There is a certain amount of caution I approach stories like this with.

I understand quite well that politicians (or their wives) make speeches and utilize many literary devices, one of which is Hyperbole.  Hyperbole is essentially intentional exaggeration which is used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, and is not meant to be taken literally.

So when Michelle Obama made her comment below I am willing to look at it in fair evaluation and determine if they were meant to be taken literally, or as hyperbole (source: Sister Toldjah):

“What we have learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback. And let me tell you something — for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I’ve seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it’s made me proud.”

Bryan at Hot Air responds thus:

Nothing America has done in Michelle Obama’s adult life, which at 44 goes back 26 years to 119822, has made her proud of her country? Nothing? Not winning the Cold War? Not our regular and orderly  transitions of power based on the rule of Law? Not the fact that we feed and defend the world, not that we lead in science and technology research, not that we elected the first black president in 1992…nothing? Not the fact that she and her husband were able to go to Ivy  League schools before embarking on extremely lucrative careers? Not the fact that we help out in disasters wherever they strike in the world? Nothing has made  Michelle Obama proud of her country in her entire adult life?

John Podhoretz continues:

Michelle Obama today said that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction.”

Really proud of her country for the first time? Michelle Obama is 44 years old. She has been an adult since 1982. Can it really be there has not been a moment during that time when she felt proud of her country? Forget matters like the victory in the Cold War; how about only things that have made liberals proud — all the accomplishments of inclusion? How about the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991? Or Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s elevation to the Supreme Court? Or Carol Moseley Braun’s election to the Senate in 1998? How about the merely humanitarian, like this country’s startling generosity to the victims of the tsunami? I’m sure commenters can think of hundreds more landmarks of this sort. Didn’t she even get a twinge from, say, the Olympics?

And I agree with both of them to a degree.  If she was being literal, she is clearly so narrowly focused on what generates pride, it is pointless because essentially, she is proud America is on the way to making her first lady.

John does however open the door that it could be Hyperbole, but he sees it as a negative.

Mrs. Obama was speaking at a campaign rally, so it is easy to assume she was merely indulging in hyperbole. Even so, it is very revealing.

It suggests, first, that the pseudo-messianic nature of the Obama candidacy is very much a part of the way the Obamas themselves are feeling about it these days. If they don’t get a hold of themselves, the family vanity is going to swell up to the size of Phileas Fogg’s hot-air balloon and send the two of them soaring to heights of self-congratulatory solipsism that we’ve never seen before.

Second, it suggests the Obama campaign really does have its roots in New Class leftism, according to which patriotism is not only the last refuge of a scoundrel, but the first refuge as well — that America is not fundamentally good but flawed, but rather fundamentally flawed and only occasionally good. There’s something for John McCain to work with here.

All good points, and he continues in similar vein on his site. 

I however, think it was just campaign rhetoric and hyperbole used specifically to reinforce the change message they are driving, which has been working so well.   It’s almost hypnotic:  Change is good, Change is necessary, we need Change, vote for Change, Obama is Change….

Cue David Bowie:  Ch Ch Ch Changes…..

And, as I said, it is effective.  Hillary and McCain both still represent some facet of the old order, where as she and her husband represent a new order.  All very stirring and emotional.   So I initially found the brouhaha somewhat boring because seems to be just more literalistic nitpicking.

Or is it?

Should we expect more care in language from she who would be our queen?  I can see how she could have said “I have never been ‘more’ proud…” without eliciting such responses.  So why didn’t she?  Because she wants to win, and in order to win, you have to come on strong (And the Obama’s are showing they are masters at evoking strong images.)?  Or was it just a lapse, a missed cue on her teleprompter?

But still, for the most part, after all my deliberations I ended up shrugging.  Hyperbole, folks.

But then the story got legs and her Husband came to her defense of course:

Barack Obama, interviewed on WOAI radio in San Antonio, Texas, expressed frustration that his wife’s comments became political fodder.

“Statements like this are made and people try to take it out of context and make a great big deal out of it, and that isn’t at all what she meant,” Obama said.

“What she meant was, this is the first time that she’s been proud of the politics of America,” he said. “Because she’s pretty cynical about the political process, and with good reason, and she’s not alone. But she has seen large numbers of people get involved in the process, and she’s encouraged.”

OK, perhaps, but then again, as he accuses people of taking her words out of context, he is adding into her words context that was not apparent to try to clarify it.  I am not sure which is worse.  Best bet would be for her to be more deliberate with her words and her ideas and avoid the discussion.

Of course Cindy McCain was right on top of it to make a distinction between the two of them:

Cindy McCain told a Wisconsin rally on Tuesday: “I’m proud of my country, I don’t know about you, if you heard those words earlier.

And while I still think the scrutiny is too intense, I have a nagging feeling That John, Cindy and Bryan may be a little closer to the truth than I am.  Why not express some pride in America?  We have done many things worthy of it.

What is it with liberals and self loathing?

Then, I read this story about a person who recently expressed some pride not just in America but in (gasp) President Bush: Bob Geldof:

Mr. Geldof praised Mr. Bush for his work in delivering billions to fight disease and poverty in Africa, and blasted the U.S. press for ignoring the achievement.

Mr. Bush, said Mr. Geldof, “has done more than any other president so far.”

“This is the triumph of American policy really,” he said. “It was probably unexpected of the man. It was expected of the nation, but not of the man, but both rose to the occasion.”

“What’s in it for [Mr. Bush]? Absolutely nothing,” Mr. Geldof said.

And Bono seems to agree:

Rock legend Bono, however, was treating Bush’s  trip to Africa as an occasion for celebrating. He and  other aging rockers like Bob Geldof view the increasing assistance for Africa from the U.S. and other wealthy nations as a sign of their own success in promoting its cause over the years..

“President Bush has every reason to be proud of what he and so  many others have accomplished in Africa,” Bono said in a statement. “From AIDS treatment once thought impossible,  to millions of bednets to keep kids  from dying of a mosquito bite, to new African jobs created with trade policy, to billions in old debts erased.

So, let me see if I can understand this.  Michelle has essentially expressed doubt over her pride in America for anything other than making her husband president, despite so many obvious accomplishments in the last 26 years. 

Yes, yes I know she was supposedly talking about political change, but be realistic, we know what she is really talking about here.  If Hillary was trashing her husband at the polls, and Obama was losing the nomination, would we be having this discussion?  No.  In that case, her message would have been about the need for change.  That aspect of this selfishness kind spoils it for me.

So she can have that lack of pride in her country and that’s supposed to be ok.  But on the other hand, two Socially Liberal Irish rock stars can see something to be proud of just this week and will go on record noting that.

Is that a good thing?

Maybe she should look a little past her teleprompter and see the country she claims she wants to represent.  One can wonder if her ivy league life left her unable to see the goodness around her.   

I have to admit, there could be a problem there.

 Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, A Blog For All, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Big Dog’s Weblog, Adeline and Hazel, , Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Faultline USA, third world county, Allie is Wired, DragonLady’s World, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, A Newt One, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, The Yankee Sailor, and CatSynth.com, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS