Mandatory Assault Weapons Now!
Socialism Versus Nature
Mike Pence's Ill-Starred Presidential Run
Bold Truth-Telling Is Out on Biden's Old Age
Disney Works to Destroy the Values That Built Its Company
Woke Corporations Are Attacking American Values
MS-13: From El Salvador to Your Neighborhood
The Slugger Was a Pitcher
If It’s Not Open Warfare, It’s Collusive Lawfare
Paul, Cruz Stand Up to Big Pharma
The Biden Administration Still Insists That Cannabis Consumers Have No Right to Arms
The Holes in Interpol – The Case of Alex Saab
LOL: Lori Lightfoot Lands Plum Gig Teaching ‘Health Policy and Leadership’ at Harvard
Americans Don’t Need Washington to Drive Up the Price of Air Travel
Liberal Colleges Should Assume the Burden of Student Debt

The Shaming of the Shrew

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of
Democratic National Convention via AP

From the middle of the last century forward, Mamie Eisenhower, Jackie Kennedy, Lady Bird Johnson, Pat Nixon, Betty Ford, Rosalynn Carter, Nancy Reagan, and Barbara Bush, in one way or another, were all gracious First Ladies. They supported their husbands, undertook worthwhile causes, and served as viable ambassadors for the United States. 

A Different Era, to Be Sure

One could argue that they all were raised in an era of male dominance, before the Women's liberation movement took hold. Nevertheless, they were accomplished in their own right. Most did not simply bask in the glory of their husbands. Many were well-versed in literature and had sterling academic credentials. Most had traveled widely, and some could speak foreign languages.

Two other first ladies, not in the chain cited above, could be added to the list, including Laura Bush and Melania Trump. These two ladies, in the face of withering criticism of their husband, of their families, and of themselves, maintained composure and spoke with eloquence. 

They each demonstrated maturity and decorum, which many members of the press and those who opposed their husbands politically would be fortunate were they to acquire those attributes.

Different Strokes

Two first ladies in recent times are anything but what was described above. The first, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is foul-mouthed and eager to cuss out those with whom she disagrees politically. She could make a hardened sailor blush with her gutter language, and we’re talking about long before 2016, or even 2008.

Before she ran for president or ‘served’ as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s potty mouth could fill a large book. Her sordid use of language is, by now, well known among those on the right. Michelle Obama, while not a potty mouth, per se, has joined Mrs. Clinton as a different sort of shrew for the ages.

Like her betrothed, Michelle has sharpened her tongue since the Obamas left the White House. Then and now, next to nothing that the American public does is to the approval of Michelle Obama, unless, of course, the activity is undertaken by someone who leans Left. 

Sowing the Seeds of Hatred

Days ago, Michelle Obama besmirched 72 million-plus Americans by announcing that Trump voters traffic in lies, hate, chaos, and division, specifically: "Let’s remember that tens of millions of people voted for the status quo, even when it meant supporting lies, hate, chaos, and division. We’ve got a lot of work to do to reach out to these folks in the years ahead and connect with them on what unites us." 

Wow. Talk about employing stereotypes and broad-sweeping generalizations. 

I, for one, take her insults personally. I have a college degree and a master's degree. Since 2004, I've devoted roughly 90 minutes a day to reading history, politics, and sociology. At 500 hours per year, that adds up to 8,000 hours. 

I read and watch political news and opinion on the left, right, and middle. I travel widely; I've been to 68 countries and 44 U.S. states. I read about 20 to 25 books per year and I’ve written quite a few books myself, particularly of the how-to variety. 

When I am told by a former first lady that I’m part of a group that supports lies and division, I am personally offended. I have never overtly engaged in any act of racism. I have never catcalled a woman from a distance, like a construction worker might. I've never owned or fired a gun. I have never struck anyone as an adult, although I confess to a few childhood skirmishes. 

The Party of Michelle Obama

I am an unaffiliated voter. After studying both major political parties at length, I’ve reached the conclusion that lies occur, all the time, on both sides. The preponderance of lies and the degree of damage that they do, are much greater on the Left. In terms of division, the Left’s raison d'etre is to disunite factions within the U.S. That is how they gain their power. They scare minorities leading up to every election and then they do nothing for them once in office.

As for hate and chaos, examine what occurred over the summer and early fall in Democrat-run cities. The Left exclaims, “largely peaceful protests,” while the physical damage is so readily visible that a seven-year-old could describe it at length. 

Chaos is the Democrat way. Without it, they'd have nothing on which to run. They are backed by a media that supports their every lie and transgression and their true mission.

Michelle, the Disingenuous

Michelle Obama knows better than this, but as a 12-year swamp creature and a member of the Marxist-progressive-liberal-Democrat machine, it is Michelle who promulgates lies, hate, chaos, and division. 

Mrs. Obama, you don't fool me, and you don't fool the 72 million of us who voted for Donald Trump.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Video