FLOTUS for Senate?

Published by

Clarissa

June 6, 2014

Have you heard of this?

FLOTUS for Senate?

It wasn’t that long ago that such a slogan would seem absurd, but political wags are beginning to wonder whether Michelle Obama is mulling a run for Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk’s seat in 2016.

I’m still living in “not that long ago” because the whole thing sounds beyond absurd to me. I happen to live in Illinois and I kind of prefer to have people representing our state who are actual politicians. I must be horribly outdated and not ready to face the reality of politics turning into an unadulterated reality-TV show that I myself predicted recently.

Rate this:

13 responses to “FLOTUS for Senate?”

Evelina Anville

June 6, 2014

Well being FLOTUS isn’t political. I agree. It’s a silly “job” right now. LIke being a princess. But before becoming FLOTUS, it’s my understanding that MO has similar experince to BO before his initial senate run: Harvard law, community organzing etc etc. I could be wrong. But I think she has some chops. And congress (senate and/or House of Reps) is where many politicians get their first breaks….

LikeLike

Reply
David Bellamy

June 6, 2014

I seem to recall that she worked as a hospital administrator.

LikeLike

Reply
b g

June 6, 2014

Please, spare us that insult. Hillary is already far too much for the sane to have to contemplate. She got her supposed phone call in the middle of the night in her advertisements. In reality, she got it in the middle of the afternoon and failed to respond effectively. Americans died, enduring slow torture, because of that. Enough all ready, engage your left hemisphere.

LikeLike

Reply
cliff arroyo

June 7, 2014

Political dynasties are not a good thing. No.

LikeLike

Reply
Erik McDonald

June 7, 2014

I see why people oppose the idea of powerful political families, but I don’t see what’s new about this. The story presumably exists because of Hillary Clinton becoming a Senator, plus the repeated precedent of widows like Muriel Humphrey or Jean Carnahan. I don’t see anything more “reality TV” about it than about sons trading in on their fathers’ political fame. If there’s a modern angle, I think it’s the idea of a politician’s last name becoming a “brand.” If we accept that, the idea that power can move from husband to wife, or father to daughter (Marine Le Pen, Liz Cheney), and not just from father to son, seems like a positive development.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  June 7, 2014
  
  “If we accept that, the idea that power can move from husband to wife, or father to daughter (Marine Le Pen, Liz Cheney), and not just from father to son, seems like a positive development.”
  
  – I don’t get this at all. How is it a positive development to have incompetent people in responsible positions? Would you consent to be treated by your dentist’s husband who has zero knowledge of dentistry but has had sex with a dentist for several years? Politicians are hired managers, just like dentists are hired managers of our dental health. Both groups need qualifications that cannot “move” from one person to another, no matter how much they rub against each other.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. Erik McDonald
    
    June 7, 2014
    
    I agree with you that it is better for people to be competent rather than incompetent; I just meant that if some incompetent people are going to benefit from unfair arrangements, incompetent men shouldn’t have an advantage over incompetent women.
    
    Also, it’s not as if the spouse of a politician is no more likely to have political talent than a random person. Hillary Clinton chose to marry Bill Clinton and took an interest in his work as governor and president; George W. Bush didn’t choose to be his father’s son, and had very little to do with George H. W. Bush’s policies.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. Clarissa
      
      June 7, 2014
      
      “Also, it’s not as if the spouse of a politician is no more likely to have political talent than a random person.”
      
      – A spouse of a politician is a lot less likely than a regular person to have political talent. People with any capacity for politics are very narcissistic. They cannot even imagine playing second fiddle, let alone become a silent shadow.
      
      “Hillary Clinton chose to marry Bill Clinton and took an interest in his work as governor and president; George W. Bush didn’t choose to be his father’s son, and had very little to do with George H. W. Bush’s policies.”
      
      – Nepotism is disgusting irrespective of what relationships the corrupt agents maintain among themselves.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
      1. Erik McDonald
        
        June 7, 2014
        
        I don’t like nepotism either.
        
        LikeLike
        
        Reply
NancyP

June 7, 2014

Politics was/is the family career for the Carnahans. Jean was no naif about campaigning or the legislature. In the younger generation, Robin (daughter) and Russ have done quite well.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  June 7, 2014
  
  I have no idea who these Carnahans are but I do remember a completely bizarre story from many years ago of a widow taking her husband’s seat in the US congress. The whole world was ridiculing that, and rightfully so. The bizarredom of that practice was out of this world. But if I remember correctly, this was just for a couple of months until a new electoral cycle started. And in a very backwards state, which IL is not.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
thevenerablecorvex

June 7, 2014

Maybe we should just do away with elections altogether and go back to hereditary monarchies; it seems to be what most people secretly want.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Jones
  
  June 7, 2014
  
  You rang? 🙂
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply