Maybe the First Lady needs better advice

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

>>Not if it's your kids project..sorry.<<

Eagle Scout projects are not a simple task. They usually involve a high degree of coordination, scheduling and elbow grease to complete. And they are always done for community service type projects, so I'm going to say this indeed counts as volunteerism. Also, if he's earning his eagle I am sure that as a family, they have done Scouting for Food and several other community service projects through the years, including working on other scouts' eagle projects, too.

How would i know? Hmmmm ..... ; )

>>But again, I question her advisors which is what this topic was started on.<<

Okay, but again, if she wore some beat up sneakers (or even a cheaper pair) what's the diff? She's doing what first ladies do -- encouraging volunteerism and highlighting worthy charities and things. Why knock her (or her advisors) for it?

I volunteer a lot, and love it when other people do, too. I'm not going to be piling on anybody or questioning motivations when it's all in the name of helping those less fortunate.

 

Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt

"But again, I question her advisors...."

Why? How do we know she was advised to wear the shoes or not?

I guess I don't understand why the value of her shoes is important in this context.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

***X, honestly, I don't think that's a fair assesment of what is community service.
If her son is doing what he's doing for community service and she's helping him, its still community service.***

It's called "giving Kozy a hard time", piper. ;p

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

There are all kinds of lavish charity events that involve celebrities and political types. Even though a lot of money is generated at these events, does it make these people disingenuous?

There are charity "crab feeds" and the like for churches to support their charitable causes. Is gluttony in the name of charity disingenuous?

Or maybe, should we look at the intent here rather than trying to find something to pretend to be outraged by?

I grew to really dislike the policies of the bush Administration, but I always argued that Laura Bush shouldn't be the target of snide remarks. I would hope people on the other side of the political fence might return the courtesy.

 

Originally Posted By dlkozy

:0)


And on the yahoo main page they have posted the article about the shoes-and NO X, I did not have anything to do with it!

 

Originally Posted By dlkozy

and the :0) was for post #63

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

***I grew to really dislike the policies of the bush Administration, but I always argued that Laura Bush shouldn't be the target of snide remarks.***

Yeah, I never understood the need to harp on First Ladies. I mean, they didn't run for office, they are more "thrust" into public life and have the right to not get harassed by the media (though they certainly do).

FWIW, I don't recall reading much about Laura Bush (though I'm sure she got her share of nastiness), but I'm pretty shocked whenever I check out some right winger comment boards about the level of vitriol thrown at Michelle (I'm not talking about this thread..but really nasty stuff like "she reminds me of grape ape", and "she is the ugliest skank I've ever laid eyes on", and "she hates America"...stuff like that).

 

Originally Posted By piperlynne

I agree its all petty. And I think Laura, Nancy et al got their share of ribbing. Only one I can think of that was universally liked in recent history was Babs.
But like it or not, elected or not, they're now figureheads. "In the public eye" etc. So people that are prone to being nasty are going to be nasty.

As for it being "news", at this point, isn't "news" whatever the audience accepts as "news". Its all infotainment anyway.

 

Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder

I don't get this entire thread. So Ms. Obama was wearing expensive shoes. Big deal. So it was a photo op. Big deal. Had she worn shoes with holes in them, she'd be criticized for her patronizing attitude. I look forward to a thread wherein the Obama girls are ragged on for not eating the same lunch as the rest of the kids.

 

Originally Posted By pecos bill

Have the Obama's had a lavish White House Ball yet? Although I am certain they would cherish the opportunity to host a State Dinner, I daresay no for the criticism they are sure to endure if they do.
Considering all the things they have to hold off on for appearance sake, it really is rather pathetic to go after their shoes.

 

Originally Posted By DAR

<<"she reminds me of grape ape">>

Wait the cartoon character?

 

Originally Posted By tiggertoo

<<I helped my son finish his Eagle project creating dozens>>

While I disagree with you on the Mrs. Obama thing (heck, the stalker media would turn a bathroom break into a photo op if they could), I wanted to congratulate you and your son on attaining the Eagle Scout award. It’s a very tough endeavor…I know.

 

Originally Posted By tiggertoo

^^^ And my mother put in about as many hours (...days, months) as I did, so I cut my patch in two and gave the other half to her.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

***<<"she reminds me of grape ape">>

Wait the cartoon character?***

Yea.

 

Originally Posted By dlkozy

LOL-tiggertoo! The rule in our house was if our boys wanted their license before they were 18, they had to have their Eagle.

Worked on both of them.

 

Originally Posted By ecdc

I think what bothers some of us, or at least me, is the blatant hypocrisy of conservatives. For eight long years they defended some of the grossest incompetence and some of the worst government decisions in many years, if not in our nation's history. Torture? Here's your excuse. New Orleans? Here's your excuse. Iraq? Here's your excuse. Not being able to string two sentences together? Here's your excuse. Claiming the VP is neither executive nor legislative to avoid accountability? Here's your excuse. Botching Afghanistan? Here's your excuse.

Many large and small blunders were waved off and "the libs" were accused of just politics as usual. And I'm sure some of it - probably plenty of it - was just politics as usual. But there were also plenty of very legitimate, deeply disturbing complaints. And now that the tables have turned, what do we get? Whining about Michelle Obama's shoes.

You know, if we'd just come off of eight years of Reagan, then maybe I could understand the give-and-take and the political back-and-forth. But after eight years of the absolute joke we had, and the excuses Republicans made time and time again, I really think they've earned the right to shut the hell up for a few more months and give the new guy a chance. But no. No amount of nitpicking is too small. No issue is too unimportant. If it gives them an excuse to not like the guy with the D after his name, then they'll pounce.

And to avoid the inevitable, I'm not obviously saying that Republicans don't have a right to speak out. Of course they do - free speech and all that. But those that defended Bush every step of the way and now attack Obama every step of the way just have to check all their shame and decency at the door.

I look forward to the next thread where we discuss Obama's Blackberry and how it's insensitive to blueberries and strawberries.

 

Originally Posted By dlkozy

Crappy advice is crappy advice and that is what her handlers/advisors gave her.

Sad that you can't see it for what it is-kinda humorous actually.

 

Originally Posted By Mr X

I still don't see any evidence that her STAFF (not "handlers"..how rude is that?) advised her or didn't advise her as to what wardrobe was "appropriate" for a volunteer thing, nor whether that would even be appropriate.

I saw the pictures. They looked like regular sneakers. I ask again, is part of their job description keeping inventory of her closets and knowing how much everything is worth?

Not to mention the fact that it's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned. Lots of people wear pricey shoes.

 

Originally Posted By dshyates

This is very much a non-issue, but it reminds me of when McCain got slammed for wearing $520 Ferragamos to the grocery store.

<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/isabel-wilkinson/a-week-in-john-mccains-sh_b_115692.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...692.html</a>

Both sides can be somewhat silly. sometimes.

 

Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan

>>Sad that you can't see it for what it is<<

Oh, I see it for what it is alright.

What is sad is that some people choose to focus on a pricey pair of sneakers rather than focusing on the cause itself, mainly because of a political bias.

One thing I always find rather hokey is when politicians (and they all do this), usually during campaign season, appear with a bunch of farmers. They sit on a hay bail, wear plaid shirts with the sleeves rolled up, to look like "regular" folk, as if they just came in from working the fields themselves. This is moments before climbing aboard their customized campaign bus, changing into an expensive suit for a $1,000 a plate dinner.

I always thought that stuff didn't fool anyone, but after this thread, apparently some people need to see that sort of thing.