1. Tom Penn wrote:

God Bless Michelle Obama!

She made HER choice, and if the progressive feminists are distressed, then tough shi* on them. I wonder how many of these “progressive feminists” are actual mothers?

The last time a Democratic First Lady stuck here nose into places it shouldn’t have been, she caused a disaster, which in turn caused the opposing party to take over Congress. Michelle is a very young woman. When she leaves The White House in January of 2017, she will be only 53 years of age. At that time she can begin yet another career in this most amazing life of choices which she has made

2. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

You know, feminists make me sick. I’m all for equal rights but deep down inside, I think most of these feminists really want to be men.
There’s nothing wrong with being equal and yet playing your role. Mrs. Obama is still strong, smart, accomplished, and assertive. But she is also a mother and a wife. I love the fact that she is involved with her family more than her career. I wish more women would take a more active role in their families and with their husbands.

3. EminemsRevenge wrote:

NIGRO PLEEZE….not only did SHE give Obama street cred, but by being a MOM she’s an automatic superhero, even thought her kids ain’t ‘hood!

4. marland wrote:

I always think about it like this: the corporation I work for can always replace me, but my child cannot. Michelle Obama’s husband is the leader of the free world, which makes her the ultimate example in setting priorities. Just when I thought I couldn’t love her more…

5. Lisa wrote:

Lousy photographer…Michelle looks like she’s missing a hand/arm.

Anyway, Michelle was smart to stay close to ‘home’ and be there for her girls and her husband. According to what I read, Michelle was the primary earner while Barack did some other things. It’s her turn to not be the primary breadwinner.

Here in Germany, they give mothers 3 yrs of paid leave (gov’t subsidized) time to care for children. But finding a part time job here is nearly impossible once you have kids. Also, there’s a tax benefit for mothers that stay home and don’t work and raise kids. If they decide to return to work, not only do they have to pay for day care but the gov’t taxes their income higher even with the children deductions. So if you’re a mother in germany, stay home and raise your kids. Americans don’t have that perk.

Marc, that’s a culture war for BillO to take on.

Sad, sad sad.

6. jordan wrote:

@Lisa. I totally agree with you on the photo. It’s weird. What is she, the next Supreme Court nominee?

On a different note, as a feminist, I think there was a moment to be disheartened when Michelle announced that her role in the White House would be a purely domestic one. It was disappointing because Michelle is such a force to be reckoned with – as charismatic as Barack with the credentials to back it up. It was disappointing because it seemed to mean that the Obama administration was giving in to pressure to hide Michelle, to hide her strengths and to hide the parity in the Obama’s’ marital relationship. It was also disappointing that the Obama administration was kinda throwing Hillary under the bus, suggesting in the announcement of Michelle’s role that Hillary’s involvement in her husband’s administration was a mistake. Say what you will about Hillary, but that’s a sucker punch.
Ultimately, though, I think Michelle has pulled off the decision to be a stay at home mom with style. She brings all of her strengths to her role: her personal charisma, the parity in her relationship with Barack, and her intelligence. It’s exciting to watch her succeed for her own sake and for everyone else’s sake, as well. Depending on who you are, you may not want to believe it, but all the feminists I hear from are falling over themselves loving Michelle.

7. james wrote:

jordan, i sincerely doubt the responsibilities of being first lady with young children is in the same social category as your ordinary stay-at-home soccer mom or dad. hillary and bill have only one child, which is a fairly different set of family circumstances. another child is effectively twice the work. and i do believe chelsea was already a bit older when the clintons came to the white house, so i don’t think the comparison is apt (teenagers, by their very natures, require and desire significantly less parental face time and hands-on involvement than k-8 kids). for that matter, i think if the obamas are granted another term, you will probably see michelle take on more of a hillary-esque role in the administration.

8. jordan wrote:

james, I wasn’t comparing Hillary and Michelle’s mothering workloads. I was comparing the perception of their involvement in their husband’s presidency. I’m disappointed if the Obama adminstration is painting Michelle as a homemaker to appeal to those who resent Hillary’s involvement in the Clinton administration. I think it’s uncool for the Obama administration to distance itself from the Clinton administration on that point, to the extent that it pits Michelle and Hillary against one another. I’m also disappointed if Homemaker Michelle is being promoted in response to Fist Bump Terrorist Michelle. If people are threatened by a 6′ tall black woman with a Harvard Law degree they should deal. She shouldn’t have to appease them.
Generally, I agree with you that the age of the Obama kids adds validity to Michelle’s decision to make family her first priority. Perhaps it was a factor many of us underestimated in our first round of hopes for Michelle’s first lady agenda. Also, I really hope you’re right that she’ll take a more active role in the adminstration in the future.

9. james wrote:

jordan, i really don’t think the obama’s decision to have michelle not work a regular 9-5 job is strictly a political decision; i think it was more of a family decision; and one that makes pretty good sense in my opinion. currently, with her husband’s income and position, she doesn’t have to work, and she won’t have any trouble reentering the workforce whenever/if she chooses to do so again. also, i think that being first lady is, technically speaking, a fair amount of work in itself, especially when you factor in the two young children.

the perception of any supposed role differences between michelle and hillary as first ladies is irrelevant because they are different people in different situations at different times in history. i don’t think michelle obama is pretending to be some kind of june cleaver to appease anybody. i think, like her husband,
she is genuinely enjoying her new role in the white house.

10. Logic wrote:

“I’m disappointed if the Obama adminstration is painting Michelle as a homemaker ”

I agree with james. I genuinely beliece that she wants to be there for their children. These are important years in their life.

11. Mrs. Rivers wrote:

I am sure she’ll take a more active role once her kids are older and when the time is right. However, we have to remember we elected Barack Obama as our President. Not his wife. I think if she took a more aggressive active role (especially within the first 100 days), the media and the right-winged idiots would use it against her and Pres. Obama.

My question to feminists is this: What is so wrong with taking an active role in your family and your children? When did investing your time and energy into your family take a backseat role to climbing the corporate ladder or proving society wrong? Feminism is about being a proud strong woman and being considered an equal. You dont have to abandon your domestic roles in order to be that.

12. Tom Penn wrote:

jordan wrote: “. It was also disappointing that the Obama administration was kinda throwing Hillary under the bus, suggesting in the announcement of Michelle’s role that Hillary’s involvement in her husband’s administration was a mistake.”

Jordan, Bill’s letting Hillary head the secret White House planning group on Health Care was the second biggest mistake Clinton made during his eight years in office. Hillary alienated Congress, AND she gave the Republicans a huge issue during the 1994 mid-term elections. That issue alone cost the Democrats both chambers of Congress, and forced Bill Clinton to go before Congress during the State of the Union address and, say, “The era of big government is over.” The Clintons surrendered to the Republicans from a point of extreme political weakness. And then came a certain intern’s stained address.

13. DCI74 wrote:

Word Sammy.

14. Lisa wrote:

I’ll never forget BillO mocking Michelle about the ‘first time she’s proud’ comment and I sent him an email defending her that he aired (and I missed because I stopped watching the show after that. Some of my co-workers saw it and called me on it, ha ha).

Anyway, I think it’s great what Michelle is doing. She’s taking a low profile now to get her family adjusted to the new location and home and life style that they need to serve. I can’t imagine the First Lady having a job/career with responsibilities like 9-5 hrs. Wouldn’t that be a conflict of interest?

I spend time reading the right wing blogs and the things they say about Michelle shock and disgust me. I do this so I know what they say and how to defend her. They had one posted on politico that they finally pulled and took off. It was disgusting. They do think she is an angry black woman and she needs to let those nasty people see otherwise and STFU.

I think as Obama’s term progresses, you’ll see Michelle find a nitch for herself and a natural progression into the role she needs to perform. I’ll be rooting for her all along the way.

15. jordan wrote:

Tom, I think people’s feelings about Hillary Clinton are more complicated than the facts you’ve stated here. If people simply disliked Hillary because she messed up Health Care, that would be awesome. There was an interesting article in Mother Jones a few years back that detailed the myriad ways people hate Hillary: she’s too much of a feminist, she isn’t feminist enough, she should have stood behind her husband, she should have left him when he cheated.

But, I don’t point these things out as a Hillary supporter. I wouldn’t call myself one. But, I think it’s easy to hate Hillary and I think it’s far too easy to rally people around Hillary hatred. For that reason, I’m cautious of the linkages that are made between what type of first lady Hillary was as the wife of the last liberal democratic president and what type of first lady people fear Michelle will be. The “wife of a liberal democratic president” is the important part. If you don’t see these linkages or aren’t interested in them, that’s fine. For people like Michelle Harris-Lacewell and Deesha Philyaw, the linkages between Hillary as a progressive woman and Michelle as a progressive woman are very much complicated by race. Mine isn’t the only lens through which to see Michelle’s first lady-dom. In fact, it isn’t the only lens through which I see Michelle. But, Michelle doesn’t live in a vacuum. She doesn’t make decisions without influence from the outside world. It’s also important to point out that we’re not hearing these things from Michelle herself. She didn’t come to your house and say, “Tom, I’m thinking about staying home with the kids.” We’re hearing about her choices through the media and from the Obama adminstration. So, I think it’s fair to talk about how they are portraying her decisions and what they are implying they mean.