And what is wrong with wearing sleeveless tops? nm
Posted By: Amanda on 2009-04-22
In Reply to: GEESH, What is next? Michelle - in a bikini?
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
My 88--year-old aunt goes sleeveless, duh
does that mean she is premenopausal. You people here are really sad.
I had heard people talking about her sleeveless outfits
What in the heck is this all about? Do we not have enough to worry about besides nonsense this which means absolutely nothing? I cannot believe a discussion would even be going on. She has nice arms, show them off, other first ladies have as well, Jackie O, Mrs. Reagan, anyone who had decent looking arms. This is a nonissue and I think anyone who says differently probably just jealous of her good looking arms. Enough said.
Does it bother you that Michelle Obama wears sleeveless dresses?
It doesn't me. I didn't see the purple dress they're talking about, either. I'm not sure what all the ruckus is about.
The whole article is about the new White House informality; here's the part about Michelle.
Then came the tut-tutting from Democrats and Republicans alike over first lady Michelle Obama's sleeveless purple frock.
Hip 26-year-old designer Jason Wu, who fashioned FLOTUS' white, off-the-shoulder inaugural gown, called her "the ultimate muse." But some were murmuring that the first lady revealed not merely bare arms beneath the dome of the nation's shrine to democracy but an unseemly lack of reverence.
"It was an unusual choice," a Democratic Capitol Hill staffer confessed to a male reporter oblivious to the nuances of Capitol garb.
ABC News' Cokie Roberts, author of "Ladies of Liberty: The Women Who Shaped Our Nation," said she fielded an e-mail from a staunch feminist fan of the first lady's who nevertheless added, "but enough with the sleeveless dresses."
It does raise some hackles. I'm a little curious about it because it's cold in the House gallery," Roberts said. "I suppose that the sense of sleeveless dress being somewhat inappropriate comes from churches. ... There does seem to be some sense of decorum having to do with covering your shoulders."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960285&page=1
Not wearing any special, but my hubby
wants to bring a cooler with some cold ones in it in case there is a long line. LOL
The U.S. Voted Wearing Their Change Goggles
The U.S. Voted Wearing Their Change Goggles
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
By Mike Baker
It seems that much of the nation rolled over on Tuesday night last week, lit a post election cigarette and dreamily congratulated themselves on a wonderful performance. Was it okay for you?
I’ve never seen anything like the global swoon we’ve been experiencing since the polls closed and Obama’s victory was announced. "OMG," cries the public, fueled by a media that got itself a bit more than a little pregnant, "how wonderful we are for electing Obama."
Maybe I’m just a cynical, churlish id*ot, but I woke up after the election with a feeling that, while historic, the result was more a vote against Bush than a vote for Obama. Dazzled by his speechifying and supercool ways, the partygoers opted for style over substance… for campaign skills over any discernible leadership record. Sure, we know he doesn’t have any significant experience and seems too smooth to be true, but what the h*ll. As a nation, we went out to the bar with our change goggles on.
So there we are the next morning, staring at our new companion for at least the next four years. You feel good for having brought home the most attractive candidate, and you did show how progressive you are… but what’s the person really like? Never mind. Let’s enjoy the feel good moment for a bit longer. Soon enough we’ll have to get out of bed and get something done. Here’s hoping the relationship works out and he’s a keeper.
Related
By the way, in last week’s PWB, we asked readers to tell us what they learned from the lengthy campaign process. The mailbag has been jammed with responses ever since. As a result, at the beginning of this week I formed a committee, led by Bobo the talking intern, to select the top ten reader responses to the question, "What have I learned from this campaign season?" Since then, the committee has been huddled in the conference room compiling the list and playing a lot of foosball. Their decisions will remain secret until next week, at which time we’ll announce the winners.
Unless of course one of the committee members opens their yap and leaks the results ahead of schedule. That would be unfortunate. There’s a no-leak policy here at the PWB, it’s enshrined in our employee handbook on page 7 in the section titled "Keep Your Piehole Shut."
In summary, if any staff or interns are unable to keep confidential information confidential, they shall be terminated. I also included a multi-panel drawing showing an employee being told a secret, then revealing the secret, then being escorted out of the office. Diagrams are always helpful in employee handbooks.
I mention this because just this past week we’ve been reminded how difficult it seems to be for some people to shut up. And refreshingly, this isn’t a Democratic or Republican thing, this is across the board. For some reason, usually because they’re complete tools looking to show how clever or important they are, many people can’t help talking out of turn.
This is why, when confronted by a rabid conspiracy theorist convinced that there is an evil cabal somewhere pulling the strings and screwing us all, I stare at them slack jawed while my thought balloon asks "Are you really that stupid?" Somebody in that cabal, whether at the top or the bottom of the cabal ladder, would eventually leak to the press.
The other day President Bush and the First Lady hosted President Elect Obama and his family at the White House. While the First Lady and soon to be First Lady successfully managed to keep their discussions private, we quickly learned from "anonymous sources" that Bush and Obama reportedly talked about striking a tit-for-tat deal on economic issues.
This is a classic example where grownups, you would’ve thought, would be disciplined enough to keep a lid on what was discussed in supposedly private discussions between two of the most powerful folks on the planet. How difficult is this concept?
It appears that the leak came from an Obama staffer, undoubtedly one currently consumed with their self importance and access. If the Obama transition team needs some help with the wording, I’d be happy to provide you with section 7 from the PWB employee handbook.
Also during the same week, the New York Times ran a front page article based on classified information provided from "anonymous sources" within the military and/or government. The story highlighted a heretofore secret executive order (exord) signed back in 2004 that gave authority for counterterrorist operations in certain countries in pursuit of AL Qaeda.
Basically, in carefully selected circumstances where operational intelligence warrants the risk, the exord allows US personnel to cross into listed countries to carry out operations against defined terrorist targets. I believe the codename for the exord is “Basic Common Sense”.
The New York Times managed to gather information on this exord from individuals, either currently active or retired, incapable of keeping their respective pieholes shut. Perhaps the sources disagree with the order and feel it their solemn duty to talk to a reporter. Maybe someone was upset over how the exord was managed or interpreted. It could be that one or more of the sources talked because they are starved for attention or recognition.
What they do have in common is an apparent inability to understand the concept of classified information and a disregard for whatever oath of office they took upon entering government or the military. Got a bone to pick? Go to the press, leak a little. Who cares if it’s classified… aren’t we all better off in a completely transparent society? What a load of crap.
If your job is to work with classified information… if you’ve been trusted with that authority and responsibility, then do your job and keep your mouth shut. If you want to talk to the press for whatever reason, man up, quit your job and go on the record. You’ll still be breaking your oath, but at least the rest of us could enjoy watching you deal with the consequences.
As always, we look forward to your comments, thoughts and insight. Send your e-mails to peoplesweeklybrief@hotmail.com.
Mike Baker served for more than 15 years as a covert field operations officer for the Central Intelligence Agency, specializing in counterterrorism, counternarcotics and counterinsurgency operations around the globe. Since leaving government service, he has been a principal in building and running several companies in the private intelligence, security and risk management sector, including most recently Prescience LLC, a global intelligence and strategy firm. He appears frequently in the media as an expert on such issues. Baker is also a partner in Classified Trash, a film and television production company. Baker serves as a script consultant, writer and technical adviser within the entertainment industry, lending his expertise to such programs as the BBC's popular spy series "Spooks," as well as major motion pictures.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,451004,00.html
ROFL!!! Yes she is all THAT..about her being intelligent, wearing fur and being blonde - who gives a
rat's tattered patoot. That woman is sick; I'm beginning to think that she and that Bachmann person are related..
I hope you are wearing a hat lined with tin foil
so the rays do not penetrate your brain. I'm convinced that people who can sit through one of his speeches have already been 'assimilated.' (Oh, and remember to blink occasionally too.)
Veteran arrested at VA hospital for wearing peace T-shirt.sm
Busted for wearing a peace T-shirt; has this country gone completely insane?
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_956.shtml
wrong, full of wrong statements, see my upper post...nm
nm
Wrong Woman - Wrong Message
http://www.truthout.org/article/palin-wrong-woman-wrong-message
Wrong, wrong, wrong, clueless Lu.
Horse hockey
Sorry about that...wrong board, wrong name
nm
You're right. Something is definitely wrong
Not with the priests who do the molesting.
Not with the Senator who absolves the priests of blame and instead blames the Liberals.
No. Instead something is definitely wrong with ME for my outrage that a Republican Senator can make such an outlandish, IRRESPONSIBLE statement, instead of trying to SAVE these children and condemning what the priests are doing. Unfortunately, this is typical of the Republican party these days. Typical of the "We are perfect and make no mistakes" mentality that's prevalent in this country. They couldn't be honest if their lives depended on it.
Well, tell us what's wo wrong about what he says?
 You can't, because he just pegged the lot of you like he always does which is why he has the top rated radio show in the country
You got it wrong....
Many of us liberals do not have delicate thoughts about terrorists. But get it through your brain, if you can, that many of us feel that invading Iraq for oil and power WAS NOT THE WAY TO attack or deal with the terrorists. Apparently they're mostly in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and what are we doing? Messing around in Iraq. We are LESS safe and I think time will prove that.
WRONG. You know what is
Not everyone is a liar. Only the ones who have done it on this board before and don't deserve to be trusted or believed again.
It's quite simple. If you want to be believed, stop lying.
Then that was wrong
absolutely wrong, and the teacher and school administration were clearly in the wrong. Shouldn't have happened, period.
Wrong.
What posts are you talking about? Either I wasn't here then or you're wrong. I've read through most of the posts but don't remember seeing that. Prove it.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU??!
You called her an elitist pig, claiming to mean it in a good way.
She replied with Yup, elistist pig here..Yeehhaaww~~
And now you’re claiming she said she speaks for God.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU??!
So was I wrong? And if not...
...what are you getting so huffy about? Just for the fun of it? There's no arrogance in assuming you aren't one of the 1% of the richest people in the country. It's a natural assumption considering you spend so much time here, and why would you bother if you could be off doing whatever pleased you with money being no object? I'm certainly not one of the 1% and you bet I'd be doing something rather than putting up with your petty indignation if I had a virtually limitless income. So I didn't assume a thing about you that you were not free to assume about me in return. What's the big deal -? Are you ashamed anyone might think you're not in the top 1% of wealthiest Americans? Mighty fragile ego, that. Better face reality and get a grip - that's a pretty exclusive club.
What is WRONG with you? sm
Seriously what IS wrong with you? This has nothing to do with anything in this thread. Except yet one more occasion to use the word LIAR.
WRONG!
I corrected myself. I admitted to my mistakes. I always admit to my mistakes, and believe me, I make a lot of them. I'm even harsher on me than the neocons are.
If the neocons could just admit to theirs, the dialogue might be more productive.
and *what if* you are wrong?
We both could be wrong. I find debating what if's a waste of time.
The simple answer to any what if question is:
If you're right then I'm wrong. However, I find dealing in knowns a better way to logistically deal with any scenario. You can what if yourself all day long and never get anywhere.
Wrong. nm
 Richard Cohen was right. Sad.
You are all three wrong. TI
Despite the UN ruling that Israel completed its withdrawal from southern Lebanon (UN, June 18, 2000), Hizballah and the Lebanese government insist that Israel still holds Lebanese territory in eastern Mount Dov, a 100-square-mile, largely uninhabited patch called Shebaa Farms. This claim provides Hizballah with a pretext to continue its activities against Israel. Thus, after kidnapping three Israeli soldiers in that area, it announced that they were captured on Lebanese soil. Israel, which has built a series of observation posts on strategic hilltops in the area, maintains that the land was captured from Syria; nevertheless, the Syrians have supported Hizballah's claim. According to the Washington Post, the controversy benefits each of the Arab parties. For Syria, it means Hizballah can still be used to keep the Israelis off balance; for Lebanon, it provides a way to apply pressure over issues, like the return of Lebanese prisoners still held in Israeli jails. For Hezbollah, it is a reason to keep its militia armed and active, providing a ready new goal for a resistance movement that otherwise had nothing left to resist. In January 2005, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution condemning violence along the Israel-Lebanon border and reasserted that the Lebanese claim to the Shebaa farms area is not compatible with Security Council resolutions.
Wrong. I did not.
I never said this person was sent to SHUT DOWN down the board, as I was accused of saying by the rude, rabid person you're defending.
I said this person was sent to crash the board (as in INVADE the board, as in someone who would CRASH A PARTY).
Yes, I made the mistake of posting on the other board twice before I read further and realized the nature of these boards. I haven't repeated that mistake since.
I suppose I can expect 3,869 more posts from you to make us even for my two posts.
After reading some posts by you on your board (such as Prophecy certainly is being fulfilled. So much of the world has turned their back on Israel.), I can totally understand your blind, unquestioning loyalty to Israel. You obviously believe the end times are near, and if you don't support Israel, you won't get to spend eternity with people like Ann Coulter. People like you scare me because I believe you will do anything it takes to self-fulfill that prophecy. That is yet another reason why religion and politics don't mix; I can't help but wonder if God told Bush to bring the end times about, which he seems to be intent on doing with his bomb first, ask questions later tactics. After all, God told Bush to go to war with Iraq, and Bush obeyed that order.
I was wrong....sm
He said Fox was off his meds or *acting.* {{same thing}}
Enjoy your show! (and all its *cough* facts).
You are wrong. sm
Noam Chomsky and Ward Chamberlain both made comments that we got what we deserved on 9/11.
you got this one wrong.
I have been to the boards in the last 2 or 3 weeks once. I did not post whatever you are referring to and when I do post I always use my name. I have yet to come up with a reason to hide behind another. It was not me.
Wrong again...
I don't know what other liberals are doing or if they are mad about TV coverage. Secondly, I am reacting to a 1-hour broadcast, nothing more, nothing less. Maybe the new War Czar will see the necessity of administration presence at soldier's funerals. I agree with Democrat that this convocation was quite a bit more pomp and circumstance than Katrina where he showed up in shirtsleeves, made promises and left. I am not mad because liberal causes are not on TV...this has not a thing to do with liberal causes or TV coverage. It was my response to an event.
Wrong AGAIN....
President Bush declared a national day of remembrance for the Katrina victims and there was a great bit of pomp and circumstance as I remember it. I have never seen any administration order half-staff for a natural disaster, no matter who was in power.
you are just wrong
your facts and thoughts are so twisted and convoluted that further discussion with you is futile. Step aside. Next.
Okay, that's just wrong, wrong, wrong!
I'd say that is right up there with Hillary attacking Obama's kindergarten essay. What's wrong with these people and their campaign? Isn't anyone telling them when they have stepped off the deep end into the abyss of bull....
when I'm wrong I'm wrong
Everyone is wrong at one time or another...gotta suck it up and admit it. That's what makes us human. My MIL...she will never admit that she's wrong - infurates DH. When he tries to tell her the truth about certain things if she doesn't want to hear it, mysteriously something will be on the stove burning and she'll have to hang up immediately. Then she doesh't have the decency to call back. LOL
I'm sorry....but you are wrong.
Clinton was impeached on two counts, grand jury perjury and obstruction of justice, with the votes split along party lines. The Senate Republicans, however, were unable to gather enough support to achieve the two-thirds majority required for his conviction. On Feb. 12, 1999, the Senate acquitted President Clinton on both counts. The perjury charge failed by a vote of 55–45, with 10 Republicans voting against impeachment along with all 45 Democrats. The obstruction of justice vote was 50–50, with 5 Republicans breaking ranks to vote against impeachment.
So....even though he was not convicted and not told to step down from office....he was still impeached. Only one president has been impeached and told to step down and that was President Andrew Johnson...I do believe. President Nixon chose to resign rather than be impeached.
wrong, wrong
True "feminists" are going to vote for Obama, issues over politician. Any true Hillary followers who followed her for issues will follow her to Obama instead of McCain. Only those few who followed her solely because she was a woman and no other reason will vote for McCain now. Fortunately they will be cancelled out by what one journalist called the "caveman" vote, in this case voting against McCain or just not voting at all because he has a woman on the ticket and no other reason. Oh yeah, they're still out there.
Wrong again, Sam.
It is not that the Soup Nazi didn't have any soup, it is just that he was free to deny soup to anyone he felt was not deserving of it. The same goes for us. We are not obligated to respond to your demands for documentation if we feel you are not deserving of it. Therefore, no soup for you!
You are so wrong!
They're trying to do it in Alaska!!!
Don't get me wrong here
I guess I am always thinking of the future, and about the choices we make today and how it could affect our future. As I said, I have two wonderful lesbian friends (partners) who I love dearly. They are the sweetest women on earth. They mean to harm no one. They have 5 children (3 offsprings of one of the women and 2 they are foster parents to - children of one of the women's sisters, who is a crack addict, and cannot take care of them). These women are wonderful "parents" to these children. It is not that I am against it. I just don't understand it, I guess. I too have nothing against gays or lesbians, as long as they do not try to push their lifestyle off on me. I am just thinking how it just does not seem to be right in the sense of the future, or past for that matter. If same-gender marriage was to be then where would there be offspring? Are you getting where I am coming from here. 
Once again you are wrong
You really need to do some research. What does Iran and the 911 attack have to do with the federal research and bailouts. OP posted a good well researched post. You are just throwing out more rhetoric for the hatred you have toward Sarah Palin. And for what? OP was correct. Stop blaming each side. This started a long time ago and both parties have been in power since it began. For me the question is who has been profiting from it. I'm not blaming either side, but it just goes to show me how corrupt Washington is when people on both sides are making money off of it, then will tax the american people more and tell us we should feel patriotic about it.
As for the 911 attack... there's a lot more involved that one day we will know the whole story (not what is being hand fed to us). SP has been correct in what she has said. We have to stop the fundamentalist no matter what country they are in.
I believe you are wrong, Sam!
The first post regarding Alinsky was posted by someone named Jules regarding a link to the Boston Globe entitled "Son of Communist organizer Saul Alinksy praises Democratic convention and Obama campaign for using his father's methods." You're response to that post was, "holey moley...gonna have to put research into overdrive. Thanks for posting." This can all be found on page 16 of the political forum archives dated 09/02/2008. Since that post on 09/02/2008, you have been dropping Saul Alinksy's name as often as possible.
If you can prove that you were posting messages about Saul Alinsky with regards to the election prior to the above post on 09/02/2008, please provide the archive page number and date for verification.
We look forward to your response.
I said "I believe.." and I did believe, and I was wrong....
I do admit when wrong. However, everything I have posted about Alinsky and Obama regarding Alinsky is true. It can be confirmed.
Well you certainly can't be wrong
You can't even spell his name! Is it intentional? Do you spell your candidate Oblama? What's the deal?
Sorry.....you also have it wrong....
The day before yesterday, Harry Reid was saying if McCain didn't come to Washington and support the bill it would not pass. When McCain said he was going to do just that, only THEN did Reid say don't come we don't need you. Obama made his comment about they will call me if they need me BEFORE Harry Reid said don't come.
But in the grand scheme of things, what does that matter? I want a President who is going to be there, hearing what this bill really is, know what is in it, and not depend on others to do the job I am supposed to be doing. He is still a sitting senator on our payroll and I as an American would prefer he was up there doing his job and getting this fixed, then he can go back to his campaign, which he has been doing for 18 months. For this one piece of legislation, quite possibly the most important he will EVER face as a senator OR a president...putting off a debate for 3 days should not be the issue he has made it. In my opinion.
WRONG!!!WRONG!!!!WRONG!!!
Don't you READ? It was the Clinton who started this mess. It was Barney Fife and others who voted AGAINST safeguards. Dems, dems, dems.
I don't know why it is wrong --
I don't understand what the big deal is - they are not forcing them into voting for one person or another - just offering them the chance to vote.
I also do not find what would be wrong in registering and voting in the same day - in fact, just drove myself to the courthouse and registered this morning and voted this morning... I don't think waiting one more day was going to change my mind in any way or make any difference whatsoever.
what is wrong with this?
I registered to vote yesterday and I then voted, but not because I was cheating - they checked my ID, put my info in the computer, realized I was "approved", then let me vote. Nothing illegal or sinister or cheating about that???
It is just wrong s/m
that you HAVE to work 2 jobs to support yourself or your family. Economy!! It doesn't matter that we cast our votes differently or to what extent we get involved. In retirement I have plenty of time but if EVERYONE will do whatever they can, whether it be emails, phone calls, talking to people...such as on forums or anywhere else they can make their voice heard, things will change. What I do have confidence in is the AMERICAN PEOPLE and I mean the everyday, mainstreet people.
I know that I have already written my sensator (Democrat) and told her that I will vote for whomever runs against her in the next election. I did that over the illegal immigration issue and she did nothing but solidify my opinion of her when she voted for the bail-out.
If your candidate wins I can only hope that you are right and I am wrong. If the one I chose to vote for (very unenthusiastically) wins, I can only pray that I am right.
Wrong there!
IF the Republicans had stood up and caused the bail-out to fail you would have seen nothing but praise from me!!!! IF McCain had stood up against it, in spite of everything else, I MIGHT have been swayed and changed my vote to support him in spite of all my other negative feelings. His support, right along with dubya, solidified my opinion that his administration would be more of business as usual.
Wrong again.
Bush is a Republican.
Democrats are in power in Congress.
Ipso facto, America does not have a fascist government.
or wrong
I totally understand why he took this position. Any other stand starts giving rights to the fetus and embryo. Do I agree with it? No. But it isn't enough to make me want to change my vote. I still believe he is the better choice for president at this time.
|
