Gary Johnson cannot be the savior you think he would be. The only cure is to limit the size and scope of the federal government. Fifty states can't all be the worst. One inescapable Fed can.

> The notion that anybody (let alone Romney) can
> paint Obama, who generally comes across as
> Mr. Cool, as an "angry black man" is rather
> a stretch.

I dunno about that. It's a caricature, but things like this (link form yesterday) are what such a caricature would do.

You're certainly right about Romney, who doesn't have enough presence in human mindspace to present a case for such an accusation. It's almost like he was raised not to say that other people even exist, because it's kinda aggressive.

Sure, Obama is a handsome guy. However, the plain truth is that he has personally inspired more racial anger than any 10 other presidents together.

His appeals to black culture and black voters are explicit. One recent example was the establishment of an office to promote "educational excellence for African Americans". As part of his campaign, In February he announced the launch of "African Americans for Obama". There are plenty more examples as well.

It's time and past time to call him what he is. Maybe Obama isn't angry, but he sure is a racist, and he discriminates against everyone who isn't black.

The issue is they can't refute that the Obama campaign is based on division and anger and hate.

That means they have to use whatever hyperbole and diversion they can to defend Obama and his campaign.

I think that Romney's side could step it up a little. But a lot of it is to get Obama and Biden to screw up even more, and then use there own words against them.

I think physical attributes are a matter of taste and preferece.

I hate both of their politics...I think Obama looks like an absolute hen-pecked geek (to me he is far from elegant) and I think Michelle, while on occassion will look absolutely stunning - is really given waaaaayyyyyy too much credit for being a fashion icon...

I mean, come ON!

http://smartsexyrichcrazy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/fashion-mistake.jpg

The media has tried to build her into the modern day Jackie O, which she is NOT.

> However, the plain truth is that he has personally
> inspired more racial anger than any 10 other
> presidents together.

Well, personally, perhaps. But race relations have improved tremendously. Things were a lot uglier for minorities in earlier decades, and Presidents represented much of that oppression. Read up on JFK & RFK squabbling with and immovable ML King in the Oval Office as Mississippi and Alabama were ravaged by fire and dogs.

Also, I don't think Obama's "cool" except precisely in the way that naïve white seventh-graders think of any accessible negro as being stylish and alluring. The guy's personality is defensive and twitchy; He's got no body of accomplishment to indicated a tempered, wizened, and steady personal bearing...

Because who needs a history of achievement when you're going to be given the Nobel Peace Prize no matter what?

A teenage sense of "cool" can carry you a long way in this world.

I disagree with Feeby about Michelle vs Jackie O., see this space later

Feebie is 100% correct. You go, sista!

I'm still not convinced that Obaba is 100% legally in office anyway. Why won't he release his student records from college? Could it be because he registered as a foreign student? His administration calling for all of Romney's records to be released at once and hiding his smacks of hypocrisy and then some. Obaba's hiding too much shit about his own background to be calling for full disclosure of anyone else's. And Romney DID answer the question of his taxes - he's paid at least 13% for at least the last 12 years. It's all documented. Why isn't that enough info for the Obaba administration?

Crid, you know I love ya, but Jackie O had more class and style than Michelle could EVER hope to even ASPIRE to. She is NOT and never will be the class act that Jackie was. PERIOD.

Well, it's all campaigning. But I agree that an image of Obama as an angry man is a tough sell (even though I personally think he's one box of Fruit Loops short of going postal). However, it's easy to sell images of a lot of Obama's closest accomplices as angry and divisive, and it's easy to sell an image of Obama as being an upper-class twit, and that's what the Romney campaign should be working on. And to flip that coin around, the Obama campaign isn't going to be able to sell an image of Romney as a "Falling Down" angry white guy either. Some parts of the Obama campaign grasp that, but some don't.

What I'm getting a chuckle out of is the Obama campaign's trying to portray Ryan as a woman-hater. Women that haven't already self-identified as entitlement class will just say "huh?". There are avenues by which the Democrats could hurt Ryan, but the misogynist meme isn't getting out of the starting gate. By contrast, the GOP doesn't even have to do any work to create a negative image of Joe Biden -- all they have to do is play tapes of his speeches.

watch this space

I'm thinking..... Chronicles of Narnia....

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.luxist.com/media/2009/12/94255296.jpg

ELEGANT!

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef013486a73dbf970c-500wi

Boys, I know what you're thinking... Thighs, right?

Long... Sturdy... Athletic, yet womanly....

I don't think the Johnson campaign has anything to do with his personality, it has to do with a large % of the voting public scratching their head and saying Too bad there aren't more than 2 parties.

As to the original post, it breaks down to 2 things. DOes angry = black? Hell no. SO the attempt by MSNB of apinting ROmney as making campaign racist is laughable. Especially considering Bidens, putting people in chains comment to a mostly AA crowd.

"Especially considering Bidens, putting people in chains comment to a mostly AA crowd."

And it is not JUST what they say either (although, it is a big part of it) but Biden isn't the only one (Hillary Clinton & Al Gore) who will change their accents to Black Venacular when speaking to a group of black people....

I mean - would they do that to any other group? They are speaking to a group differently BASED on race. Helllooooo!?!?

Do Republican's have a history of doing this?

It's really weird shit....

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

Proud!!! Proud!!!! Proud!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HdQdcXqbcw

"You can not go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIT3jUrNTX0

OK, Feeb & Flynners, please read the comment here. (We've covered a lot of topics on this blog over the years.)

This photo is the perfect example of what the article describes. Unattractive surfaces, closed mouth, super-alert gaze....

Recessive, womb-defending posture.

Crid. For the record, I don't think Jackie O was all that - startchy and sterilized, too controlled. I think the media fussed over her much too much too - which is why I think it's so ridiculous to compare the two.

What do YOU find so attractive about the woman?

She comes across as extremely awkward to me.

So Amy didn't like Jackie's pill box hats. So what? They were fashionable back then, even if other people didn't care for them. The second picture shows a stunning woman, subtle, yet her presence is inescapable. "Womb-defending posture"? Maybe she had cramps? 'Smatter Crid, it's not like you to grasp at straws like this!

It wasn't clear.

Michelle was meant to be the subject in my last two sentences posted above.

I think the only thing Jackie O and Michelle O have in common is the ridiculous, Schmaltzy, fawning by the media over their supposed oober attractiveness.

On both counts.

Meh.

Got interrupted by life:
Part two is: Is Obama angry? Last electin he was the cool collected one, not as much this time. Not that I'd go as far as saying angry, but at times and in some campaign attack ads, there's a grain of truth to it.
His secret is having those around him, attack, so he has deniability.
It's not Obama who claims Romney paid no taxes, it was Reid.
It's not Obama who said, putting people in chains, it was Biden.
It's not Obama putting out inflamitory lies in attack ads, it's his superpac/campaign.

So the Obama campaign is angry, just not so much Obama.

Not saying the Repubs aren't doing it too, just no where as well. Their attack dogs are Rush L AnnCoulter etc, but they don't have the credibility, of majority leader/ VP.

@ Feebie: "Do Republican's have a history of doing this? "
To an extent, I seem to remember some of the Bushs doing some campaigning, in Spanish / Spanish accent depending on where campaigning.

"To an extent, I seem to remember some of the Bushs doing some campaigning, in Spanish / Spanish accent depending on where campaigning"

Arguably, yes. But they are also from Texas. Pandering...definately. But not condesending per se, because they come from a culture that is fairly enmeshed with Mexico.....TexMex anyone?

No where did it have the feel of speaking DOWN to someone else. They spoke spanish, they didn't waddle in there speaking with an ethnic accent.

And I am not a fan of Republicans - but it only spot lights the immense double standard...and that Democrats have had such a PASS from consequences, they actually don't realize they are the ones judging people by color.

I think they are terribly ignorant.

Fucking brilliant timing here....

http://www.irishexaminerusa.com/mt/2012/08/14/racebaiting_and_the_resultant.html

The trick, in the battleground states, is to get libertarians out to the polls, where they're sure to break for the GOP. God, I love libertarians and their fine, white whines.

Beg pardon?

There are two ways to do facetiousness through text:

[1.] Thundering hammer-slam with unmistakable intent.

[2.] Not at all.

Freebie: "they actually don't realize they are the ones judging people by color.

I think they are terribly ignorant."

I couldn't disagree more, They fully know this and know how to milk it for all it's worth. To me it is easily shown with the twists and turns when they redefine terms so that, group X can't be racist, because, because, because, follow lengthy laughable argument, which wouldn't even convince a 5 yr old.

Much as people try, you really can't compare Jackie K. and Michelle O.

______________________________

Jackie:

Jackie Kennedy was stylish because she fit her times. Public upper middle class women's clothing was body armor.

Jackie grew up in wealthy and connected families (parents were divorced) - with all that entailed back in the day, summer houses in the Hamptons, couture, prep schools, Miss Porter's, a debut, a Grand Tour, etc.

That's why JFK married her. She brought to the rowdy Kennedy clan all the class their wealth couldn't buy.

Jackie later married Ari for protection and security. John and Robert had both been assassinated and she worried her children would be the next targets.

Jackie's reverted to a more personal style (less body-armorish) after she left the White House.

______________________________

Michelle:

Michelle grew up in a rented apartment on Chicago's South Side, the daughter of a city water company employee and a secretary. Her vacations were in a rented cabin in White Cloud, Michigan.

Michelle was smart and often attended accelerated classes. She (and her brother) earned their way into Princeton and later Harvard Law School.

______________________________

Jackie's fashion choices were upper middle class. They were somewhat staid and were not intended to make a statement. Jackie grew up wearing couture

Michelle's fashion choices are lower middle class striving. She didn't grew up wearing couture, she grew up idolizing courture. She dresses in obviously expensive clothes because she wants people to know she made it (and she did, mostly on her own).

______________________________

When GHW Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot contended for the presidency in 1992, a major daily compared their writstwatch choices.

Clinton, who grew up poor, wore a Rolex to show people he was no longer a country bumpkin, but a Yale Law School graduate. He had "made it."

Perot, who grew up middle class and went to the US Naval Academy, wore a Seiko, somewhat showy but, in keeping with middle class values, not outlandishly expensive.

GHW Bush, who grew up in an upper middle class household, wore a Timex with a grosgrain band. He didn't have to show anyone he had "made it."

______________________________

When my dad entered the work force, there was a men's clothing store in Charlotte, NC that had a sign on the wall that read, "If they notice your clothes, you're overdressed." That was the epitome of upper middle class style back then.

She dresses in obviously expensive clothes because she wants people to know she made it (and she did, mostly on her own).

Not according to her husband, ;)

Quick question, when hispanics become the majority in a few years will all the blame the mexicans for everything become liberals, and all the liberals who blame white guys for everything become racists?

shoulda been

Quick question, when hispanics become the majority in a few years will all the racists who blame the mexicans for everything become liberals, and all the liberals who blame white guys for everything become racists?

> They were somewhat staid and were not intended
> to make a statement.

Says who?

(We all enjoy the company of a responsive audience at the end of a good concert.)

> She dresses in obviously expensive clothes because
> she wants people to know she made it (and she did,
> mostly on her own).

Oh, Puh-leeeeeeeeeeze....

Late in 2008, M.O. was teased by conservatives for wearing an expensive Italian gown to some function. It turned out to be a $170 knockoff or something... She just made it look elegant.

I resent her endless vacations and her politics. But I respect the fact that she cares enough about the epidemic of morbid obesity enough to speak out against fast food... Even to young black athletes.

I don't think we've had a more attractive first lady. (Laura Bush was recessive and perhaps depressive; Roz Carter, while attractive, matched the sanctimony of her husband volt-for-volt.)

Two FZ links and it's not even lunchtime... Damn, I'm good.

I think I have a different definition of "upper middle class". The Bush kids don't fit into it.

> Got interrupted by life:

Never let that happen again. Listen, dude... We make choices.

___________________


I wanna quibble with Conan some more.

First, at the time (as recorded in my earliest memory of such things), everyone described Jackie as a fashion-forward avatar of youth culture and continental sophistimication... Both because she spoke French and because of the weirdness of her eyes. (In a rarely-seen kinescope from CBS' coverage of the 1960 Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, news anchor Walter Cronkite can be heard muttering "Jesus Christ, that little bitchchild is a freak."*)

I especially recall that the designers she consulted were grateful... It was like when Jordan signed with Nike. It was a big deal that created whole new sectors of industry. I'm pretty sure they gave her the clothes she wanted to have, and everyone agreed to pretend the emperor wasn't naked (or rather, that the empress wasn't scratchy to the touch).

More to the point, as FZ says, almost everyone is in uniform, and "fashion" understates things. The guy who owns two shirts –which is still a lot of the world– wakes up to decide whether today's a day for the nice one.

Michelle dresses for her her voters. If her tastes strike us as garish or weird, I promise you they're no less unpleasant for us than were Nancy Reagan's choices 30 years ago. I promise you this. Please, believe me.

Michelle knows what she's wearing.

* Not true.

Use the Google.

Use the Google.

I like that.

Michelle knows what she's wearing.

Of course she does.

"Catlett liked to watch people going by, all the different shapes and sizes in all different kinds of clothes, wondering, when they got up in the morning if they gave two seconds to what they were going to wear, or they just got dressed, took it off a chair or reached in the closet and put it on. He could pick out the ones who had given it some thought. They weren’t necessarily the ones all dressed up, either." ~ Elmore Leonard

I like how Michelle dresses because she pushes the envelope. When you do that, there are going to be mistakes but it sure beats the endless line of Ann Taylor-clad women that make up the rest of D.C.