President Obama vs. UConn Basketball champs

Glenn Beck’s dressing room

I didn’t make this, but it’s funny and should be true

Media coverage of First Lady Michelle Obama: realistic or ridiculous?

For weeks now, “news” sites like Huffingtonpost.com, CNN.com and others have been drooling over every external aspect of the first black First Lady. We have heard her titled “Mighty Michelle”, “First Lady of Fashion”, “a Fashion icon”, “a modern Jackie O”, and on and on and on. We have seen every article of clothing she has worn be critiqued, rated, and often praised to no end as some brilliant fashion choice. I recall seeing Chris Matthews of MSNBC drooling over her appearance at the State of the Union address, and Jack Cafferty exclaiming that “he has a crush on Michelle Obama.”

What is going on here? Is all of this coverage reflect what is realistic, or does it teeter on being somewhat ridiculous?

Michelle Obama was not known for her fashion choices before her husband ran for office. She was not a super model or fashion runway diva. I do not recall hearing her name in the same breath as Naomi Campbell, Iman, Cindy Crawford or Tyra Banks. In fact, Barack did not meet Michelle at a photo shoot, but he worked under her at a law firm. So where is all of this fashion hype coming from? Is it driven by the struggling fashion industry, desperate to make a star out of any super high profile icon?

Concerning Michelle’s fashion, it is mixed. Some of her choices look excellent on her, and others seem somewhat experimental. When you listen to the First Lady speak, she sounds like a lawyer. She is strong, determined, and insistent on making her points and supporting her beliefs/stances. She does not sound like Halle Berry or Sade Adu, nor are her mannerisms completely soft and gentle.

This is not a knock on the first lady. My only wish is that the media would cover Michelle Obama for who she is and for the strengths got her here, as opposed to some gleeful fantasy in which only the external and superficial are acknowledged or praised.

Let’s get this straight, Michelle Obama is pretty. She is not unbelievably drop dead gorgeous (as the press would have you believe) and she is not unattractive (as some mean spirited conservative citizens would have you believe). She has a nice smile, great figure, beautiful engaging eyes, and youthful skin. However, what is most attractive about her is her humanity. She has her flaws like we all do, but she does her best with what she has and encourages others to do the same. She’s raised two lovely daughters, and supports her husband in a loving way that strengthens both of them. She keeps up with her fitness and watches her diet, which is admirable in this increasingly obese society. But most of all, she is genuine. What you see is what you get, and she cares about the youth.

I think the press would honor the first lady more if they discussed her character more than her shoes. Millions of women across the globe would love to be the wife of President Obama, but Michelle has captured his heart and loyalty. He was incredibly protective of her against GOP attacks (Remember “lay off my wife”), and grew agitated over rumors of an email relationship with Scarlett Johansson and videos from Obama girl. The President is always quick to praise his wife, even calling her the rock of the Obama family. And President Obama does not appear to be a superficial man. He does not chase after any short skirt out there (like a number of Washington politicians and past Presidents have), but he has found lasting value in Michelle, which means he knows a good thing when he sees it. Despite her initial rejection, the President was “persistent”, and their relationship has flourished and lasted while the same cannot be said for many of Hollywood’s hottest.

So the media should look at other things about Michelle, what makes her a beautiful person inside? What makes her a wonderful mother for her daughters, even as she juggles work as the first lady? What about her value for education that took her to some of the nation’s top Ivy league schools, and had the President working under her for a time? What about her resilient spirit that did not allow fear of racist threats or the stress of our current crisis talk her out of supporting her husband’s Presidency?

There are alot of things the press could and should focus on if they are talking about the nation’s first black first lady. And zeroing in on her belt, her shoes, her new hair style or sleeveless dress is a pretty empty choice.

Angry tea crowd boos GOP Congressman

Obama Patriot Shirt by craigbehrin

Obama Patriot Shirt by craigbehrin
Shop the t-shirts section of www.zazzle.com
See other Clothing T-Shirts

Return of the “peasant” class

The Peasant class returns

It is hard to say it any better than the video above says it. People at the tea bag parties around the country are full of misdirected anger and hatred. Their behavior is completely irrational, ignorant and ironic. They will be receiving one of the largest tax cuts in recent years, and they are in a fury about taxes? They are calling the President a fascist, and they do not even know what the word means. Rachel Maddow also uncovered alot of not-so-hidden racism within this bunch, including posters of President Obama as a shoe shine boy.

They make a small, yet convenient army for the rich in this nation, whom taxes will affect the most after the Bush tax cuts expire. Their anger and demonstrations will not improve their lives. Nor will their hatred towards our President, who is actually trying to pass policies that will help them.

Sad.

President Obama’s speech on the Economy

Youtube link

Two of the great strengths of our President are his calm demeanor and his ability to communicate clearly and analytically what he believes and why. One reporter mentioned that this latest speech was like an Economics 101 class, in terms of its presentation. To often in politics, substance and reasoned explanations are replaced with high volume emotion and fear mongering. Take Glenn Beck for example. He might very well have some legitimate concerns and good arguments to make against some of the policies from this administration. However, his over-the-top “dooms day” rants, and ridiculously immature behavior (like pouring “gasoline” on a guest spokesman or drawing cartoon pictures of “Jesus” representing the President) prevent many independents and most mature adults from taking anything he says seriously. He just comes across as an idiotic and potentially dangerous buffoon.

While Keith Olbermann might not be as crazy as Glenn Beck, he would still add more credibility to his stories if he calmed down the mockery, the anger rants, the “worst person in the world” garbage, and just spoke plainly about the issues facing our nation. One could argue that these are media personalities, and thus a certain level of “entertainment” value is necessary to increase viewership. But the issues they are discussing are real to the American people. If they are discussing war, torture and our military, or health care or government response to natural disasters, or the record job loss, these are not “entertainment” issues, they are real and should be treated with a manner of seriousness and respect.

And as for the politicians, the Dick Cheneys, Rudy Giulianis, Michele Bachmanns and the like in both parties should remember that we are Americans first and should respect fellow Americans even if they are in the opposing party. You don’t need over-the-top rhetoric or insane fear mongering to prove your point, if you have a good point. If you have sound reasons to support the policies you do, then simply explaining them as the President has here will gain you much greater respect, attention and possibly support.

Even for those that disagree with the President’s economic policies, it cannot be denied (after hearing this speech) that he has thought through them thoroughly and has sound reasons for his beliefs. This isn’t some wild liberal idealism. It is a practical approach to restore the economy and secure America’s future.

Puppy News! The Obama’s new puppy named ‘Bo’ is here

Here’s the story So much for keeping the secret until Tuesday, the “official” White House announcement date.

The Obama’s dog “Bo” Bo Diddley post card by altworld
Post cards created online using www.Zazzle.com

If President Obama was a puppet, as Alex Jones and his “Obama Deception” claims…

Saw the following in a forum.

Alex Jones tries to make the point that the position of the US Presidency is merely a ‘puppet’ position, and that the real power is held by “secret bankers”. Let’s follow this logic with a series of questions:

preview point. Why would the secret service risk their lives to defend a “puppet” and his family? Puppets are disposable and replaceable, and they have no mind of their own. Who would die for that and make their own family suffer?? Why would our top commanding officers salute a puppet? What would make these brave men and women, who have sacrificed for their country, stand at attention for a mere empty suit puppet?

1. Why would anyone possibly run for “puppet” given that the job pays $400,000 a year, and merely writing a book about yourself could get you $2.5 million?? President Obama’s earning potential is way higher than this. Also, McCain, Romney, and Clinton all already have hundreds of millions of dollars, what would possibly possess them to sacrifice so much to run for the office of “puppet”? What world leader would waste their time shaking hands with or respecting a mere puppet? Why would Gordon Brown be kissing up to a puppet?

2. If Obama is merely a “puppet”, why mention him at all? Why talk about what Obama is doing, or his policies, or any policies at all, because Dems and Republicans are exactly the same and the real power is owned by these “bankers”? The point is, puppets are not significant. In the 1990s movie Casino, a “puppet” was raised to look like he ran the Casino, but everyone who wanted to see changes made in the Casino knew not to go to him, but to the head guys running the Casino. If Obama is a puppet, then arguing against “his policies” is stupid, because he’s not making any decisions anyways.

3. Who the heck are these “secret” bankers? Name names and show figures. Surely they don’t belong to Bank of America, Citi group, or any of the other failed banking systems the government has had to bail out! Why does Alex Jones portray them as secret if he wants to ‘expose’ them? Why does he have a mere “puppet” on the cover of his DVD rather than the names and photos of the entire “NWO” group? After all, Obama is an empty suit puppet, he is meaningless his words are empty and he holds no power. He is merely controlled by someone else.

4. If Obama is a puppet, then who would donate to a puppet? Who would campaign for a puppet? Who would watch a debate amongst puppets who are all working for the same boss anyways? Who would serve a puppet? What military soldier would give his life on the orders of a puppet? We have lost 4,000+ lives in Iraq due to the orders and policies of a mere puppet? Is Alex Jones saying our armed service men work for the bankers? So the international bankers are the commanders in chief?

5. If Obama is a puppet, then there should be no anti-Obama sentiment. There should be no outrage over “Obama’s budget”. There should be no outrage over Obama’s spending. There should be no speculation on who made a better puppet (after all, all Presidents since JFK are just puppets). Anti Obama conservative’s real anger has nothing to do with President Obama at all. After all, he has no power, no policies, no active brain. He’s just there to say “Yes Sir” to some secret bankers somewhere in London, DC, and New York.

Thus, that means the “secret bankers” are socialist. The secret bankers passed the stimulus bill. The secret bankers will raise taxes. The secret bankers have a huge budget. etc.

6. Sayings according to Alex Jones logic:

Is America ready for it’s first black puppet?
Who will run for puppet in 2012?
I hope Hillary will break this nation’s highest, hardest glass ceiling: being a puppet.
You can be anything when you grow up, you can even be a puppet.
MLK and other Civil Rights activists died so that one day in America, it would be possible for a black person to be a puppet for wealthy bankers.
Our armed services follow the command of a puppet.
The world’s leaders lower themselves to meet with our nation’s puppet.
Everyone in Washington wants to have the ear and email of our puppet.

Dems = Republicans = candidates for puppet
Fox News = MSNBC = stations in favor of puppets
Liberals = Conservatives = supporters of puppets
Hillary Clinton = Palin = Romney = McCain = Ron Paul = Huckabee = candidates for puppet

Some Americans were real disappointed that Gore didn’t get to become puppet, and the Supreme court ruled that Bush got to become puppet instead.

Alex Jones is a nutcase.

The truth about Alex Jones, creator of the “Obama Deception” dvd

Saw the following in a forum.  Good post

Alex Jones is an entrepreneur.
His product is distrust of authority.
He knows there is always a market for this, because people have doubts and fears and no human can know or control everything.
The agenda of Alex Jones is to exploit those fears and exploit those doubts for his own personal profit.

We hear it all the time from Alex Jones “buy my dvds”, “read my book”, “visit my website”, “tune in to my radio show”, “subscribe for just pennies a day”.

Thus, no good deed, no good policy, no good speech, no good action, no success, no right decision, no problem solved, no noteworthy accomplishment that President Obama could ever make will be lucrative to Alex Jones, unless he injects fear and deception into it. Anything good the President could ever do taints the image Alex Jones is marketing, so he has to skew it to fit into his agenda.

And what of the listener? My opinion is that most of the listeners want Alex Jones message. It is like ear candy to them. They need to believe that Obama is secretly evil, something about that satisfies them.

Thus demand needs supply and supplier is happy to meet demand, but truth is out of the equation.

1 copy is $19.95, it’s also sold in bundles

If Alex released it for free online (or even if he allowed it) it’s for promotional purposes of his show, from which he gains advertising revenue. He wants new listeners to tune in to his weekly fear rants.  His “free” version also has ads running through it, encouraging the viewer to purchase a higher quality copy.

What McDonald’s means to you

As a kid, following your school soccer game, McDonald’s is a gift. It is almost as if you are being rewarded with McDonald’s food for playing a good game.

As a poor person, McDonald’s is a savior. Nothing is better than knowing that you only need 4 quarters + tax to get a decent sized meal (double cheese burger + a water) to survive. I suppose one could argue for Ramen soup as an even better economical choice, but McDonald’s is a close 2nd.

As a health expert, McDonald’s is the devil. You should never ever ever eat there. It will just make you fat and ruin your workouts. It just bad for you all around. It makes you feel bad, there’s way too much sodium and fat. It’s one choice that should never be in your diet.

As a McDonald’s employee, McDonald’s is a gift. I’ve had friends that say they get free meals there. They’d bring back 40 chicken nuggets, and two buckets of fries. It’s just one perk for working there, free food.

As an emotional eater, McDonald’s is a friend. Had a rough day? Boss cussed you out? Well a 10 piece chicken nugget meal, 2 apple pies and a coke will cheer you up!

And finally, as an obese person, McDonald’s is a threat. It’s a literal threat to your life. You will always be reminded that McDonald’s is KILLING YOU. Do not eat there unless you want to die.

If, ultimately, McDonald’s means death, then why doesn’t it always mean death?  In other words, for the kids who just won their soccer game, why should their parents “reward” them with death? (aka McDonald’s)  For the homeless person looking for a meal, why should they worsen their difficult lives with the death that McDonald’s brings?  For the McDonald’s worker, they should not view a McDonald’s a free meal as free “food”, but rather a risk to their health and increase to their medical bills.  For the lonely emotional eater, they should view McDonald’s as just another troublemaker to their lives, only worse.

McDonald’s will only continue to push their food as long as the public is willing to pay for it.  And paying for it seems to be done twice by Americans.  They pay once when they buy the food, and again when they receive the negative consequences.