There’s no simple way to state this at all. It is apparent that Fox News purposefully edited Michelle Obama’s comments in order to create a controversy that just didn’t exist. Mrs. Obama was remarking how the events of recent past – including her husband as nominee – for the first time in her life she was ‘really’ proud of her country. Well, by simply eliminating the word ‘really’ – which is clear on the original – they created a fervor of strawmen among the Right Wing Camps all over the country.
Filed under: American National Government, Internet, Media, Politics | Tagged: Drudge, FOX, Foxnews, Michelle Obama |
The Almost Daily Binx 
With or without the “really” it was a stupid an inflammatory statement for a candidate’s spouse to make – but Mrs. Obama has a track record of making such statements.
It’s kind of sad when both Dem. candidates’ spouses are serious PR concerns.
I disagree with your assessment of the statement being inflammatory. If you listen to the speech, the word “really” was key to what she meant. I’ve been proud of my family – but other times I’ve told someone that I was “really” proud. It is positive modifier, and emphasis device that is in current English usage. You must have more research resources than we do – because we don’t have any information about Michelle Obama that is alarming.
What is alarming is the collusion of a major News organization altering actual recordings of events in order to influence or falsify reality.
When a Black woman from a blue-collar family with an Ivy League post-graduate education describes her husband’s candidacy as the 1st time she’s been “really” proud of America, that’s inflammatory.
Anyone associated with a very public figure should have enough common sense not to make remarks that are very easy to either – I hope – misconstrue or twist into a weapon against that figure.
I don’t disagree with your semantic assessment. I disagree with the value you place on semantics in common usage.
Sad isn’t it?
It is sad – but maybe it will get better. I’ll acknowledge your etymological prerogative and I’m happy you visit here.
Happily I think it WILL get better. The 2008 election process is very heartening due to the involvement of the average “Joe” and”Jane.” People are actually concerned and looking for information!
If it comes down to Obama v. McCain, I actually don’t know who I’ll vote for since I agree with some parts of their respective platforms and virulently disagree with other parts. As frustrating as that is, it’s also strangely hopeful the recent polarized years.
For me its easier – Obama isn’t part of the established core politique. As far as McCain – his reversal on the torture bill is stinging to many former military – of which I am one. His POW hero status went out the window when not 30 days after stating emphatically, that water-boarding was torture (something that he would know first hand) he reversed a career opposition to torture – A CAREER opposition to torture … in exchange for an endorsement.
Secondly, I’m enthusiastic about the Joes and Janes, just as you. But I don’t see them very lit up on the McCain team. That pretty much looks like the AARP crowd to me. Ron Paul – now he’s got a lot of grass roots – young people action – but not McCain.
And lastly – the only problem I have with Obama’s central theme is calling for Health Insurance instead of Health Care. Even if National Health-care is not the best solution – letting the insurance companies own the game can’t be good either.
After the Republican permitted coup of our government by neo-con operatives – I don’t think there’s much hope for McCain – unless of course the Democratic Leadership Committee rigs the game and forces the nomination to Hillary. Then McCain wins and the Democratic Party ceases to exist instead of morphing into a more relevant force.
I’ve met a few AARP lifelong republicans who are so disgusted with the GOP, they changed party affiliation and for the first time in their lives voted for a democrat in the primary election. But it wasn’t Hillary who received their votes. There are large numbers of disenfranchised republicans voters. But none of those votes will be going to Hillary. Absolutely none.
Obama has mentioned that he has quite a number of former republicans in his camp, and no doubt he does.
Considering that Rupert Murdock is supporting Hillary, it’s not surprising that Fox News omitted the word “really”. Fox does do infotainment, but I don’t consider them a credible news source.
thats it, bro