Congrats to Michelle Obama

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by Sparklez1920

The point i was making was that they can continue to question his affiliations as they have been doing this election. Of course Rezko and Rev Wright are more questionable, but digging up a hazing incident from way back when can show this so called "Lack of Judgment" that Obama has and a pattern of questionable affiliations

I wasn't trying to say the repubs dug those up, but it wouldn't surprise me if the repubs dug up those old hazing incidents and tried to link his campaign with it

Folks are already speculating about it right here

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dc/20...om_melody.html

Could you point out for us just where in the Washington Post blog is there even a mention or speculation about hazing?
Or are you pointing out the comment section of it?
And if so, you should read the comments in the NYT's blog as well. Sort of the same, just better written. Or is it written better?

Originally Posted by jon1856

Could you point out for us just where in the Washington Post blog is there even a mention or speculation about hazing?
Or are you pointing out the comment section of it?
And if so, you should read the comments in the NYT's blog as well. Sort of the same, just better written. Or is it written better?

Yes, im talking about the comments section, which is why i said FOLKS are speculating about it

And the FOLKS, are the ones who are going to the voting polls in November

*written better

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by Sparklez1920

Yes, I'm talking about the comments section, which is why i said FOLKS are speculating about it

And the FOLKS, are the ones who are going to the voting polls in November

*written better

Your POV may be right, may be correct.
In MVHO/POV, many times the "folks" that write into the comment sections of stories and blogs are even worse than some of the trolls we get here in GC. Thus take a great deal of it with a large grain of salt.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by jon1856

Could you point out for us just where in the Washington Post blog is there even a mention or speculation about hazing?
Or are you pointing out the comment section of it?

From the comments section:

"If AKA is so inclusive and by virtue of their tax status MUST NOT be biased for or against a particular party, I must ask, did AKA extend the same honorary invitation to Cindy McCain? Also isnt AKA the sorority where two young women lost their lives to hazing? As I write anohter young woman is recuperating from disabling injuries due to hazing by AKAs. Lets all write Obama and ask why Michelle Obama is willing to join this elitist exclusionary group whose members were featured in Mink coats as a form of status."

Posted by: Rita | July 14, 2008 9:05 PM

[rhoyaltempest]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

From the comments section:

"If AKA is so inclusive and by virtue of their tax status MUST NOT be biased for or against a particular party, I must ask, did AKA extend the same honorary invitation to Cindy McCain? Also isnt AKA the sorority where two young women lost their lives to hazing? As I write anohter young woman is recuperating from disabling injuries due to hazing by AKAs. Lets all write Obama and ask why Michelle Obama is willing to join this elitist exclusionary group whose members were featured in Mink coats as a form of status."

Posted by: Rita | July 14, 2008 9:05 PM

Why did you post this woman's "under"educated drivel here? She is an example of someone who thinks she knows everything about what she speaks...only she only knows some or part of it. Go back and read the comments from members of the NPHC which address everything in her "under"educated comments. I have to say my D9 brothers and sisters handle her quite well.

Or ask direct questions, if the answers are what you seek.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

Why did you post this woman's "under"educated drivel here?

Because, as should have been obvious from the way that I quoted Jon in my post before quoting the drivel, I wasn't giving any credence to the drivel, nor was I asking any questions or seeking information. I was responding to Jon's specific question:

Originally Posted by jon1856

Could you point out for us just where in the Washington Post blog is there even a mention or speculation about hazing?
Or are you pointing out the comment section of it?

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Because, as should have been obvious from the way that I quoted Jon in my post before quoting the drivel, I wasn't giving any credence to the drivel, nor was I asking any questions or seeking information. I was responding to Jon's specific question:

I figured thats why you quoted his question

[jon1856]

^^^^^^^^While I truly do understand all of the above postings, just wish to point out that my question was originally about the hazing comment that was made. And that part while never answered was perhaps just perhaps corrected.
And my guestion about location of comment was also answered by the OP.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Because, as should have been obvious from the way that I quoted Jon in my post before quoting the drivel, I wasn't giving any credence to the drivel, nor was I asking any questions or seeking information. I was responding to Jon's specific question:

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

Why did you post this woman's "under"educated drivel here? She is an example of someone who thinks she knows everything about what she speaks...only she only knows some or part of it. Go back and read the comments from members of the NPHC which address everything in her "under"educated comments. I have to say my D9 brothers and sisters handle her quite well.

Or ask direct questions, if the answers are what you seek.

While i agree with what you are saying, you have to remember, she and others who have those opinions are the folks who are going to the voting poll

It may not be right, but it is what people will begin to perceive. Nov. 5th, AKA shoulda inducted her into their sorority. I sincerely hope it doesnt cause problems in the media, however, folks will form their opinions about this issue

[rhoyaltempest]

Originally Posted by Sparklez1920

While i agree with what you are saying, you have to remember, she and others who have those opinions are the folks who are going to the voting poll

It may not be right, but it is what people will begin to perceive. Nov. 5th, AKA shoulda inducted her into their sorority. I sincerely hope it doesnt cause problems in the media, however, folks will form their opinions about this issue

I agree with you also...should've waited until after the election. Some people are just waiting for a reason (even a small one) to not vote for Obama.

The sad part is that all of these "opinions" may be out there for nothing since Michelle will likely not become a member if she is insisting on "non-exclusive" membership.

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

I agree with you also...should've waited until after the election. Some people are just waiting for a reason (even a small one) to not vote for Obama.

The sad part is that all of these "opinions" may be out there for nothing since Michelle will likely not become a member if she is insisting on "non-exclusive" membership.

Tru Indeed. I hate the fact that people look for the smallest things in order to not vote for him. Silly. Just say, "Well, i dont like N*****'s"

But we have to see what she meant by the non-exclusive comment. She may have just meant that she would like to work with us all. Maybe her spokesperson said it wrong. But all in all, Greeks are wondering about it, so damage control needs to come quick