Posted on 08/15/2010 11:30:57 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Somewhere out there, in what Winston Churchill once called “the Great Republic” is the not-too-happy wife of a Republican governor or senator.
This poor lass has devoted the last two or three decades of her life to the gruesome indignities of American politics, shaking hands with morons, forfeiting all privacy, wearing a fixed grin, warily eyeing the bouncy blondes on her husband’s campaign staff and trying to retain her girlish figure through the endless parade of bull roasts, picnics, fundraising banquets and state fairs.
(“Try the deep-fried Twinkies ma’am?”)
She has done this all with one thought in mind. Someday, she will be first lady. And it would all be worth it. One day, and it could be soon, given President Obama’s troubles, she will have her choice of designer fashions. Be held up to the world as the epitome of American womanhood. Pick a personal cause to champion. Have a staff of hundreds of flattering aides. Wreak vengeance on her enemies. Host state dinners, with real movie stars, and make all those marvelous, exciting trips abroad, in luxurious style befitting a first lady, to exotic locales…
Oops.
I can hear her now. “What are those idiots on Fox, and the Tea Party dumb nuts doing? One lousy European trip--to Spain in August, no less--with her daughter, and the right wing is portraying Michelle Obama as Marie Antoinette? Don’t they know the price she has paid? The loss of liberty, spontaneity and authenticity? The toll on her soul? What woman would ever pay the cost to be first lady, without the perks? What candidate’s wife would let her husband run for president, if the payoff is clothes from Land’s End, gun shows, and fried pork sandwiches at the Iowa state fair? Honey, no way am I doing this.”
[See photos of Michelle Obama.]
If they are smart, the Republican wives will band together; sign a pact, and get the word out to the conservative media. Lay off Michelle, or the only Republican candidate you’ll have in 2012 will be divorced. Or Todd.
Remember how the press treated Nancy Reagan? Compare and contrast with its treatment of Jackie Kennedy, that paragon on self indulgence. Hillary Clinton never took flak over her lavish vacations, mostly because Bill was there, too, and that meant an expense account vacation for the whole damn White House press corps. The Vineyard is just so much tonier than Kennebunk or, God forbid!, Crawford.
And therein lies the Democrats-eye view of public service. "Let the public serve us". I don't remember Pat Nixon, Nancy Reagan, or Barbara and Laura Bush - and to be fair Rosalynn Carter doing any of those things. I do remember Hillary... and I can see Michelle following in her footsteps, with bigger feet.
What? So this moron thinks republican women are as shallow as Michelle?
Remember Pat Nixon, and her “good republican cloth coat”.
I'm okay with that. Todd's idea of relaxing is finishing the Iron Dog race . . . with a broken arm . . . and still winning.
The left never fails to reveal how they really feel about voters. Disgusting.
You’re right, probably not, but it does look like a trap.
If we make this election about the wife’s trip we won’t be in as solid a position as we would be with “too much government”.
What a contrived piece of editorial trash. The media is indeed letting it all out.
“This poor lass has devoted the last two or three decades of her life to the gruesome indignities of American politics, shaking hands with morons ... “
‘Rats were counting on M’Antoinette’s star power on the campaign trail. Her approval rate amongst the “morons” is nose-diving, and this tool is blaming Republicans.
Pfft.
And to this poor lass I would say: If you consider American retail politics to be like getting worked over by Marsellus Wallace’s hard pipe-hittin’ brothers with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch, and your sole reason for enduring the misery is the certain hope that you’ll reap the goodies when your husband gets elected president...well, first, your attitude will probably leak out at some point, with unfortunate consequences for your and your husband’s career plans. And second, even if that doesn’t happen, your certain hope is in fact almost certain to be disappointed. There are just so many more politicians (and their spouses) running for the job than can possibly ever have it. If you’re doing it for that, think again.
Michelle takes her “LET’S MOVE” campaign....LITERALLY!
The argument against 'too much government' can be made on two grounds: economic and liberty. Framing Michelle's behavior in terms of spending will strike the cord of limited government on economic ground.
Yes, except Michelle didn't do this. Because her husband is black he got to go to the head of the line.
Then there is this little gem...I love it when dems swerve into the truth and let their slip show. In almost every article they write there is one little naked moment when a real, naked thought slips through their proton sheild hull plating.
"Pick a personal cause to champion. Have a staff of hundreds of flattering aides. Wreak vengeance on her enemies."
Seriously, WTF is up with that line?
John Aloysius Farrell = face of a fool
" U.S. News & World Reporter (author of The Nation column) and author of Tip O'Neill and the Democratic Century - John Aloysius Farrell (a longtime reporter for The Boston Globe) is the latest media liberal to rip Brit Hume for being "creepy" and saying his incredibly "stupid" piece about how Tiger Woods should try Christianity."
The left is desperate. Asking right wingers to layoff the Kenyan and the First Wookie is crazy. They can expect exactly the same support and treatment that W got.
No quarter asked. None given.
This sounds like something coming from the Meghan McCain wing of the Republican Party.
"George VI and Elizabeth worked hard to endear themselves to their subjects...He and his Queen refused to leave England for the safety of Canada during the blitzkrieg. As a matter of fact, they refused to leave London even after Buckingham Palace was bombed. Instead they stayed tirelessly making daily visits to the victims who had lost their homes. They lived as their subjects did. Theo Aronson describes what Buckingham Palace guest Eleanor Roosevelt discovered in his book, 'The Royal Family at War: 'The rooms were huge but freezing. When the bombing of the palace had shattered the windowpanes, the glass had been replaced with wood and isinglass. The wartime restrictions on heat, water and food were as strictly observed in the palace as in the humblest home in the land."
Err...um....this is satire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.