Terry Mitchell

Why the First Lady Is Irrelevant



Posted: Tuesday, May 12, 2009

by Terry Mitchell
http://commenterry.blogs.com

A lot is being made about the performance of First Lady Michelle Obama. After only a little over 100 days in the White House, she is getting rave reviews from all parts. I have no doubt that all the accolades are justified. She is indeed an intelligent and greatly accomplished person in her own right.

However, no matter who she happens to be, the First Lady of United States is always irrelevant, at least from a political standpoint. Her "job" is strictly a ceremonial position, making her nothing more than a figurehead. The Constitution does not recognize the position of First Lady. There is no record of any of our Founding Fathers even mentioning her in any official document.

She is neither elected nor appointed to her post. She has no political power or authority to affect the lives of Americans or anyone else. Yes, she is given a bully pulpit that she can use to be an inspiration and example to many. The bottom line, though, is that no one has to listen. If the First Lady desires real power, then she should follow Hillary Clinton's example and run for a real office.

Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, amateur political analyst, and blogger from Virginia, USA. He posts a least one article a day to his blog - http://commenterry.blogs.com - on subjects such as current events, politics, technology, society and culture, religion, health and well-being, self improvement, personal finance, trivia, and sports.

This Article has been viewed 171 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)
» left by Jean Horst
 2 years 352 days ago.
178 fans.
Hmmmmm, true - BUT - Hillary Clinton managed to parley her "irrelevant" job into a spot in the US senate and then on to one of the highest jobs in our government...
» left by Terry Mitchell 2 years 351 days ago.
91 fans.
Yes, Jean, but she ran for the Senate because of her frustration with the irrelevance of being First Lady. She couldn't wait until her her husband's second term was over. In fact, she was elected to the Senate while still First Lady.
» left by Anonymous
 2 years 352 days ago.
Wow, I don't know where to begin with this one. Martha Washington was irrelevant? Eleanor Roosevelt was irrelevant? Jacqueline Kennedy? Ladybird Johnson? Nancy Reagan? Hillary Clinton? Sour grapes!
» left by Terry Mitchell 2 years 351 days ago.
91 fans.
They were propped up by the media.
» left by Joel Hendon
 2 years 346 days ago.
Hi Terry, good article and correct I believe. We've had some good ones and some worthless ones, but as you say, they have no position as such in government and their role is simply to be a good wife and hopefully make a favorable impression where ever they go. I believe Michelle Obama is doing just that.
 
Hillary was about the only one who really tried to squeeze herself into her husband's role. Her attempt to introduce her blockbuster health legislation from her non-political position cost the Democrats their majority in congress during their first mid-term election.
» left by Terry Mitchell 2 years 346 days ago.
91 fans.
Joel, thanks for your comments. I completely agree.
» left by Anonymous 2 years 346 days ago.
I hate your article. 
 
Do you have a problem with the First Lady?  It seems as if you are trying to use  irrelevant facts in order to showcase your dislike for our First Lady.
 
Does it bother you that she is getting such rave reviews?  It would have been easier and much more gracious to talk about the First Lady's achievements instead of trying to diminish her importance.
 
If you don't have something nice to say, then don't say anything at all.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.