Fox News Leads Skulk Over Michelle Obama’s Oscar Showing

| February 25, 2013 | 0 Comments

 

 When Jack Nicholson, who appeared to be wearing a sweatsuit and down coat under his tuxedo, waddled out to present the final Oscar of the night, we knew viewers would be divided over the winner. But what America didn’t know, was just how divided the nation would be when he introduced first lady Michelle Obama to announce the winner.

Imagine, for a moment, Ann Romney doing a spittake and coughing up a gobful of coffee cake. You can practically hear the Romneys’ party guests jangling for their keys and rustling their coats back on.

Naturally, many on the left wondered what the right was thinking, but Fox News remained uncharacteristically restrained for the night and into the early morning hours. But about twelve hours after the Academy Awards ended, the news organization eventually stooped to the occasion and made up a few questionable pull-quotes.

According to FoxNews.com, there were “loud groans from journalists backstage” and someone identified as an “industry expert” told FOX411’s Pop Tarts column that Obama’s appearance was a “suck job.” Then “another” person said “it was stupid and pointless.”  Rewind that for a moment: Fox has a “Pop Tarts column?” Suck it, Edward R. Murrow.

Click to Share Image

Viewers also weighed in on Michelle Obama’s appearance on Politix.topix.com with decidedly differing opinions. Their online poll showed that 66 percent believed the first lady negatively politicized the event, 32 percent thought “she was great,” and 2 percent had “mixed feelings.” It should be noted that only fifty-five people actually voted in this so-called poll.

The forum underneath the poll was rife with ridiculousness. Commenter “Dan_Tien” hated Obama’s bangs and didn’t care for “the arrangement of gaudily dressed servants” who surrounded her. “Dan_Tien” is apparently not only a fashion critic, he’s also a fiscal genius: He believes that the key to reducing “government spending” is for the first lady to “stop spending hundreds of thousands on clothes.” In point of fact, however, the first lady’s wardrobe is donated, borrowed or purchased but never with government funds. And those tacky maids and butlers? Those are servicemen and women of the United States Military.

When challenged by “tgirl2” over “Dan_Tien”’s sartorial commentary qualifications, he responded that his “wife can buy a Coach clone knock-off purse for $15.” Suck it, Anna Wintour. You too, Diana Vreeland.

 “TDriver04” also expressed outrage and wanted everyone to know that the Obamas are not monarchial and the commenter wants the first couple to:

“Stop indecting you’re selves into every aspect of cilvilins life’s and try to hold you’re selfs at the level of office you hold.”

Where do you even begin with something like this? We were going to “[sic]” this, but that would have left only “at,” “the,” and “you” unchecked. Not to be outdone, “Cheenoguy” flung mud right back at “TDrvier04” asking if Obama should just “act more like Nancy Reagan who gave Sinatra a blow job in the Oval Office?” Yeah,  so suck it — oh never mind.

Website TheHill.com reported that the Academy Awards was “largely politics-free, however, despite the fact so many nominees made stops in Washington as part of the Oscar campaigns.” The reporter also noted that “Spielberg made an especially big Washington pitch for Lincoln.” What the writer appears to be unaware of, however, is that no one on Capitol Hill or in the White House is actually a member of the Academy.

The comments under the aforementioned article ranged from “Beady Eyes” calling Obama a “baby ferret” while commenter “think_first” waxed nostalgic about the time when “the Presidency [had] a little bit of honor and cachet to it.” One assumes that “think_first” is thinking about the fifth — as in the fifth lowest ranking president of all time: President G.W. Bush (Click for best and worst presidents). And just for the record, we think baby ferrets are awesome but mongooses can totally suck it.

“Cherut” was pretty upset, and expressed her dismay that “Michelle in regal dress” was flaunt[ing] the opulence and avarice of elite Hollywood in the face of average Americans…”

That person’s comment prompts a rhetorical question of our own: What must it be like for conservatives to watch a Hollywood awards show, knowing that the vast majority of their entertainment is created and produced by liberals?  And for the smattering of Republican thespians who actually attend those awards shows, what would they be wearing if it weren’t for the Diors and Chanels and Kleins and Versaces — all designed by liberals?

If Republicans stayed true to their party’s offerings they’d be playing that old Ted Nugent album, and dressed up as Buddy Ebsen from The Beverly Hillbillies — yep, he was a Republican, too. Weeeelll, doggies. Suck it, Jed Clampett.

Tags: ,

Category: Featured, NEWS, Opine

Add a Facebook Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.