Tag Archive: michelle obama


Welcome to the fifth edition in the series of the Water Cooler – appears every Sunday on this blog. This feature will highlight what’s hot, topical and up for discussion.

Here we go.

Others in the Series:

Water Cooler, Water Cooler Ed. 2, Water Cooler Ed. 3, Water Cooler Ed. 4

Politics

On Friday October 2, 2009 the Obama administration traveled to Copenhagen, Denmark to encourage the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to choose Chicago, USA for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games. Competing with Chicago were Madrid, Tokyo and Rio. With local issues behind and pundits crying out for him to stay and focus on the problems affecting the country, Barack Obama flew to Denmark to make the case for Chicago his home state.

Later in the afternoon, the first round of voting eliminated Chicago’s bid to host the 2016 games. Many people especially Americans were shocked and flabbergasted by their early elimination. The energy surrounding Chicago’s bid and information that the media reported was that the decision would have been between Rio and Chicago. Oh how they were wrong?

When I heard the words “Rio de Janeiro” to host the 2016 Olympic Games I had mixed emotions. I am happy that the South American country will be able to host the games of such magnitude there and it shows great leadership and planning on the part of the Brazilian team. The twitter world was lit up by this announcement with IOC, Chicago and Rio as trending topics. What also struck me was that many people seemed happy that Chicago had lost the bid. Were these sentiments ‘un-American’? Were theses feelings driven by conservatives?

In this post I want to share the information that was presented to the International Olympic Committee. I am doing this to give readers a front row seat in the presentations that were delivered. Below are the video presentations and speeches of Chicago and Rio to host the 2016 games.

I must say hands down the presentation by the Rio team was concrete. It articulated a phenomenal approach to the games. The video presentation outlined to the delegates was unique and displayed quality images to show voters what they would expect from Brazil hosting such a game. The video presentation made you believe that this would be spectacular; it challenged your imagination and made you believe that athletes would live their passions in Brazil. This was followed by a moving speech that was delivered with such emotion and one that would make the delegates move to action to choose Rio as the perfect destination.

The Chicago bid was different from the Rio presentation. In that it presented the information but was low on substance – imagery.  The presentation would be what my lecturers accuse my classmates of having – it was all over the place. It was not compelling and not believable. As we saw in the Rio presentation a focus was on sporting activities and the athletes; I did not see that in Chicago’s bid. I got the impression that they (the athletes) would be spread across the city like nomads. In Rio’s presentation, although they (the athletes and games) are in four areas, it had an aim in mind. I watched the videos carefully and nowhere in Chicago’s video do you see people. They talked about humanity and friendship and one would have liked to see two people laughing or sharing something. The video showed buildings, google earth graphics and animations the entire time.

michelle-obama404_676280cSpeeches by the Obama’s and the others didn’t help. Michelle Obama before her trip to Denmark said the Obama team would be taking the bid as the Iowa primary. What was their focus? Clearly they thought these delegates would have been bought by their fame and shared ignorance of what the Olympic Games are all about or they are still in campaign mode. The Chicago team sent the wrong signal expecting everything to change with Obama’s presence; in their words “to put it in the bag.” With Michelle Obama lies and a groggy President Obama the speeches clearly made the delegates cringe. Michelle Obama stated that she sat on her father’s lap cheering on Carl Lewis etc. Which 20 year old sits on a father’s lap at that stage of their life watching the Olympics? Barack Obama’s speech didn’t help. He focused on his ego and him winning the election, this is not what the speech should have surrounded. He should have emphasized more the decision that they had to make and how Chicago is the best option. Obama wants to step a few blocks from his home with Michelle and his girls to welcome the world. Wouldn’t it have sounded better if he stated that Chicagoans and Americans want to welcome the world to their shores?

Who would you have voted for? What do you think?

Love & Relationship

Many people would agree that compromises are the hallmark of all relationships. Sharing an environment like a home isn’t always easy for couples; living together or dating. Couples who face this challenge face a real divide especially dsc_0076when pets are at the heart of the issue. A dating partner may compromise on one pet, but what should be done when the other keeps adopting more animals? Surely, pets should be cared for and deserve a home. Should your partner keep adopting pets ignoring your preference of having none at all? Or shouldn’t it be an issue once you are not allergic to one?

Having pets is surely a rewarding experience for those who love them but it should never be at the expense of your partner’s happiness or experience.

Inspiration

2072865350015798315S500x500Q85This week’s inspiration has to deal with taking care of our bodies. We have one life to live and one body to experience it with. Eating the right foods and exercising regularly should be everyone’s focus as we get older. We are busier than ever these days with family obligations, our own education pursuits, workplace issues etc. We should however take some quality time in taking care of ourselves. If it means taking a well needed check-up at the doctor, a massage at a spa, that visit to the dentist, for women – that pap smear test and for men prostate exam. You have one body; take care of your health this week and on.

Rock on Michelle Malkin

I have an open ear to contending views. I will sit down and have an honest debate and after it is finished have no bad feelings against you. Many people however cannot do this. I find it hard to believe that people cannot have a discussion and still love each other at the end. That is one reason why some people hate politics as well. I must point out something that is interesting. Politicians put on a show for us and spew hate and opposing views at each other and at the end they are best friends leaving their offices. They are loyal friends for life. However, when these discussions are viewed by citizens and the electorates they are separated and they hate each other because of the differing views.

Malkin

Malkin

Recently I came across Michelle Malkin. I have seen here before (didn’t know her name) but now I really know her or so I think. In recent times she is making the media talk show rounds on television networks in a bid to promote her new book ‘Culture of Corruption’. In the book she attacks Barack & Michelle Obama and the corruption that goes on in Washington with other democratic members of Obama’s cabinet also highlighting the background of her targets.

The first clip I saw of her was on Glenn Beck, later on the Today Show on NBC, Sean Hannity and more recent The View. She (Malkin) is just able to dominate a conversation so easily because these interviewers cannot and does not have the facts to oppose. In the Today Show interview Matt just sat there and listened to her as she dominated the conversation entirely. On the contrast, the Sean Hannity’s interview was more interactive and open. The View’s interview was by far the worst. The ladies on The View were ill prepared and lackadaisical in the interview. Malkin smashed all the possible arguments one could use to oppose her making the hosts look stupid. Oh, that word again. I thought it was horrible when Malkin hit back at Whoopi for misquoting her words, that was not good.

I think she is a great debater. She articulates her points very well and she is armed with facts. That’s the main reason why she will win any debate coupled with her passion and charisma on any political issue. I tend to switch from side to side depending on the issue whether Republican or Democrat. I have to agree and believe Malkin on this issue of the corruption in the Obama administration. She discloses the factual information that proves her point.

We know what the Chicago politics is like. There are the pay for play syndrome and the many acts of corruption in public service. It is surprising that Obama rose to prominence out of a culture like this to promote transparency and change.

Obama has failed to deliver on change. He has used the same corrupt politicians in his administration and has employed so many persons to make this a huge government. The fact is the bigger the government the more failures we will see including mismanagement. Republicans stress less government and I can see through that. The less government holds in a society the more freedom and choices citizens will have.

Many people question why the addiction to Obama’s past. I believe in checking Obama’s past because in his past we have found out why he stands on certain issues. His influences are important to note and people should care about the foundations and policies one believes in. This spread the wealth around and universal health care are all Obama plans that will damage the economy. I am tired of hearing Obama inherited this mess. He campaigned to inherit it so this argument of not being hard on him is ludicrous. This is Obama’s economy, the buck stops with him.

I like Michelle Malkin though not because she is attractive. I can understand anyone who can boldly say they hate her. If I were a baptized democrat I would too. She is brutal with her comments and does not apologize for her opinions on certain issues. If there is anything I take away from her it’s her passion, the charisma and love she puts in her work. I will always appreciate the facts she brings to a debate and will be forced to deliver facts if I ever decide to oppose.

Marketing for any business operating in today’s harsh business world isn’t easy. Getting the right campaign to the target market is a huge task. Hitting the nail on the head can be a massive gamble. Companies who use the services of marketing/advertising agencies most times are not in control of what the agencies produce. Somehow, companies even accept anything that the agency produces without contesting or even make suggestions to improve on the advertisement. It is sad when companies have to withdraw ads that offend a segment of the target market even sometimes offending the society. Advertisements are not only produced for the intended market. Because they are viewed in the mass media, extending the reach of the ad, the advert may be offensive. Companies however have a huge role in ensuring that the ads that the company has on television, radio, print etc are comfortable and not offensive.

Recently, KGB a company that answers questions that they receive by text messaging released an ad that some people find offensive. Some even want the ad to be pulled. The ad portrays black females in a salon getting their hair done. A female talent in the ad asked the other ‘What kind of hair is this?’ The response of the hairstylists says natural. The discussion there continues with the quest to find out what natural hair means by sending a text message to KBG for the answer.

From the advertising agency and company’s point of view they have achieved their objectives. They produced an ad reflecting the company’s proposition (product), and they used talents which reflected in some way their intended target audience. Success huh?

But the issue is bigger than that. The issue is the portrayal of black people. Culturally, the black race is known for their sense of humour, survival, hardworking attitude, breaking the law etc. Generally in advertisements the black talent would always deliver that punch line of a joke, or be seen eating unhealthy foods like chicken (not that chicken is bad). There are both positive and negative images that are embedded in ads today. These images can be offending; some can be flattering while others can be motivating.

There is certainly nothing wrong with the advertisement of this company. People will find issue with the ad that most of the actors were black. Normally, companies with a huge target market would show diversity in the ad to show that all races accept their product. This advertisement borderlines offensive because it appears to be saying that only black people wear weaves and emphasizes the fact that they cannot explain where it comes from. The believe that black people wear the most weaves may be a lie, but this ad does not make it appealing.

But how did we get here? There are issues within the black community and it is sad that this company is highlighting that flaw to sell their brand. Majority of people believe that black people use weave as a way to change who they really are. They use all the hair products and chemicals to look like someone else. Weaves do compliment and enhance a woman’s features. There is nothing wrong with wearing a weave. There might be a problem when weave identifies your race.