But then, my fellow NQ writer/friend, LisaB, alerted me to a story I missed in my own home town paper while I was out of town, which she found at Michell Malkin’s site. Now, you may recall that I have no love lost for this man who repeatedly stabbed the Clintons in the back before our primary last year, painting them as racists for stating actual facts (like that it takes a president to sign a bill into law – one would THINK a US Representative would be aware of that, but apparently, Rep. Clyburn does not know that). So, I was not at all surprised that he claimed in a recent Post and Courier article that Michelle Obama won’t come to SC because we’re all a bunch of racists and too hostile. Oh, how I wish I was making this up:

U.S. House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said Friday that a conversation with White House staff left him with the sense that a hostile environment in South Carolina is keeping the first lady from visiting.

The high-ranking South Carolina Democrat said he has received more than 100 invitations for Michelle Obama. But this summer when he brought one of those requests to her staff on behalf of his alma mater, South Carolina State University, Clyburn said her security was an issue.

The conversation came after former Richland County GOP activist Rusty DePass suggested on Facebook in June that an escaped zoo gorilla was not harmful because it was probably one of Mrs. Obama’s ancestors. DePass’ comment was coupled with a remark in July from U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, a Republican. DeMint said that beating the president’s health care plan would be a ‘Waterloo’ moment for Obama.

Congressman Joe Wilson’s ‘You lie!’ outburst during Obama’s joint address on health care reform last month didn’t help either, Clyburn said.

‘A lot of it has to do with the fact that the climate in South Carolina just is not good, and that’s a shame,’ Clyburn said at a roundtable discussion at his Columbia office.

‘I do believe it is keeping her away from this state,’ he said.

The congressman said the first lady’s family connections in South Carolina and her fond childhood memories from Georgetown County left many excited at the possibility that the Obamas would vacation on the coast here. Her security must be guaranteed before that could happen, Clyburn said.

DePass said Clyburn’s comments were off base.

‘The idea that people in South Carolina are hostile to the Obamas is poppycock,’ he said. ‘That’s utterly ridiculous.’

I concur. Just more race baiting from Rep. Clyburn. Oh, I am so proud that he speaks for me – NOT. But there’s more:

DePass apologized before the South Carolina Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People for his Facebook comment, and reiterated that apology

Friday. He also said that his history with the Republican Party included reaching out to minority voters and trying to remove the Confederate battle flag from the Statehouse dome.

Wilson’s office also said Clyburn was wrong.

‘Congressman Wilson respectfully disagrees with Congressman Clyburn’s assumption,’ Wilson spokesman Ryan Murphy said in a statement. ‘He believes the people of South Carolina would welcome the president and the first lady should they decide to visit our great state.’

Neither the first lady’s press office nor the Secret Service provided comment for this story. DeMint’s office also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Pat Caddell of Hanahan, an expert on public opinion polls and a Democratic strategist, said South Carolina surely has racists among its residents, but racism isn’t the prevailing sentiment. ‘The Democratic Party will blow itself up if it keeps assigning things as racist,’ Caddell said. (Reach Yvonne Wenger at 803-926-7855 or ywenger@postandcourier.com.)

Sigh. I have to tell you, I am pretty damn sick and tired of being called a racist because I live in South Carolina for starters, but for any, ANY, questioning of President Obama’s policies (or lack thereof). For Rep. Clyburn to claim that the First Lady isn’t coming here, even though she has FAMILY here, because it’s “hostile” just makes me, well, “hostile!”

I had to read some of the comments at the end of the article to see what some of my fellow Palmetto State residents had to say. Three in particular caught my attention. The first is obviously in response to another comment:

treasured wrote:

regulardude…Please give us a break!

Was Obama’s negative remarks about the US to other countries patriotic?You get respect when respect is earned.

Just because he is the President does not mean that we have to agree with him and like you, we can voice our opinions and our concerns.

There have been many concerns about this President and they have not just been from SC.You are just reading articles from a SC paper.What is the difference in your remarks accusing us of not respecting the President and you obviously not respecting your own state that you insist on living in?Must be something you like about it.

I have grown children and I have a young child. As it stands right now, they and their children will have to pay back for many years all the money that Obama has dished out in his so called stimulus plans.

Now, if you want to sing his praises, well and good, but don’t call the rest of us unpatriotic if we don’t agree with what he is doing.That is our right as Americans.

And this one:

caberchucker wrote:
Yeah, that makes sense that she’s “scared” of the hostility in SC. Oh wait, didn’t the Obamas and Oprah have to move their rally to USC’s stadium while campaigning, so they could accomidate all the people? Nevermind, I guess that never actually happened.

Uh yeah, evidently not.

And finally, this one, which I think really hits at the core of this charge by Rep. Clyburn:

wonderdog wrote:
Clyburn is embarrassed because he got snubbed by the Obamas, so he made up this nonsense to make it appear that it’s somebody’s fault. If he can get enough people to buy into that BS, maybe he can convince himself, too.

Now that the Obamas have no more use to them after he played his role as patsy during the campaign, why should they deign to do anything that might help him in some way? But yes, so much easier – for Rep. Clyburn, that is – to blame it on the very people who sent him to D.C. Nice, really nice. Can’t wait to see what he calls us next!

The American Idol president is running his own reality show and we are picking up the tab. Mr. Obama seems to think that he and his wife are the most fascinating part of the American narrative. Last Friday, the IOC clarified the butter for the Obamas. In the past months, we have published many articles reporting on Kool Aid drinkers who have lifted their heads from the pink trough, dazed and confused, wondering where the “Change” is. The list is long: Peggy Noonan, Frank Rich, Susan Estrich, Andrew Sullivan, Camille Paglia, Robert Reich. Feel free to add your own. Today I add three more to that growing list.

First WaPo’s Richard Cohen complains Obama Doesn’t Seem Ready to Lead:

Barack Obama’s trip to Copenhagen to pitch Chicago for the Olympics would have been a dumb move whatever the outcome. But as it turned out (an airy dismissal would not be an unfair description), it poses some questions about his presidency that are way more important than the proper venue for synchronized swimming. The first, and to my mind most important, is whether Obama knows who he is.

This business of self-knowledge is no minor issue. It bears greatly on the single most crucial issue facing this young and untested president: Afghanistan. Already, we have his choice for Afghanistan commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, taking the measure of his commander in chief and publicly telling him what to do. This MacArthuresque star turn called for a Trumanesque response, but Obama offered nothing of the kind. Instead, he used McChrystal as a prop, adding a bit of four-star gravitas to that silly trip to Copenhagen by having the general meet with him there.

Mr. Cohen is blaming Gen. McChrystal for someone else leaking his report to the President. The more important point is, as Gen. Wes Clark or anyone else who’s actually been in this position will tell you (and as he did say in an interview this weekend), you’d better listen to your commanders on the ground. Cohen is right that the 25 minute meeting with McChrystal on Friday was merely a photo op. He’s still deliberating. How many more months of ‘deliberating” are required while our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan?

This is the president we now have: He inspires lots of affection but not a lot of awe. It is the latter, though, that matters most in international affairs, where the greatest and most gut-wrenching tests await Obama. If he remains consistent to his own rhetoric of just last August, he will send more troops to Afghanistan and more of them will die. “This is not a war of choice,” he said. “This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al-Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans.”

President Obama has the disastrous example of Iraq where Bush’s Generals told him from the outset that an overwhelming force was needed. They did not get it. You saw the result. Obama himself admitted that the belated 2007 surge was wildly successful. How much more evidence does he need? Define the mission, and either send the forces in to get the job done or pull all our men and women out of there. Choose. Lead. That’s the job description. Date night I don’t care about. Dog walking I don’t care about.

Cohen concludes:

But the ultimate in realism is for the president to gauge himself and who he is: Does he have the stomach and commitment for what is likely to be an unpopular war? Will he send additional troops, but hedge by not sending enough — so that the dying will be in vain? What does he believe, and will he ask Americans to die for it? Only he knows the answers to these questions. But based on his zigzagging so far and the suggestion from the Copenhagen trip that the somber seriousness of the presidency has yet to sink in, we have reason to wonder.

Has the seriousness of the presidency sunk in? Now there’s a question.

You may be surprised to note that NY Times columnist Bob Herbert is wondering the same thing. A huge cheerleader for Obama, Herbert cried racism and even saw phallic symbols in the leaning tower of Pisa in a misguided attempt to defend his chosen hero last year. Now he wonders Does Obama Get It? Well, Mr. Herbert, don’t feel bad. This question has been keeping me up nights, too. He states:

The big question on the domestic front right now is whether President Obama understands the gravity of the employment crisis facing the country. Does he get it? The signals coming out of the White House have not been encouraging.

Clearly Mr. Herbert, if you have to ask, then Obama does not understand the gravity of the situation. Where is his good judgment? How can one not understand 9.8 unemployment – in reality it is a much higher number when one includes Americans out of work for so long they have fallen off the rolls.

The Beltway crowd and the Einsteins of high finance who never saw this economic collapse coming are now telling us with their usual breezy arrogance that the Great Recession is probably over. Their focus, of course, is on data, abstractions like the gross domestic product, not the continued suffering of living, breathing human beings struggling with the nightmare of joblessness.

Even Mr. Obama, in an interview with The Times, gave short shrift to the idea of an additional economic stimulus package, telling John Harwood a few weeks ago that the economy had likely turned a corner. “As you know,” the president said, “jobs tend to be a lagging indicator; they come last.”

The view of most American families is somewhat less blasé. …

Nearly one in four American families has suffered a job loss over the past year, according to a survey released by the Economic Policy Institute. Nearly 1 in 10 Americans is officially unemployed, and the real-world jobless rate is worse.

It is a nightmare. No one is blasé when they are worried how they are going to feed their families. What about the porkulus package? Is this administration waiting to release most of the funds in 2010 to help them at the polls? If that is the case, shame on them.

Why should Obama understand when he isn’t spending his own money? Half million dollar pizza parties, an obscene amount spent on the inauguration and several million on this reckless Copenhagen junket show a frightening disconnect between Obama’s priorities and his fiduciary responsibility to the American people. Herbert continues:

The Obama administration seems hamstrung by the unemployment crisis. No big ideas have emerged. No dramatically creative initiatives. While devoting enormous amounts of energy to health care, and trying now to decide what to do about Afghanistan, the president has not even conveyed the sense of urgency that the crisis in employment warrants.

If that does not change, these staggering levels of joblessness have the potential to cripple not just the well-being of millions of American families, but any real prospects for sustained economic recovery and the political prospects of the president as well. An unemployed electorate is an unhappy electorate.

Mr. Herbert, they are already crippled, but instead of addressing the urgency of the economy and Afghanistan head on, we get what George Will calls The Obamas’ Narcissism on Display. Speaking of Mr. and Mrs. Obama’s speeches before the IOC last week,

…Their separate speeches to the International Olympic Committee were so dreadful, and in such a characteristic way, that they might be symptomatic of something that has serious implications for American governance.

Both Obamas gave heartfelt speeches about … themselves. Although the working of the committee’s mind is murky, it could reasonably have rejected Chicago’s bid for the 2016 games on aesthetic grounds — unless narcissism has suddenly become an Olympic sport.

George Will suggested that since the Obamas used so many “I” and “me” references in their speeches, Obama’s genius speechwriters (Favreau et al) should have substituted the words I and me with “sauerkraut” to underscore the ‘antic nature of their excessive appearances.’ Someone needs to tell the Obamas that what is compelling about America is all Americans – all colors of the rainbow, all states, all social strata – together. All of us. Not just the two of them. And all of us are hurting out here. Our soldiers are hurting, too.

Will also points to Obama’s excessive use of cliché:

“At this defining moment,” a moment “when the fate of each nation is inextricably linked to the fate of all nations” in “this ever-shrinking world,” he aspires to “forge new partnerships with the nations and the peoples of the world.”
…
Does our Cicero even glance at his speeches before reading them in public?

All this is indicative of a man not connected to his words or not caring enough about either his audience or the subject at hand to come up with anything better than patented brand phrases that some focus group told him “resonate” with the public.

Our soldiers and our economy need a coherent plan. Now. He has had ample time to figure this out, as has Congress. Too much energy is focused on infighting for a health care plan that is such an incoherent monstrosity that they should trash it and start over. This is not even supposed to take effect until 2013, after the next election. Hmmm I wonder why. All things considered, that leaves health care the least urgent issue of the three.

On Afghanistan and the economy, pressing matters where lives, jobs and homes are on the line – where is the president? Will concludes:

Unhappy will be a president whose defining adjective is “vain.”

In keeping with the vanity of this man’s administration, we also see that nothing President Obama does is his own fault. This is the job he wanted. And a majority of the electorate voted him in to do it. What is he waiting for? There is no one else to blame if he hems and haws so long that Afghanistan is lost. There is no one else to blame if he insists on focusing on parts of an agenda that are not helping put the American people back to work. This is his presidency now. So I’ll ask again.

Mr. President, why did you want this job?

Or this:

And finally (!), this:

I sure as hell know I am. Oh, and all photos came from this Huffington Post site – where else, unless it was MSNBC? Ahem. There are plenty more, if you wish to go see them. I know you’re surprised by that.

I tell you who I would rather see. While the Obamas and their pal, Oprah, you know, the one who anointed Obama as The One, were wasting our tax dollars on a trip no other president has made EVER, there was someone who was hard at work for the country. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, of course, as the photos* below make clear. She was meeting with Dr. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, who is the Secretary General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, to discuss issues related to Muslim relations around the world. Here she is greeting him:

Here is Secretary Clinton in rapt attention as he speaks:

And here, Secretary Clinton indicates it is time to move on:

Look at how he looks at her. We have seen this look of respect from leaders all around the world. They know what so many of us know – this woman is no political lightweight. She is brilliant, she is knowledgeable, and she is capable. She will get the job done, no hemming and hawing around, no sirree.

Sophie B. Hawkins says it all in the video below:

Damn – I wish she was president, too…

* All photos by Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images North America

Um, it seems to me that if you happen to be the President of the United States, maybe you could appoint a Fact Checking Czar to go with the other Thirty-One – make a nice even number of it. I’m just saying – when you are giving a speech before Congress, televised all over the nation, it seems the very least he could do is MAKE SURE HIS FACTS ARE CORRECT.

Hey – maybe THAT’S when Rep. Wilson called him a liar! He KNEW Obama was lying about the cancer-stricken patient he was using for political gain. Just a thought.

Not for nothing, but they are using their own daughter to further this debate? Interesting. Funny how they don’t seem to make the connection that they are MILLIONAIRES, most people in this country are NOT, and the illness wasn’t serious (according to Michelle, anyway). Or that they both had jobs at the time – really, really, good jobs. Or that those jobs provided excellent health coverage, the very kind that 87% of employers would work to reduce if this Health Care Reform goes in as defined now. I know, picky, picky, picky…

Anyway, you know, there are plenty of REAL examples from which Obama could choose, I am sure, but honestly – why lie? ABOUT HIS OWN DAUGHTER? Is it just that he hasn’t met a truth he couldn’t corrupt? What’s the deal?

Oh, well. I am sure there will be plenty more examples to examine as his time in office goes on. But for now, I will leave you with this peppy little tune. I’m sure it will stick with you for the next 3 yrs and 4 months:

(1) “Barack, Get Your Facts Right,” published on June 12, 2008

(2) “An Update on the Michelle Obama Rant, on June 7, 2008

(1) “Barack, Get Your Facts Right,” published on June 12, 2008

If Barack’s first foray into setting the record straight is a sign of how he would handle the weightier matters of the presidential office, boy are we screwed. Here’s what Obama considers a “lie”:

Lie:
Blogger Larry Johnson wrote on May 31st that he would add „New and dramatic developments. This is a heads up. I‚ll post the news Monday morning by 0900 hours. Now I know why people who have seen the videotape say it is stunning. Barack‚s headaches are only starting.‰

Read the post

Truth:
Johnson posted no such update.

Barack? DUDE. Open your eyes brother. Here’s what I posted on Monday morning (17 minutes earlier than promised) on 2 June:

Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan Take On Whitey
By Larry Johnson on June 2, 2008 at 8:43 edt AM in Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Minister Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., Whitey Tape | Edit
I learned over the weekend why the Republicans who have seen the tape of Michelle Obama ranting about “whitey” describe it as “STUNNING.” I have not seen it but I have heard from five separate sources who have spoken directly with people who have seen the tape. It features Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan. They are sitting on a panel at Jeremiah Wright’s Church when Michelle makes her intemperate remarks. Whoops!! When that image comes out it will enter the politcal ads hall of fame. It will be right up there with the little girl plucking daisy petals in the famous 1964 ad LBJ used against Barry Goldwater.

That ain’t a “lie” Barky. It is a fact. Of course, most Barack supporters have trouble grasping this concept. Maybe that’s why they support Barack–does not require much intellectual effort. Simply close eyes and hold your nose.

(2) “An Update on the Michelle Obama Rant, on June 7, 2008

The recording that shows Michelle Obama saying disparaging things about white folks is for real. It is not part of some elaborate dirty trick. The people who have seen her comments describe it as “stunning” or “devastating.” I have not spoken directly with the people who have seen the tape, but I have spoken to two of my friends who are friends with those who watched the tape/dvd.

Are they playing me? No, but it is a valid question to ask. Two of my sources, who have recounted the reactions of their friends who have seen the Michelle “performance,” live on opposite sides of the United States geographically and politically. They do not know each other and had no way of knowing that each of them was talking to me. This is one reason I believe the report of the “tape” is true.

I also have learned that Obama campaign knew about this “tape” at least two weeks prior to my first blog item on the matter. And they are not laughing it off as a joke. (Note to Barack: There are leaks in your campaign.) Ben Smith’s report on the matter only tells part of the story.
The woman from McClatchy who dared ask the question was verbally assaulted by Obama aides. She was treated as if she had made a death threat.

Then there is the matter of the email/disinformation campaign the Obama folks are trying. First they sent some of their bloggers an email claiming that Michelle said “WHY DID HE” rather than use the pejorative, “WHITEY.” And now the excuse is being circulated that somehow I, or someone else, is cribbing from some silly book I have never heard of until now. A campaign does not react this way to a fabrication.

I apologize for any confusion generated from our effort to get on top of this. We made the mistake of putting up the claims from Hillbuzz, but have no way of verifying Hillbuzz’s claim that it is a recording that features Michelle Obama with the wife of Louis Farrakhan. That is not what the sources who have seen the “tape” have reported to me.

The sources who have seen the tape report that Michelle says disparaging things about “whites” and that Louis Farrakhan is visible. There is no identifying information on the segment they have seen to identify the location or time when this was recorded.

Why does this “tape” of Michelle Obama matter? The folks who have it are working to elect John McCain. They are using it now to raise money for a 527 effort that will attack Barack Obama. I am told that they fully intend to keep this “off-the-market” until after the Democratic Convention. The Republicans involved with this believe that Barack Obama is a more beatable candidate than Hillary Clinton and see the tape as reinforcing an image of racial division that will hurt Obama.

I support Hillary Clinton for President. I believe she will be a stronger candidate. And if I had the tape I would put it out in a heartbeat. Getting the tape out now does one of two things–either it persuades Super Delegates that Barack is not electable or it gives the Obama campaign time to repair the damage.

I now appreciate somewhat how Cofer Black, the head of the CIA’s Counter Terrorism Center, must have felt as he tried to warn Condaleeza Rice and the Bush White House about a brewing terrorist attack in the days leading up to September 11th. And please, I am not equating the Michelle tape with the attacks of 9-11. Rather I am focused on the point of what happens when someone has incomplete information, which warns about a future event, and tries to raise the alert. Just because Cofer Black could not say in late July 2001 that the coming attack would be carried out by 19 hijackers on four commercial airliners did not mean his intelligence was wrong.

Those who want to vilify me for having the audacity to raise this warning can have at it. I ran up against similar attacks and skeptics in May of 2003 when I warned that the Bush Administration had cooked the intelligence on Iraq. It is only now that we get a Senate Intelligence Committee Report and a book from Scott McClellan confirming what I said five years ago.

I caught more heat in October of 2003 when I defended Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA officer. Again, we had to wait until the trial of Scooter Libby to learn that the claims she was just a glorified secretary were lies. And once again Scott McClellan, Bush’s former Press Secretary, confirms that he was lied to as well about Valerie’s status and who was involved in spreading her name around town.

My efforts on those two issues earned me the enmity of many on the political right. On at least two separate occasions the Wall Street Journal editorial page attacked me by name and accused me of being part of a CIA effort to sabotage the policies of President Bush. Those charges were repeated and amplified in a subsequent book by Kenneth Timmerman,

Shadow Warriors

.

Now it is some on the left who are attacking me and behaving in the same manner as those who rejected my reports on Iraq and Valerie Plame. Now I am a Republican tool. Here’s a small, but representative sample of the “love” letters coming my way:

From: KC Broberg
Sent: Jun 6, 2008 7:17 PM
To: Larry Johnson
Subject: WHERE IS THE VIDEO BIG SHOT?

more lies from mr. johnson it appears. no video on whitey? shocker
keep up the good work – swift boating is really going to work well this time…..

or this

On 6/6/08 9:57 AM, “Ben Bulloch” wrote:

Crawl in a hole and bury yourself. You fucking toolbag.

and finally:

On 6/6/08 12:49 PM, “Alejandro Queral” wrote:

On May 26, you wrote in your blog: “I know for a fact that Barack and Michelle Obama would like the tape of her blasting “whitey” during a rant at Jeremiah Wright’s church to never see the light of day.”

Really? If that’s the case, where’s the video? You and I know that if such a video exists it would have appeared on YouTube by now. But the truth seems to be there’s no such tape not because it hasn’t appeared on the web but because you can’t even keep your story straight. If you knew anything for a fact, your story would at least be consistent. I especially love how your sources are “all Republicans with access to knowledge but who do not know each other.” How convenient. But you and I also know that most insiders with access tend to know, or know of, each other. I suspect you made this up to cover your ass: since you name no names and you say the Republican insiders don’t know each other, there’s no way for anyone to disprove you. How clever. I’m also amazed at the bold face lie you tell your readers: that Michelle Obama was at Trinity Church when she made the speech, only to recant later and admit that you “do not know where this [the alleged panel discussion] occurred.”

Please stop using your blog to spread lies and rumors. It is not making this country any better.

Alejandro Queral

Now for the shocker. If the election comes down to a choice between John McCain and Barack Obama I will vote for Bob Barr. I live in Maryland and my state is very likely to vote overwhelmingly for Barack. I continue to believe that Barack is not qualified by experience or temperament to be President. I will be happy to be proved wrong on that count. But, if elected, he is likely to revive memories of the failed Presidency of Jimmy Carter. How apropos that Jimmy endorsed Barack.

And I cannot support John McCain, who is staffing his national security team with many of the bozos who were instrumental in bringing us the debacle in Iraq. Of particular concern is Randy Scheunemann. A confidant of Douglas Feith, Scheunemann represents a continuation of the disastrous Bush policies in the Middle East. I’ll devote more time later to these issues.

Let me conclude with this–I think there is at least one tape/recording that will be released sometime after the August convention and is likely to be very damaging to the Barack Obama presidential campaign. While I hope that Super Delegates wake up and realize that Hillary is their best shot for victory in the fall, I realize I am swimming upstream. So word to Barrack and team–the tape is coming at some point and you folks better be ready to deal with it because, unlike the situations with Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger, you cannot divorce your wife in the middle of a campaign.

Michelle Obama’s arms are transformational. They are representative of a new kind of woman: strong, vigorous, intelligent and loving. And they are a mother’s arms.

It’s bad enough that the Washington Post publishes the drivel of the sniveling, stuck-up snob,Sally Quinn, but that they’re actually featuring her ode to Michelle Obama’s arms — literally and metaphorically — is too much to take. Check out the left column at the top of the home page of the Washington Post:

 
Last fall, Larry Johnson wrote how Quinn eviscerated Sarah Palin:

Last September, Larry Johnson wrote “Sally Quinn Projecting on Palin.”

Now, you’re going to have to read Larry’s entire article to get the irony of Quinn’s attacks on Palin, but here’s a sampling:

I was puzzled by the crazy attack that Sally Quinn launched on Sarah Palin, Republican V.P. nominee, because it was so over the top. Sally’s view? A woman with five kids has no business being Vice President. (Of course, no one made that argument to Joe Biden when he was a widower and single dad working in Washington as a Senator. But I digress.) Here’s Sally’s latest ranting:

Sarah Palin has five children. She is nursing her fifth child, an infant with Down syndrome. Her 17-year-old unmarried child is pregnant. Palin has spoken against sex education or the teaching of contraception. When her water broke with her Down Syndrome baby she got on a plane and flew eight hours back to Alaska, making it only hours before the birth, a risky decision for a pregnant woman of any age. After delivering one child she went back to work the next day. After the birth of her fifth child, she was back in the office after a few days.

I would like to hear what women think of her priorities. Do they believe that her first priority is as a mother or as a governor? Will her first priority be as a mother or as a Vice President or a President? One in three Vice Presidents become President. John McCain is a 72-year-old cancer survivor. As Vice President, Palin could ascend to the highest office in the land at any moment. Do women believe she should relegate her job to second place or her children to second place? Does she have to make such a choice? Every woman, and particularly every woman who works, including me, understands that the conflicts and the guilt are always there in a way that they are not for men.

So what’s her problem? Well, to use her logic, she’s a lousy, irresponsible mother. She was working as a journalist at the Washington Post, had a fling with the boss and married him, and then, at the advanced age of 41, had a child. …

It is well-known that Sally Quinn treated the Clintons like “trailer trash” when they attempted to join D.C. society during Bill Clinton’s two administrations.

But somehow Michelle Obama — who’s dropped the black power mantra to portray a 1950s-style motherly and wifely role — is superior?

People like Sally Quinn can’t stand — they actually fear — women who dare to stand up and take positions of authority beyond the traditional roles typically assumed by First Ladies.

I couldn’t bring myself to read all of Quinn’s column, but here’s another excerpt sent to me by Lyn:

“May I change the subject,” said a prominent Washington theologian at a recent dinner. The conversation had been high-minded — religion, philosophy, the nature of evil. “I’d like to talk about Michelle Obama’s arms,” he said.

He is a big fan of those arms. We then began a discussion about the significance of the first lady’s arms. Actually, it turned out to be equally serious. Michelle Obama’s arms, we determined, were transformational. Her arms are representative of a new kind of woman: young, strong, vigorous, intelligent, accomplished, sexual, powerful, embracing and, most of all, loving.

Today is Mother’s Day. Today we should celebrate Michelle Obama’s arms as the arms of a mother.

This is a woman who has the courage to say “I am mom in chief” and make her children and her family — unapologetically — her No. 1 priority. She is able to do this because she is so intelligent and accomplished that she doesn’t have to prove anything to anyone. She is healthy enough to be able to say, this is who I am, these are my values and my priorities. …

By all means, let’s worship as a role model a woman who has earned millions thanks solely to her husband’s political clout and who has servants waiting on her day and night.

Every mother who’s forced to work two jobs to put bread on the table will be doubtless inspired.

Some things can never be repeated too many times.

One such example is how Michelle Obama, showing the common touch of Queen Marie Antoinette, idiotically stated that President Bush’s $600 personal stimulus was only good for buying a pair of earrings.

Now it transpires that Michelle was wearing a pair of trainers worth $540 while volunteering at a DC food bank, proving that her vanity is more than a match for that of her husband and creepy old Uncle Joe. Just ‘cos she’s hanging out with the bums doesn’t mean that she has to look like one, y’all.

Michelle, as with all other politicians plus spouses, is obviously not feeling the recession’s pinch (or is it a depression? Are we allowed to call it that yet?).

Unlike the rest of us, money just seems to be given to Michelle, regardless of trifling matters such as working to earn it.

Please do tell, Michelle: what is your secret?

While his rhetoric in this attached video is far more subtle than usual, I believe his message is clear. He is portraying Michelle Obama as the anti-Hillary – someone who is staying away from policy and is “by choice,” according to him, assuming a more classically feminine background role of tilling her victory garden, in designer jeans, of course, and visiting with cabinet staff, federal employees and military families – a good will ambassador for her husband, as it were. He points out that Mrs. Obama is a very intelligent, educated woman who is “choosing” this background role for herself, rather than being more ambitious. This seems an odd contradiction for a woman who is always out in public making reference to the fact that she isn’t getting paid for her work as First Lady.

There is nothing wrong with her behaving in a more docile fashion, of course, if it truly is her choice. Uh, this is a very outspoken woman and after her disastrous “for the first time in my life I am truly proud of my country” remarks,” I would venture to say her handlers started doing a lot of the choosing for her. Matthews compares her to Jackie O and says that it does not hurt that she is “stunning.” He also, as per usual manages a dig at the Clintons, saying they never understood the larger image they represented to the American public, but the Obama’s do. Yes, the $500,000 pizza party seemed to send a very healthy message indeed, Chris.

And judging by Mr. Matthews past Hardball performances and his book “Life’s A Campaign” in which he talks about “winning the girl of his dreams,” as if she were a cupie doll in the window, it is obvious that he revels in Michelle Obama’s behavior because it reflects the role he feels comfortable seeing an intelligent woman assume – one of quiet, steadfast support to her spouse, somewhere in the background. I hate to give the mouth breathing blowhard Matthews any oxygen but since his panel indicates the First Lady has 79% popularity thus far, many out there must agree with him.

Whether one likes Michelle Obama or not, there is no doubt she is an intelligent, outspoken, educated person who is being over-handled with these constant makeovers, full time make-up artist and the fashion plate image. The last photograph I saw of her was advertising her new “softer” eyebrows and huge false eyelashes. If you’ve ever tried wearing false eyelashes this size, it is not unlike trying to open and close your eyes with feather dusters attached to them. Okay. Whatever works for you and your style guru, Michelle.

After the vilification Hillary received in her campaign for the Presidency, and her “ambition,” perhaps President Obama’s staff got the message that they’d better keep Michelle under wraps as much as possible. Matthews’ panel seemed to be subtly indicating that after her early campaign booboos and sound bites, their senior staff was not going to allow another such mistake. Certainly they have done a wonderful job in protecting her from being vilified as Hillary was when she was First Lady. And what do they think is the best way to do it? Put an apron on her and let her play with garden implements. Is anyone buying this image? This is a successful working woman with two kids. A garden trowel? M’kay.

It just seems to me the White House is attempting to package her as a 50’s mom. There is something downright regressive about the image they wish to paint, relentlessly “softening” her for the American public. Even her rhetoric out in public is more soft spoken and yielding, even emotional.

But why does she require softening? That is the more important question. Chris seems to make issue of the fact that she is deferential enough not to pick a policy issue of her own and go after it. This is obviously a smart woman – why wouldn’t we want her to pick up and run with the ball of a cause near and dear to her heart. After all, during these terrible tough economic times, with two wars abroad, the President can use all the help he can get.

I wonder what your reaction is to this. What role do you think a First Lady should assume? Clearly she is not an elected official so I don’t expect her to necessarily push a policy, though she can be pushing a cause. I do worry however that she is being made to appear as submissive rather than an equal.

Upon Hillary Clinton’s appointment as Secretary of State, Matthews indicated that “her spirit seemed to be with Obama” and she has “sublimated her ego.” I see. He only feels comfortable with a woman when she is submissive to a man.

No wonder he finds Michelle’s new image so appealing

This brings me to the question of who is in charge as the leader in the White House when Bo is around. It appears that Bo is.

I have been forced to endure a plethora of photos of Bo with his new family.

Bo supposedly spent a month with a trainer. Not bad for a “rescue … cough cough, cough.

The thing is, if Bo spent a month with a trainer, then someone needs to explain why it is that Bo is dragging everybody’s ass around the White House grounds in just about every photo taken.

There can only be one of two explanations: Bo went to a trainer who did nothing with him……..or Bo got to Pennsyvania Avenue and figured out that the rest of his pack are weak and there isn’t a real leader among them, so he’s the Leader now. Therefore, all past training no longer counts. And nobody has trained Bo’s people on how to handle a dog. That’s a huge part of dog training. Mostly, the trainer trains you. If you don’t know what to do, the dog will do what he thinks is best. Thus, Bo is now officially in charge. That isn’t going to go over very well for very long over in Narcissist Land. Witness, Bo walking Michelle in the above photo. And Bo isn’t anywhere near full grown yet. Bo is too much dog for the Obamas and that’s an understatement.

I love my dog. I know her body language. She is always telling me something. She looks at me. I know when she’s happy and I know when she has a problem. I take her to parades. I take her to romp in the woods. I run with her. She comes to the pet store with me and picks out her toys. I bring her to the homes of friends and she is always welcome. I want her around and she knows it. She has a half dozen different barks, from “I need a walk now” to “Something wicked this way walks, let me handle this”–and I know what every one of those barks means. When I am with her, I feel safe. When she is with me, she feels safe. If you come to my yard you will invariably run into some toys, a beach ball and a rubber pool. My dog and I never stop training one another. We know each other. She knows her pack of people and other pets, and she knows her position in that pack. She knows who the Leader is and that would be Me. One command from me, softly spoken, is her command. She protects her family, she loves her family and always, she knows what is expected of her. And we know what she expects from us. It’s not that I’m a superior dog owner. It’s just that I took the time to learn, and to give my dog what she needs–and in turn she returns the favor. We have a relationship. In other words, I really wanted a dog when I got her. That is why you will never see my dog dragging me across the lawn while I choke her with her leash.

You see, dogs don’t really much care if you are famous or not. Bo doesn’t even know or care that he just got shipped to the President of the United States. What’s more, if he did know, he wouldn’t give a crap. He’s not interested in photo ops either. He’s interested in being part of a family. He’s interested in being The Family Dog. He’s interested in being The Family Portuguese Water Dog, in fact. I’m looking at all these shots of Bo and I can honestly say by the body language of everyone concerned, Bo included, that Bo is about to have a problem. Bo also lives where people can disappear him. He could land alone in his Kennel a lot more than he wants to. Since he is showing leadership over the people in the White House, this isn’t going to go over well. Bo will be blamed that he doesn’t have a leader and became one instead. He will never sleep on somebody’s bed if this keeps up. Not that any of us envisions that he will ever be allowed to do that anyways.

Bo is going to be a big boy. And at six months, allowing him to drag people around on a leash is not a good idea. He won’t forget how to do this when he’s an adult. In other words, if these two quasi-adults think they are being dragged now, they haven’t seen anything yet. This is going to be a problem for Bo. He’s just being a dog. He’s got no leader, so somebody has to do the job. Still, he’s going to want to be with His Family. He’s going to want to go on those trips where there is water. He is, after all, a Portuguese Water Dog. That’s why Teddy has PWDs. Teddy takes his dogs with him on the yacht and on the sail boat and Teddy is a water person. This is a seafaring dog, strong-willed, every energetic and in need of some adventure. This is a dog that won’t adapt to being an ornament. He is not for the limp of wrist dog owner who has never had a dog in his life. You can tell that Teddy really loves his dogs and is in control. On the other paw, do we really envision Bo going along on Obama vacations where Dad can surf, choking and dragging everyone into the water? Really? We are talking about two people who have never owned a dog. That in itself is kind of strange, but then again, I am an animal lover. I can’t even imagine living into your mid -40s and never having lived with a pet. If you haven’t gotten around to it by then, you are just not a pet person. I also have never known a person who wanted a dog so badly that it took over a year to actually get one.

Bo’s only hope will be the Obama girls. But then again, if they are never given the opportunity to be Bo’s kids beyond the photo ops, then the bond will never occur. Malia looks like Bo’s Chance. She actually has a look of joy upon her face here. I must confess that there is something about this young lady that I like. She should be sent with Bo to a trainer where she can learn to be Bo’s Person and Leader and Companion. That dog will want to sleep at the foot of her bed. Somehow, I don’t envision Michelle and Barack , two people who never had the desire to have a dog until they moved to the White House, going for that, but maybe Malia will intervene.

Poor Bo. Unless Malia intervenes, in a few weeks when all the photo ops are over and the publicity wears off, Bo will be seen walking along the back acre with his Kennel Master, hired to feed and walk him. He will be trotted out for occasional photo ops and drag his owners along again. But you see, dogs don’t lie. Up to this point, I haven’t seen a single shot of Bo trying to kiss anybody. His tail is always down. He’s not looking at anyone’s face. He’s chomping at the bit, straining at the leash, contorting himself to get moving away. He looks like he just wants to get away from everybody and run. I see no shots of anybody on the ground actually playing with Bo. There are no toys hanging around in the shots. Just Bo, dragging one of his pack along.

Bo is an ornament. Bo isn’t going to like that. Bo should have been a goldfish. This is one time I wish to be proved wrong. Not for them, but for Bo–and maybe even for Malia.

——————————————————————————————————————

As a side note, I thought you might all like to know about two of those Presidents Barack Obama fancies himself similar to–and their pets.

Here’s FDR with his dog Fala. Fala went everywhere FDR went, long trips, short trips, meetings. Every morning, Fala was delivered a bone on the President’s breakfast tray. Falah slept in her own special chair at the foot of FDR’s bed. FDR truly loved animals. You can bet he had pets long before he became President.

Here is JFK and family with part of their menagerie of pets. The Kennedys were animal lovers long before they moved to the White House.

There is one President who is a bit of a disappointment in the pet department. Harry Truman was given the cocker spaniel puppy as a gift. “Feller” didn’t fare so well and the American public let Harry know just how awful they thought he was when it came to “Feller”. Not a lucky White House dog at all. According to the Presidential Pets Museum:

Feller, a beautiful blond Cocker Spaniel, was an unsolicited 1947 Christmas gift to President Truman. The Trumans elected to give the puppy to the White House physician, Brigadier General Wallace Graham. Dog lovers around the country attacked the President as being anti-canine. Dr. Graham, soon tiring of the press and publicity, decided to get rid of the dog. He had Truman’s Naval Aide, Adm. James K. Foskett, take Feller to Shangri-La (Camp David). As the camp was not open to the press this seemed to end the Feller story, until now. The Admiral left Feller with the chief-in-charge, Quartermaster Chief George A. Poplin. When Poplin was transferred, Charles G. Ross, President Truman’s secretary, came to camp and told Poplin to leave the dog there. Poplin was relieved as chief-in-charge by Damage Control Chief Ralph O. Loften, who in turn was relieved by Chief Boatswain Robert W. Lyle.

In 1953, while Chief Lyle was being transferred to Italy, he sought permission from Naval Aide Admiral Robert L. Dennison to take Feller. Permission was granted, provided that no mention be made that the dog once belonged to Truman. Robert gave Feller to his father, Archie Otis Lyle, who owned a farm just outside Greenfield, Ohio. There Feller lived for many happy years until he died of old age.

Not good, Harry. Not good at all. This story forever changed my entire opinion of you.

The Hill

Note: For those with no sense of humor or those with an MA over CA times 100 that is lower than three digits, the following piece is satire.

*********

A recent swarm of honey bees in Michelle’s Victory Garden led to a Homeland Security investigation to determine if the bees are Republican bees. The ornery bees were not carrying any bee signs, but they were rather hostile and therefore the potential that they were Right Wing Extremist Bees led to the intense investigation. Homeland Security Director Napolitano even made an appearance encased in netting, which seemed appropriate on so many levels.

Homeland security swarmed upon the swarm and a bee-swat team was dispatched. Three of the bees stung Homeland Security agents and were immediately arrested and charged with treason.

Luckily, Charlie Brandt, the White House carpenter (they have one of those?), is also a beekeeper who will be looking after two hives in Michelle Obama’s White House garden. Decked out in protective gear, Brandt coaxed the queen bee into a cardboard box. Most of the worker bees dutifully followed.

They followed the Queen Bee. Now that’s leadership. That’s why they had to kill her and blame her for the entire incident.

It was not revealed whether or not these bees were Carpenter Bees, but since the White House is fully exempt from hiring Union Carpenters, it doesn’t matter and the White House Carpenter has no grievance over the demand that he manage bees.

The Queen bee was killed, but she was just a female so nobody feels very bad about that. It had to be done. Obviously she was a superior leader and we can’t have female leaders getting any traction even in the bee world. That would make all the mediocre male bees feel inadequate even though that’s exactly what they are, considering they can’t make a single decision without their Queen.

The remaining bees were finally released when it was discovered that they weren’t Republicans at all. They were only harmless illegal undocumented foreign worker bees that had come here to take jobs away from Imperialist American bees.

ACORN was called in to force the remaining bees to register Democratic, and the bees were relocated into a nearby foreclosed home where they are currently wandering aimlessly because they lost their Queen. They were also given social security numbers of dead Americans and a number at the Department of Social Services to call in the morning. Walmart has also inquired as to whether they care to be employed in their Chinese honey factory and 12 members of congress have attempted to hire them for pollination positions at their palatial estates.

The Taliban sent a group letter to the White House praising them for the execution of the Woman Bee.

Your opinions are sought in two polls below, and there are TWO UPDATES:
Which colleges did this yokel go to? Anybody? You are so correct! What percentage of body mass does “white guilt” occupy in this guy, do you think? REALLY? That much? Of course, CNN chose his IReport for publication! It’s so touching, and, um, uh, forward-looking.

Rep. Paul Ryan, get goin’, guy. You’re real presidential timber with the brains and the actual experience!

After all, the American people always choose a person of substance over a symbol. Right?

There are hundreds of resources on the Internet, and countless books and seminar tapes, that advise that one — during a job interview or in any formal setting outside one’s own home — never cross one’s legs. The feet are to be flat on the floor with the legs comfortable resting together.

See the person on the right for how to do it. Do not follow the example of the person to your left:

Photo: Daily Mail

This photograph was sent by a fellow NoQuarter writer who asked, “Does she have to show so much of her thigh?”

The rise of the skirt and the surely unintended display of the thighs is one of the reasons why all experts advise that one does not cross one’s legs in any public setting outside the home.

By the way, don’t you think that the dress worn by the person to your left looks quite suitable for an early evening cocktail party? And don’t you find that the Dior ensemble worn by the person to your right is “quiet” — i.e., it does not call attention to itself? And should not all clothing worn in both formal and professional settings be “quiet,” and not intended to cause the eye to rivet to the clothing but instead to the person?

Here are but a very few of the experts on how to sit properly. They were randomly chosen. You can find hundreds more via Google’s search engine.

“BODY TALK,” by Carol Kinsey Goman, Ph.D, NonVerbalAdvantage.com:

Don’t Cross Legs:

While some people may think that crossing legs shows that you are comfortable and relaxed, this is not the time or place for crossing legs. Crossing legs is seen as especially inappropriate for women as well. Keep both feet on the floor and refrain from shifting leg positions. You will have plenty of time to stretch and cross your legs when the interview is over and you’re behind your own desk.

“Interview Body Language That Sends the Right Message“:

Be aware of the interview body language message your legs are giving. A lot of leg movement is both distracting and indicates nervousness. Resting one leg or ankle on top of your other knee makes you look too casual and comes across as arrogant. Crossing your legs high up conveys a defensive attitude in the one-on-one context of a job interview. Crossing them at the ankles or placing both feet flat on the floor conveys a confident and professional look during the job interview.

“How One Should Sit During The Job Interview?“:

• Crossing your legs at the thighs: Too familiar, especially at the beginning of an interview.
• Leaning forward too much: May make some interviewers feel uncomfortable, especially if you’re physically big and talk loudly.
Tips on good sitting practice include:
• Straight and upright body: This is a neutral sitting position that interviewers expect to see.

“Proper attire and etiquette for men and women“:

Wear a Suit – Although women have come a long way in the world of work, skirt suits are still preferred. There is an old saying “Dress the position you want, not the one you have.” Many corporate offices follow the professional look their customers are accustomed to working with and placing confidence in. Longstanding colors such as Blue, Black, Gray, or Brown are the color choice of many executive champions.

The trick is to look conservative and professional. Wear an appropriate length skirt, avoid tight skirts and mini-skirts. Let quality of your suit, followed by the strength of your words to impress your potential employer.

Blouses – A cotton or silk blouse in a neutral color with a simple collar is fine. Do not wear a sleeve-less blouse, just in case you have to take off your jacket. Most conservative offices do not allow sleeveless blouses as proper dress attire. Be sure, to ask about the corporate culture of an office prior rushing out to the interview. With the rise and fall of dot.com companies, much has changed. Make sure your power blouse should fit comfortably, and not appear to be tight, wrinkled or distracting due to loud colors.

In this photo, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton provides a perfect example of both attire and the positioning of one’s feet and legs:

As for the United States of America’s president? Well, perhaps he can sit like that at Camp David while he watches his beloved sports games. But at a formal tea service? Oh my.

See also, this book’s section: Global business etiquette By Jeanette S. Martin, Lillian H. Chaney

Special thanks to G. and P. for the photographs. And thanks to G. for the video update below.

UPDATE: Here’s the title of the EUX.TV video: “Is Michelle Obama pregnant?” My goodness.

And that bow! Isn’t that something?!

This video, which I do not believe we saw on American TV, comes from EUX.TV, which is “an independent webtv channel that reports on European affairs and EU politics.”

EUX.TV is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium.

Here is the accompanying text:

After the G20 in London, the NATO meeting on the French-German border, the Obama’s travelled to the Czech Republic for an official EU-US summit.

Obama and his wife Michelle listen to a Czech band at the presidential palace in the Czech capital Prague. Obama is in Prague for a summit with the European Union later on Sunday. The Czech republic currently holds the rotating EU presidency.

YES! The EUX.TV page is titled, “Is Michelle Obama pregnant?”

Update #2: Just in case EUX.TV stops by, we want them to know that Michelle’s stomach looked the same on January 20, 2009:

March Madness turned into April Fools in the battle for the No Quarter Trophy. The Trophy is awarded annually to the person you decide is the Biggest Ass on The American Political Landscape. While exciting play and buzzer beaters are usually the norm this time of the year, the Elite Eight was blow-out city (which is also the name of one of Barney Frank’s favorite watering holes.) Not only were none of the national quarterfinal match-ups close, but the winners had these contests wrapped up moments after the opening tap. VOTE BELOW!.

It certainly seemed like the tournament selection committee knew their business as three number one seeds have made it to the semi-finals. The only non-number 1 to crash the party is the red hot Donna Brazile. The number four seed in the At Large Bracket humiliated the second seeded Oprah Winfrey 75-25. That was the closest of the Regional Finals.

Oprah’s size and weight advantage were just no match for the feisty Brazile who showed during the primary season that she knows how to play and win dirty. Donna now gets a crack at Keith Olbermann who had his way with Andrew Sullivan (and Andrew loved it) in the Media Bracket final. Olbermann was the leading vote getter in the entire round and racked up an 85-15 win. Keith was a huge favorite to make it into the championship game when this tournament started, but no one should be betting against Brazile at this point.

Over on the side of the brackets. Barack Obama easily disposed of the First Lady in the White House Regional Final. The Messiah was an 80-20 winner. It was a disappointing performance for Michelle, whose makeover as “Mom in Chief” seems to be softening the hard as nails image that propelled her through the election season to a number two seed. Barack showed his sharp elbows, when despite the fact he was winning this one going away, he bowed to a Saudi Prince just to run the score up and remind everyone why he was the overall top seed in the tournament. Barry has yet to be tested in this tournament, but may have his hands full with Nancy Pelosi. The number one seed in the Capitol Hill bracket destroyed number three seed Barney Frank 85-15. After the game, Frank immediately made himself eligible for federal bailout funds. Pelosi has faced the stiffest competition so far, already beating Christopher Dodd, Claire McCaskill and Barney. If anyone can take a piece out of the Community Organizer in Chief, it’s Madam Speaker.

So without, further ado. Lets get to the voting. Just pick the person you think is the Bigger Ass in each match.

NATIONAL SEMI FINAL NUMBER 1
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

NATIONAL SEMI FINAL NUMBER 2
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post's poll.

The Polls are open until Tuesday Night at 8:00 PM EDT. Join us live on No Quarter Radio, Tuesday night at 9:00 PM for the Nocturnal Warrior Show. We will review the Final Four contests and handicap the National Championship game. Feel free to post your comments as to why you voted as you did below. Have fun!!!!!

It’s always ABC’s Jake Tapper who gets the essential details (h/t B). Besides a great many photos of the Queen’s visits to the U.S. in 1957 and 2007, there were these, because surely the Queen must be dying to hear and see “The One”:

• Photos from President Obama’s Inauguration
• Audio of then-state senator Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, and
• Audio of President Obama 2009 Inauguration Address

There was also this amusing exchange between Prince Philip and President Obama, via Mirror.co.Uk:

Prince Philip nearly put his foot in it on meeting Barack Obama last night.

The president told him: “I had breakfast with the Prime Minister. I had meetings with the Chinese, the Russians, David Cameron.”

The prince replied: “Can you tell the difference between them?” Observers said they believed he was referring to the meetings, not the people.

Prince Philip, as you may recall, is a bit infamous for not being terribly P.C.

We who partook of television news today were told countless times that one NEVER touches the Queen. Well … reports the BBC:

Michelle Obama has frequently displayed a down-to-earth approach during the trip.

On meeting the Queen, she followed formality by curtseying, but later, during a reception, she showed her more casual, affectionate side by putting her arm around Her Majesty to hug her.

It is reported that the Queen was so taken by Mrs Obama she even said: “Now we’ve met, will you please keep in touch?”

I’m sure.

Then there was the BIG question of the day: Would Michelle bare her arms? Everyone expected it wouldn’t quite be proper protocol. Nevertheless, as we all saw when she and the president arrived at 10 Downing Street for dinner, here she was:

Here’s one more photo from the BBC:

I have a question. How did the president of the United States end up in the second row? And why is Brazil’s President Lula seated to the Queen’s right?

Lastly, here’s the serious stuff, with the “blame the U.S.” meme going strong, adopted by PM Gordon Brown because he’s teetering on the edge of an abyss and will use the ploy if it wins him a percentage point or two in the polls:

UPDATE: Here’s a CNN video about Michelle’s style. There are things I could say. I’ll recall a memory from my teen years: I vividly recall my mother, and her friends, emphasizing to me how to walk, and we girls would often practice with a book balanced on our heads.

WE ARE LIVE NOW! CLICK ON THE ARROW TO JOIN US!

Come on by and let your hair down. You’ll be free to RANT about what you REALLY think about Michelle and Barack’s destruction of the once-unparalleled position of the United States as the globe’s clear superpower, both real and symbolically. I, for one, can’t take it anymore. Be sure to share what you’ve been saying and e-mailing to friends and family. Copy and paste any especially Obama-damning e-mails or blog comments you’ve written.