November 8, 2012

Obama as feminist avenger? Huh?

From the WaPo:

Obama photo a snapshot of modern marriage


(Scout Tufankjian / OBAMA FOR AMERICA)
CRITIC’S NOTEBOOK: The image sent from the president’s Twitter account that went viral Tuesday night, that clearly speaks to people, represents a more modern ideal of true equality in emotional relations.
I don't get it. In my new Taki's Magazine column,
The major exception of respected woman in the White House has been Valerie Jarrett, but Obama likes her less for her sex than for her race, class, and similarly exotic biography. Also, as his wife’s old boss from the Daley Administration, Jarrett’s West Wing clout reassures the suspicious but slightly clueless First Lady. 
By the way, has anybody noticed through the Comedy Blockade that the Obamas’ marital relationship rather curiously resembles that of old-fashioned radio comedies like The Bickersons, TV shows such as The Honeymooners and The Flintstones, or cartoon strips like The Lockhorns, in which the purported man of the house is in perpetual fear of upsetting his nagging helpmate (or his live-in mother-in-law), requiring him to sneak off for frequent rounds of relaxing golf? 
Obama has never taken white feminists seriously. The only bit of feminist boilerplate I noticed in Obama’s 150,000-word memoir was a single clause within a long sentence. Indeed, resentment of his working mother and grandmother is a constant theme running through his pointedly entitled Dreams from My Father. You can tell how un-African-American Obama is by upbringing from his passive-aggressive sniping at his mother and grandmother, something that a normal black man just wouldn’t do. 
Over the years, Obama’s treatment of his pioneering female bank executive grandmother, who paid for the bulk of his posh education, has been noteworthy in its nastiness. In his celebrated 2008 Philadelphia speech, for instance, he compared her to Rev. Jeremiah Wright over her supposed racism for wanting a ride to work because she feared being mugged by a black drifter who had been hassling her at the bus stop. This hurt the strapping youth’s feelings. Over a decade later in his memoir, he described the emotional impact on himself of his grandmother’s worries about her safety as a “fist in my stomach.” 
In 2011, Obama took the opportunity of his one meeting with biographer David Maraniss to call attention to his grandmother’s “alcoholism” (see p. 287 of Barack Obama: The Story.) Thanks, Mr. President, glad you pointed that out for us so we can remember her that way. Classy.

Read my whole column there.

34 comments:

DaveinHackensack said...

Steve,

Rush Limbaugh might be a reader of yours. He's now bringing up the impact of immigration on unemployment, and shooting down mainstream GOP claims about the political need for amnesty (asking, for example, why Reagan's amnesty didn't buy the GOP the enduring loyalty of Hispanic voters, or why McCain couldn't win a majority of them).

Toddy Cat said...

They're hugging each other. What the Hell is that supposed to prove? I saw my (very non-feminist) Dad hug my (very non-feminist) Mom that way a hundred times. Once again, this illustrates the fact that the Obamas are a mirror that other people project their hopes and dreams onto.

Marc B said...

No relationship is ever truly equal, and by any empirical measure, ball-busting Michelle O has "hand."

David said...

>has anybody noticed through the Comedy Blockade that the Obamas’ marital relationship rather curiously resembles that of old-fashioned radio comedies like The Bickersons<

The Blockade must be pretty strong. No, I haven't noticed this.

Anonymous said...

It's a biography. You tell people about your family. If you know less about a family member, say your father, all you can mention is what little you know, then move on to those you know.

You're giving your illiterate readership the impression that Obama throws his white side under the bus, which just isn't the case.

eah said...

Didn't the Obamas jump the shark quite a while ago? As a couple they are, in the end, unappealing, even boring, as well as a rather grating reminder of how far affirmative action (in the broadest sense) inspired by misplaced white guilt can take two rather unexceptional Blacks.

Move on.

Auntie Analogue said...

That snapshot going viral is simply further evidence of most Americans having ceased to think rationally, or of Americans having been indoctrinated not to think rationally, in favor of insensible (i.e, witless) pursuit of serial self-congratulatory warm fuzzy feelings.

In short, that photo went viral for the same reason that every newscast has come to feature - most often to close with - one or another form of Fuzzy Puppy Story.

(Femninism is, by the way, unreason unleavened by sentiment and bereft of anything remotely resembling a sense of humor: like all forms of totalitarianism, feminism merely uses the totems of sentiment to banish all forms and degrees of genuine emotion, to replace genuine emotion with Approved Sentiment - with Goodthink.)

I'm not anti-sentiment. But to be ruled wholly, or even chiefly, by sentiment (especially in its most vile Goodthink form) is to be ruled by unreason, which forms the short road to hell on earth.

Us Weekly said...

We'll have the first post-election interview with sensitive modern man Barack. Lots and lots of sensitive pix

Anonymous said...

I guess in both the cases of Obama and Romney, the stable marriage is one where the man is smarter than the woman.
Clintons... Hillary was too much of a ballbuster.

Anonymous said...

In his celebrated 2008 Philadelphia speech, for instance, he compared her to Rev. Jeremiah Wright over her supposed racism for wanting a ride to work because she feared being mugged by a black drifter who had been hassling her at the bus stop. This hurt the strapping youth’s feelings. Over a decade later in his memoir, he described the emotional impact on himself of his grandmother’s worries about her safety as a “fist in my stomach.”
________________________________-

There isn't a word this man has written or spoken that I believe. He's just a Chicago-trained pawn of the labor union and Daly machine.

It's that simple. His dabbling in college aged socialism simply meant he was ripe for the pickin' in Chicago when they noticed he really wanted to "be somebody." AFter the loss to Rush, they molded him.

pat said...

I don't really have any inside information so you can disregard everything below if you like.

I do know that there are a series of odd rumors about Barrack Obama. There's his birth issue - which I don't think means much. There's his being a Muslim - and of course he is a Muslim by the definition that Muslims themselves hold (father was a Muslim, etc.). And finally there are the persistent rumors that he's gay.

This rumor has some prima facie credibility because he has gay mannerisms. The rumors are that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright offered his gay black parishioners a matchmaking service. Some claim Michelle was procured for Obama as an appropriate kind of female "beard".

There are also all the stories about Obama's attendance at Chicago's gay bathhouses. They say he likes to be fellated by older white men.

I never know quite what to make of these sort of rumors. I always accepted that Rock Hudson was gay but for years I refused to believe that Cary Grant was gay. But eventually all the reports and stories wore me down. Now I read that Spencer Tracy was gay and that Katerine Hepburn was a lesbian and that their famous romance was an elaborate screen. I have no idea if this is true but if it is true it was something like the Obama romance - except that Katerine was less butch than Michelle and Spencer was a lot more manly than Barrack.

Homosexuality is an issue that keeps arising in connection with the Obama administration. He got almost all the gay vote. His standing with homosexuals is about the same as his standing with blacks. That might mean something.

And I wonder about the gay slant to the whole Benghazi incident.

Apparently some Libyans objected to our ambassador being a gay man (if he was in fact a gay man). At about this time the ambassador asked for more support and the White House for what would appear inexplicable reasons denied it to him. Was this denial because of some understanding with the Libyan government to respect Muslim attitudes towards homosexuality? I don't think I really believe this, but I can offer no other explanation. Something as yet unrevealed was going on, and it is yet another case of homosexuality being an issue with Obama and his administration.

In the bad old days everyone worried about gay men being blackmailed. This kept them out of jobs that required security clearances. Maybe we're not as enlightened now as we like to think.

BTW I had a friend who applied to work for the CIA back then. They hooked him up to a lie detector and asked him a series of innocuous questions. Then - so he told me - the examiner suddenly yelled at him "Do you like to suck a man's penis"? My friend was so rattled that the needles came off the chart.

The Cold War had its funny side.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

So I guess it would have been better for his grandmother to be mugged (or worse) by a black drifter, then that Obama have his feelings get "hurt". Obama's feelings are more important then the safety and well-being of his grandmother. What a guy.....

John Craig said...

It's testosterone levels, not exercise, which determine political outlook. (Different forms of exercise can influence hormone levels, but not all that much.) And even more than sticking up for one's class, it correlates with how much one sticks up for one's own ethnic group. One look at the 2008 Presidential primary contestants shows that:

http://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2008/10/male-hormones-and-politics.html

x said...

it's a pic of obama hugging michelle.

wtf does it have to do with feminism?

Londoner said...

Off-topic: http://www.pcworld.com/article/259753/youtube_asks_users_to_post_real_names_in_bid_to_clean_up_comments.html

Google is now pressuring people to use their real names to post comments on YouTube. Not compulsory yet, but that's clearly the way things are headed.

Too much honest commentary on videos of flash mobs, racial beatings etc, it seems.

This story is dated July, but I've been commenting on YouTube videos between then and now without being asked to use my real name - that happened for the first time today. Almost as if some event in the last two days has precipitated it.

How long before Blogger goes the same way? These are dark days.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the muscular guys have a higher level of testosterone, and the purported relationship between bulk and conservatism is just an epiphenomenon. It would be a mistake to underestimate the effect of hormones on the brain.

Also, isn't muscularity strongly genetic? Most of the World's Strongest Man contestants I've seen while flipping through the channels have been Nordic/Northern European.

Anonymous said...

That picture was in the Washington Post either today or yesterday and it literally took up an entire page. I guess the propaganda campaign never ends and now stupid women can think of their dreamboat Barry being equal with them (all night long).

It's no surprise Barack hates his loving grandmother and worships his drunkard father, don't all mulattoes hate their white side and embrace the dark?

elvisd said...

I wonder about how Obama's childhood period with the tranny nanny in Indonesia had any effect on him.

Anonymous said...

"Google is now pressuring people to use their real names to post comments on YouTube. Not compulsory yet, but that's clearly the way things are headed."

Does anyone even read youtube comments?

Anonymous said...

"This story is dated July, but I've been commenting on YouTube videos between then and now without being asked to use my real name - that happened for the first time today. Almost as if some event in the last two days has precipitated it."

Just make up a fake 'real name'.

Anonymous said...

When google asks to see our birth certificate, now that is scary.

Hunsdon said...

Albertosaurus said: Was this denial because of some understanding with the Libyan government to respect Muslim attitudes towards homosexuality?

Hunsdon replied: Sir, ordinarily I find your contributions to be well written and well thought out. This one, I am pained to admit, has me flummoxed. It strikes me, frankly, as a "Whiskey level" argument.

Benghazi is tragedy masquerading as farce. Was Amb. Stevens involved in covert weapons diversion to FSA elements? Could be---and far more probable/rational than "we'll indulge Muslim homophobia." Was it a reluctance to have Libya look bad in the run up to the election? (Some decisions can be astonishingly short-sighted.) Was it just a parlor pink's reluctance to cry havoc and let slip the proverbial?

Frankly, I expected better of you. (Still a fun read, though!)

C. Van Carter said...

"I read that Spencer Tracy was gay and that Katerine Hepburn was a lesbian and that their famous romance was an elaborate screen"

So elaborate it boggles the mind.

DCThrowback said...

@daveinhackysack

Limbaugh recently commented that he's sick of "carrying their water", referring to his relationship with the GOP corporate bigwigs and his ability to carry their message forward. He has probably limited discussion on our ridiculous wars, immigration and disparate impact despite, IMHO, the popularity of discussing those issues from the tea party right.

He may read Steve (I hope he does), but I doubt it. Limbaugh has commented a lot about his color-blindness, which is something the Steve-o-sphere is decidedly not (thankfully).

Hannity's recent "enlightenment" on immigration ("I believe in a path to citizenship.") is also amusing.

Anonymoose said...

They're just hugging. Did spouses not hug before feminism? Goofy premise. Also Michelle's chief role has been promoting healthy eating. That's not exactly some groundbreaking role for a woman. Her "causes" have been less feminist than those of Hillary and even Laura. As someone else said, it seems that liberals are projecting onto this.

Cail Corishev said...

I can't figure it out either. I thought maybe the position of their arms was backwards or something, but no: he has his arms around her waist, and she has hers around his neck, just like a normal man and woman. I can't find any special "equality" in it either. Seems to be an especially blatant case of projection.

snapperhead soup said...

"Rush Limbaugh might be a reader of yours. He's now bringing up the impact of immigration on unemployment, and shooting down mainstream GOP claims about the political need for amnesty"

Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, and Savage have been fervently anti-amnesty for yrs. Their problem is they love globalist free trade. Limbaugh attacks China but loves Walmart.

Anonymous said...

I think you misunderstand The Honeymooners.

Chicago said...

Obama hates his white side and thus has always been a conflicted person. This led him to become a twenty year follower of honky-hater Wright and to pick a pure-breed looking black female for a spouse. He's been chasing after his father his whole life and even wrote a book with a title referring to his father, a father who in actual fact cared absolutely nothing whatsoever about him and ditched him without hesitation. Obama himself seems to be pretty good at discarding people without emotion. He probably secretly thinks all those true believers who came out for him and banged the drums on his behalf are just a bunch of repulsive fools, but fools he needed at the moment.

Corn said...

"shooting down mainstream GOP claims about the political need for amnesty (asking, for example, why Reagan's amnesty didn't buy the GOP the enduring loyalty of Hispanic voters, or why McCain couldn't win a majority of them)"
I hope this line of thinking keeps propagating. It's time the Republican Party did something for its voters (white working and middle class).

Anonymous said...

"a fist in my stomach" ????
Funny, that at the time none of
Barry Obambi's pot smoking cohort
ever got vibes about all these things that later on became sooo
important in his life. He's had in his formative years about as much contact with the issue of race
as an Eskimo has with air conditioners.

David said...

Rush will conclude that economics trumps actions of racial conciliation just as it trumps actions of racial prejudice. He will proclaim that the problem is "parasites" (or takers), sans color. By "parasites" he will not mean transnational US corporations, the Pentagon, bankers, or high-paid Federal employees. He will mean anyone in the private sector who has used an EBT card, and any workers who want a 40-hour week and a living wage.

Anonymous said...

"...[R]epresents a more modern ideal of true equality in emotional relations."

"Modern?"

Looks like something straight out of one of those chauvinistic 1930's Depression, 1940's WWII, movies.

Anonymous said...

"[T]he purported man of the house is in perpetual fear of upsetting his nagging helpmate,... requiring him to sneak off for frequent rounds of relaxing golf?"

I can confirm this impression firsthand. I saw then-Senator Obama speak in 2005. After his speech (which struck me as nothing but uninspired lefty boilerplate), a young man in the audience coyly asked a question clearly hinting that the freshman Senator should run for President (as far as I could tell, the questioner was heterosexual, but he sounded like a smitten schoolgirl). In his response, Senator Obama said that his wife would be absolutely furious with him if he took on any more responsibility than he already had, so he was just going to focus on being a Senator.


The other amusing part of this anecdote was what went through my head- "This guy is a hardcore leftist with barely any high-level political experience. There's no way he could be elected President". I guess that tells you how much I know about the American electorate. I was also probably the only person in the audience who actually read (most of) Dreams from My Father beforehand, so maybe that inoculated me against Obamamania.