Grab and Keel

Tuesday night my Hubby and I were getting ready for his hernia surgery, so I didn’t get to do much more than watch the Convention on PBS. I do want to mention a couple of things, however. I don’t recall ever having a well-spoken sister give voice as character witness to a presumptive nominee before. David Brooke said again that Obama needs to tell the voters who he is. DAVID, WE KNOW WHO HE IS!!! What a truly odd thing that we voters must again be subject to the homilies of family, when what we want is to know once and for all whether “Hope and Change” has any sort of resonance beyond the fairy tale Camelot Re-enactment. It isn’t so odd that the Obamacons object to the critics.

Secondly, I can’t decide whether we are looking at the natural future of first ladies or if this is an aberration, but Michelle Obama? Speaking to the main convention? When Senator Clinton spoke in her husband’s first campaign it was never in the main Convention, but to the Democratic Women’s Convention. Now, I know Ms. Obama has had a few other engagements this week; my point is that in the DNC’s attempt to portray the Obamas as family folk, they yet again tripped over the obvious. The wife of a “presumptive” nominee is speaking at main convention before the nominating vote!

I don’t blame Ms. Obama; I blame the DNC scriptwriters of this spectacle. Since the fix was in from the start, they just dispensed with any semblance of protocol. What superficially was one message was really another, eye jabs to Clinton supporters and PUMA. This event is attendant to the recent abortive 3:00 AM attempt to announce the VP. The play on the much-maligned Clinton ad exposes the Obama campaign once again as small and vindictive, not unifying.

Following another tack, what else might this early elevation of First Lady mean? Are we really, after all, hiring two for the job? Should the campaigns stop pretending that the First Lady is an incidental perk? We almost made the change this year to First Spouse. Is this a two-person job, as Senator Obama alludes, when he says he runs his heavy decisions by Michelle or his grandmother? Should we not consider, in the future, single applicants for the job? Or, I know, I know! Let’s consider the real expertise required to be First Spouse and apply that experience to Senator Clinton!

We should then consider the skills and aptitudes that potential spouses bring to the table. We know what Bill Clinton would have brought. It was clear from the start that Obama was not going to have Bill Clinton as second in command’s spouse. The rampant rumors about a potential third Clinton term were never repudiated by the DNC. Obama himself gave voice to that concern.

Now it appears we may be left with Ms Obama and Ms McCain. Following the theoretical tack of a two-person presidency, should we more fully evaluate the attributes of each in our decision making process this year? Or, should we just decide on the basis of Party, like always? Maybe, since we don’t really have a job description for First Spouse, it’s time to revisit the issue and make one up. Otherwise, we have no standard upon which to judge, or hold accountable.

This issue is, of course, one of the deep layers of sexism, that has been successfully manipulated this election. Neither party was really ready to acknowledge the contributions of First Spouse. Nor were they able to see outside the the vision of Bill Clinton making sure the pillows were fluffed and the tables properly set.  Or worse, that he might have the ear of the President.

 I Own My Vote, Just Say No Deal, Puma Pac, the Denver Group