Posted February 27, 2013 at 9:36 am by Sybil Anne Drew, IP Staff Writer

The First Lady appears to making a grand publicity tour and media blitz of unprecedented proportions for a First Lady in effort to kick off the first year of her husband’s second term as president. With her latest appearance being an Oscar Awards presenter, many are now wondering if First Lady Michelle Obama is being groomed for something bigger.

After all, Ms. Obama is still rather young at 49-years-old. She is a former lawyer and graduate of Princeton and her oldest daughter, Sasha, will be an adult by the time Ms. Obama would be eligible for a presidential bid, her youngest daughter will be 16.

While the FLOTUS has previously denied a run for office as recently as last year, she changed her definitive “no” to a “maybe” last Spring after an engaged and adoring media started eying her potential and seizing upon the idea. So could the new publicity tour be part of a grander campaign? As criticism and skepticism grows in light of Ms. Obama’s obvious PR campaign, calls for a Michelle Obama run for the White House in 2016 have just now started to pique interests in social networking circles.

One Michelle for President supporter with the screen name VictoriaNickers tweeted on Wednesday, “Why can’t Michelle Obama be president..she’s way cooler.”

Another supporter tweeted last week, “Michelle Obama for President!”

On the other side of the opinion aisle, Ms. Obama’s close relationship with Hollywood has drawn criticism from several conservative columnists including Jennfer Rubin from the Washignton Post who suggests Ms. Obama’s elbow rubbing with celebrities makes her look more a like tacky celebrity hanger-on than the distinguished wife of a leader of one of the most powerful nations on earth.

If Ms. Obama does run, it would also answer the question as to why President Obama continues to aggressively campaign and keep his campaign offices open across the nation. Given the popularity of Obama and his ability to separate himself from any negative consequences of economic fallout, Ms. Obama could go into the next election as a clear leader.

If Michelle does run, she will likely have a huge advantage in funding, support and preparation. Those looking for a change though, may have a tough road ahead of them if the pubic sees her as an extension of an already highly popular president.

So, what do you think? Could we, and should we, be looking towards another possible eight years of the Obama agenda after Barrack’s term ends?

 

 

Posted February 18, 2011 at 10:08 am by Jessica

The mamasphere and politcos are beside themselves today. The left is fuuuuhhhreakin’ out because Sarah Palin made a “joke” about Michelle Obama’s latest nutrition cause du jour, breastfeeding. Michelle Obama wants all mothers to breastfeed lest their children be sick and dumb.

Sarah Palin’s retort?

“It’s no wonder Michelle Obama is telling everybody you need to breast feed your babies … the price of milk is so high!”

This has caused the mommy blogosphere to go ape shit and accuse Sarah Palin of having a lower IQ than a goldfish. The left has created a mock-fest out of this by smugly and arrogantly pointing out that you don’t give non-breastfeeding babies milk, but rather, infant formula.

Now, I’ll admit, I’m not a big fan of Sarah Palin (in fact, her voice makes me cringe) and I have no confidence in her as an elected official, however, the last laugh is on those who are trying so desperately to degrade Palin and the knee jerk insecurity that goes along with trying to prove that Sarah Palin is an idiot at all costs.

The truth is, if the price of milk continues to go up, so will infant formula — the majority of infant formula in the U.S. uses cow’s milk whey and casein as their base. Furthermore, it was a joke (even if it was a bad one) that made a valid point in my opinion. Perhaps we have more pressing issues (ie; economy, food prices, gas prices, unemployment, etc.) than whether or not an already educated society breastfeeds. Most women in the U.S. at least initiate breastfeeding. The jig is up. We get it. Breast is best, move on already. Lastly, Sarah Palin did in fact breastfeed her children so let’s not try to politicize this.

And this all on the heels of recent press conference President Obama in which Obama threatened the devastation and unethical suggestion of cutting off funding for poor children in this country who need formula. He was playing on American’s sympathy. Think about the children!!

So, which is it? Are we trying to get the poor to breastfeed so we can cut funding to WIC? Or are we trying to get more babies to suck on the artificial breast teat? Maybe Mr. and Mrs. POTUS need more dates, so they can, ya know, talk to each other and get on the same page.

Either way, this should prove to keep the mommy bloggers tied up this weekend.

Where’s the popcorn?

Posted January 22, 2010 at 9:38 am by Kris

A little over a week and a half ago, I posted about a bill being proposed in Indiana that would collect winnings won in casinos by parents who are behind in child support payments and handing them over to the kids.

Last Wednesday, the bill moved forward to the state Senate:

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 9-1 Wednesday to advance a bill to withhold gambling winnings from parents who owe back child support and win more than $1,200 on slot machines and different amounts on other winnings.

Of course, the casinos are still complaining about it, citing the same reason: searching and checking the names against a list of those owing child support would cause a two minute delay on the casino floors.

Two minutes. That’s all.

Two minutes the casinos aren’t making money, I guess….

Governor Mitch Daniels supports the bill, saying:

“…. helping single parents collect child support is more important than any minor inconvenience to casinos.”

See the full article here. (Jan 13, 2010)

Original bill proposal article from ABC. (Jan 6, 2010)

Posted January 16, 2010 at 6:00 am by Kris

In Glasgow, Scotland, a new regulation states

a parent must escort children under 16 years old to the washroom in places such as restaurants.

and any other “licensed” restroom. What are they afraid of? Children being snatched? Pretty sure most 14-16 year olds can handle going to the bathroom by themselves.

“While children are in any part of licensed premises and in particular the toilet areas, they must at all times be within sight of an accompanying adult.”

Really? I’m sure the 15 year olds love that. Mom or Dad  tagging along to the bathroom? Ew. Gross.

They claim the rule is in place to prevent any harm to the children, but it sounds more like businesses covering their butts if something should happen.

They also “expect licensees to apply this rule with a degree of common sense,” the council said.”

A DEGREE OF COMMON SENSE. Right. Doesn’t seem like common sense prevails here.

Read the article here.

Posted January 12, 2010 at 6:00 am by Kris

A group of mothers in Iran gathered in peaceful protest against anti-government protests resulting in their children’s deaths and were then arrested.

The International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, citing an eyewitness account, said more than 100 police and plainclothes officers broke up a gathering of the Mourning Mothers in Laleh Park Saturday afternoon. The group — formed by women whose children have been killed in recent anti-government protests — gathers every weekend at the park to call attention to the deaths.

“They would not allow anyone to even sit on the benches or congregate,” the organization quoted the unidentified witness as saying. “After about 70 mothers entered the park, security forces engaged them and started chasing them, grabbing them, and forcing them into police vans. They used a lot of violence and insults in the process.”

“No culture permits such violence to be unleashed against mothers,” Ghaemi said in a news release posted on the campaign’s Web site. “How can this government, which claims to have moral and religious authority, treat mothers who have lost their children in such a way? The Iranian officials should know that the activities of Mourning Mothers will not stop until their legitimate grievances are properly addressed.”

The group, Mourning Mothers, was founded in response to the highly publicized and controversial election last year with the mission of having the government take responsibility for the deaths.