Tweet
It seems that a lot of media coverage of Michelle Obama we have all experienced surrounds her physicality, first and foremost. She’s either a fashion plate, or bare-armed and aggressive. Second, media coverage that isn’t focused on her clothing or visible limbs centers on her image as a mother and wife. In this context, she is inevitably portrayed as very devoted to her children and husband, making no Hillary-esque forays to the floor of Congress but instead engaging in charities and other more traditional first-lady fare.
This is odd for a woman who is a high-ranking, intelligent, and successful Harvard-educated lawyer. Unlike Hillary Clinton, Michelle Obama never failed the bar exam and chose to marry a professor not an up-and-coming politician whose influence could be peddled. Michelle Obama is definitely a very respectable figure from the standpoint of anyone who sees in communities of color a crisis of opportunity, success, and societal acceptance.
My question – is Michelle Obama deliberately being produced in mass media as a traditional wife figure in order to:
- Avoid the Clinton-era pitfalls of a national debate surrounding a "co-president" in pantsuits?
- Create her as a role model for healthy, functional black families, given that so much crisis exists in black families nationwide?
Or could it be that she has a lot more involvement and political weight "behind the scenes" than we are aware? It’s amazing to me that a black woman who has become first lady (after her high-flying law career) would not be encouraged in particular by liberal/left observers to much more involved and aggressive in the political world.
Or could it be that the focus on her physicality (her height, her arms, her figure, etc.) is actually a manifestation of the white American fear of black physical power and strength? Perhaps the white mass media is shocked by the sight of her arms because first ladies don’t do that and in her case there is a tall, strong, black woman baring relatively toned arms and having a toned, strong figure.
What do you think about all this? I find Michelle Obama and intriguing figure, as I’ve described above.
27 Comments
Obama was never a professor. Just a parttime lecturer. Why can’t people get that straight? There’s a HUGE difference.
Honestly, I think she chose to step back and take the mother role for the White House years, since their children are young and need parents even more, to protect them from the media glare.
This is based on some interviews with her (read, not personal) during and after campaign/election.
Re her arms – I think it is unusual to have a “first lady” who dares to bare her arms; presidents and their wives are usually older than the Obamas, and the women are into the stage of life, as I am, where you raise your arm and go -OMG, where did that flapping fat come from? And, I understand she exercises for fitness and for arm-shaping, and is rather proud of her arms. Justly so , in my opinion.
In my humble opinion, she did look absolutely faaaaaabulous in her gown fro the State Dinner this week, and that’s all right. It made me proud to see the pix of her and the prez with the Indian PM and his wife.
It’s not Camelot (which wasn’t really Camelot, either), but after the slugs the Bushes were, I don’t mind a little glamor with my pres. I looked at the NYT slide show of the dinner and its beautiful decorations, and was impressed and pleased.
I think they are striking just the right note of enough pomp and elegance, but not too much.
Now, that doesn’t mean I’m thrilled with much of Obama’s performance, but I think he and Michelle have the head of state part down.
I’m very happy to have Michelle as our First Lady. She’s smart, obviously a great mother, appears to be a real partner to Obama, and she looks wonderful in her clothes. The gown for the State Dinner was gorgeous and she looked like a million in it. As I said in another thread, I don’t get all the hoopla about her bare arms. That’s just silly.
What tejanarusa said.
If you think about it, she may be our first First Lady to have benefited from Title IX, the sports thing for girls in school.
What evidence is there that’s she’s any more a leftist or less a corporatist than her Wall Street flunkey husband?
Maybe she’s just like Lloyd Blankfein’s wife.
I wasn’t suggesting anything about her personal political allegiances (I know nothing of them), I was merely suggesting that it is odd that liberal/left *observers* of the Obamas haven’t pushed her to be more involved directly in politics.
“Lecturer” or “adjunct professor” then. My point was that he wasn’t exactly a shoo-in for high office at the point in time she married him, so it wasn’t the same situation as we had with Hillary Clinton. *That* first lady apparently dithered and waited and wouldn’t actually marry Bill Clinton until it became clear he was going to be political up-and-comer, in other words, she latched on to him early on for social climbing purposes. Michelle Obama cannot vaguely be accused of this.
Sfriendly, I think that she’s the flip-flop (and an appropriate word for both) of Obama. Someone who’s incredibly ambitious; someone who used government supported programs such as affirmative action to get into schools she likely couldn’t otherwise and who hates public education; someone who’s a creation of propaganda and public relations; and someone who’s intensely concerned about her image but not much else. I think she’s pulling a huge fraud with her “care” for military families. She has never been part of the military, never a military family and is obviously just using this to burnish her image that was tarnished in the presidential election campaign. So, very much like her husband and that should come as no surprise: she’s Lady Macbeth to Obama’s Macbeth.
Sfriendly, you claim that Hillary failed the bar examination. Do you have a source for that? Hillary, whatever her other foibles may be, is incredibly bright.
Sfriendly wrote: “I was merely suggesting that it is odd that liberal/left *observers* of the Obamas haven’t pushed her to be more involved directly in politics.”
I’m one of those leftist progressives so let me take a crack at it. Could it be because Michelle is a good friend of Rahm’s too and that she is as much a fake at being a liberal-progressive as her husband who lied his way to get the Democratic party nomination and the presidency? Do we need another flip-flopper DLCer pretending to be a reformer and really killing reforms? Nope.
It is interesting to see the inane comments of the Obama haters. None of you know any more about her than the snippets written about her. Lets have the courage to admit that most of the haters just can’t stand the fact that the Obama family is Black and not on welfare, singing a song, or playing with one ball or another. He is the president of the USA, like it or not
The sister is fine, educated and civic minded. Haters keep on, that is your job to hate, you don’t have any substance behind your insipid comments, so don’t stop, keep baying at the moon, I doubt the moon will stoop to answer, but it makes for interesting reading, it just illustrates how many stupid people own or use computers. Stay focused, one day you will have someone like Alaska Bimbo to celebrate. Of course there is always Michelle Bachman I can see Russia and I can see death panels, now that’s a pair to draw to.
(To save you the trouble, I know you should not end a sentence with a Preposition)
Dageneral, you and you alone are the person who played the race card when you wrote: “Lets have the courage to admit that most of the haters just can’t stand the fact that the Obama family is Black and not on welfare… .”
Far from such inane and racist remarks as your own, other posters have:
1) asked: “What evidence is there that’s she’s any more a leftist or less a corporatist than her Wall Street flunkey husband?
That’s rather a good question, is fact based (what with Obama’s bailout of Wall St. and the banks and his numerous ties to Goldman Sachs).
2) I myself pointed out: “Someone who’s incredibly ambitious; someone who used government supported programs such as affirmative action to get into schools she likely couldn’t otherwise and who hates public education; someone who’s a creation of propaganda and public relations; and someone who’s intensely concerned about her image but not much else. I think she’s pulling a huge fraud with her “care” for military families. She has never been part of the military, never a military family and is obviously just using this to burnish her image that was tarnished in the presidential election campaign.”
Again, these are criticisms but they are fact-based and have nothing to do with race, aside from the affirmative action program which is of course based on race. Michelle Obama had all kinds of difficulty, as you may well recall, in the last election, she has “embraced” military families although neither she, or anyone in her family I know of, has ever served in the military. That’s an obvious p.r. ploy.
But then, it was the Obama campaign that played the race card in the Democratic primaries when the going got tough, wasn’t it dageneral?
Michelle Obama got her last job at a Chicago Hospital as a direct result of her husband being elected Senator and that hospital obtained a lot of government financing as a result. Her position was created only for her within a few weeks of Obama’s election, and has not been filled since she left.
In addition the U of C hospital began a policy of discouraging low income people from being treated at that non-profit hospital as part ofd a program initiated by Michelle Obama.
She is not a liberal. She has used her husbands contacts to work her way up. She has fashioned her image after Laura Bush so she gets treated like a barbie because that’s what she wants.
Great info, Apishapa. We need to smoke more of the real info out on these kinds of people because the MSM doesn’t do it. Was the hospital she worked at affiliated with the U. of Chicago? If so, what’s the big deal with UC and the Obamas since he was there as an adjunct law teacher?
“manifestation of the white American fear of black physical power and strength”
“can’t stand the fact that the Obama family is Black and not on welfare”
Why does it never occur to these people that stereotyping a group of millions as being racists is a kind of bigotry on their part?
Different take: The comments so far are buttressing my prediction for 2012: The Right of course will vote uniformly against Obama. The Far Left has gone beyond bitterness into something darker and will NOT vote for Obama. They probably won’t vote at all. Independents will break to the conservative side in greater or lesser numbers depending on who The Repubs nominate or if an attractive candidate such as Ron Paul or a Ross Perot type runs on a third party ticket. Obama will get support ONLY from just left of center Obamabots and nearly 100% of the African-American population. Blacks will do this even though Obama’s policies work entirely to their disadvantage. It just feels too good to have one of their own as President. I think that’s really dumb politics but understandable given all the sad history.
Anyway. I know that a year is a lifetime in politics and we have 3 of them to go before the election, but that’s how I see things shaping up.
I am delighted with the way Michelle represents us. Just proud as punch to see how she behaves in the WH and in other countries.
On the physical side, she has the most beautiful hands on the planet, and Miss Malia has inherited them.
oo she does!
Here are Malia and Sasha’s hands. Looks like Sasha may have them too, but she’s still a little young to tell.
you’re right.
they are both so gorgeous and graceful – and at such a young age.
My question is?
If she’s so damn smart why is she not talking to Her husband about the way He is handling His job?
High faluten Lawyers are supposed to know right from wrong. She and He are supposed to understand what the people are about because they came from middle class roots.
It seens an election and getting to flaunt with the rich and famous, makes you forget the ones that brought you.
There’s much truth to your analysis but yes, three years is a long, long time in politics. If the economic situation in general and unemployment in particular remain problems (as most economists expect) and Obama escalates an unpopular war, a progressive-liberal democrat might also challenge Obama in 2012 just as Eugene McCarthy did to LBJ ultimately knocking him out of the presidency. It seems clear that if in 2008 during the Democratic party campaign, had Obama taken the kind of stands he is taking now instead of lying about his real DLCer-neo-Republicanism, he NEVER would have gotten the Democratic nomination. He lied to get the nomination and the presidency and now we are seeing what he really stands for: pretty much the same as George W. Bush.
Magicians and con men also like people to concentrate on nonessentials to obscure what they are really doing. Who cares if Michelle has beautiful hands: that’s not the issue.
Extreme ambition is a pretty weak knock on any person who is in residence at the White House, is it not? To the best of my memory-I’m getting old, so feel free to help me out here-it has always been a prerequisite for the job!
Who was the last occupant of that esteemed address with a direct link to the Armed Forces? Maybe Bush One?
There is plenty to criticize without finding things which are not unique to this administration to snipe at. When you stoop to this you are merely acting like the hypocrites on the other side of the fence…
Couple things. I heard recently that the number of Independents has surpassed the # of Dems or Repubs for the 1st time in history. My experience with most Indies is they tend to lean to the right and are not very well informed on the issues. (Lots of exceptions, I’m sure.) But they have a gut belief that both parties suck. Who’s to argue? I think they are really a wild card. Depends on who runs and is nominated.
Who would challenge O from the left? Who would challenge an historic sitting black President who knows how to turn on the charm when it’s game day? True Obamabots will vote for O no matter what.
I wish Spitzer had’nt self destructed. Elizabeth Warren was mentioned here recently, but I don’t know how wide her experience is. Hillary’s been shackled and beside’s, she’s a Clinton and that’s just more of the same. I’d like to see Marcy Kaptur of Ohio achieve a higher profile in the media. Kucinich or Sanders? Almost certainly a fail in November.
Oh well. Too early to get all worked up about it I guess.
Funny!
First of all when Neo_Cons talk about playing some sort of race card, that just exposes them for the bigots they are. Tea baggers and others of that ilk claim we Black folks play some imaginary race card to gain some alleged advantage. How often is being Black in this country an advantage? Racism is a function of power, not ones individual philosophy.
Then there is always the illusion promoted by bigots that anytime a Black person is able to achieve against the obstacles placed in our path, we are the recipient of preferential treatment. Some fool talks about Affirmative Action, as it that were the only way we can achieve or obtain an education. Conveniently ignoring the effort, discipline, determination and intellect required to attain certain positions of influence or power.
Granted most Black people do not have the grades, money or peer influence to attend some of our better schools, the same is true for all races in this country, particularly the Ivy league schools. It should not be overlooked that very few students regardless of race are accepted at both Princeton, and Harvard.
When I attended Columbia Univ, It cost $70.00 a credit, I couldn’t afford that sum. I went under the GI Bill. The government paid for my education Some people so biased and stupid, have insinuated that I only attend Columbia Re: AA. In 1957 there was no such thing as AA, even under the GI Bill I had to pass an entrance exam, but people like you would prefer to believe I was admitted to preserve a quota.
But I am not important, you carry on about Michelle as if she was given some free pass to an education. In high school she was on the Honor Roll for four years, She was class treasurer and was the Salutatorian at her graduation.
She graduated from Princeton with a BA In Sociology (Cum Laude), she received her JD from Harvard Law School. How she gained admittance into two such prestigious institutions is irrelevant, when you take into account what she did with the opportunities she had. She excelled in two of the top universities in the world, but you ignore those facts and bray like a jackass about AA. Metaphorically speaking of course. I know “like a jackass” is a simile.
She is one of only three First Ladies to have attained graduate degrees, Hillary Clinton, and Laura Bush being the other two. These and other facts you choose to ignore and attempt in your pathetic way to trivialize her efforts and insinuate that her accomplishments are only due to the benevolence of AA.
Before you say it, I do not believe that every critic of Obama is a bigot. Just most of them. If you do not agree with his management style, I can dig it. But your talking points are basically character assassinations.
I am not completely satisfied with his work so far. He should by executive order repeal Don’t ask don’t tell, I am not a champion of Gay rights, but if a man or a woman is willing to place themselves in harms way, what they do in the bedroom is their business. The war in Iraq should have ended the day he took office. Gitmo should have been closed the same day.
All things considered he has done a fantastic job, and the best is yet to come. I know you do not agree, but check this out, Who Cares?