Yesterday I read this article in USA Today which stated that U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama has very high approval ratings. And as I read the article and the comments that followed, I was struck by three things:1) The article says that 79% of the public approves of her and "just" 8% disapprove. It's the "just" that I question. I'm surprised that THAT many people have a problem with her. What has she done that causes anyone to have a problem with her? Are these responders old school British people who are mad she touched the Queen? Or are they technophobes ticked off that she got the Queen an iPod? Or are they Republicans still holding resentment about the "For the first time in my life I'm proud to be an American" thing from back during the election? I think she's done an outstanding job thus far, and there's really nothing to complain about.
2) As I read the comments at the end of the article, over and over again crass people (and that's normally the kind of people who post comments on news web sites) mentioned how their biggest problem with her is that she's, as one put it, "ugly as a mud fence." I take exception with these comments, and not just because no one talks about how attractive or ugly a man is when talking about whether or not that person is approved. I also take exception because I disagree--I think Michelle Obama is a very attractive woman. Maybe it's just because she's so well spoken and smart, though. I dig the smart ladies. At least that's what my wife tells me (Rimshot). Seriously, I get as excited by a well-spoken, intelligent comment from a woman as a I do by a beautiful face or a slender but shapely figure. Okay, maybe I get excited in a DIFFERENT way, but I still get excited!
3) I don't know. I had three distinct points when I started this thing, but I have long since forgotten what the third one was. Before I even started the second point, as I was proofing the first point, it occurred to me that I didn't remember what the third point was. Oh well, I told myself, I'll figure it out while I'm typing #2, but I never did. And now here I am with a promised #3 but nothing to say. Bummer. And I'm sure if I re-read the article I'd remember what my third point was, but hey, I'm not THAT interested in this article.
You may wonder, Why didn't he just go back to that first paragraph and edit it to say that he was struck by TWO things? No one would ever know. Well, that's a lie. I was struck by THREE things. I just don't remember all of them. Maybe someone who reads the article now can tell me what was the third thing I was struck by.
2 comments:
Perhaps #3 is the fact that,just as her husband is a role model for young African-American men, she is a role model for women (all women, although it could be argued African-American women, as well). She shows us that we do not have to hide behind our husbands and hold tea parties and balls at the White House. We can have our own voice for the causes that we believe in - even if they don't exactly fall in line with what our husbands are doing. And we can do all of this while still wearing J. Crew. She never approaches a situation nonchalantly. Everything she does is backed with passion and interest. She inspires us all to be better mothers, women, and citizens of the world.
I don't think that's what my Number 3 was, but I know that what you wrote is better than whatever it was I forgot!
Post a Comment