(5/24/10) What? Michelle Obama isn't America's favorite first lady? (The Christian Science Monitor)

[VotingHillary]

Someone may want to tell Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton as she globe-trots on behalf of President Obama’s foreign policy that Americans pick her as one of their favorite first ladies.

Secretary Clinton ties with Nancy Reagan in a new national poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion in New York that asks Americans to name their favorite first lady since 1974. Clinton and Mrs. Reagan finish tied for first place at 19 percent each, with current first lady Michelle Obama coming in second at 15 percent. Laura Bush follows with 12 percent.

“The irony of this is that Hillary and Nancy were the two first ladies of modern times to be a political liability for their husbands,” says Robert Watson, a scholar of US first ladies at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla. “They are the only two first ladies who were not more popular than their husbands when they were in office.”

But first ladies Reagan and Clinton have both risen recently in the public’s estimation, he adds, first as their respective husbands have gained in public stature, but then in their own right.

The online survey of 1,016 Americans, conducted in early May, did not ask respondents to explain their choices. But an accompanying finding of the poll –that Americans want first ladies who are strong advocates for certain causes during their time in the White House – may help explain the poll’s results.

Nancy Reagan is remembered for the admonition to American kids to “Just say no” to drugs, while Clinton is associated with international women’s and girls’ issues (that is, once Americans get past the Clinton presidency’s health-care debacle).

The other first ladies since 1974 – Betty Ford, Rosalynn Carter, and Barbara Bush – all came in under 10 percent.

Despite taking the red second-place ribbon, Mrs. Obama clocks a favorable 60 percent approval rating among Americans over all.

Often in such ratings the current “office holder” takes top prize, aided by current events and name recognition. “In any poll of the ‘best’ and ‘worst’ presidents, for example, the recent ones always come in at the top of the list,” Professor Watson says.

But the poll suggests that Obama may have been denied the blue first-place ribbon by American men, who give her considerably lower marks than women. While women overall give Obama the top prize at 20 percent, nearly a quarter (24 percent) of American men choose Nancy Reagan as their favorite first lady.

Obama, whose husband faced a deficit among male voters in the 2008 election, lags behind Reagan, Clinton, and Laura Bush with only 8 percent of the male vote.

I found this interesting. And Spang, I will save you the time...well, WHITE MEN..yada yada...

More at the link.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0524/What-Michelle-Obama-isn-t-America-s-favorite-first-lady

[Spang]

Second place ain't bad for a First Lady who has only been First Lady for less than two years. When we're no longer the most obese country on the planet, due in large part to Michelle Obama, she'll move up another notch.

[Suzan]

Looks like a good line-up to me. :thumbsup:

[VotingHillary]

Looks like a good line-up to me. :thumbsup:

I found it interesting Suzan that while women continued the tradition of the current First Lady being the favorite.....men were a whole other ballgame.

[Suzan]

I found it interesting Suzan that while women continued the tradition of the current First Lady being the favorite.....men were a whole other ballgame.

That is interesting. It was definitely women who put her in 2nd place.

Obama, whose husband faced a deficit among male voters in the 2008 election, lags behind Reagan, Clinton, and Laura Bush with only 8 percent of the male vote.

[VotingHillary]

That is interesting. It was definitely women who put her in 2nd place.

I think you meant men...:D

[Suzan]

I think you meant men...:D
Well, you could say it either way. I meant that women's votes raised her total. Based on the men's votes she could have been a whole lot lower. Or did I read that wrong?

[foxyladi]

YAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Hillary first:thumbsup:

[LadyLazarus]

I'm shocked Michelle could get second. No wait! I'm not shocked that America loves her cast in a role as a Stepford wife, figuratively gagged and acting as if it's still 1950. What an AMAZING roll model. :rolleyes:

[sojourner]

That Nancy Reagan polled so high was a big surprise to me. Michelle Obama not so much. I think it is a little early to get a read on her.

[foxyladi]

just imagine then trying to muzzle Hillary O/M/G/ :laughing:

[jlynne]

That Nancy Reagan polled so high was a big surprise to me. Michelle Obama not so much. I think it is a little early to get a read on her.

Nancy Reagan's stock went up tremendously after she took care of "Ronnie" through his waning years, including fighting for him every step of the way once he was diagnosed with alzheimers. When you saw her at his funeral, graceful yet shaken to the core, you couldn't help but think that's what marriage is supposed to be about -- love that endures. I don't think we've seen many first ladies in that light. It's too easy to dehumanize them, stereotype them, cast them in the role of our choosing not theirs.

[foxyladi]

That Nancy Reagan polled so high was a big surprise to me. Michelle Obama not so much. I think it is a little early to get a read on her.

by others maybe..

[sojourner]

Nancy Reagan's stock went up tremendously after she took care of "Ronnie" through his waning years, including fighting for him every step of the way once he was diagnosed with alzheimers. When you saw her at his funeral, graceful yet shaken to the core, you couldn't help but think that's what marriage is supposed to be about -- love that endures. I don't think we've seen many first ladies in that light. It's too easy to dehumanize them, stereotype them, cast them in the role of our choosing not theirs.

Maybe that is why men rated her so highly.

[Kbentleyis]

Nancy Reagan's stock went up tremendously after she took care of "Ronnie" through his waning years, including fighting for him every step of the way once he was diagnosed with alzheimers. When you saw her at his funeral, graceful yet shaken to the core, you couldn't help but think that's what marriage is supposed to be about -- love that endures. I don't think we've seen many first ladies in that light. It's too easy to dehumanize them, stereotype them, cast them in the role of our choosing not theirs.

Well said and I believe very true.

[Jim744]

by others maybe..

Yep, I think she's sort of lazy when it comes to the affairs of first lady. Her kids first, no problem but she could do better rather than telling us what Obama is going to make us do!

[Suzan]

I'm shocked Michelle could get second. No wait! I'm not shocked that America loves her cast in a role as a Stepford wife, figuratively gagged and acting as if it's still 1950. What an AMAZING roll model. :rolleyes:
I never liked the Mom-in-Chief idea. If that was her goal or their goal for her--and I'm sure it's the latter--why did she bring in her mother? And why would we limit any first lady to just that role when there's so much more she could accomplish. And how is she supposed to be a role model to girls who want to be more than mothers? So many problems with that.

[jlynne]

I never liked the Mom-in-Chief idea. If that was her goal or their goal for her--and I'm sure it's the latter--why did she bring in her mother? And why would we limit any first lady to just that role when there's so much more she could accomplish. And how is she supposed to be a role model to girls who want to be more than mothers? So many problems with that.

Common Ground! I don't like the Mom-In-Chief idea either. She is a lawyer for heaven's sake! Let her be herself no matter where the chips fall! She's a living, breathing human being not a product to be packaged and sold.

[Spang]

Yes, Michelle Obama is a horrible person. How dare she be a mother to her own goddamn kids.

[jlynne]

Yes, Michelle Obama is a horrible person. How dare she be a mother to her own goddamn kids.

No one is saying she is a horrible person because she's a mother. Laura Bush was a mother. So was Hillary Clinton. So was Barbara Bush. So was Nancy Reagan. In fact, most first ladies have been mothers.

The idea is she is so much more than mother-in-chief that she shouldn't be limited to that role because of politics. She should be free to express her opinions and act in accordance with her beliefs even when its not convenient for Barack Obama or his political team.

[Spang]

The idea is she is so much more than mother-in-chief that she shouldn't be limited to that role because of politics. She should be free to express her opinions and act in accordance with her beliefs even when its not convenient for Barack Obama or his political team.

She's taking on the obesity problem in this country, and guess what? She's getting criticized for that, too.

[Spang]

She's taking on the obesity problem in this country, and guess what? She's getting criticized for that, too.

Just look (http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=56789) at all the criticism.

[LadyLazarus]

She's taking on the obesity problem in this country, and guess what? She's getting criticized for that, too.

Beyond the fact that I think she's a terrible role model for young girls and sends a very damaging message about rigid gender stereotypes, I think we just have to face it that if there is something "likeable" about Obama, there is just something very "unlikeable" about her. I don't know if it's her facial expressions or just a degree of arrogance she has, but I honestly think that like Nixon people are just never going to fully take to her no matter how much good she does. People hated Nixon well before watergate and watergate would never have gone down the way it did if the public actually liked him. Rather, they used it to confirm all their worst suspicions about him.

Michelle has, oh how shall I say, the opposite of the Obama-factor, which is that no matter how much bad he does, people can't stop liking him, which is why I think he'll ultimately be re-elected.

[Alces95]

Beyond the fact that I think she's a terrible role model for young girls and sends a very damaging message about rigid gender stereotypes, I think we just have to face it that if there is something "likeable" about Obama, there is just something very "unlikeable" about her. I don't know if it's her facial expressions or just a degree of arrogance she has, but I honestly think that like Nixon people are just never going to fully take to her no matter how much good she does. People hated Nixon well before watergate and watergate would never have gone down the way it did if the public actually liked him. Rather, they used it to confirm all their worst suspicions about him.

Michelle has, oh how shall I say, the opposite of the Obama-factor, which is that no matter how much bad he does, people can't stop liking him, which is why I think he'll ultimately be re-elected.

Oh I don't know. I think she is "likable enough."

Wouldn't you agree Hillary? :D

[jlynne]

She's taking on the obesity problem in this country, and guess what? She's getting criticized for that, too.

She deserves to be criticized if she is adding to the weight discrimination that many children, predominantly white girls already suffer from. I haven't heard her speak on the topic but I will be happy to look into it and see if the criticism is warranted or not, at least in my opinion.

[Spang]

...people are just never going to fully take to her no matter how much good she does.

You're exactly right. The naysayers will never be pleased.

[Suzan]

Actually, the more they "allow" her to speak and interact, the better I like her. I didn't like her much during the primaries, obviously, but I'm seeing another side to her that I find appealing. Maybe that was the point of the whole Mom-in-Chief thing, which I still think is a bad idea. She has the perfect platform to be an amazing role model to minority kids, and to all kids. She could be very inspiring. Maybe at some point they'll free Michelle, lol.

[Jim744]

I don't think she's being muzzled so much as she just doesn't want to do much. Maybe it's because she is criticized when she does but whatever the reasons, as first lady she should step to the task of teaching young girls that they can be whatever they want to be. But maybe she doesn't want to get into why she gave up her law license and doesn't practice (which sets a bad example).

[sojourner]

I don't think she's being muzzled so much as she just doesn't want to do much. Maybe it's because she is criticized when she does but whatever the reasons, as first lady she should step to the task of teaching young girls that they can be whatever they want to be. But maybe she doesn't want to get into why she gave up her law license and doesn't practice (which sets a bad example).

Choosing not to practice law is setting a bad example?

[Spang]

Choosing not to practice law is setting a bad example?

Yes, and choosing to quit as governor of an entire state is not, if you can believe that.

[foxyladi]

we have had some fantastic first ladies.I can think of a lot thats more deserving of the second spot.

[Clinton's boy 18]

Choosing not to practice law is setting a bad example?

Actually, her law license and her right to practice law was taken from her. We still don't have all the details on that one. Another coverup? Maybe.

[sojourner]

Actually, her law license and her right to practice law was taken from her. We still don't have all the details on that one. Another coverup? Maybe.

No kidding? That is news to me.

p.s. Apparently she requested to go inactive. My question is: why bother?

[mack20]

No kidding? That is news to me.

I'd like any of the lawyers on the board to offer some details if they can, but from the looks of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission website (http://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=630586684), Michelle Obama is listed as being voluntarily inactive since 1993. It also says that she is on court ordered inactive status. From what I've read, it appears that if she had decided to have her status as a lawyer voluntarily rendered inactive (perhaps because she had decided to switch careers and wanted to avoid all the fees and continuing education requirements - though of course that's only a theory) she would register with the court to do so and then they would approve it, aka "court ordered inactive status". Of course, some people have latched onto the "court ordered" part as being the result of some sort of disciplinary action against her, though since the website also says The disciplinary results displayed above include information relating to any and all public discipline, court-ordered disability inactive status, reinstatement and restoration dispositions, and pending public proceedings. it would seem that there was no disciplinary action that resulted in her inactive status.


Any of our lawyers care to chime in and indicate if I'm right or wildly off base?

[Clinton's boy 18]

Michelle Obama is on COURT ORDERED. She didn't request it.

Only 4 years after getting a law license?

Huh?

The question is: What did she do? Why was she PUT ON INACTIVE by a
DISCIPLINARY AGENCY?

[mack20]

Michelle Obama is on COURT ORDERED. She didn't request it.

Only 4 years after getting a law license?

Huh?

The question is: What did she do? Why was she PUT ON INACTIVE by a
DISCIPLINARY AGENCY?

Who said she was?

[Clinton's boy 18]

From what i know, it was rendered Court Ordered Inactive.

No record of what happened was made public.

Some say, if she had contested it, it would be listed as 'revoked' and records would be public.

Someone wanted whatever happen to be done with, and to not look back.

Of course, everyone has their opinion what "might" have happen.

On this one, she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me, maybe from others.

[mack20]

From what i know, it was rendered Court Ordered Inactive.

No record of what happened was made public.

Some say, if she had contested it, it would be listed as 'revoked' and records would be public.

Someone wanted whatever happen to be done with, and to not look back.

Of course, everyone has their opinion what "might" have happen.

On this one, she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me, maybe from others.

See, this is exactly why I'd like some of our lawyers on the board to weigh in. Because I think that the idea that she had to petition the court to be declared inactive and therefore was deemed "on court ordered inactive status" makes perfect sense. That's the explanation I've seen given by people on other boards who claim to be lawyers (though it's the internet so of course, who really knows). I think that your version of events sounds a bit too conspiracy theory for me personally.

[mack20]

For what it's worth, Snopes has debunked this as false:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp

And from the Snopes article is another link to the ARDC site which says:
Prior to November 1, 1999, former Supreme Court Rule 770 provided for a proceeding in the Court for any voluntary transfer to inactive status, whether because of some incapacitating condition or solely as a matter of the lawyer's preference because the lawyer would not be practicing law.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080102005754/http://www.iardc.org/rule770inactivestatus.html

[Clinton's boy 18]

See, this is exactly why I'd like some of our lawyers on the board to weigh in. Because I think that the idea that she had to petition the court to be declared inactive and therefore was deemed "on court ordered inactive status" makes perfect sense. That's the explanation I've seen given by people on other boards who claim to be lawyers (though it's the internet so of course, who really knows). I think that your version of events sounds a bit too conspiracy theory for me personally.

Oh really??? I think every's viewpoints/opinions through the internet has somewhat of a conspracy theory to it. Since, nobody knows what exactly happen, then everything is "maybe this or that". Far as I know, what happen back in 93 is not public. hmmm, many would like to know what happen.

[mack20]

Oh really??? I think every's viewpoints/opinions through the internet has somewhat of a conspracy theory to it. Since, nobody knows what exactly happen, then everything is "maybe this or that". Far as I know, what happen back in 93 is not public. hmmm, many would like to know what happen.

I have the ARDC website to back up my claims though, I've not seen you provide a single source or link that backs up yours.

[Spang]

I have the ARDC website to back up my claims though, I've not seen you provide a single source or link that backs up yours.

Game, set and match.

[Alces95]

From what i know, it was rendered Court Ordered Inactive.

No record of what happened was made public.

Some say, if she had contested it, it would be listed as 'revoked' and records would be public.

Someone wanted whatever happen to be done with, and to not look back.

Of course, everyone has their opinion what "might" have happen.

On this one, she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me, maybe from others.

You know what? I heard she is from outer space! They covered it up so there is no public record. Some closer to her wanted that story to go away but someone wanted this story to be buried and never be seen again. She can say all she wants but I won't beleive it!%-(


Also- Lady L - A bad role model for women? See this link. What really this is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole)

[Laura Cereta]

From what i know, it was rendered Court Ordered Inactive.

No record of what happened was made public.

Some say, if she had contested it, it would be listed as 'revoked' and records would be public.

Someone wanted whatever happen to be done with, and to not look back.

Of course, everyone has their opinion what "might" have happen.

On this one, she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from me, maybe from others.

This is not a matter of "opinion." She has no disciplinary action on record. Her license is not revoked, suspended, or expired. Inactive is a status that one can only request if already in good standing. Court ordered inactive meant her status was approved by a court, as I understand, per IL statutes.

[LadyLazarus]

You know what? I heard she is from outer space! They covered it up so there is no public record. Some closer to her wanted that story to go away but someone wanted this story to be buried and never be seen again. She can say all she wants but I won't beleive it!%-(


Also- Lady L - A bad role model for women? See this link. What really this is (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole)


It's not hyperbole (and you could have just used the word rather than directing me to a web site?). It's pretty much common consensus in feminist criticism that the role she is playing in the White House is setting women and gender relations back decades. Have you been under a rock? Have you not seen all of the articles discussing it? Seriously.

[Alces95]

It's not hyperbole (and you could have just used the word rather than directing me to a web site?). It's pretty much common consensus in feminist criticism that the role she is playing in the White House is setting women and gender relations back decades. Have you been under a rock? Have you not seen all of the articles discussing it? Seriously.

I thought posting the link was more humorous.;)


I guess then I disagree with what the "common consensus in feminist criticism" is. (I know, you're shocked.) The new wave of modern work has two key components to it: independent worker (1099 style) and a work/life balance. The work/life balance seems to be the most sought after work trait that younger workers look for; above salary. Indentity does not depend on being simply a career. My wife is a professional. She is an environmental consultant and pulls in just slighty less than I do working ~25 hours a week. She also gets to be the SAHM that she wants as well.

Seems to me that Mrs. Obama has what many people would want and is an excellent role model. The academic feminist movement should modernize its thought a bit and get out of the 70's. "Career 1st" models are long gone - for men as well.

[foxyladi]

Jackie Kennedy had small children..but she wasn't a (mom in chief).she was a fantastic first lady:thumbsup::D