The news that First Lady Michelle Obama will be attending the funeral this Saturday of slain teenager Hadiya Pendleton is welcome news. It’s the right thing to do and frankly, I don’t understand why some are criticizing the decision.
Where was the President and The First Lady before this? What makes Hadiya’s death so special? Because she performed at the inauguration a week before she was shot down? Every gun death is a tragedy say those questioning why the White House cares so much now when they were so stonily silent before.
I understand why this is controversial to some, but I disagree agree with them. I don’t want The First Lady or The President attending funerals for murdered kids for the next four years. It would be like attending funerals for every fallen soldier. They would have no time for anything else.
This is a special case with a great deal of symbolic importance. In her own way, the First Lady and the Obama Administration is acknowledging all the fallen from urban violence and Black-on-Black crime. Hadiya’s case is particularly heart-rendering coming so soon after her having paid respect to Obama at his second inauguration. No, Hadiya is not “special,” but the circumstances are different. The presence of Michelle Obama is an acknowledgment of that and proves the president is not indifferent to the suffering going on in our cities.
it simply isn’t possible for them to attend every funeral of every young person’s whose life was prematurely and violently ended without it being a logistical nightmare, eventually making their attendance a trite affair. Can you imagine how much of a strain on law enforcement it would be to handle the security details each time the president or his wife attended? The media would be all over it and who wants photographers snapping pictures while you’re trying to bury your dead? Never mind how it would affect the Obamas personally to in effect become “professional mourners.”
How long would it be before every family that lost a loved one serving in Afghanistan or somewhere else start wondering aloud, “My son died for this country, yet the Commander-in-Chief didn’t attend his funeral. Why?” That would open a Pandora’s Box of misery that would never be closed again.
I can’t believe people are so obsessed with polishing their Obama Bashing Badge and pushing their b.s. political agendas to demean the First Lady showing up to pay her respects to a dead Black teenage girl.
No, actually I CAN believe it. There’s always someone sitting comfy in a chair that knows how they could do a job better than the person who actually has to do it. It’s just really disgusting when it comes over the dead body of Hadiya Pendleton.
I am not in any way trivializing the deaths of Black people across the nation when I cite the cases of Hadiya Pendleton, Trayvon Martin, Oscar Grant, Sean Bell or Amadou Diallo and more for special notice as I have for years. I am never numb or indifferent to the unnatural deaths of my people, but there simply aren’t enough hours in the day to mourn each individually.
Not for me and certainly not for The President of the United States either.
The critics should STFU. A young woman is dead. The president’s family said they were praying for Hadiya and tomorrow the First Lady will be present to commemorate her life. There’s nothing wrong with that and those who accuse the Obamas of a “publicity stunt” or not showing enough concern for other murdered Black children are out there where the buses don’t run.
They need to stay there because they are miserable excuses for human beings. Shame on them for their cynical exploitation of a dead girl to score their meaningless political points.
There is no difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. That’s the story for those voting third-party and bless ‘em. They have the luxury to think that.
I know better.
There is no difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. That’s the story for those cynics who will stay home and sit the election out.
I know better.
Staying home on Election Day will never be an option and voting for overreaching third-party candidates isn’t either. Nothing against those that do because I did it myself when I voted for John Anderson, but I knew Reagan was going to kick Carter’s butt and had the presidency in the bag.
But that was then and this is now. I couldn’t look myself in the mirror if I sat on my ass and let Romney waltz into the White House based upon my lazy indifference.
The professional pundits of the Washington press corps sniffed Obama’s DNC speech was “dull,” “workmanlike” and a “failure.” They miss the point. Obama knew his speech wasn’t better than Clinton or Michelle’s. It didn’t have to be. All it had to be was better than Romney’s and he did it with something Romney doesn’t have and can’t buy: droll wit.
Now, our friends at the Republican convention were more than happy to talk about everything they think is wrong with America, but they didn’t have much to say about how they’d make it right. They want your vote, but they don’t want you to know their plan. And that’s because all they have to offer is the same prescription they’ve had for the last thirty years: ‘Have a surplus? Try a tax cut. Deficit too high? Try another. Feel a cold coming on? Take two tax cuts, roll back some regulations, and call us in the morning!’
The president was only half-joking. The Republicans do seem to think like Robitussen, there’s nothing that can’t be fixed with more tax cuts.
I’m sorry for those folks who feel Obama didn’t deliver on the hope and change they were hoping for. I think they have to take into account the enormity of the mess he had to clean up and the fierceness of the opposition to his presidency he faced. Sure he’s made some bad mistakes, but I can’t think of a Chief Executive in my lifetime who hasn’t made me cuss them out multiple times.
Obama came up short on a lot of important issues, but before anybody switches to Mitt, I would appreciate if they could explain to me exactly how Mittens will make things better? Nothing about his campaign or personality indicates he identifies with the problems of anyone but the wealthiest and most privileged Americans.
This is a reason Mittens is so doing so atrociously with African-Americans. Many of us have already figured out he has no use for us and is incapable of relating to issues of importance to Blacks. Accordingly, the majority of Blacks have no use for Mittens.
Maybe we are simply ahead of the curve. Maybe we’re the canaries in the coalmine. Maybe the rest of America might want to try to figure out why Romney is like a dull knife that just ain’t cuttin, talkin’ loud and sayin’ nothing. Or maybe some of us see Romney for who he is. A rich guy who can’t identify with people who have to work for a living and has no understanding of what that means. Whenever someone tells a kid who wants to go to college or start a business to borrow the money from their parents, that should tell you all you need to know about them.
It certainly tells me if next year Mitt if it left up to him who sits on the Supreme Court, which government program benefiting the middle class family the most or whether there’s a war with Iran, how he decides is going to be brutal, cruel and nasty. All his life Mitt has shown a willingness to shove aside a previously held belief when it becomes inconvenient. That shouldn’t inspire confidence in his character. A man who will say anything to get elected will do everything the billionaires and businessmen underwriting his campaign want him to do once he’s in the White House.
If you haven’t demonstrated you have steel in your spine when you’re running for president, it’s too much to assume it will show up once you are.
I’m not naïve. After four years on the job Obama is obliged to obey his own set of masters. There are rich people and special interests that have their calls returned first and fast when they call on the president. The Obama who spoke in Charlotte was a grayer, more sober and less confident in his own charisma and talents Obama than the one who ran for president four years ago. Now it’s as he said, “I’m the president” and instead of answering questions about Reverend Wright, Tony Rezko or William Ayers, now he has to answer for the state of the economy, the lack of jobs and his inability to successfully negotiate with Congressional Republicans.
A President Romney can’t fix the problems of the economy and gloomy job numbers any easier than President Obama has. He will have better relations with the Republicans on the Hill because they figure he will be following their directives, not the other way around. And he will. When Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Eric Cantor and Jim DeMint say, “Jump Mitt, Jump!” Jump, he will. The only questions are for how long and how high.
Rubber Stamp Romney would be far weaker and less effective than Obama. What his presidency would mean to anyone who isn’t part of Romney’s diversity-free America isn’t hard to figure out. Four years of neglect and contempt interrupted by occasional actions of malicious hostility.
On one side there’s Obama. On the other there’s Romney. If you want me to believe there’s no difference between them, you’re going to have to first convince me there’s no difference between going forward and going backwards.
- Romney Rips Paul Ryan: Calls Running Mate’s Vote For Defense Cuts ‘A Big Mistake’ (thinkprogress.org)
- Obama widens lead over Romney despite jobs data: Reuters/Ipsos poll – Reuters (in.reuters.com)
- Here It Comes …. (tarpon.wordpress.com)
- Why Can’t We Be Friends? by Martha Thomases – Brilliant Disguise (mdwp.malibulist.com)
Going into their convention, Democrats had a disadvantage the Republicans did not. The GOP base is fired up to vote against Obama. The Democrats need to get theirs fired up to vote for Obama. The advantage Democrats have is it is easier to get people to vote for someone than against them. But too much of the Democratic base hasn’t been engaged thus far in the president’s reelection and that could imperil it.
Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton delivered show-stopping speeches to set it up for President Obama to make the case he deserves four more years. The speculation was which Clinton would show up in Charlotte. Would it be Bad Bill looking to stick a shiv in the back of the guy who blocked his wife’s bid for his old job or Good Bill rallying the faithful to help Obama join him and Harry Truman as the only Democratic incumbents to win a second term since FDR?
It took 48 minutes for him to say it, but Clinton left no doubt he’s all in with Team Obama and squash any speculation he wasn’t. Obama and Clinton have had a prickly relationship, but with his ringing endorsement of the embattled president and shredding of the Republicans, Clinton is poised to become a significant asset to Obama’s campaign.
Michelle Obama’s job was tougher than the one Clinton had. He had to say the things about the opposition in the way a former president can that a current one can’t. Bill had to draw the distinctions between Obama and the Republicans. Michelle had to reach out to disillusioned and disappointed Democrats to remind them, yes, there is are good reasons to show up and vote for her husband.
More than a few amateur psychologists such as D’nesh D’Souza have attempted to put the president on the couch trying to figure out why he hates America so much. He doesn’t, but they are too full of hate for him to realize it. With the First Lady, they can’t question her “Americaness” so they hit on her as being “angry.” The go-to move for right-wingers too lazy or too stupid (or both) to understand the Obamas is to write him off as uppity and her as angry.
Stereotyping Michelle is a way to minimize her intellect and beauty. She has been hammered by her critics as snobbish, materialistic, bossy and nosing into the dietary habits of American’s children. It’s amazing how low they will go not to take Michelle seriously. She has more grace, charm and smarts in one finger than most of the haters do in their entire flabby bodies.
She is also thought of as being the true liberal in the marriage or at least more than her husband. That’s a sentiment shared by Salon’s Joan Walsh:
There are Democrats who believe Michelle Obama carries the torch for liberalism, and reminds her husband what he came to Washington to do, when his Beltway advisers may be telling him something different. Tuesday night she spoke to those Democrats, who may not be as enthusiastic or optimistic as they were in 2008. She told them she loves her husband even more than she did four years ago, because of all that he’s done for the country – and maybe helped them to love him a little more, too.
All the professional and amateur “fact-checkers” will comb through every last word of their speeches looking for exaggerations, half-truths, and outright lies of a Paul Ryan level, but a fact is not the same as the truth and what Michelle Obama said about character and what Bill Clinton said about the economy Obama inherited was the gospel truth.
The First Lady said, “I have seen firsthand that being president doesn’t change who you are – it reveals who you are.”
President Clinton said, “President Obama started with a much weaker economy than I did. No President – not me or any of my predecessors could have repaired all the damage in just four years.”
Today is the last night of the Democratic National Convention with Joe Biden and Obama himself ringing down the curtain with perhaps the two most important speeches of their political lives. What they say doesn’t have to be as good as what Bill and Michelle said, but it would go a long ways to waking up the base if it’s every bit as good
If the Democrats don’t come out of their convention energized and mobilized to send Mitt back to one of his six homes it won’t be because the Big Dog and the First Lady didn’t do their part.
Motivation? Yeah. They built that.
- Michelle Obama’s message: The president is just like you (thegrio.com)
- DNC Dispatch: Bill Clinton Shows Dems How it’s Done (wnyc.org)
- What if Michelle Obama ran for office? (politico.com)
Washington isn’t just the seat of power in America, it’s also the world’s biggest fishbowl and there is no bigger fish than the President and his First Lady. So when New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor focused her attention on Michelle Obama and her frustrations in her role as the second billed star in a history making accomplishment, she ruffled some feelings within the White House.
How much weight you give to the accuracy of this book has to go back to how much trust you have in the Bob Woodward style of writing books about people based upon second and third hand sources. My take as a journalist is I take these kind of gossipy, unsubstantiated stories with a certain degree of wariness. I won’t go so far as to say the author got the story wrong, but she’s trying to sell a book and she needs a hook to separate hers from the many others already written about the Obamas. If she found one nobody else did, good for her. I know how the sausage gets made so I’m not as wowed.
Kantor said: “I interviewed 33 White House staffers, most of them many times. I wouldn’t trade that for a quick interview with the president, because I’m not sure he’s at liberty to discuss the real questions I asked in this book. In a way, it goes to Barack Obama’s own predicament as president: He’s such a gifted storyteller. Yet can he really tell his own story anymore?”
The White House response: ‘This is the author’s take, reflecting her own opinions, on a remarkably strong relationship the President and First Lady – both of whom share an unwavering commitment to each other, and to improving the lives of Americans. The book, an overdramatization of old news, is about a relationship between two people whom the author has not spoken to in years. The author last interviewed the Obamas in 2009 for a magazine piece, and did not interview them for this book. The emotions, thoughts and private moments described in the book, though often seemingly ascribed to the President and First Lady, reflect little more than the author’s own thoughts. These second-hand accounts are staples of every Administration in modern political history and often exaggerated.”
Decide for yourself who’s got more to lose or gain here: The White House trying to put the best face on the Obama’s marriage or an author with a book to sell?
I listened to Kantor on NPR’s Fresh Air program today and I came away with a totally different impression of her and the book than I had previously. She clearly feels warmly toward the Obamas, particularly Michelle. She said at one point despite the sensationalism of some reports, Michelle doesn’t hate Rahm Emanuel. What was going on is the natural friction between the First Lady’s staff in the East Wing and the President’s staff in the West Wing.
Anybody know how many people are responsible for the president’s schedule? Two? Ten? Try 33 on the scheduling staff. Now balance that against Michelle wondering if the president isn’t being over-scheduled or will he be able to attend a school function for his daughters?
Michelle Obama had to grow into her role as The First Lady as much as her husband has had to grow into hers. It’s been more difficult than she expected, but she’s risen to the challenge. So has her husband for whom her support is absolute, total and unshakable.
It’s doubtful I’ll pay to read The Obamas but if I saw a copy at the library, it’s probably worth checking out.
ADDENDUM: But don’t give Mrs. Obama a copy as a birthday present. You might get it flung back at you faster than you hand it over.
Speaking to Oprah gal pal Gayle King on the CBS Morning News, the First Lady made it clear she did not approve of Kantor putting his business on the street.
“I never read these books, so I’ve just gotten in the habit of not reading other people’s impressions of people.”
“I guess it’s just more interesting to imagine this conflicted situation here,” she said. “That’s been an image people have tried to paint of me since the day Barack announced, that I’m some kind of angry black woman.”
Maybe Michelle isn’t an angry Black woman, but she isn’t remotely happy with Kantorr trying to climb in her head.
- New book on Obamas says there were clashes between Michelle and aides (csmonitor.com)
- Matt Lauer Grills Controversial Obama Book Author Over White House Pushback (mediaite.com)
- Michelle Obama’s First Days As First Lady: ‘Alone, Frightened’ (maboulette.wordpress.com)
- Robert Gibbs Said A Very Bad Word About Michelle Obama (buzzfeed.com)
Here’s what a slow news day looks like.
Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), known for his cantankerous ways and for not speaking to media unless it’s his idea, was overheard at the Delta Crown lounge at Reagan National Airport today talking on his cellphone about an incident he said occurred three weeks ago while at an Episcopal church auction. Please note, a church auction.
Our source, a Democratic operative who heard the whole thing, said he was “very loud”. Sensenbrenner was overheard saying that after buying all their “crap” (his word) a woman approached him and praised first lady Michelle Obama. He told the woman that Michelle should practice what she preaches — “she lectures us on eating right while she has a large posterior herself.”
The representative might have a better case to make about the First Lady’s gluteus maximus if he wasn’t sporting a double wide one himself and probably hasn’t seen his Little Sensenbrenner without a microscope and tweezers in the last twenty years.
If you want to accuse Michelle Obama of being a food and fitness fascist, there might be a credible case to be made for that, though it’s hard to see what’s wrong about anyone advocating eating better and staying active.
But when you have to add stupid remarks about a woman’s figure to make your point, you lose the argument. That’s just plain dumb. It’s rude too.
Not to be sexist or racist, but all n’ all, my personal experience and observation is in comparison to their Caucasian counterparts, many Black women got it goin’ on with the junk in the trunk.
The First Lady has a nicely shaped posterior (not that I’ve looked). Based on their belief that everything with the name “Obama” attached to it is wrong, bad, and evil, the First Lady’s crusade to get Americans to take their hands out of the Doritos bag, off the remote and get up and move something has been ridiculed by know-nothings such as Sensenbrenner, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh, if you can believe that.
It doesn’t help Sensenbrenner’s case when he’s packing more than a few of extra lbs and a couple of spare chins. Also, it’s a good thing if you’re not shopping in the Big & Tall section because you’re not particularly tall when you’re cracking on someone’s butt. Porky White guys who can’t see their feet commenting on the build of the Black First Lady who is not just fit, but obviously fitter than the person calling her out, are just asking to be ridiculed.
Or we could just go with the fact it’s sexist. Yeah, that works too.
Let me it plain for Big Jim: Michelle Obama is smart, beautiful, elegant and classy. And she’s kind of hot. These are all the things you are not. She was blessed with a bountiful boo-tay and if Barack doesn’t have a problem with it, what’s your beef?
Have the self-awareness not to dog out someone for having a healthy and nicely proportioned butt if your own is unhealthy and spreading rapidly. Stick to wet dreams about a stick figure like Ann Coulter in a bikini, Congressman.
Nobody’s ever had a romantic fantasy about Big Jim Sensenbrenner. Imagine that ass in a thong.
Black women are the most marginalized women of color in the world to my way of thinking and I don’t arrive to that conclusion based upon advanced symptoms of Angry Black Male Syndrome.
Whether it is one fat bastard from Wisconsin snapping on the size of the First Lady derriere or Satoshi Kanazawa‘s post on the Psychology Today website, “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women?” or the Dutch fashion magazine that sneered about the singer Rihanna’s “ghetto ass” and dubbed her “the ultimate nigga bitch” a lot of people who are not Black and do not love Black women feel free to dismiss them for not meeting their standards of beauty.
It might be a personality quirk of mine since a Black woman gave birth to me, I married a Black woman and my daughter is a Black woman. I don’t like hearing Black women being dogged out. It might be be why I love, protect and defend Black women.
It doesn’t make a dime’s worth of difference to me if it coming from some clueless editors across the pond or a cheap backbencher 99.9 percent of Americans had never previously heard of. Go after Black women and I’m coming after you.
Permission is not needed. Agreement is not required.
Here’s the bottom line, so listen up America. You have a First Lady that has a great ass. Deal with it.
- LARGE POSTERIOR: Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner Slams Michelle Obama’s Backside (blippitt.com)
- Rep. Sensenbrenner to Apologize to First Lady Obama for Low Class Sexist Remark (littlegreenfootballs.com)
- GOP Rep. Sensenbrenner On Michelle Obama: ‘ She Has A Large Posterior’. (theobamacrat.com)
Obamabot: One who supports Barack Obama and yet knows very little or nothing about Obama the man and politician; his history, accomplishments and challenges beyond repeating Obama Camp talking points and/or slogans.
An Obamabot typically can’t define, explain or defend Obama’s policies. If an Obamabot is pursued or confronted about his or her seeming blind loyalty and lack of knowledge, he or she will typically launch a ‘counter attack’ (to a perceived attack) and accuse those who differ as racist, ignorant, hateful, etc. and/or will become resentful, indignant, insulting, and even threatening (in cases which are most extreme).
Urban Dictionary definition
There’s a new game I’ve noticed a lot of the Black pundits are starting to play (and I include myself in that number) and that is a need to prove we are not Obamabots. Some of us have become hypersensitive to the criticism we will automatically leap to President Obama’s defense no matter how legitimate that criticism may be. We are now desperately attempting to prove we are not mindlessly loyal robots, programmed to be uncritical of the president.
Now some of us have over-corrected. We search for something to criticize Obama about to reassert our independence and to prove to our Caucasian counterparts that we have not “gone native” and reestablish our loyalties to journalistic independence supersede any misguided racial loyalty. Therefore we have African-Americans joining in with the talking heads of Fox News, and demanding Attorney General Holder explain why he isn’t aggressively pursuing the New Black Panthers voter intimidation case or investigating ACORN. The latest outrage is to now click our tongues in mock dismay over the money being spent on First Lady Michelle Obama’s vacation/trip to Spain.
Some people whose opinions I respect are seriously posing questions like this: Is First Lady Michelle Obama’s trip overseas to Spain inappropriate in a bad recession here at home–unemployment close to 10%, 40 million people using food stamps–they are calling her “Let them eat cake Marie Antoinette, Michelle Obama”–is that fair or foul??
To which I replied: I fail to see how the First Lady and the girls sitting around the White House wringing their hands about something they can do nothing about is a valid reason to criticize them.
The true answer is neither fair nor foul. The correct answer is to pose another question: Who are “they” and why should I play their stupid game of “gotcha?”
I have my own sneaking suspicions of who “they” are, but I doubt “they” have ever had a kind thought for Barack or Michelle Obama.
There are two things I should make clear. The first is I voted for and admire President Obama and his family. The second is when he disappoints me I don’t have a problem saying that he has. I see his faults. It doesn’t require a Beck or Limbaugh to hip me to where Obama comes up short.
Knowing that I am a Obama supporter, why do so many Black conservatives/Republicans try to run the okie-doke on me and ask, “Where were you when everyone was saying all these terrible things about George W. Bush?” If memory serves I was probably one of those guys saying some of those terrible things since I did not like the guy, voted enthusiastically against him twice and was happier than hell when the son-of-a-Bush finally left after eight long, terrible years.
Please don’t come at me anymore with that “Bush was treated badly too” line because that simplistic reasoning ignores the reality how hard Bush worked to earn his lousy approval ratings. There’s a sense among White Americans that Obama is Jimmy Carter reincarnated; a really smart guy with a nice smile, but kind of cold and absolutely in over his head as a Chief Executive. With Bush, they knew he wasn’t that smart and his smile looked more like a smirk, but Bush was smart enough to surround himself with exceptionally smart people like Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice to balance out the cold hitmen like Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, The Obama Cabinet lacks those kind of clearly defined heroes and hissable villains.
Is it the support of 30 million African-American Obamabots and their 93 percent approval of Obama’s job performance all that is keeping the President’s drooping poll numbers from going into complete free-fall as Washington Examiner writer Byron York suggests in Cord Jefferson’s analysis in The Root? York seems to believe it can be chalked up to racial loyalty that has Obama doing so well with Blacks when Whites seem to be deserting him in droves.
Yet what explains a Gallup poll from December 2008 when 72 percent of conservative Republicans still held a favorable opinion of the job Bush was doing while only 29 percent of the rest of the nation shared their sentiments? White loyalty? Say it ain’t so!
Maybe what’s going on here is Blacks are not as willing to give up on Obama as Whites are because they’re ahead of the curve. Bush never scored particularly high with us and by the time he limped out of office only 7 percent of Blacks agreed with those conservative Republicans that Bush wasn’t a total bust as president. The rest of the country finally caught up in 2008 to a perspective African-Americans had held since 2001: Bush was a loser who reeked of incompetence and flop sweat.
The fact there are thousands, if not millions of African-Americans who don’t dig Barack Obama neither troubles nor surprises me. There were those who thought Martin Luther King Jr., was a troublemaker, Malcolm X a militant loudmouth, Angela Davis a Commie and the Black Panthers a motley group of gun-toting thugs. I have it on good information there are some of us who didn’t think Michael Jackson was much of a dancer.
There has never been one unified mind among Black folk about anyone, any issue at any time. Every Black person is free to say awful, mean and terrible things about Obama without having their membership in the race called into question. Heaven knows I’ve said my share of unkind things about the President and thought even worst things. I have before and expect to again before he leaves office.
What I’m not about to do is rip Obama over trivial junk simply to show my autonomy or because some right-winger who watches too much Fox News accuses me of not being fair and balanced. Never let anyone convince you because you’re not always bipartisan it must mean you must be biased. I’m honest enough to admit Obama gets the benefit of the doubt from me and his critics do not.
Does that make me a Obamabot? I can see how someone might say it does. That doesn’t make them are right or me obligated to prove they are. I reserve the right to rip the President when I think he has it coming. I need a better reason than the ones Rupert Murdoch’s fantasy-is- reality-factory have given me thus far.
President Obama’s popularity ratings may be taking a dip but he’s still a hot commodity among some groups. Or is that groupies?
A word of caution to Michelle Obama: if a woman calls The White House claiming to be ambassador from Sweden who urgently needs to meet with the president on a matter of utmost importance, hang up.
That’s just Malin Akerman sniffing around your man.
If you didn’t see Watchmen, the name of Malin Akerman probably won’t mean much to you, but that’s okay. Here’s all you need to know. She played the heroine Silk Spectre in a vergy tight latex uniform she described as a “human condom.” The other thing you need to know is in an interview in the October issue of Esquire, Akerman has some….well…interesting things to say about the president.
Such as the fact the O-Man makes her think naughty thoughts about doing naughty things to him.
“I get sweaty palms when I think about him. He’s so supremely intelligent, and he’s a man. I just want to go in there and become a home wrecker. No, I really don’t.”
The Esquire interviewer tells Malin there’s pictures on the internet of a shirtless Obama swimming during a Hawaiian vacation. Akerman has never seen the photos, but she’s clearly curious to do so and more than her palms are getting damp.
“I might have to have a little bathroom break. Change my panties.”
The interviewer pulls up the picture of president splashing in the surf. Akerman is not disappointed.
“Oh, my God. I really need to meet him and mess up his marriage. And mess up mine, too.”
Akerman is married to some Italian guy who plays drums in her rock band. I think Barack’s probably got a pretty good shot if he and Michelle ever hit a rocky patch.
“Have you seen his hands? I’m sorry, but I’m a big hand freak, and those hands could wrap around you twice.”
Oh, that old myth again. Isn’t the only thing you can say with real certainty about a man with big hands is he has to wear big gloves? Apparently, there’s a few 31-year-old Swedish starlets that didn’t get the memo.
The First Lady is a confident classy, smart and accomplished woman whom even when Barack was in the U.S. Senate, was making more money that he was. You think she don’t know what a babe magnet her hubby is? I know more than a few brothers who confess to checking out The First Lady’s fun buns. You ever hear of anyone scoping out Laura Bush’s butt?
Chris Rock famously observed, ” A man is only as faithful as his options.” I’m willing to bet President Obama has a lot of options. If he were to unleash his inner Bill Clinton/John Kennedy and creep around, Obama would be spoiled for choice.
If the president even reads Esquire, he’d probably be smile and be flattered by Akerman’s panting and plotting on how to break up his happy home, but whatever else Obama is he ain’t stupid. Even if he wanted to get his freak on with a little sumpthin’ sumpthin’ on the side, he wouldn’t do in the White House with a White woman. With as much on the ball as Obama knows what he might gain from fooling around isn’t worth what he would lose.
It’s like Tupac said, “All eyez on me.” There’s no shortage of eyes on Obama every moment of every day. Except when he retreats to the presidential lavatory where he probably sneaks a quick cigarette in. But as for sneaking in a blonde or brunette? Fuhgeddaboutit.
Besides he’s already got Michelle who’s smart, fine and bootylicious. When you’ve already got prime rib at home, why go out for a hot dog?
Why does Michelle smile so pretty? You’d smile too if you knew thousands of women are fiendin’ on your husband, but he’s not going anywhere. Imagine if he got caught in the act. Does Michelle look like someone who would stand by her man’s side at a news conference where he admits to an act of infidelity? Hell no, Negro! She knows she ain’t got a damn thing to worry about from Malin Akerman or anyone else checking out the Commander-In-Chief. Let ‘em look because they won’t get to touch.
Even with the Secret Service, Barack’s protected by a strong Black woman who’s protecting her interests. As far as Malin Ackerman’s Jungle Fever fantasies goes, I hope they keep her warm on a cold night.
If they’re not named Malia, Sasha or Michelle, there ain’t no other “Obama Girls” in Barack’s forseeable future.
The Republican Party may not have a clear leader, but they still have some core beliefs and one of them is it’s fun to be racist.
A Republican activist and former South Carolina state senate candidate Rusty DePass made a comment/wisecrack after learning a gorilla had escaped from the Riverbanks Zoo:
“I’m sure it’s just one of Michelle’s ancestors – probably harmless.”
DePass later apologized saying, “I am as sorry as I can be if I offended anyone. The comment was clearly in jest.”
In Tennessee, Sherri Goforth, the executive assistant for Republican state senator Diane Black e-mailed the photo at the top to other legislative aides.
Christian Grantham of Nashvilleistalking.com interviewed Goforth.
I spoke with Sherri Goforth minutes ago to confirm she sent this email. She confirmed she had sent it and also said she had received a letter of reprimand from her superiors but said she will stay on the job.
When I asked her if she understood the controversial nature of the photo, Goforth would only say she felt very bad about accidentally sending it to the wrong list. When I gave her a second chance to address the controversial nature of the email, she again repeated that she only felt bad about sending it to the wrong list of people.
“I went on the wrong email and I inadvertently hit the wrong button,” Goforth told NIT. “I’m very sick about it, and it’s one of those things I can’t change or take back.”
Senator Black issued a statement that the cartoon “does not reflect my views” and that Goforth was reprimanded verbally and in writing, but no further action would be forthcoming.
Tennessee Democratic Party Chairman Chip Forrester said, “I am calling on Sen. Black to reject this racist smear and fire this staffer who, on state government time, on state government computers, using a state government email account, launched this bigoted attack on our president.”
Goforth and Senator Black are both White.
Another day, another weak, half-assed Republican “apology.”
You have to wonder how long the Republicans can pull this kind of racist crap, but then you realize this is a political party that is made up of primarily Southern Whites who are hostile to Black people and it becomes very obvious, they’re going to keep it up every day Barack and Michelle Obama are in the White House.