"My right to speak my mind, to have a voice, to be what some have called 'opinionated,' is a right I deeply and profoundly cherish," she said, "and my only hope is that one day soon, women, who have all earned the right to their opinions, instead of being called opinionated will be called smart and well-informed - just like men."
Hear, hear, though I'm not sure that telling a reporter to "shove it" qualifies as smart and well-informed. Never mind that hoping women can have a public voice is about 30 years late. What's next, bra-burning?
First ladies continue to baffle us as we try to sketch an appropriate image in a world of evolving gender roles. We want someone strong yet feminine, accomplished but not too ambitious, maternal and wifely, but not smothering and subservient. Recent first ladies have run the gamut.
Nancy Reagan was viewed as too doting, gazing like a Labrador at her master, while Hillary Clinton wasn't "wifely" enough, famously displaying her Rodham charm by declaring that she wasn't the stay-at-home, cookie-baking sort.
The two Mrs. Bushes earn consistently high ratings among both Democrats and Republicans. The senior Mrs. Bush is everybody's no-nonsense mom - strong, kind and humorous. As for Laura, what's not to like? An attractive, feminine librarian, she's an utterly uncontroversial Tollhouse wife and mother who enjoys reading to kids and publicly defers to her husband without seeming obsequious.
Then comes Teresa, a native of Mozambique talking about un-American traits, an extraordinarily wealthy woman who, whatever charms she may possess, clearly isn't used to playing by the usual rules of civility toward lesser mortals. The rich really are different than the rest of us, but the smart and well-informed ones let the little guys believe otherwise.
At least until their husbands get elected to the White House.