Michelle in London is like when Jackie went to Paris.

[ronnykmarshall]

“I do not think it altogether inappropriate to introduce myself to this audience. I am the man who accompanied Jacqueline Kennedy to Paris, and I have enjoyed it…” - President Kennedy

[Fading Captain]

1. Stop romanticizing the Obamas

It's stupid and shallow.

[ronnykmarshall]

3. Cake?

[Fading Captain]

10. Don't mind if I do ... that's some good looking cake

eom

[JuniperLea]

45. Here, have some more...

[Thrill]

5. Why does it bother you so much?

Trying to tell people what do on a message board is stupid and shallow

[Fading Captain]

7. It bothers me because it's stupid and shallow

And Democrats should be better than that.

[ronnykmarshall]

13. Care for a slice?

[Fading Captain]

15. Hmmm

More of a cake fan.

[Captain Hilts]

29. Folks here liking the comparison to Diana is what baffles me. nt

[JuniperLea]

47. Where did you see that?

This is the first time I've seen anyone say anything like this.

[JuniperLea]

46. No, what is stupid and shallow

Is being a Debbie Downer when Democrats finally have a POTUS we can be proud of.




Hey... the jerk store called...

[Cha]

53. It's not stupid and shallow so your premise

is up in :nuke:..and we'll do what we damn well please anyway..we're Dems.

[roguevalley]

81. actually, being only serious is shallow. its possible to be engaged by more than

the sorry assed side of life. Smiles and laughter are good for you. they keep cancer away. try that with being dour.

[leveymg]

6. I think that was more like romancing Jacqueline Kennedy

Jack had really bad taste flagrantly cheating on that woman.

[Demi_Babe]

11. admiring social grace is neither stupid or shallow

[Fading Captain]

14. Why not?

What does admiring social grace do that isn't stupid and shallow?

What is Michelle Obama's "social grace" going to do for the world?

[skygazer]

17. Charm a lot of people who we need to be talking to

Do you really not see the importance of first impressions? Are you really so dense that you can't see that the charm and social grace of both of the Obamas opens doors to communication? There is nothing stupid and shallow about that - it's called "diplomacy."

[Fading Captain]

21. Diplomacy is real. Social Grace is fake.

It might charm the masses who wish to see their hopeless ideals in a leader. But it means nothing in real terms.
Diplomacy is negotiations.
Not nostaglic bullshit about Jackie Kennedy.

Who was the last President or first lady we had with "social grace."

And what did it do for us?

[skygazer]

I'm sorry - I didn't realize I was debating with a 12-year old

Why don't you go do your homework or something constructive?

[TahitiNut]

32. Wow. Thanks for such an apt demonstration of "social grace."

:eyes:

[skygazer]

37. 1. I never said I had any

2. I wasn't talking to you.

[Fading Captain]

66. And 3

You don't have an answer to the question.

[JuniperLea]

79. I doubt you would understand it

You're not showing a great depth of intelligence here.

[JuniperLea]

52. That is just ignorant...

The Reagans

The Carters

There were plenty who had social grace. You can't have good diplomacy without it.

Who pissed in your Wheaties?

[LiveLiberally]

76. With all due respect..... the masses VOTE. Ipso Facto: social grace matters.

So does random antagonism BTW :)

[cali]

20. pretty clear it's doing quite a bit.

don't see how you could miss that.

[ronnykmarshall]

24. Tee hee!

[pnwmom]

26. Like it or not, her popularity has some effect on their combined influence for the good,

both in the U.S. and in other other countries.

[JuniperLea]

50. Think of all the harm W did because he didn't have said social grace!

Jeez! It's obvious to any thinking person.

[Fading Captain]

61. Shrub's lack of social grace

Was seen as a plus in some circles.

Social grace is meaningless when you're talking about the President of the United States.

Nobody is going to care about grace. They are going to talk about how Bush's policies screwed the country and the world. And about how Obama's policies did or did not improve things.

Fuck social grace.

We have Tent Cities in America.

Fuck social grace.

[JuniperLea]

77. IMHO you'll go nowhere with that attitude

The lack of social grace has a hand in all that is wrong with the world right now.

"Social grace is meaningless when you're talking about the President of the United States." Quite frankly, this is the stupidest thing I've read on DU in some time.

[Canuckistanian]

64. Admiring "social grace" isn't a crime after 8 years MISSING IT

And if you hadn't heard, "social grace" as you call it goes a long way in restoring REAL, CONCRETE goodwill.

You know the kind of goodwill that gets things done, rather than just "going along" out of fear of harm and shameless bribes.

[Fading Captain]

67. Bullshit

If Obama farts at the dinner table, but has real policies that repair goodwill to America, his lack of social graces would make for nothing but chatter for the knuckleheads.

[JuniperLea]

78. This is by far the most ignorant conversation I've seen on DU

You must be joking. I'm series.

[Brazenly Liberal]

25. Really? And what drew YOU into this "stupid and shallow" thread, eh?

The sort of thread it is was pretty clear in the subject line. You could have thought to yourself it looked "stupid and shallow" and gone on to the next one. So what are YOU doing here? Does your unjustifiably bloated ego puff up even more at the opportunity to be an insufferable scold? Racking up asshole points?

Sweetie, if you don't like this kind of conversation, it's a big world. If you look really, really hard, you just might be able to find someone somewhere who doesn't think you're a tiresome bore. Try freerepublic. There are a lot of guys over there who sound just like you.

[JuniperLea]

55. Hear hear!

:applause:

[Fading Captain]

62. I am hopefully showing people who fawn over their "leaders"

the folly of their way.

[Brazenly Liberal]

71. BZZZZZZ! Wrong answer.

Wrong, dumb, and - worst of all - boring. Your delusions of adequacy are embarrassing to witness.

Off to the ignore list with you.

[phleshdef]

74. No, you aren't showing anyone shit. You are just annoying people.

[tekisui]

75. Hmmm....

Thanks for the tip, buddy.

[karynnj]

33. You miss the entire point - this IS similar to the Kennedys in the 1960s

The point is that Michelle absolutely charmed the Queen and a substantial part of the UK. That is similar to what Jacking did in Paris. Does this make him a more effective President? At minimum only marginally, but it certainly doesn't hurt.

In terms of repairing the damage to the reputation of the US, it makes an incredible change. It also reaffirms the real asset that Michelle Obama is - something that counters the huge smear campaign run against her by the right. If it is needed, it also further signals that the world and the US is much more color blind than many of us would have thought possible if we were asked in the 1960s.

As to romanticizing the Obamas - there is no need to do that - they did that by being who they are - and comparing them to the Kennedys doesn't do that.

[Catshrink]

60. Hey, use the "Hide thread" icon

and they won't bother you. I do that with octomom and Palin threads because they annoy the hell out of me.

[Dappleganger]

63. If you don't like it then ignore those remarks.

I'll romanticize whoever the hell I want--it's been a LONG FUCKING TIME since being able to be proud of who's in office!

[namahage]

65. Someone once said

"Don't tape your enemies' mouths shut. Win the argument."

Of course, maybe this only applies when justifying Rush and Hannity's right to spew.

[Every Man A King]

70. Fuck You

[redqueen]

2. Heh, I'd never heard that quote before.

:)

[skygazer]

4. Jackie was so glamorous

That's a gorgeous picture of her. But Michelle is both glamorous and accessible and I love that. Everyone in the world seems to love that. Very proud of our President and First Lady and anyone who thinks impressions don't count is an idiot.

[ronnykmarshall]

8. Jackie was a first lady of her time

Michelle is of her time.

Michelle to me has the beauty and glamor of Jackie and the intellegence and conviction to causes of Hillary.

[redqueen]

16. Well said!

[tammywammy]

80. Good post

Excellent analogy.

:hi:

[ruggerson]

9. She's far more substantive and engaged than Jackie ever was

I think the fashion comparisons, while meant generously, only serve to objectify her.

As I noted in another thread, she has much more Eleanor Roosevelt in her than Jackie O, imho.

[MADem]

22. I like Mrs. Obama's brains, but I think, no matter how much people say times have changed,

that Jackie Kennedy had the advantage when it came to fashion. She had better advisors, most notably Oleg Cassini, who wouldn't let her make a mistake or a misstep, her choices in clothing were classic, not trendy, and she looked more pulled together than Mrs. O does. That's not a slam against Mrs. Obama, she isn't defined by that kind of shit--with the exception of this idiotic obsession about her arms, which I think is unfortunate.

But then, times ARE different. People don't give a shit about "proper attire" anymore, and running around looking like you got dressed in the dark is a fashion statement nowadays. It might not be in ten years, but it will work for the next few.

[Captain Hilts]

57. Yes, but the decorative expectations for First Lady have not changed all that much. nt

[MADem]

72. So much for progress....and the irony is, these are so-called "progressives"

who are making all these simpering, as you say "decorative" comments.

I guess those first ladies have "Come a long way, baby" but they have a long way to go before people stop regarding them as "baby."

[Pharlo]

82. Part of the reason that First Lady Kennedy had an advantage

was because she had one VERY wealthy father-in-law supporting her clothing habit. Like many of us, First Lady Obama is doing this on her own with a budget.

While some state occasion gowns may be donated, her day-to-day wardrobe is not. Yet, she is being judged on everything she wears. I don't know about anyone else here, but that is one contest at which I would fail miserably.

Another difference between the two first ladies is the degree of press exposure now compared to then. In today's 24/7 televised coverage, First Lady Kennedy might have had a few more fashion lapses.

Personally, both first ladies have worn outfits I did not particularly like. That doesn't mean it's not stylish or they don't look good. It just means that I didn't care for the outfit.

No matter WHAT she wears, someone out there is not going to like it. That doesn't mean it's not a nice outfit, it just means someone out there doesn't care for it. Big deal - eventually, she'll put something on they do like.

She needs to wear what she likes and what she feels good in and the hell with the rest of us, or she'll have a psychotic break before the end of year one just trying to determine how to dress to please everyone.

She is VERY fortunate that she can wear damn near any color. Nancy Reagan may have liked red, but as far as I was concerned, she ought never to have worn it - it made her look washed out. Like the clothes were wearing her, not the other way around. But, that was my opinion. She liked red, she felt good in red, then she should wear red. I could close my eyes or look at something else.

[avaistheone1]

23. How is she more substantive?

[ruggerson]

59. She talks about meaningful things

healthcare, job security, taxes, the lower middle class - things Jackie never would have discussed.

[Captain Hilts]

73. To give JBK some cred, when LBJ was prez, she was all over McNamara about Vietnam.

But it had been her policy not to talkpolitics with JFK.

[MADem]

12. No she isn't.

Back then, a woman's stock in trade was beauty. That's all she had to be, was a beauty with a nice booty. If she could be charming and a bit sophisticated, that was good, too. If she could wear clothes well, better still.

But no mixing it up with the menfolk in substantive discussion--ladies, powder your noses; men to the den for cigars.

These silly comparisons continue and they are asinine. It was a different era then. To compare Mrs. Obama to Jackie Kennedy is an insult to Mrs. Obama, frankly. There's a lot of bad karma in the comparison, too. I wish it would cease.

Michelle Obama has an advanced Ivy League degree and has held REAL JOBS. Jackie Kennedy dabbled in photography, married a politician who made good, and she went along for the ride (and aquitted herself well, certainly), then married a rich Greek, got a nice settlement to live on from him, and later dabbled in editing.

Also, the JFK quote you note? If the people of Europe were individually given the choice of meeting EITHER Mrs. or President Obama, but not both, the President would win in a landslide. So, nothing against Mrs. Obama, she is the woman who accompanied the President to Europe.

She's a draw, but he's the Main Event.

Edit/spelling

[Captain Hilts]

30. THANK YOU. Michelle is so much more substantial. Times are different so the comparison...

isn't fair to either woman.

[HopeOverFear]

36. *standing ovation*

YESSSSSSSSS! Thank you.

[roughsatori]

84. Thank you, excellent post.

I have never admired, or aspired to embody, "glamour." That is not to imply that I think if is wrong, it is just not something I value.

I am troubled by posts equating Mrs. Obama to Mrs. Kennedy because comparison ignores Michelle Obama's warmth, intelligence, and accomplishments.

"Jackie" seems to have been seduced by wealth and superficiality. Then again, wealth and superficiality are the hallmarks of "high-fashion," so I can understand how fashion lovers could find that comparison complementary.

Thank you for that thoughtful post.

[firefox28]

18. No comparison

No i don't think Michelle's trip is comparable. Jackie won fame because of herself and her fluent French. Michelle Obama gained more the fame through her husband.

[Jackeens]

27. If Michelle wore hosiery would you be more impressed?

:shrug:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8314326

[DevonRex]

48. For some reason that made me think of Monty Python and "shrubbery."

I could NOT believe that thread. I couldn't figure out if he thought she would be cold without hose or if she shouldn't show her skin. Especially since pantyhose don't keep your legs warm unless they're worn under pants AND since they don't actually hide the skin.

Well, I suppose she could wear thick wool tights... :shrug:

[NYC Liberal]

31. Would Jackie have won fame if she wasn't married to JFK?

This is stupid. Just because someone became known to the world by virtue of who they married, doesn't mean that they don't have their own accomplishments. It just means the world found out about them.

[Brazenly Liberal]

19. A very appropriate comparison!

I'm old enough to remember Jack and Jackie. The Obamas remind me of them quite a bit. Different times, different challenges, but in both cases they seemed extraordinarily natural and at ease in the roles.

[Captain Hilts]

28. Or Eleanor in Sydney, London or Paris. nt

[firefox28]

34. Disagree

I still disagree.

[Phx_Dem]

35. Great photo. Gorgeous dress. n/t

[saracat]

38. Delete Dupe

[saracat]

39. I am liking Michelle more and more, but Jackie she ain't. Sorry

I don't think it likely we will ever have a First lady to equal Jackie in beauty charm and grace. Michelle has her own style as did hillary but neither can be compared to Jackie. They are their own women and Jackie is an icon.

[EFerrari]

42. Jackie wasn't an icon when she moved into the White House

and it took some time and a great deal of effort to make her one. In addition, Michelle is not a refugee from a bankrupt oligarchy as Jackie was. What she is, she and her family worked for, every bit of it.

[Pharlo]

83. The only thing I would concede to Mrs Kennedy over Mrs Obama

is her posture. Barring parents who do not stress 'proper posture', a stint in the military, or back problems which require an erect back, a person tends to be a bit more relaxed.

That doesn't mean she's lacking in 'beauty, charm, or grace', it just means she has a more relaxed posture.

[EFerrari]

40. At first I was going to disagree with you because I REMEMBER

the media storm over Jackie even if I was only a little girl.

The difference is, when Jackie when to Paris, our media hadn't been bought out by a hostile opposition yet. So, yes. I agree with you. Michelle was a huge hit and one we'll likely only learn about from the foreign press in dribs and drabs. She's magnificent. :hi:

[Top Cat]

41. I think it is great that the world is falling in love with our First Lady

[DevonRex]

43. I believe Ronny is saying that the wonderful reactions are quite similar, not that

the women themselves are just alike. We can certainly say that the folks in Great Britain seem to be as taken with Michelle as as the French were with Jackie.

And we can also say that both women are beautiful, gracious, caring women who represent us so VERY well. They share the fact that they have unique styles and personalities that shine through, when there is so much pressure on political wives to look like every other political wife. They both appear at ease in all situations, which is a tremendous feat.

And might I say that Michelle does it even though she wasn't born to it, which of course is not meant to disparage Jackie in any way. It is, however, a fact. To me, Jackie has always been the perfect role model for the position. It seems that we have another role model in the making in Michelle, a more modern one to be sure, and one that demonstrates all the things women can do and be in our time.

(I used the present tense in comparing the women for ease of composition.)

[firedupdem]

54. You just said it perfectly. n/t

[DevonRex]

56. Why thank you dear!

:hug:

[firedupdem]

58. You're more than welcome!

:hi:

[DevonRex]

44. Forgot to say I rec'd your thread. :)

[ronnykmarshall]

49. xoxoxoox

[Adelante]

51. Jackie had every advantage in life

Michelle is a working class kid made good. They are different. But I do think the European success has been very similar.

[Stephanie]

68. but.... Jackie's arms are BARE

[starroute]

69. In 1960, like now, the world was really fed up with Americans

1958-60 were the peak years for the Ugly American, Yankee Go Home, Nixon getting rotten fruit thrown at him in Latin America, worldwide anger over nuclear testing, and a couple of other things. It isn't particularly remembered now, but the final years of the Eisenhower administration managed to piss people off almost as much as Bush did. Not only was America throwing its weight around, but Americans were widely seen as crude, boorish, and lacking in subtlety and sensitivity.

The Kennedys cut through all that. Between Jackie in Paris and "Ich bin ein Berliner," they convinced the Europeans, at least, that Americans could have culture and class. That meant a lot.

It did a lot for America's own image of itself, as well. In the late 50's, most of the movies worth seeing were foreign films, while Hollywood movies were generally vulgar and always overblown. American pop music was even more ersatz and disposable. Except for a certain amount of beatnik-y stuff around the edges -- jazz, off-Broadway theater, and Jules Feiffer cartoons -- there wasn't much American culture worth writing home about.

The Kennedy administration didn't immediately fix that -- but it did put in place the shifts in perception that made possible an explosion in popular culture just a few years later.

Michelle in London *is* like Jackie in Paris -- but not because of superficial style. It's because she enables us to be proud of ourselves as Americans again, for the first time in a long while.

[AnnieBW]

85. I was joking about this the other day

I told my husband that Barack should introduce himself as the man who accompanied Michelle Obama to London. :D