No, it is ridiculous. And, frankly, a bit creepy, coming as it does from from a "journalist":
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.
And some people wonder why major newspapers are struggling? Has The Washington Post become People magazine? Oh, sure, it's in the "Style" section, but perhaps it should have been in the "Religion" section, filed under "Idol Worship/Secular Spirituality". By the way, I wish Quinn would have mentioned the identity of the "prominent theologian". Any guesses?
Also, what does it say of Quinn and Co. that they think Michelle Obama is a "new kind of woman" when, in fact, millions and millions of women before her have been "young, strong, vigorous, intelligent, accomplished, sexual, powerful, embracing and, most of all, loving"?
I also have a quibble with this statement: "She also has a husband who is facing more crises than any president we have had in more than half a century." An argument can be made, I suppose, for the veracity of that statement, but it does not stand easily as an assumption. What about Ronald Reagan in January of 1980, facing a horrible economy, the fallout of the disastrous Seventies, the bazillion messes created by Jimmy "The Sweater" Carter, the Evil Empire and the super chilly Cold War, the Iran hostage situation, the disco era, etc., etc.?
It's all very constitutional Carl. Doesn't the Second Amendment enshrine the right to "bare arms?" I could be mistaken.
Posted by: LJ | Sunday, May 10, 2009 at 04:41 PM
LOL, LJ. I should have known the Constitution was written for Michelle Obama, the first woman to ever be young, have a degree, have a job, and have kids.
Posted by: Carl E. Olson | Sunday, May 10, 2009 at 04:54 PM
Shows the hypocrisy in how Michelle is adored while Sarah Palin was vilified. Wasn't Sarah also "young, strong, vigorous, intelligent, accomplished, sexual, powerful, embracing and, most of all, loving?" Where's her "Happy Mother's Day" balloon?
Posted by: gsk | Sunday, May 10, 2009 at 07:05 PM
That's a fairly revealing insight into the levels of ignorance and stupidity that voted for this unknown, untested, banana-republic kleprocrat; and that would award an unmerited doctoral to himself (Quis Ut Deus).
We will all suffer the unnecessary hells that will descend on our country through all this rancid asininity.
I pity intellectuals. They believe crap that is so stupid that only another intellectual could believe it.
Posted by: T. Shaw | Sunday, May 10, 2009 at 07:40 PM
I'm a foreigner so my opinion won't count come election time, but I believed then, and still do, that Sarah Palin is outstanding. Oh, I know, she made some ' faux pas' when discussing Foreign Policy but a woman who has a baby who is disabled and then praises God for him, when she could have had him put to death, who shows that much courage, who shepherds her daughter through so much and takes a hammering for doing so, who speaks eloquently and courteously and refuses to condemn fellow Republicans who attempted to 'scape-goat' her for John McCain's defeat and who is so elegant( I admit it, I think she is drop-dead gorgeous ). Michelle Obama? Not in the same class.
Posted by: Dr John James | Monday, May 11, 2009 at 02:40 AM
Apparently Michelle Obama has been unable to practice law in Illinois since 1993. Here is link:
https://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=387071669
And then there is the question of which passport BHO traveled under when he went to Pakistan in 1981. Could not have been US, so was it British or Indonesian?
But no matter - his wife is a powerful, loving mother. Why wasn't Sarah so honored? Because she is (fill in the blank- you know the drill).
Posted by: A Mauldin | Monday, May 11, 2009 at 07:38 AM
Ah yes! The EVIL that is disco! Alas, it was short-lived, but was eventually rivaled by nearly two decades of rap/hip-hop from '89-'09. UGH!
Posted by: Trubador | Monday, May 11, 2009 at 11:34 AM
I would guess that Fr. Richard McBrien was the prominent theologian in question.
-Theo
Posted by: TDJ | Monday, May 11, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Spare us, O Lord, from this type of idolatry! I remember very well how Jacqueline Kennedy was admired for her sense of style, her re-decoration of the White House, her support of the arts and culture, etc. Never do I remember this sort of weirdness... Yes, Mrs. Obama is in good condition, attractive, a good Mom, etc., but puh-leeze ... Ms. Quinn goes way overboard in her article. It's almost nauseating, and makes me wonder what the (*&^%$% Sally Quinn was thinking! Or was she? ...
Posted by: Patricia Gonzalez | Monday, May 11, 2009 at 04:01 PM
BY GUM! How could Ronald Reagan survive the disco era! Forget the KGB and SALT II, those were easy... The real problem started when you tried to shake the melody of "Staying Alive" off your brain... OH NO! I infected myself again with it! AAAAGGGHHH!!!
Posted by: Disco Casualty | Monday, May 11, 2009 at 09:12 PM
The Iran hostage situation was concluded as of Reagan's inauguration so at least that was not a Reagan challenge.
Posted by: SJ | Tuesday, May 12, 2009 at 05:52 PM
Dr. John,
I followed that link that you posted. There is no disciplinary action against Michelle Obama that has kept her from practicing since 1993. As of 1989 she was not a licenced attorney - meaning she had either bothered to pass the bar exam or had not passed it despite trying. Your comment's inflection suggest that you wished to stir up some scandal regarding the first lady. A remember when the standards for leadership in church sponsored thoughts were much higher than what has been allowed on this page.
I truly have been feeling embarrassed by some of the Catholic spokesmen and women that have surfaced as of the last few years. It is no wonder that our numbers are dwindeling. The approach of casting aspersions on anything and anyone who does not agree with your world view is distasteful. I myself have stopped going to church because of this, have stopped tithing, and actively cast my votes for individuals not endorsed by church spokespeople. You guys have gotten out of hand. The contry has gotten worse since the conservative became active. Balance is the key to saving and preserving this country in God's name. Personally, I believe that many of you are inadvertant slaves of Satan. You ooze of evil.
Posted by: Michael Albert | Wednesday, May 20, 2009 at 09:13 PM
Dear Michael,
Wasn't "A Maudlin" above just responding to "Carl's" comment above about (Michelle) having a job? That maybe she hasn't been actually actively "employed" for a while.
When you meet your final Judge you won't be able to use the excuse that you thought Insight Scoop was evil and therefore you turned away from God, Jesus and His Church and the giving of alms.
You ooze of need for prayer.
I have found this blog very tolerant of polite disagreement and different points of view. I only wish I could way the same about your post.
Posted by: Loretta | Friday, May 22, 2009 at 10:41 PM
The reason the topic was changed by the theologian(?)from Religion,Philosophy,the Nature of Evil,to the topic of her arms,was probably because they were getting to close to the Nature of the Evil in the Hearts(that which is unseen by man,But,not God)of themselves,Mrs.Obama,Pres.Obama,etc..Their (none of them)arms would not Embrace a Woman during her pregnency because to them she's carrying someone they Hate,a Creation of God,A Baby,which they Deny the Right to Life.Mrs.Obama her husband are Evil people,(Prayerfully they've not created a Family of Evil in their Family) Most of his Cabinet Members(if not All) are Evil.Sally Quinn forgot(well maybe not forgot,she too was involved in the change of topic) to mention that those same bare arms Embrace Evil,Her husband,as her Heart Embraces Evil through his works,and hers.He thinks his daughters would be Cursed if they were to have children after having sex.Children would be a burden,a curse for them,so they would be Aborted. By their Fruits of their works shall You know them! Their work Abortion,their fruit is Murder. No one involved in that converstion would with their arms (covered or bare)would embrace a woman seeking help to save her child in the Womb.Mrs. Obama's arms are bare but still Murderously Evil even in their embrace. Respectfully with Love,Joseph J. Pippet...Wildwood,New Jersey
Posted by: Joseph J.Pippet | Tuesday, May 26, 2009 at 12:01 PM