Democratic Convention 2012

Michelle Obama DNC Reactions, from "untrue and ludicrous" to "How is there even a choice???"

|

La Gioconda!

The New York Times mixes up comparative and superlative, Breitbart.com throws some cold water on the First Lady's Dickensian tales of youth, and The Economist makes you wonder if there's a term for that feeling you get when somebody says something so embarrassing that you become embarrassed on that person's behalf. A sample of reactions to First Lady of America Michelle Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention: 

Alexandra Petri, Washington Post 
[First Lady of America Michelle Obama] spoke feelingly about being America's "Mom in Chief", about her roots and her parents' struggles and the need to pull together. She teared up. The audience teared up. Their tears teared up. Several elderly misers opened their windows and began flinging all their possessions at street urchins.

Allessandra Stanley, New York Times
Like Mrs. Romney before her, Mrs. Obama was tapped to draw a personal, approachable portrait of a husband who is sometimes seen as aloof and didactic. Both women spoke winningly, but Mrs. Obama, who has addressed a political convention before, gave the strongest performance.

Cory Booker, @CoryBooker
Wow! Our Nation's 1st Lady just gave a phenomenal & inspiring speech. Go #MichelleObama!

David Espo and Matthew Daly, Associated Press
The president was back home in the White House after a campaign appearance in Virginia as delegates cheered every mention of his name from the convention podium. He promised he'd be watching on television when his wife spoke.

Tatyana Ali, @OfficialTatyana
#MichelleObama is so fierce, so much integrity and HONESTY. How is there even a choice???

Michelle Obama, The Onion
Honestly, I'm thrilled to see all of you here tonight, knowing that my presence has been consciously engineered to soften my husband's image and give his poll numbers a quick boost. There is really no greater pleasure in the world than getting up on this stage and talking to millions of Americans not only as a first lady, but also as a cynical ploy to add warmth, humanity, and relatability to an otherwise cold, detached three-day display of political gamesmanship.

Joel B. Pollak, Breitbart.com
Both Michelle Robinson and Barack Obama began their adult lives with a leg up on the rest of America. They attended elite schools: Michelle went to Whitney Young, the public magnet school for Chicago's upper class, while Barack attended Punahou, the private prep school for the top stratum of Hawaiian society. They were accepted to Ivy League schools despite undistinguished credentials, and both attended Harvard Law School.

Jonah Goldberg, National Review
There were many points where I thought what she said was simply untrue or ludicrous, but rarely dishonest. Political wives are almost always immune to the charge of dishonesty because you have to assume their love for their husband is sincere. There are exceptions, but I don't think the Obamas qualify as one.

The Illuminati, @ThelIluminati
#MichelleObama is the new Queen of The Illuminati. All Hail Michelle Obama 

Peter Rof, Politico
She couldn't claim that Americans are better off today than they were four years ago so she talked quite movingly about the kind of man her husband is. Being a good man, however, does not mean you are a good president and—in any event—his likability is wearing thin.

Jan Slagter, @slagter_jan
#MichelleObama:Verandering kost tijd.Oproep aan vele dovemansoren.Rechts Amerika heeft een andere agenda, Lady!

Will Wilkinson, Economist
Ms Obama's speech was paint-by-numbers, but the painting happened to be the Mona Lisa. 

Mary W., @myownwa
Woke up feeling inspired.. #MichelleObama

Ama Dwimoh, Esq, @AmaDwimohEsq
America's first Lady was simply brilliant! She made the case–Her sincerity & credibility spoke volumes-Chief Mom! #MichelleObama #DNC2012

Michael Tomasky, Daily Beast
What was that about the "enthusiasm gap" the Democrats are suffering from, which has been conventional wisdom for months, or actually a couple of years? 

NEXT: Berlin Outlines Conditions For Circumcision

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. yes, nothing to fire up the troops quite like an affirmative action beneficiary lacking the self-awareness that only here could she have become what she is. Being white and liberal must require leaving a certain part of your brain at the door, so you can be lectured to by someone who hates you yet pretend that the words are loving.

  2. I think the Politico guy has it about right. She gave about as good of a speech as she could given the circumstances. But, being a good guy doesn’t make you a good President and the country is figuring out that Obama isn’t even that good of a guy.

    1. Yeah, I don’t get the lover for either of them. They’re both race hustling con artists that lie about their past.

      I guess those are the values and upbringing that she realized she shared with Barack when they were dating.

    2. The only one to have it about right is The Onion.

      1. No. The Onion has it exactly right. The politico guy has it about right.

        1. John, I disagree with you so frequently that I’d like to take this opportunity to agree with you wholeheartedly.

        1. That is awesome.

          1. I want to point out that the Obama campaign is already citing nonexistent bad weather as the reason they have to move from BoA Stadium to the indoor arena.

        2. Anyone else get the Chewbacca, er I mean sasquatch ads, to go with the Onion link?

    3. I think the Politico guy has it about right.

      As illustrated by Ramirez:

      Are we better off today than four years ago?

  3. To her credit, she was a great co-pilot on the Millennium Falcon.

  4. I found a shorter version of her speech.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr3sBks5o_8

    1. +1 Millenium Falcon

  5. I breathlessly await the Nick Gillespie post explaining how she is a fake because she claimed two Ivy League grads maybe didn’t have a life of wine and roses all of the time.

    1. I didn’t see the speech, but if she is out there claiming a life of suffering at any point after Barack got his law degree, she is totally full of shit too.

      With his degree and his race he could have strolled into any major firm in the country and negotiated the highest possible starting associate salary for that year. If he suffered because he didn’t choose to do that, that was his choice.

      1. I think you are wrong. Just because you are black and have a Harvard degree doesn’t mean life is perfect or you are insulated from reality. Just like the Romneys, the Obamas are entitled to their memories and their lives.

        But I will give you credit for being consistent. I seriously the Jacket will be. For some reason perceived Democratic hypocrisy doesn’t quite create the fierce moral urgency for him the Republican kind does.

      2. Keep in mind that Michelle did exactly that — she started at Winston Strawn I believe and was making a very good salary right out of the gate.

  6. I think Jan Slagter nailed it.

    1. Several run-together words caused gTranslate to gag. I believe it should have been “Verandering kost tijd. Oproep aan vele dove mansoren. Rechts Amerika heeft een andere agenda, Lady.”

      (“Change takes time. Calling many deaf mans ears. Right America has a different agenda, Lady.”)

      Which is almost coherent, say on the level of John.

      1. Bwa ha ha. This is the kind of gay wit I thought Tony would bring to the table.

        1. On his good days you can almost confuse Tonio for Tony.

      2. How about fuck off? That coherent enough for you?

  7. All I can say is Alexandra Petri must be one stupid cunt. Glad I do not listen to this crap; reading about it is bad enough.

    1. Most of the really fawning shit was written before they even heard the speech. Petri works for the Washington Post. She knew what she was going to write before Michelle Obama even started speaking.

    2. At first I thought Petri was kidding.

      1. It’s a for-laffs column, so even if she isn’t quite kidding she’s always being ironique.

        1. This is what happens when you become so “ironic” that it collapses on itself into sincerity.

          I pine for the future when this age of so-called “irony” passes and people stop trying to be cute all the time.

          1. One online forum that I know of had a bunch of hard lefties being meta-ironic about those evil racist right-wingers to the point where they were making death threats against Obama, because that’s what those fucking teabaggers really want, etc.

            The Secret Service didn’t get the joke.

          2. I thought ironic was ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife.

    3. Later in the column, she called it a “junk-food speech.”

  8. “Jonah Goldberg, National Review
    There were many points where I thought what she said was simply untrue or ludicrous, but rarely dishonest.”

    Wonder what it feels like to have a mush-filled cranium.

    1. Why? Is it possible to be wrong without being dishonest.

      1. Sure, but it’s not possible for you or Jonah Goldberg to distinguish whether that’s the case or not.

        1. Since no one can read Michelle Obama’s mind, I would say that it is impossible for anyone to. Again, just because she believes dumb things, doesn’t mean she doesn’t believe them genuinely.

          1. “Again, just because she believes dumb things, doesn’t mean she doesn’t believe them genuinely.”

            And it doesn’t mean she does believe them genuinely either. What relevance does genuinely believing “simply untrue” or “ludicrous” things have other than to generate an excuse for saying “simply untrue” and “ludicrous” things?

            1. It means she is stupid and not a liar. There is nothing wrong with giving people the benefit of the doubt and at least assuming their honesty.

            2. How does anyone know anything, Camping?

              This is a particularly dumb line of argumentation on your part. Oh wait I can’t know that it’s dumb. Damn.

              What relevance does genuinely believing “simply untrue” or “ludicrous” things have other than to generate an excuse for saying “simply untrue” and “ludicrous” things?

              There is a value in distinguishing between malevolent liars and the misled and ill-informed.

              1. A simple, “Oh, I didn’t see what Goldberg was trying to say, but it makes sense now” would have been much cleaner than trying to make some bullshit argument about the nature of knowledge.

              2. “How does anyone know anything, Camping?”

                The discussion isn’t about how anyone can know anything, Randy. It’s how you can know Michelle Obama’s motives. You can’t. There is no “value” in knowing them since there is no fucking way you can discern that.

                “There is a value in distinguishing between malevolent liars and the misled and ill-informed”

                There is no fucking value in something you can’t do. Idiot

                1. There is no fucking value in something you can’t do. Idiot

                  Wow, you’re right. I can’t tell if you are actually this dumb or if you are just trolling.

                  It’s how you can know Michelle Obama’s motives. You can’t. There is no “value” in knowing them since there is no fucking way you can discern that.

                  So there is no such thing as interpreting anyone’s actions ever.

                  I have met some dumb people in my life, but you take the Dumbass Cake.

                  1. “So there is no such thing as interpreting anyone’s actions ever.”

                    Sure, it’s called solipsism.

                    1. If someone comes up and punches you in the face, don’t get mad, because you have no idea why they did it. It coulda been outta love.

            3. OK. So if you cannot determine which way she is going on this, misinformed v. dihonest, how is the Goldberg comment indicative of his head being stuffed with soggy oatmeal?

              1. WEll, we don’t really know if he was just being dumb or dishonest.

    2. Can’t one honestly believe that the moon landings were a hoax or that Obama has been a good President? That these are untrue or ludicrous doesn’t mean the belief is held dishonestly.

      1. “Can’t one honestly believe that the moon landings were a hoax or that Obama has been a good President?”

        One could hold those beliefs honestly, but given nobody has reached the ability to read minds yet, explain how one could reach that conclusion?

        1. They don’t appear to be of dishonest intent, Nitpicker Nancy.

          1. “They don’t appear to be of dishonest intent”

            We aren’t even discussing the particulars of what is “simply untrue” and “ludicrous” and you’ve already seen an apparition.

            1. I bet you think you’re really clever, but serious, solipsism is tiring and not terribly insightful, you know.

              1. “I bet you think you’re really clever”

                Since you possess the valuable ability to read my thoughts and motives, this isn’t a surprise.

                “solipsism is tiring and not terribly insightful”

                Denying your ability to read minds is not solipsism. I’m not the one defending something unproven inside another’s mind as an excuse for their actions or words. Isn’t that what you’re doing?

                1. You need to learn the difference between an excuse and an explanation.

                  No one is saying anything about reading minds. If you want to interpret it that way, that is your own exercise in deliberate misunderstanding.

                  It’s pretty clear that Jonah Goldberg is offering an interpretation based on observation mixed with his own opinion.

                  If you disagree with that, you can offer your own mix of sensory percepts and opinion and tell us why the interpretation of Michelle Obama’s actions is not the correct one. If you present a convincing enough argument, you “win”.

                  There’s no mind reading required, any more than a person playing competitive poker has to read minds to believe that someone is bluffing, or how a parent can tell their four-year-old is lying to them.

        2. It’s the difference between lying and being mistaken. If you are of the opinion that we can’t make that distinction based on the circumstances then there’s not much I can do to help you.

      2. One can indeed, NEM. And a corollary is that the holding of some untrue or ludicrous beliefs (ie, young earth creationism) doesn’t mean that the person is insane.

    3. Let the wookie win.

  9. Will Wilkinson, Economist
    Ms Obama’s speech was paint-by-numbers, but the painting happened to be the Mona Lisa.

    Looks like his transformation is just about completed.

    1. My roommate in college knew Wilkerson well at NIU. They were both in the same masters program. Wilkerson is a total phony. I am not sure he actually believes anything other than it is good to tell your bosses what they want to hear.

      1. Who is this Wilkerson, and what does he have to do with the discussion of Wilkinson?

        1. I forget sometimes how slow and literal minded you are Tonio. My apologies for not previewing. I meant Wilkinson.

          Again my apologies. And for the record I think you do fabulous on here given your limitations.

      2. WilkINson. WilkINson. You do this all the time. If you’re doing it ironically, that’s OK.

        1. You know who I mean. And I haven’t figured out why I should know who he is anyway.

          1. You know who I mean.

            Well, not necessarily. You could have him confused with someone else with a similar name.

            And I haven’t figured out why I should know who he is anyway.

            Because liberaltarians are entertaining, that’s why.

      3. Was that during the 15 minutes he was calling himself an Objectivist?

        1. Apparently that’s what people call themselves to earn some cred from the unread proles.

          Dennis Miller called himself an objectivist a few days ago. He then proceeded to trumpet increased defense spending and support Mitt Romney.

          Crazy objectivists.

          1. He used Objectivist because he knows that no one believes him when he says he is a libertarian anymore. While I find Dennis Miller quite talented when it comes to comedy, he is completely fraudulent when he talks about his political leanings. He is a neo-con and refuses to admit it.

    2. Even a pinot sipping, Orange Line riding, Saville Row wearing elitist like myself thought that Wilkinson deserves a big giant pile of vomit in his lap for that one.

      If you look at the rest of the liveblog over there, though, Wilkinson’s got some good ones:

      Ted Strickland makes me want to buy an imported car and drive it over Ted Strickland.

      You have to give credit where credit is due.

    3. A paint-by-numbers Mona Lisa is inherently an inferior product compared to the original or a good print. So Wilkinson’s comment is ambiguous at best.

      1. He is saying it was routine, but it was a beautiful routine. I fail to see the ambiguity.

  10. I believe the term you are searching for is “douche-chilling”.

    1. “Deuce-chills,” actually.

      http://www.urbandictionary.com…..uce-chills

  11. She couldn’t claim that Americans are better off today than they were four years ago so she talked quite movingly about the kind of man her husband is.

    when her would-be successor talked of the man her husband is, giving millions of his own money and scads of his time to others, I don’t recall the same hosannas being tossed. Anyway, we know what kind of man Obama is, one who hates the place he is leading. It is beyond ironic that the most pro-American force in his life was his Indonesian stepfather.

    1. Which is why his moonbat mother dumped the guy and got young, impressionable Barry away from him and into the commie school.

  12. Is this shit over yet? Also, Will Wilkinson, good lord.

    1. Just makes you want to be a Liberaltarian doesn’t it?

      1. ANARCHISTCHAOSSOMALIACRAZYTALKZZOMFG!!!1!!11one!!!

      2. ANARCHY! CHAOSCRAZYTALKWEIRDNESSZOMFG!!!1one!!

          1. They have no roads there, you know.

    2. Indeed, I’m embarrassed by proxy.

  13. I literally turn down the sound when the First Wookie or her She Man husband come on the Radidio or TEEVEE. I cannot stand the sound of either of their voices any more. Literally.

    1. Last night I was thinking I should do this when I felt like I should go out and hit a women just to spite Obama in the new campaign against hitting women.

      1. Liking the way you think, newsletter subscription, etc. etc. etc.

  14. That was a brilliant piece by The Onion, though I suspect whoever came up with it will probably check “All Democrats” on the ballot this November.

    1. At least he has a sense of humor. That puts him above about 99% of the rest of them.

      1. You can’t have a sense of humor when you believe that you have a solution to all of the world’s problems and that most people are too stupid or greedy to understand you magnificent plan.

        When you think about it, it must be torture to have a liberal worldview.

        1. *“your”

        2. I would almost think you would have to have a sense of humor if you thought that.

        3. You can’t have a sense of humor when you believe that you have a solution to all of the world’s problems and that most people are too stupid or greedy to understand you magnificent plan.

          Well, except for the greedy part, that’s sort of where libertarians find themselves. The rest of the nation/world is too stupid to realize that more freedom for EVERYONE would be beneficial to them. They’d rather have decisions made for them while making decisions for others.

          1. A good thing to keep in mind is that Americans are stupid up until the moment that they have a good or service that they can sell to you, and then they’re your master.

    2. He spoke truth to power, so it’s OK for him to then vote power to bullshit

  15. The Onion piece is both hilarious and dead-on.

    Lest we forget, I hasten to add what a privilege it is to be objectified by all of you here and the millions of people watching at home, as I’m forced to use my charming smile and physical attractiveness to distract an entire nation from what is, by most accounts, a generally disappointing presidency. I can’t begin to convey what a dream it is to be used as a puppet by the hordes of political playmakers who direct my husband’s campaign, and to stand here in a shameless attempt to appeal to voters who like how I carry myself as a strong, independent-minded woman and love the picturesque image of our seemingly ideal American family.

    Needless to say, I am also overjoyed to have our two young daughters repeatedly roped into participating in this sick little dog and pony show.

    If all goes to plan, after I walk off this stage, you will see my husband not only as a strong political leader, but also as an everyday man who is trustworthy, honest, compassionate, and all the other bullshit you’d expect to hear from someone being used exclusively as a totem for some uplifting and calculatedly inspiring political message. And you have no idea how proud that makes me.

    1. The Onion has been killing lately. Their Ryan piece from a few weeks ago was fantastic.

  16. Wow. Even MoDo is panning him.

    This isn’t looking good for Obama.

    1. And she even called him Barry.

      It is difficult to read that entire article without throwing up. And someone needs to remind this air head that Bill Clinton is not the VP.

      Doesn’t matter for Barry though, he has this election wrapped up and he knows it. There is nothing he can say or do no matter how insane to change that.

      1. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/po…..ty-bounce/

        Do you honestly think a Democratic President who has an unfavorable rating with women is going to win?

        He knows he has it wrapped up? Are you kidding. He is panicking. They are not running the big gay marriage abortion convention because they think they have it wrapped up. They are doing it because they think doing what Rove did for Bush in 04 and out drawing the base is their only chance.

        1. I have been watching the RCP average polls for years and they are pretty accurate most of the time. Obama is up 30 in the electoral count. There is really no way to overcome that at this point, IMHO. Obama did his best to lose this, but the electorate are just too dependant and too dumb. You might have a valid point if not for that, but that makes the point moot. Not that Romney would be much of an alternative.

          1. Obama is up 30 in the electoral count. There is really no way to overcome that at this point, IMHO.

            What? Take Florida and it is 221-220.

          2. Look where those polls are trending. The are all trending against Obama. It is just a matter of time before the polls start to catch up with reality.

          3. I have mentioned the RCP polls and 270 to Win before, and said pretty much what you’re saying, Hyperion. I think it’s too close to call, however, and I think the polls are trending towards Romney. Even during the DNC, which should be ringing alarm bells in their headquarters. The Republicans are trending towards winning Ohio and Florida, and if that happens, O is in deep shit.

            What do we think a shooting war before November will do to O’s numbers? Particularly one with a good casus belli like a USN vessel getting shot at? I don’t put such machinations past this morally bankrupt Administration.

  17. Did anyone say *BARF*, because it is in order.

    If you think the popularity of the divider is chief is waning now, just wait until 3 years into his ‘need more time’ and see what is looks like. Of course that won’t have any effect on him and the liberal media will still be fawning over him after we’ve dumped a few more trillion down a rat hole and unemployment hits 15%.

    Also, watch the things this guy says after he doesn’t need to worry about reelection, it will make ‘you didn’t build that’ sound like something Reagan would have said. And he will continue to blame everything on Bush and those obstructionist GOP.

    The crazy thing is that this is probably the most disliked president of my life time and the worst economy since Carter and he will still win because the GOP are too stupid to find an electable candidate.

    1. He is not going to win. And if he did, you are right that is exactly what would happen. It would pretty much put an end to the Democratic Party. I seriously doubt we are living well enough for that to happen.

      1. Will, and here is why.

        We have 47 million people on food stamps. You are forgetting about the dependant sector and how they are going to vote. This POTUS election will be won by the guy who promises the most free stuff. Who would that be?

        1. The people getting free stuff don’t vote. Don’t worry Hyperion, when Obama loses badly, I won’t rub it in too bad.

          1. Many of them do vote, unfortunately.

            Feel free to rub it in if Obamney loses badly. You know, I still don’t care which Obamney loses.

          2. And here John keeps telling me that he isn’t cheerleading for Romney.

            Huh, imagine that.

            1. I will rub it in about being right about the result. If I were predicting Obama, I would rub it in just as much.

      2. It will not end the Democrat party. The Republicans will just get that much worse. This is a race to the bottom. Think of it as reverse Darwinism. In nature, incredibly stupid behavior will get you killed, either the local top predator will decide you are dumb enough to eat, or you fall off the cliff onto the rocks below.

        In America, when one political faction craps into the community’s bowl of Cheerios, the other one decides to piss into the milk. This keeps their common enemy a.k.a. ‘the electorate’ confused as to which way party to kill off.

        This is not a carefully orchestrated dance, these are Pavlovian responses more akin to a fern turning its leaves toward the sun. Such is the evolution of our political ‘class’ or ‘phylum.’

  18. The Economist makes you wonder if there’s a term for that feeling you get when somebody says something so embarrassing that you become embarrassed on that person’s behalf.

    I believe the technical term for that is a Costanza.

    1. Larry David takes it several factors beyond Costanza in every Curb Your Enthusiasm episode.

  19. When’s the Biden speech?

    1. GOOD EVENING CHARLOTTE GOOD TO SEE Y’ALL SHRUGGED OFF YA CHAINS

      1. Naah:’
        ‘Great crowd here tonight! I love Raleigh! Wonderful town, wonderful people!
        Uhhhh.’

    2. He was gonna speak, but it’s raining.

      1. Ha. Well done.

    3. I would absolutely love to see him walk on stage wearing an eye patch and carrying a trident.

  20. Seems H. Clinton suddenly has a lot of work to do a loooong way from the convention. Probably not coincidental.

    1. That’s what I was thinking. China? Will she be visiting Nepal, too?

    2. As soon as I heard that, I thought she knows how much of a disaster this convention will be and she doesn’t want to get any of it on her.

  21. I still can’t get over how damned homely that woman is. I flinch every time I see her picture.

    1. Why is it, sarcasmic, that you cannot see that they are the most attractive and elegant couple to ever inhabit the white house. We all know why, don’t we, you RACIST!

  22. Joel Pollak says “Michelle went to Whitney Young, the public magnet school for Chicago’s upper class.” Upper class kids don’t go to public schools, Joel. And you could have gone to a magnet school if you had studied hard.

    The whole tone of Tim’s posting is seriously snotty. Jonah Goldberg, not a fan of the Obamas, in the part of his commentary that Tim didn’t quote, said

    “I thought as a political speech it was excellent and did nearly everything she needed it to do. She was more comfortable and convincingly passionate than Ann Romney and made not only a defense of her husband the man (where Ann also excelled) but also of her husband’s policies (where Ann Romney was largely silent, if memory serves). Will it convince anyone already leaning against Obama to change their mind, I sincerely doubt it. Will it win back a few waverers? Quite possibly. Will it fire up the Democratic base? Absolutely.”

    I am way not voting for Obama this year, but this piece reeks of sour grapes. Next time, Tim, try harder.

    1. Clean up in the living room. Alan shit on the rug again.

      “Sherlock Holmes and the Mystery of the Orangle Line Deuce” (repeated from yesterday).

    2. You mean the “piece” that is all quotes from other people? Next time, Anal, read harder.

    3. Upper class kids don’t go to public schools,

      Are you that stupid or just that fucking dishonest. Upper class do to go to public schools. They just go to the right public schools you fucking moron.

      1. John, you intelligent, good-looking, well-spoken individual who totally does not llive in his mom’s basement, do you remember that U of Chi law professor who said that earning $400,000 a year did not make him rich? Here’s what he said about schools: “We pay about $15,000 in property taxes, about half of which goes to fund public education in Chicago. Since we care the education of our three children, this means we also have to pay to send them to private school.”

        If you scroll down, you can find his entire spiel here: http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/…..-rich.html (unsurprisingly, he deleted it from his own blog)

        1. So fucking what you idiot? That doesn’t mean no upper class kid ever went to public school or even public school in Chicago. Go to Oak Park sometime. It is full of rich kids going to public school. Bronx Science is a public school full of rich kids. They are called magnet schools you half wit.

    4. You are right Alan. Most of the comments here are sour grapes as well. A good speech is a good speech, and she gave one, whether you agree with her politics or not. Her delivery was exceptional. Of course, it is just the opposite of the speeches from Christie, Rubio and Eastwood, and thus all the hand-wringing here.
      Get over it, folks…she gave a very good speech.

      1. HA HA! He called you all Republicans!

        PWNED!

      2. Of course, it is just the opposite of the speeches from Christie, Rubio and Eastwood, and thus all the hand-wringing here.

        Team Blue retard is retarded.

      3. But as far as the candidates are concerned, who will give the best speech of all, Obamney or Obameny?

  23. Feelingly?

    What?

  24. The Economist makes you wonder if there’s a term for that feeling you get when somebody says something so embarrassing that you become embarrassed on that person’s behalf.

    Douche-chills. That feeling is called douche-chills.

  25. I thought it was funny how she mirrored Romney’s speech in many ways, even down to the phrase “unconditional love”. WTF.

    Vote Obamaney?

  26. [First Lady of America Michelle Obama] spoke feelingly about being America’s “Mom in Chief”

    Are you fucking kidding me? I’ve been mockingly calling Obama National Dad for four years now, and now they’re not even trying to hide it. I don’t need more parents.

    1. If I want fucked up parenting advice from a fatass who scolds an Olympian, at least I’ll know whom to ask.

  27. Well fuck me! If they got the Illuminati we’re all doomed.

  28. I think she’s wonderful in those Jack Links beef jerky commercials.

    1. You owe me a new keyboard to replace the one I just spewed soda on.

      + soda geyser.

  29. Here are More characteristics, novel style,varieties,and good quality low price

    http://avoo.net/ajgjk

    http://avoo.net/ajgjk

  30. Both Michelle Robinson and Barack Obama began their adult lives with a leg up on the rest of America. They attended elite schools: Michelle went to Whitney http://www.chaussuresfree.com/ Young, the public magnet school for Chicago’s upper class, while Barack attended Punahou, the private prep school for the top stratum of Hawaiian society. They were accepted to Ivy League schools despite undistinguished credentials, and both attended Harvard Law School.

  31. Is anybody aware that this article quoted The Onion, a fake news forum? How and why should I take this seriously?

    Ifail to understand how this is relevent. So, the Obama’s were never poor. Does that mean that the Romney’s were?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.