« My Nomination for Most Interesting Speech of Dem Convention’s First Night
DNC: “Discourse” with Michelle Malkin, Did the MSM Get It Right? »
Erasing Michelle Obama, Some Pundits’ Comments on DNC Speech
Aug 26th, 2008 | 8 responses
Look, maybe pundits are just tired from the altitude in Denver… many come from sea level of zero. Here is it 5280 feet above sea level. Enough to noticeably augment the effects of alcohol imbibing; enough to make many feel short of breath; even faint. It takes about a year at this altitude to acclimate.
Or, maybe it’s because I myself ‘don’t get it,’….don’t get the deep meaning behind these repetitious lavings. Forgive me please, I think I must be in a grumpy mood. It’s been a hard last five days, which I’ll explain after the DNC convention is over.
She humanized herself tonight
(Wait, is that an accomplishment? she looks human just fine to countless people.)
She is angry, hard
(Um, that’s an exclusive right of only certain kinds of people?)
She isn’t a real American
(As opposed to unreal American? Where’s the list of authentic traits of a real American? I’ve never seen the revised statutes in this area)
Tonight, she planted herself firmly in family, her father, her working class family
(Does anyone still realize there are working class poorest of poor, and working class far more well-off people? Does anyone really believe out of work people sitting on sagging porches will identify with this trope?)
Is America ready for his black wife and his black kids?
( Which of the thousands of layers of ‘America’ are you referring to? What constitutes ‘ready?’ Why cant each presidential candidate just have a wife and kids… without the incessant Technicolor annotations? )
she looked fantastic and that matters
(matters to whom? for what reason? You make it sound like she overcame snoring and bedhead and for a change showed up looking swell)
The first lady is the nation’s official hostess
(Well, if that’s true, then who is the nation’s official Twinkie?)
She’s a working mother
She’s an Ivy League educated attorney
She is dark skinned
Her children wear braids
and she looked great
and she looked great
she proved she is capable of being the official hostess of the nation
(too, there are working class mothers who can barely pay for daycare, and there are working class mothers who have nannies… These kinds of bland comments actually erase Michelle rather than define her more clearly. It’s like calling Ahr-nald simply a Governor. It’s like calling Ted Kennedy a white haired old man.)
It is very difficult for a black woman to assert herself on both fronts; hostess and policy person
(Really? You mean, Harvard + Princeton= Nation’s Hostess? Boy, that sure makes sense.)
You know, in a way, these comments, many of them by black commentators as well as people of other RGB certified skin colors, do to Michelle, what some evangelicals do to God: reduce the incandescent to what is more easily ‘handle-able’… just life-sized filament, manageable low wattage, well-behaved, no surprises, therefore no creative fire. Like themselves. More or less.
Leaderly women ought not have to be held under a microscope to be seen in all their actual magnitude, ought they? I wonder what strange rite we have in our culture that insists accomplished women must diminutize themselves in order to fit the mold/casket already custom-made for them… by minds smaller than their own?
opinions powered by SendLove.to
8 Responses to “Erasing Michelle Obama, Some Pundits’ Comments on DNC Speech”
[...] their kids as best they can. And importantly, they’re not likely to forget their past or their current privileges, privileges that many Americans can’t claim as their own. Though they have more money, their experiences reflect many American families, whether [...]
Leaderly women ought not have to be held under a microscope to be seen in all their actual magnitude, ought they?
No they shouldn't and I agree with your entire post. I've seen black woman like Michelle Obama my entire life (albeit with much less income). And they are my mother and aunts. Leaders and mothers all. And I except them as they are. But in politics, it's all about the microscope and microanalyzing. Sometimes I wish we had robots covering these conventions.
I thought the coverage was inane too, and I understand that these things shouldn't matter but the fact is that they do. Personally I felt that Michelle hit a home run last night, and that's coming from someone who strongly opposes her husband politically.
I have to say, I expected to feel the emotional impact of Obama's nomination when he makes his acceptance speech, but I didn't realize that Michelle's speech would affect me in that way. I was watching it more as a spectator to the political process, but I was taken in by the realization of a very real chance of a black first family; although I could never vote for someone for that reason, I can better understand why some people will. I found Juan Williams' reaction to be very poignant (he was almost tearing up, and while generally I prefer journalists to be more objective and dispassionate, I felt it was perfectly justified in this case.) I also felt that he made a valid point, that the images not only of an accomplished black woman but more importantly, the loving and involved black men in her family and what that has meant to her and her children- are culturally important right now.
The media were stupid, as usual, “analyzing” and inferring largely what they wanted to say and were making up out of thin air. This was simply a feel-good occasion and Michelle Obama's speech was a success.
Many of the stations had their “experts” [sic] yakking while there were people or presentations on stage and I found that annoying. PBS had what often was the best coverage, namely everything on stage was broadcast.
Yes, Juan Williams's reaction was the best. I noticed his reaction, too, C.S..
Obama 2008 — one house, one spouse. Father in the White House.
Side note — I cycled through various channels and here in Detroit metro, I discovered (as I normally don't watch television) that Glenn Beck has a television show! He apparently has his temple hair dyed so he looks like older Rush Limbaugh and he had people on there saying ludicrous things. “Obama” and “Marxist” are synonyms, I “learned,” for example, last night.
I think it shows how far we have come as a nation. Three of the four frontrunners in the Demcratic party were not white males, yet were strong candidates in their own right. Obama is no Jesse Jackson, Clinton was no Geraldine Ferraro. The American Dream, which used to be reserved for white males, is open to anyone who can realize their potential.
I like those last two paragraphs, too.
And, I quoted you,of course!
And, this is poetry: “reduce the incandescent to what is more easily ‘handle-able’… just life-sized filament, manageable low wattage, well-behaved, no surprises, therefore no creative fire.” It's so true. Why is this? Why do we (humans, not just MSM) tear down those who shine brightly? Why do we require others to fit into our own small vision of who they are (and who we are)? What causes people to bring others down rather than all seeking to rise?
I open the two fingers of my right hand and peek through………..it's all I can bear. It all seems like a carnival complete with clowns and barkers, cops and pocket thieves. A part of me feels so much younger, really young, maybe 8 or 9 and I 'm so excited I need to go to the bathroom all the time. Where's the cotton candy stand? But there is an older one here too, the one who doesn't want to look. the one who is bored by it all. It won't be just Michelle that gets reduced/diminished to something less significant. Obama's turn is coming……………..then I can't bear all the inane commentary and turn it off.
LONG LIVE PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA!
Speaking of Barack Obama:
Barack Obama is a racial-minority individual and does not like racism:
And Michelle Obama is a racial-minority individual and does not like racism:
WORLDWIDE PROLIFERATION OF INFORMATION RELATING TO SCANDALS:
(I) I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention. Many people know what Bush did. And many people will know what Bush did—even until the end of the world. Bush was absolute evil. Bush is now like a fugitive from justice. Bush is a psychological prisoner. Bush often worries. In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.
(II) It is opined that Bill Clinton committed terrifying, racist, hate crimes during his presidency, and I am not free to say anything further about it. Numbers 32:23: “Be sure your sins will find you out.”
(III) What if basically all racial-minority people would subscribe to the interpretations that George Herbert Walker Bush committed monstrous, racist, hate crimes while he was the President of the United States? It will eventually come out: it is only a matter of time.
(IV) I know it may be hard to believe. However, Ronald Wilson Reagan committed horrible, racist, hate crimes during his presidency.
Respectfully Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang, J.D. Candidate
B.S., With the Highest Level of Academic Honors at Graduation, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
(I can type 90 words per minute, and there are thousands of copies on the Internet (by March 29, 2009) indicating the contents of (I), (II), (III), and (IV). And there are thousands of copies in very many countries around the world.)
“BAD NEWS FROM THE UNITED STATES: ON THE HATE CRIMES AND ETERNAL INFAMIES OF GEORGE W. BUSH, BILL CLINTON, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, AND RONALD REAGAN” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
http://badnewsfromtheunitedstates.blogspot.com/…
_______________
‘If only there could be a ban against invention that bottled up memory like scent & it never faded & it never got stale.’ Off the top of my head, it came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.