What is it about leftwing female Ivy
League-educated lawyers whose husbands attain prominence in the
political arena that makes them, well, so alienating? Is it that they
secretly think they’re the real powers-that-be and resent all the hoopla
about their husbands?
After all, it takes a fairly intense
degree of competitiveness to slosh through either Yale or Harvard Law
School, as Hillary and Michelle Obama did respectively, and then juggle
the demands of childrearing with careers. Does that competitiveness
mysteriously evaporate or just as strangely make them morph into adoring
second-banana wives when the men they consider either their equals or
inferiors are showered with public adulation?
Hillary chose to deal with the competitive
problem by sacrificing her pride – and tolerating over-30 years of
humiliation inflicted by her philandering husband – to their mutual goal
of her becoming the first female president of the United States, a goal
that became more urgent as the mister’s impeachment and disbarment
threatened the “Clinton legacy.”
Hillary’s Competitive
Curse
Interestingly, in marriages of this kind,
competitiveness works both ways. While Bill yearns, indeed lusts, for a
return to the White House, and has worked indefatigably to make
Hillary’s success happen, his malignant narcissism has proven to be the
main barrier to her road to the White House.
Between his unsubtle racist statements and
his scarlet-faced, finger-wagging, spleen-venting confrontations with
the media and regular citizens alike, he has told the American public
that he, not Hillary, is the “power” in their family, which has
effectively undermined her “own voice” that she found so magically in
New Hampshire.
Now, as 60-year-old Hillary is on a
spiraling-downward trajectory – having lost 10 primaries in a row, as
well as most of the caucuses – and has failed to exceed Obama in both
electoral and popular votes, the “Clinton machine” is challenging the
Michigan and Florida primary votes that both Hillary and Obama agreed
would be disqualified (in terms of delegates) and calling in all their
cards for the Super Delegate votes, which depend largely on “inside”
favors, deals, and – tada – money.
Then there is the nasty matter of New York
City’s Board of Elections undercounting Senator Obama's share of the
February 5th presidential primary vote, where in 80 election districts
(including Harlem, where Bill Clinton’s office is located) he received
no votes.
"This is just an outrage," said the City’s
mayor, Michael Bloomberg, calling the Board of Elections "the last
openly, outright, pure, partisan patronage organization we have in this
state and in this city."
Here’s another beauty. Hillary is now so
desperate that she’s insulting her daughter Chelsea’s chosen profession!
The other day, at an economic roundtable in Parma, Ohio, she said that
wealthy investment bankers and hedge fund managers on Wall Street aren't
doing “real work.” Duh. While Chelsea is flying around the country
trying frantically to save her mother’s devolving campaign, she is told
that her work for a hedge fund organization, McKinsey & Company, is a
pretense!
Michelle’s Competitive
Curse
Last Monday, speaking in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, Michelle told a packed-to-the-rafters crowd of her husband’s
supporters that, “People in this country are ready for change and hungry
for a different kind of politics and … for the first time in my adult
life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally
making a comeback.”
Let’s run that by again: “For the first
time in my adult life, I am proud of my country...”
Immediately, the Democrat spin-control
crowd, as well as Republicans, weighed in:
Kirsten Powers, a Fox
News Democrat apologist, said that Michelle’s crystal-clear statement
had been misinterpreted.
The editor of The
Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol said: “[Michelle Obama] was an adult when
we won the Cold War without firing a shot. She was an adult for the last
25 years of economic [and] social progress.”
According to
writer-economist Richard McDonald, “This utter lack of pride is
especially damning in light of the amazing and praiseworthy work that
President Bush has done for Africa during his two terms as President.
Michelle Obama calls her husband's socialism the reason why, for the
first time in her life, she is proud of America. Madame Mao could not
have said it better!”
“It says something
about her view of this nation, and of her husband and herself, writes
Jonathan V. Last, “that she seems to find it so difficult – their own
experience notwithstanding – to feel gratitude for and pride in her
country.”
“What Michelle Obama
is doing is just echoing the sentiments of the hardcore left abroad, and
telegraphing it to the hardcore domestic left here in the U.S.,” says
Rene Guerra, a conservative activist, writer, and former Marxist from
Venezuela, who says he “knows the leftist agenda and how destructive it
is to the vitality and survival of America.”
Various and sundry talking heads on the
left rationalized that Michelle – whose husband was an Illinois state
senator for seven years and has been a U.S. Senate for four – had never
been exposed to national scrutiny and so was unprepared to have her
statements scrutinized with such ferocity.
Horsefeathers!
At the beginning of Sen. Obama’s campaign,
it was clear to anyone with eyes-wide-open that 44-year-old Michelle had
an “edge.” The spiteful little barbs at her husband escaped no one’s
notice, nor did the sharp edges she displayed while being interviewed by
Larry King – until, that is, she apparently remembered her media
advisor’s counsel to tone down her voice and attitude and go nice.
But let’s get real. Michelle has been in
the public spotlight for the better part of a decade. She knows the gig
and she knows the consequences of intemperance. But she couldn’t help
herself! This privileged and successful woman – the absolute embodiment
of the American Dream – said what she meant and meant what she said.
No matter how she tries – or gets others
to try – to downplay her statement of abject ingratitude, I predict that
Michelle’s toxic salvo will linger in the public imagination for the
rest of the campaign, if not for the next several decades.
According to psychoanalyst and ethicist
Willard Gaylin,
“You are for the most
part what you seem to be; not what you would wish to be, nor, indeed,
what you believe yourself to be. Spare me, therefore, your good
intentions, your inner sensitivities…”
It appears we have a new phenomenon in our
midst – the bizarre specter of a woman who competes with her husband,
ala Hillary, and who sabotages her mate as well, ala Bill. It turns out
that Michelle Obama is new wine in two old bottles.