Just Wondered/Michelle Obama's Thesis ?s

[Laura]

Don’t you remember these Laura Bush smear attempts?

2000: her fatal automobile accident when she was a teenager.

2004: her comments about the Kerry swift boat ads.



.

I felt bad for her about the accident being rehashed, I'm sure that wasn't pleasant. I don't remember about the Kerry comments, though. Memory must be fuzzy today.

 

[bsnyder]

It's relevent especially when she's substituting for the candidate - giving stump speeches, which she does regularly.

 

[lilyv]

The very fact that they have hidden it contradicts your statement.

If a spouse is campaigning, actually going out on the stump and delivering speeches on behalf of Obama, which Michelle Obama is doing, then she has voluntarily placed herself in the political process, and that, rightly or wrongly, entails a lot of public scrutiny.

Well, it's wrong to demand she be treated as if she was a candidate. She's not.
Her husband, Barack is running for President.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Don’t you remember these Laura Bush smear attempts?

2000: her fatal automobile accident when she was a teenager.

2004: her comments about the Kerry swift boat ads.



.

I wasn't here in 2000 or 2004, but I would have defended Laura Bush in the same way. SHE WASN'T RUNNING.

 

[bsnyder]

I just looked up Cindy McCain's educational history. She has a master's in special education from USC. I'm sure everyone here who is so interested in Michelle Obama's thesis has read Cindy McCain's. Would you like to enlighten us as to what her thesis had to say?

Do Special Education masters write a thesis? I have no idea.

Is that USC, as in the Trojans, or USC as in the University of South Carolina?

 

[Charade]

It's wrong. Don't you agree? So why engage in it?

Maybe she shouldn't be out stumping for him.

I don't think it's wrong. Why should spouses get to say whatever they want without any scrutiny.

 

[DisneyMomOK]

Since you're back, I'll repeat my question - are you really going to use what a college essay written by a candidate's wife 20 years ago as criteria in who to vote for? Or are you just trying to stir up controversy?

Look, I feel strongly that, until their name appears on the ballot, a candidates wife should have a thing to do with picking who to vote for. But if Republican's really want to go down this path, and start to say that a candidates wife should influence people's vote, they better take a very, very long look at Cindy McCain first.

I have NEVER been registered as anything but an Independent (and that is over 3 decades). I actually have never voted for either major political party's candidate for POTUS; luckily, I have had other candidates that had platforms that (even though I knew they had no choice of winning) my vote seemed appropriate. However, this year might be different. And, if a candidate's spouse is IN MY OPINION going to be a voice to which he listens and relies on, I don't understand why it is inappropriate to question why in a sea of theses at Princeton, Ms. Obama's appears to be the only one restricted. And, if Ms. McCain appears as influential to her husband as Ms. Obama, I would like to see anything she has written, too.

 

[salmoneous]

It's relevent especially

Relevent how? Are you saying people should base their vote on something the candidates wife wrong on college 20 years ago, or you aren't. If it isn't something to base a vote on, how is it relevant?

 

[bsnyder]

And if Cindy McCain does have a thesis, I think we should have access to it also.

Really, though, I'm simply amazed at some of the responses here.

Are ya'll really as insecure about your candidate as this makes you appear? If so, I fear for you in the general election. This thesis thing is nothing, compared to the vetting and scrutiny that is to come.

Come on - have some HOPE in your candidate's ability to withstand the heat!

 

[smartestnumber5]

Then thesis's are useless. What's the point of pouring your heart and soul into something that may be meaningless and "not you" 20 years later?

Do people really feel like they "poured their heart and soul" into their BA theses? I don't feel that way at all about mine. I felt strongly about my topic, I enjoyed writing it, felt a great sense of accomplishment when I was done, and learned a great deal. But it's only been four years, and there are lots of things I'd change about it if I were doing it now; I don't feel that it represents me or my philosophical views anymore.

I think the point of writing a thesis--the reason that they exist in the first place--is the experience of independent research and writing. If you want to go on to post-college education you really need that experience and it helps to get into programs to have that credential on your CV. Other than that, I would think that for most people 20 years later a thesis is just a really long academic paper they once wrote.

 

[salmoneous]

And, if a candidate's spouse is IN MY OPINION going to be a voice to which he listens and relies on, I don't understand why it is inappropriate to question why in a sea of theses at Princeton, Ms. Obama's appears to be the only one restricted. And, if Ms. McCain appears as influential to her husband as Ms. Obama, I would like to see anything she has written, too.

Just for clarity - are you saying you are going to use what a candidates spouse said 20 years ago as a basis for picking who you will vote for? Or are you just saying it's OK to question it?

 

[Fitswimmer]

And if Cindy McCain does have a thesis, I think we should have access to it also.

Really, though, I'm simply amazed at some of the responses here.

Are ya'll really as insecure about your candidate as this makes you appear? If so, I fear for you in the general election. This thesis thing is nothing, compared to the vetting and scrutiny that is to come.

Come on - have some HOPE in your candidate's ability to withstand the heat!

I'm not insecure at all about the CANDIDATE.

 

[Maleficent13]

I don't think it's wrong. Why should spouses get to say whatever they want without any scrutiny.

Because they are separate people with separate opinions?

My one complaint with Laura Bush has always been: I believe she is an intelligent, educated woman with valid and possibly well reasoned opinions. Which she has subjucated in furtherance of her husband's career. That I personally do not agree with.

Of course, as always, YMMV.

 

[bsnyder]

Relevent how? Are you saying people should base their vote on something the candidates wife wrong on college 20 years ago, or you aren't. If it isn't something to base a vote on, how is it relevant?

I personally wouldn't. But people based their votes on any number of factors, or combination of factors.

To me, it's at least as relevant to base a vote on this as it is to base a vote simply because Barack Obama is black. And a whole heck of a lot of people appear to have done that already.

 

[salmoneous]

Come on - have some HOPE in your candidate's ability to withstand the heat!

I have cofidence in Obama's abilty to withstand the heat. Doesn't mean I shouldn't object to irrelvant personal attacks on a candidates wife, does it?

Do you think people should use what his wife wrote 20 years ago in a college essay in deciding whether or not to vote for Obama? Yes or no. If no, then all people are doing is trying to dig up things for the sake of attacking a candidates wife. I think that's wrong. Do you?

 

[Fitswimmer]

Do Special Education masters write a thesis? I have no idea.

Is that USC, as in the Trojans, or USC as in the University of South Carolina?

She's the spouse of a candidate. right? She delivers speeches for him, doesn't she? She's going to have influence on him should he win. Shouldn't we all know everything about her?

NOT...

 

[lilyv]

I personally wouldn't. But people based their votes on any number of factors, or combination of factors.

To me, it's at least as relevant to base a vote on this as it is to base a vote simply because Barack Obama is black. And a whole heck of a lot of people appear to have done that already.

*Sigh.*

 

[bsnyder]

I have cofidence in Obama's abilty to withstand the heat. Doesn't mean I shouldn't object to irrelvant personal attacks on a candidates wife, does it?

Do you think people should use what his wife wrote 20 years ago in a college essay in deciding whether or not to vote for Obama? Yes or no. If no, then all people are doing is trying to dig up things for the sake of attacking a candidates wife. I think that's wrong. Do you?

Why do you automatically assume people will attack? You haven't read the thesis.

If all spouses wives were off limits, in all campaigns, you'd have a point here. But they are not. Whether they SHOULD be is immaterial to the reality of our political climate. And to treat one candidate's spouse differently than another is wrong!

 

[wvrevy]

Really, though, I'm simply amazed at some of the responses here.

Are ya'll really as insecure about your candidate as this makes you appear? If so, I fear for you in the general election. This thesis thing is nothing, compared to the vetting and scrutiny that is to come.

Come on - have some HOPE in your candidate's ability to withstand the heat!

Bet and others, I'm assuming you missed my post. As one of the most vehement Obama supporters here (I think ) let me refresh what I said:

I don't like it either, and I'd have preferred if his campaign just said "here it is, but be sure to ask us to clarify anything you have a problem with" and released the thing. My guess is, it may have some inflammatory language in there regarding the racial politics of this country, and they knew that people like Rush and Hannity would then be parroting those lines every time they had the opportunity.

I really do understand both sides, and if we lived in less of a "gotcha!" political environment, I'd be a lot more disappointed that the Obamas chose this route. As the reality stands, though, I can't really blame them.

Does that help explain why I, at least, don't see this as a big deal?

 

[charlie,nj]

Man...if only there'd been this kind of outrage when Bush refused to release his own "military" records...or Cheney's Energy Task Force records...or, well, the dozens of other times this administration has refused to allow the public to know just about anything about just about anything.

So, a 20 year old black female college student wrote a paper at Harvard about intentional and unintentional racism she experienced while on campus at the overwhelmingly white school?

Speaking of releasing records here's an interesting piece:

If Bush Is Dumb...? - By Larry Elder


"Does anyone in America doubt," said former New York Times executive editor Howell Raines before the 2004 presidential election, "that [presidential candidate Sen. John] Kerry has a higher IQ than [President George W.] Bush? I'm sure the candidates' SATs and college transcripts would put Kerry far ahead."

And, on March 6, 2004, a New York Times article called the way Kerry thinks through problems "the mark of an intellectual who grasps the subtleties of issues, inhabits their nuances and revels in the deliberative process." The Los Angeles Times dismissed Bush's achievements, and editorialized that he became president only as a result of an "accident of birth and corruption of democracy."

Get it? See, Bush is a dunderhead, while Kerry positioned himself as the thinking man's alternative. Really?

After promising during the campaign and then refusing to do so, Kerry finally signed Form 180, which authorized the military to release all of his records. (One of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, John O'Neill, says the records are incomplete and mysteries still remain.) The recently released records appear to back up Kerry's account of his activities and injuries in Vietnam.

Why, then, didn't Kerry release his records during the campaign? After all, his refusal seemed like a cover-up. Now we know.

Kerry's military records also include his college grades. (The New Yorker printed Bush's grades in 1999, but Kerry consistently refused to release his.) It turns out that "dummy" and fellow Yalie George W. Bush made better grades than did brainy, intellectual John Kerry. Under Yale's grading system at the time Bush and Kerry attended, grades from 90 to 100 meant an A, 80 to 89 a B, 70 to 79 a C, and 60 to 69 a D. Kerry received five Ds, including four in his freshman year, with a D in political science! Bush, during his time at Yale, got one D, in astronomy. Overall, Kerry finished Yale with a cumulative score of 76. Bush finished with a score of 77. So who's the dummy?

Retired history professor Gaddis Smith taught both students, but only recalls Kerry. Smith remembered Kerry as a "good student." When informed, however, that Kerry received a 71 and 79 in Smith's history courses, the professor said, "Uh, oh. I thought he was [a] good student. Those aren't very good grades." Oh, what did the forgettable Bush get in history? 88.

Kerry and the Democrats clearly considered Bush stupid. During the campaign, when Bush injured himself by falling off his bicycle, Kerry snidely said, "Did the training wheels fall off?" And on 2004 election night, as the returns came in, a dejected Kerry said, "I can't believe I'm losing to this idiot."

What did some in the mainstream media make out of Kerry's now-released records?

A Boston Globe article began, "During last year's presidential campaign, John F. Kerry was the candidate often portrayed as intellectual and complex, while George W. Bush was the populist who mangled his sentences. But newly released records show that Bush and Kerry had a virtually identical grade average at Yale University four decades ago." The New York Times, too, ran a piece – on page 10 – about Kerry's grades. The Los Angeles Times, however, ran a page A-17 story, only about how Kerry's records refute allegations made by the Swift Boat Veterans. Not one word was printed about Kerry's grades! "The long-awaited documents," said the Los Angeles Times, "contained no bombshells ..." No bombshells?

A week after Kerry's grades were released, a Fox News poll found that only 27 percent of likely voters (about one in four) believed Bush had better grades in college, while 43 percent still believed Kerry had better grades. Does the contained-no-bombshells media play a role in voters' ignorance of current events?

Bush also performed better than Kerry on military intelligence tests. This came out during the presidential campaign. When Tom Brokaw told Kerry that Bush scored higher, the senator sniffed that, the night before the exam, he "must have been drinking."

After repeatedly implying that Bush lacked the intellectual goods, how could Sen. Kerry release his transcripts during the campaign? After all, what looks worse? A "brainy" intellectual who underperforms? Or the "dunce" who manages to outperform the "genius"?

In fact, Bush himself jokes about his mediocre grades. At the 2001 Yale commencement ceremony, the president said, "To those of you who received honors, awards and distinctions, I say, well done. And to the C students – I say, you, too, can be president of the United States." Can we expect similar self-deprecating humor from Kerry?

For what it's worth, Thomas Stanley, author of "The Millionaire Mind," says that most millionaires come from the ranks of B and C students. Their success comes from the "people skills" to manage, lead and inspire. That sounds like poor George W. He got elected and re-elected governor of Texas. And then elected and re-elected president of the United States.

Not bad ... for a "dummy."


.