Congressman to Apologize After Reported Comment on First Lady's Figure

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner has become the butt of blogosphere jokes after reportedly making an unflattering remark about first lady Michelle Obama’s derriere.

Sensenbrenner, who is not exactly svelte himself and could never rock a sleeveless like the first lady does, apparently went there while talking to someone over the phone at Reagan National Airport outside Washington, D.C. The blog FishbowlDC first reported that he was overhead recalling a conversation he had a few weeks ago at a church auction.

According to the account, Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said he told a woman who was praising Obama – who has pushed her “Let’s Move!” campaign and others to improve childhood eating habits – that she should follow her own advice.

“She lectures us on eating right while she has a large posterior herself,” Sensenbrenner reportedly was overheard saying.

foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/22/congressman-to-apologize-after-reported-comment-on-first-ladys-figure/

:smiley:

Well…

LOL you can’t say anything these days. Besides, most men like women with pleasantly plump ‘posteriors’ :smiley:

That wasn’t very nice.

Hopefully she won’t take up smoking with her husband in order to lose weight.

And, as always when I read of these glorious foot-in-the-mouth moments, the thought drifts into my mind…what was he THINKING of?:whacky:

That she has a large posterior?

(A) I get so sick of people pointing to Michelle Obama’s rear end and calling her fat. One only need look at her arms and back and see that she works out regularly. Black women tend to have more muscle in their behinds. It would help if folks would stop using anorexic white women with no butts as the standard of beauty in this country

(B) Jim Sensenbrenner should have taken a good look in the mirror. I counted at least three chins on that head attached to his rotund body!

High profile women are always subjected to this kind of c**p from small-minded folks who apparently have nothing better to think about. Prime Minister Xyz travels to Lalaland to sign an important trade agreement, and the press is all over her because her skirt was too short. Or it was too long. Or she was wearing a pants suit. Or the colors she was wearing were all wrong for her. Or the earrings she was wearing were too gaudy. Whatever.

This isn’t a new thing. The press was all over Elanor Roosevelt about her fashion sense, years before she became First Lady. Former First Lady Barbara Bush was lampooned because of her clothes and the way she styled her hair. And I can’t even remember the occasion, but Madeline Albright was somewhere doing something politically important and was photographed at a state event wearing a brooch that no one could get over. Really? One of the most powerful women of that time, and the press was obsessing over her jewelry?

Yeah, celebrities and women who make their livings from their looks should expect to have their hail, nails, outfits, shoes, etc., discussed. But business professionals, academics, and politicians? We’re really that shallow?

Luna

Oh dear. -_-’

Yeah, not the nicest description to say about the first lady. There seems to be a theme of late with calling politicians, or in this care married to the President, over weight. The New Jersey governor Chris Christie has been called “fat” many times by an unfriendly press. Happily I read at least the Congressman has apologized to the first lady for what was mentioned.

As for the first ladies healthy food initiative forcing school kids on what to eat, read the program has been a flop. Many meals are not being eaten, and a black market for snack foods has been created. But the unions are happy, which might be the intent from the beginning. The program is making the SEIU fatter with more members.

“Michelle Obama’s Unsavory School Lunch Flop”

michellemalkin.com/2011/12/21/michelle-obamas-unsavory-school-lunch-flop/

snippet:

According to a weekend report by the Los Angeles Times, the city’s “trailblazing introduction of healthful school lunches has been a flop.” In response to the public hectoring and financial inducement of Mrs. Obama’s federally subsidized anti-obesity campaign, the district dropped chicken nuggets, corn dogs and flavored milk from the menu for “beef jambalaya, vegetable curry, pad Thai, lentil and brown rice cutlets, and quinoa and black-eyed pea salads.”
Sounds delectable in theory. But in practice, the initiative has been what L.A. Unified’s food services director Dennis Barrett plainly concludes is a “disaster.” While the Obama administration has showered the nation’s second-largest school district with nutrition awards, thousands of students voted with their upset tummies and abandoned the program. A forbidden-food black market — stoked not just by students, but also by teachers — is now thriving. Moreover, “§rincipals report massive waste, with unopened milk cartons and uneaten entrees being thrown away.”
This despite a massive increase in spending on nutritional improvements — from $2 million to $20 million alone in the last five years on fresh produce.
This despite a nearly half-billion-dollar budget shortfall and 3,000 layoffs earlier this year.
Earlier this spring, L.A. school officials acknowledged that the sprawling district is left with a whopping 21,000 uneaten meals a day, in part because the federal school lunch program “sometimes requires more food to be served than a child wants to eat.” The leftovers will now be donated to nonprofit agencies. But after the recipients hear about students’ reports of moldy noodles, undercooked meat and hard rice, one wonders how much of the “free” food will go down the hatch — or down the drain. Ahhh, savor the flavor of one-size-fits-all mandates.
There’s nothing wrong with encouraging our children to eat healthier, of course. There’s nothing wrong with well-run, locally based and parent-driven efforts. But as I’ve noted before, the federal foodie cops care much less about students’ waistlines than they do about boosting government and public union payrolls.
In a little-noticed announcement several months ago, Obama health officials declared their intention to use school lunch applications to boost government health care rolls. Never mind the privacy concerns of parents.

While I think that what he said was uncharitable I also really don’t think its anyone’s business what he said and we shouldn’t judge him either.

I’m inclined to agree, since the remark was made in a private telephone conversation. Of course, he should have taken more care to be sure that he wouldn’t be overheard, but I imagine he’s learned that lesson now.

I agree with you. He shouldn’t have said what he said but if he was going to say it anyway, he should have made sure that he wasn’t overheard.

Racist comment noted.

Indeed------good comment. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

I’m in two minds about this. The first is that the media and the some parts of the public are so shallow that a remark like this should even be reported. Who cares about some politician privately shooting his mouth off.

The other is that we place far too much emphasis on a person’s appearance. Winston Churchill wouldn’t get past first base in today’s paparazzi media atmosphere.

Apparently.

Sarah Palin.

Not many people came to Sarah Palin’s defense against such attacks for sure.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.