Michelle Obama’s family: From slavery to White House | Seattle Times Newspaper

Posted: December 5th, 2008 | Author: karlfrankjr | Filed under: Culture, History, Karl Frank Jr., Politics | Tags: , , , , , | Comment Here »

Michelle Obama

Only in America!

Tiny wooden cabins line the dirt road once known as Slave Street as it winds through Friendfield Plantation.

More than 200 slaves lived in the whitewashed shacks in the early 1800s, and some of their descendants remained for more than 100 years after the Civil War. The last tenants abandoned the hovels about 30 years ago, and even they would have struggled to imagine a distant daughter of the plantation one day calling the White House home.

But a historical line can be drawn from these Low Country cabins to Michelle Obama, charting an American family’s improbable journey through slavery, segregation, the civil-rights movement and a historic presidential election.

Politics | Michelle Obama’s family: From slavery to White House | Seattle Times Newspaper

Share and Enjoy:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Google
  • Live
  • NewsVine
  • Spurl
  • Fark
  • Sphinn
  • Mixx
  • Furl
  • Print this article!

Obama $30,000 ring story is probably not true - Ben Smith

Posted: December 2nd, 2008 | Author: karlfrankjr | Filed under: Culture, Karl Frank Jr., Politics | Tags: , , , , , , , , , | Comment Here »

According to Ben Smith’s blog on Politico.com, the Obama ring story is probably not true.

Obama aide denies ring story - Politico.com

The communications for Obama’s transition, Dan Pfeiffer, flatly denied a Daily Mail report that Obama is buying an exotic $30,000 ring to thank his wife “for her support during the election.”

The report is sourced to an anonymous spokesman for the manufacturer of the rhodium ring, who is quoted claiming, “Our agent in the United States was asked by Mr. Barack Obama about the ring because he wants it as a thank-you gift for his wife, Michelle, for her support the last two years.”

The spokesman is not named in the story, and there seems to be no other evidence for the claim….

That being said, who cares if it is true.  Barack Obama has no problem with people being wealthy and has a history of statements that he supports common sense capitalism and personal accomplishment.  I don’t remember Obama ever saying anything at all about people not being able to have and buy nice things for themselves, and working hard to get those things.  When did he ever say otherwise?

His politics is that the system should be protected that allows all people the opportunity to succeed and to have personal accomplishments.

On the contrary, the reason why Palin got hammered for her clothes purchases is because, unlike Obama, she was being hypocritical in her statements about Obama being an elitist, and her being the plain and simple girl from Alaska.  It was all a big show and she got called on it.

Another example would be Senator Craig soliciting gay sexual favors in the bathroom.  People on the left didn’t care that he was gay, they made a bid deal about it because of the hypocrisy of the things he had professed about gay people, just like Reverend Haggard.

I don’t see anything hypocritical about Obama buying fancy jewelry for his wife unless anyone has heard him say something that I missed.

Share and Enjoy:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Google
  • Live
  • NewsVine
  • Spurl
  • Fark
  • Sphinn
  • Mixx
  • Furl
  • Print this article!

Michelle Obama is not the next Jacki O….Who cares?

Posted: November 30th, 2008 | Author: karlfrankjr | Filed under: Culture, History, Politics | Tags: , , , | Comment Here »

This is a Newsweek story.  Is this an appropriate time for the word ‘banal?’  I mean really, who gives a flying rats butt.  I will give them credit though.  They did finish with:

Historians say they hope it’s a passing phase—that the public will
eventually focus on Obama’s serious contributions to the country
instead of the fierce urgency of her fashion.

Why Michelle Obama Is Not the Next Jackie O | Newsweek Periscope | Newsweek.com

Obama’s bold wardrobe choices have tapped into a yearning among style writers for the bygone days of Jackie’s youthful elegance. The New York Post has already christened the Obama White House “Bamelot,” playing on the Kennedys’ “Camelot” mythology. But aside from youth, beauty and little kids running around—plus that prominent “O”—what exactly do the two have in common? Next to nothing. “There seems to be this moving train that simply insists that Mrs. Obama is the new Mrs. Kennedy,” says Carl Anthony, historian for the National First Ladies’ Library, who has been fielding calls from reporters eager to connect the dots. But Anthony thinks they’re worlds apart.But even the fashion comparison falls short. Kennedy was the epitome of 1960s haute couture. Her style was aspirational, unattainable. Obama is more of a fashion populist. It’s hard to imagine Kennedy, in her pillbox hat and leopard-skin coat, dishing about shopping at J.Crew.

Share and Enjoy:
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Google
  • Live
  • NewsVine
  • Spurl
  • Fark
  • Sphinn
  • Mixx
  • Furl
  • Print this article!

Daddy Hogwash is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!