-By Warner Todd Huston
The Washington Post had an interesting article on June 25 headlined, “A First Lady Who Demands Substance.” I think it was meant to highlight that fact that Michelle Obama is more than a mere first lady but is a strong, substantive person — which is, by the way, without question. Unfortunately, though, it ended up revealing a Michelle Obama that is an angry, arrogant, martinet that isn’t aware that “first lady” is an honorary title that has no proper, Constitutional role and is not an elected position with legal, legitimate powers of its own.
The story penned by Lois Romano comes on the heels of Michelle’s dismissal of her chief of staff, Jackie Norris, who was replaced by 61-year-old Susan Sher. Apparently, this switch is supposed to mark the arrival of the new Michelle Obama, the one that will have “impact” at the “fulcrum of power and policy.” To pursue this new “power” Michelle has hired a full-time speech writer and has told her staff to think “strategically.”
Impact? Power? Strategically? I have but one question: who elected you to this “power,” Michelle? I also have an answer: no one.
What a presumptuous, arrogant woman this wife is! I can’t believe I am going to say this, but here goes… Michelle, if you want legal and legitimate power do it the right way like Hillary Clinton did. Actually get elected to something. Don’t steal it illegitimately like Hillary tried to do when she was First Lady. Go gain what you imagine is your rightful place at the seat of power the proper way. Run for something.
Now, don’t misunderstand me here. I am neither saying that wives are unimportant nor that a first lady should hide her light under a bushel for the entire time she is in the White House. But a first lady, Michelle, does not direct policy, nor serve as an official advisor in government, nor have “deliverables” to promulgate, nor have much of a role with czars and “advisory boards.” That, little lady, is for the actually, legally empowered, officials.
To put it simply, dear, you ain’t no official.
Aside from the arrogance of Michelle’s “vision” of what her “official role” is to be, one is struck with the monumental waste of the taxpayers money this “role” of first lady has become. It has been a money pit for a long time, of course. Mary Lincoln spent a King’s ransom on curtains, china and furniture when she sashayed into the White House in 1860 and all of Washington tsked her for it. Nancy Reagan was tweaked for her expenditures as well, as were many other first ladies of history.
But a close reading of this Washington Post article shows and incredible array of high powered former business execs and whatnot taking spots on the “staff” of First Lady Michelle “the Empress” Obama. And guess what, folks? We are paying for this nonsense.
Worse than the money is the assumption of privilege that this first lady and her high-powerd staffers seem to be accruing to themselves. Look at where these “first lady staffers” are ending up in the White House on a daily basis:
Every morning, Rogers and Sher attend White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s 8:15 staff meeting. Johnston, a newcomer to Obama’s circle but a White House veteran, and Katie McCormick Lelyveld, the first lady’s press secretary, sit in on White House press secretary Robert Gibbs’s daily message meeting. As part of the president’s domestic policy team, Frye meets with its staff weekly. Senior aides David Medina and Trooper Sanders work on national service and international issues, and Norris remains close to the office in her new job at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
Chef of staff meetings, press secretary meetings, senior aide meetings, domestic and international policy issues? Why is a first lady staffer in on any such meetings? They have no role to play in these meetings nor does their “boss,” the first lady.
Chillax, honeypie. Read a magazine, watch the kids, and leave the policy to the real officials, will ya?
There is one more tidbit in this story that reveals the angry, unpatriotic, mean-spirited Michelle we became so familiar with during the late campaign.
She also intentionally served a formal dinner to the nation’s governors on mismatched china — 28 years after Nancy Reagan famously complained because nothing matched and proceeded to spend $200,000 on a new set of Lenox.
Wow. What a creep. She went out of her way to cast aspersions on former first lady and wife of one of America’s most beloved presidents? Why? What purpose did this serve other than to be mean spirited? No wonder she was never proud of her country in her adult life. She is too hard hearted to have it in her.
____________
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as newsbusters.org, RedState.com, Human Events Magazine, AmericanDailyReview.com, townhall.com, New Media Journal, Men’s News Daily and the New Media Alliance among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events and is currently the co-host of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Conservatism” heard on BlogTalkRadio. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of publiusforum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions : EMAIL Warner Todd Huston
Fair Use: This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.