration. You'll see this with every administration. I do think that the criticism Michelle is getting is heavier than Laura, to be certain, but I don't think it is non-traditionalism.
Click to expand...

Rare Criticism of Michelle Obama from the Left | CNS News
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Not true.

FactCheck.org : The Obamas’ Law Licenses
Click to expand...

Well the part about both of them not being attorneys is true. Guess you couldn't save on that one.....huh? Although, Fact check says nothing about the Case Michelle was involved in with the Insurance Fraud and concerning what the Judges remarks were. The same case Michelle dismissed herself from and then by her own preference gave up her license.

Yes.....I already knew what Fact Check said. Course their people weren't around when that judge was speaking. Not to mention there were no Cameras in the Court Room, nor a Court Steno.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
It's pretty widely known that she came from an "elite" background. Hell, her critics have even referred to her as "uppity" and elitist.
Click to expand...

How can you be uppity and elitist?
 
What's next? Wheel of Fortune?
 
At least Hollywood is now being completely open about partisanship.
 
joko104 said:
At least Hollywood is now being completely open about partisanship.
Click to expand...

You must have missed the post about how Laura Bush was the first first lady to make an appearance with the Oscars in 2002.
 
It's the ****ing Oscars. Who cares.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom