Does the First Lady wear pants?

Dear Sarah Palin-

You may not remember me, but I have seen you on TV an awful lot lately, and so I think that this qualifies me to give you some advice. Both personal and political. Don't worry, I have never actually been in politics, but I do have a lot of opinions (just like you) and have spoken in church a lot (which is pretty much like that convention gig - captive audience obligated to tell you they liked your talk) - so don't worry, I'm just the girl you've been waiting for.

So - since there has been so much criticism about you leaving your kids and all to get paid to go galavanting around the world eating fancy dinners and talking fancy talk to fancy people while wearing fancy clothes, and because I am sure you want to avoid such nonsense (the criticism, not the dinners thing) I have come up with this solution (and it's brilliant if I do say so myself) - RUN FOR FIRST LADY.

Now, at first glance this suggestion may puzzle you, especially since your husband is not actually running for president (I'm pretty sure we can get around this), but trust me Sarah Palin, this is going to fix all your problems. You want to serve the country? The First Lady totally serves the country. She has causes and charities and visits victims of bad stuff and diseases and makes speeches to important people and connects with the folks in small town America (you're good at this last part) - all with her children in tow. As a matter of fact, I think Michelle Obama totally makes sure they serve chicken strips and fries at all those fundraisers she's attending to help out Barack. Kids gotta eat too, you know.

You want to travel the world? The First Lady is on the move all the time. Hillary Clinton made 23 trips abroad without her husband (and let's face it - I would have done the same thing if I had her husband) and I'm pretty sure Chelsea must have been with her the whole time, otherwise we would have heard about it from all those political mom watchers that are giving you the "what for". Don't worry, I'm sure you won't catch any heat for spending taxpayer money for extra seats, but be warned - airlines have been cutting back on in-flight snacks and drinks, so you might want to stock up on that stuff (unless First Lady Air Force One gives better service.) I don't know how many trips Dick Cheney's been on, but I'm betting it's pretty close, otherwise there would've been tons more "accidental shootings" in the news.

Then there are the dinners and balls and fancy schmancy stuff you'll have to attend (just like the Vice President) and you get your own staff (just like the Vice President) and there will be big fun changing stuff in the White House, like china (the plates not the country) which is something the Vice President does not get to do. And again, just like Jackie Kennedy, your kids will play around your feet during all of it, reciting their spelling words.

So, Sarah Palin - as long as you're cool with all of the work, but none of the pay - or the power to make any relevant policy decisions (some that might actually help women raising families) - this First Lady thing could be just as good as being the Vice President. The real beauty part is that no one will ask any more questions about who will take care of your family, because as long as you're working for free to build up your husband's career we can all pretend it's something, that like the Jackie Os and Lady Birds before you, can be done on the side while brushing teeth, vacuuming the oval office and driving the car pool.

I told you it was brilliant. Let me know what you think.

Bookmark and Share


Guinns said...

Oh, fab idea!! Ok, I will concede I do like a mother out there representing us. But something just seems slightly "off" with her parenting. Does she ever hold that baby herself? Even in the picture I posted, it looks like he's holding the baby and she just has her hand up to him.

Ok, I'm totally projecting. And actually, I'm rooting for her seeing as my choices are limited. We shall see!

Endre - High Priestess of the Rant said...

ok - so I don't actually know if I'm on board with her politics, or even if I like her as a candidate, no one in the press seems to be focusing on that part of her, but... my point is, that it is unrealistic to believe that women in politically active families have ever been hands on with their kids. (Ex. - the First Lady). The problem is that these "mothering" questions are only raised when women go from "volunteerism" to paid work, or when they are pursuing their own interests instead of propping (sp?) up their husband's. Also, not all moms are nurturers - some just are not affectionate, that is true of fathers as well, but we would never say that Bill Clinton looked uncomfortable in a family photo so maybe we shouldn't vote for him. Should we really penalize a mom simply because she is a different kind of mom than we are - or reward her because she is the same?

Quite frankly, I'm not thrilled about either ticket, and I may not vote for either, but I don't want to discount Sarah Palin because I am at home with my kids and she's not.

Guinns said...

I think part of the problem I'm having is I'm wanting someone in this election to knock my socks off and it hasn't and apparently won't happen. I'm feeling a little claustrophobic with my choices. Although, I admit, I feel like that, at least somewhat, with every election. I hope I'm pleasantly surprised with the outcome. I guess that outcome being in 4 years when all is said and done?

Endre - High Priestess of the Rant said...

I agree - I am not engaged by either ticket. I would have really liked to see someone young and new on the Republican ticket - even though I was totally wanting to vote for him in 2000 when he was running against Bush the first time.