DiscussMormonism.com

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50144220n
"During an interview with Burlington, Vt. CBS affiliate WCAX, first lady Michelle Obama described herself as a "busy single mother" ...."

Her Freudian slip reveals how delusional she really is....oh if every single hard working mother had no real living expenses and a household income exceeding 6 million dollars over the past few years.
The arrogance is becoming trite.
I dare to say their popularity has little to do with substance and only relies on style (ie Bangs)....
opinion?

Just out of curiosity, do you have this same seething level of envy and resentment of everybody in the top 1%, or does it only come out for blacks in the top 1%?

subgenius wrote:opinion?

I don't care.

Criticizing a politician for a slip of the tongue is just dumb. These people give hundreds of interviews and deliver hundreds of speeches every year, of course things like this will happen. Aren't there enough legitimate things to criticize our government for without going into this stuff?

subgenius wrote:I dare to say their popularity has little to do with substance and only relies on style (ie Bangs)....
opinion?

With that in mind, maybe the Republicans can find a candidate with some style next time?

Style v. Substance is a ridiculous bifurcation. To over-simplify: style is part of substance and substance is part of style.

Morley wrote:Style v. Substance is a ridiculous bifurcation. To over-simplify: style is part of substance and substance is part of style.

i disagree...that is a persistent belief of most Americans that eventually subsides.
The 2-for-1 mentality, or "duality of man" mantra is over-played.

Style can most certainly exist without substance and vis-a-vis...it is precisely why we have two different words for them.

subgenius wrote:

Morley wrote:Style v. Substance is a ridiculous bifurcation. To over-simplify: style is part of substance and substance is part of style.

i disagree...that is a persistent belief of most Americans that eventually subsides.
The 2-for-1 mentality, or "duality of man" mantra is over-played.

Style can most certainly exist without substance and vis-a-vis...it is precisely why we have two different words for them.

I'm curious.

Which parts of the written Declaration of Independence are style and which parts are substance? How about of Michelangelo's David? Or the delivery of Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech? Or of Frank Lloyd Wright's "Fallingwater"?

I'd be genuinely interested in your analysis.

subgenius wrote:

Morley wrote:Style v. Substance is a ridiculous bifurcation. To over-simplify: style is part of substance and substance is part of style.

i disagree...that is a persistent belief of most Americans that eventually subsides.
The 2-for-1 mentality, or "duality of man" mantra is over-played.

Style can most certainly exist without substance and vis-a-vis...it is precisely why we have two different words for them.

This is from a person who claims to be an "extremely successful architect".

So Michelle Obama says "busy single mother" and then immediately corrects herself to say "busy working mother." An obvious truth if there ever was one.

And subgenius, who has stated in the past that he hates her physical appearance because she looks like "a female Patrick Ewing"... yeah, that guy... he decides he's going to spin this incident as if it represents some profound psychoanalytical truth about the woman.

Raise your hand if you're surprised.

Again, these folks on the Right prove every day why they've already excused themselves from the table of civil, intellectual discourse.

Though it is hilarious to point out the hypocrisy of Republican resentment of people with money. To suggest Michelle Obama didn't really work her way through life, while giving birth to two beautiful children, is to reveal just how committed to the bubble you really are.