Who Loves You, Baby?

Michelle Obama’s “Angry Black Woman” Role

In Opinion on January 18, 2012 at 7:54 pm

Michelle Obama, in my opinion, is no more an “angry black woman” than I am Bill Goldberg. I may be a big, bald, Jewish

President Barack Obama and the First Lady Mich...

Image via Wikipedia.

man, but I’m hardly ready to body-slam Hulk Hogan or any other steroid monster. By the same token, Michelle Obama may be the First Lady, but she is no more a militant black woman than Barack Obama is legitimately deeply concerned about all the unemployed and destitute Americans trying to forage a life together while there remains no job creations program of any kind and no discernible plan to do anything to improve our economy (except give more perks to the rich and then wait).

While it may please racists (whether they be “racist lite,” those who don’t know they’re racist or believe they are; or those who know they’re racist and proud of it) to believe that all black women are either militant crusaders (we should be so lucky) or 700 pound welfare recipients with a train of babies following them everywhere they go; the reality is that neither extreme is the case, of course.

Bottom line: Michelle Obama’s “angry black woman” statements, undoubtedly orchestrated by her army of handlers and PR messaging massagers, are carefully constructed comments intended to deflect attention from her unflattering portrayal in recent books-during a precarious re-election campaign. With Obama’s approval ratings dipping, the last thing they want are books depicting the First Lady as taking a more proactive stance on matters than her President husband.

If Michelle Obama is angry about anything, it’s her unflattering portrait in the recent spurt of “tell all” books that are coming out or have already come out.

Here’s a link to an article about her latest string of protestations:

Is Michelle Obama playing the “race card?” Well, it depends how you define that “card,” but she is, again in my estimation, denying something that she clearly is not. A corporate CEO whose husband and family live in in an insular bubble from the rest of the country and are unable (for whatever reasons) to enact any policies to help those most struggling to make it has nothing to be “angry” about. Maybe “proactive” would be a more appropriate adjective.

And maybe Michelle Obama doesn’t want to say her husband appeared to be passive about certain matters he needed to be engaged in and she wished to take a stronger lead role where she saw a deficit.

Just my opinion. And I could be wrong.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: