Michelle Obama Becomes GOP Target

Politico: Both Parties Are Trying To Define Democratic Candidate's Wife For The General Election

(The Politico)  This story was written by Carrie Budoff Brown.

---

It’s less than a week into the general election campaign, but already Michelle Obama is a Republican target.

Former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger leveled the first blow, introducing Republican John McCain’s wife at a fundraiser this week as someone who is “proud of her country, not just once but always.” Obama wasn’t mentioned by name, but the audience got it.

The dig signaled the start of what Democrats expect will be a concerted effort to cast Michelle Obama - and, by extension, Barack Obama - as an unpatriotic radical. It also pointed out the urgency to define Michelle Obama to general election voters before the opposition goes too far in doing it for her, strategists said.

“We live now in an era where everything and everyone is fair game,” said Douglas E. Schoen, who was a pollster and adviser to former President Bill Clinton from 1994 to 2000. “It is certainly the case that Teresa Heinz Kerry was probably not an asset in John Kerry’s campaign, at least publicly, and the jury is still out on how the public will view Michelle Obama.”

Despite being a steady presence at her husband’s side on primary election nights, and sitting for occasional media interviews, Michelle Obama remains an unfamiliar figure to most voters, strategists said. When she campaigned in recent months, it was almost always alone and in small settings. The most sustained attention she received on cable news shows was for her controversial February statement leaving the impression that she wasn’t proud of her country until this year.

“There is no reason to expect her to have a brand. But the campaign needs to start doing that,” said Erik Smith, a Democratic strategist and aide to former Rep. Richard Gephardt during his 2004 presidential campaign. "Defining Michelle Obama goes a long way in defining Barack Obama. I am sure it is a campaign priority."

Indeed, when the campaign launched a website today to combat rumors about Barack Obama's patriotism, his religion and his family, the first entry dealt with his wife.

Other efforts are on tap. She joins the candidate Friday for a roundtable in Ohio with senior citizens and appears as a guest host next week on "The View," the popular daytime talk show, giving her access to friendly, high-profile platforms. Campaign aides said they are “staffing up across the board,” including for Michelle Obama - a move that Schoen said reflects the need to “manage the image and utterances of the spouse.”

The heightened scrutiny “requires a level of staffing and attention to detail that goes beyond what spouses have typically gotten,” Schoen said.

Most voters likely won't decide which candidate to support based on wives. Only 22 percent of respondents in a Rasmussen Reports survey released Wednesday said their perception of the spouse is very important to how they vote. But the more people learn about her, the more people understand her husband, strategists said.

The Rasmussen survey showed Michelle Obama, at this point, as a more polarizing figure than Cindy McCain. Forty-eight percent of voters hold a favorable impression of the presumptive Democratic nominee’s spouse, while 42 percent view her unfavorably, including a “startling” 25 percent with a very unfavorable opinion, Rasmussen wrote in its release.

Cindy McCain earned a favorable assessment from 49 percent of voters and an unfavorable review from 29 percent, including 10 percent who held a very unfavorable opinion.

Michelle Obama receives lower ratings than first lady Laura Bush did during the 2004 campaign but fares better than did Heinz Kerry, whose numbers dropped as Election Day drew closer. Obama is drawing comparisons to another presidential spouse: Hillary Rodham Clinton, who, like Obama, was 44 years old, was Ivy League-educated, earned more money than her husband and raised a child in the spotlight. Clinton also became a lightening rod for the conservative right.

But unlike 1992, the debate isn’t a proxy battle about the traditional bounds for women. Obama, to a greater degree than Clinton, makes her family life the centerpiece of her public image, talking frequently about family-work life balance and her two young daughters.

This time, the criticism is rooted in a combustible mix of race and patriotism.

The Obama campaign and PolitiFact, an independent fact-checking website, have debunked chain e-mails in the last month claiming she advocated racial separatism in her college thesis. Long the domain of rumors about her husband, the e-mails also focused on her February remark: “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.”

Michelle Obama later clarified her statement, saying that her pride was in the political process and that she was “absolutely” always proud of the country.

The Tennessee Republican Party picked up on the remark, however, and posted a Web video last month that juxtaposed her statement with average voters claiming pride in their country.

The video reaped considerable national media attention and drew a sharp response from Barack Obama (“Lay off my wife,” he said at the time). He did the same last week when he was forced to respond to rumors of a video showing his wife using a derogatory term for white people.

“There is dirt and lies that are circulated in e-mails, and they pump them out long enough until finally you, a mainstream reporter, asks me about it,” Barack Obama said to a reporter who asked about the purported video, for which there is no evidence to support its existence. “That gives legs to the story. If somebody has evidence that myself or Michelle or anybody has said something inappropriate, let them do it.”

His comments followed a month of chatter from conservative pundits that the video's release was imminent. The fact that Barack Obama was personally pressed on the matter is said to be a reason why the campaign launched the website, which states on the front page: "No Such Tape Exists."

Chris Lehane, a veteran of Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign, said the Obama campaign faces a choice similar to the one they faced with Hillary Clinton. As she, too, became a target of Republicans, “we made the decision to put her out there and not go into the bunker,” Lehane said.

The campaign gave her “an entire support system,” including more than a dozen aides, he said. By the late summer, attacks on Hillary Clinton at the Republican National Convention backfired as polls showed the criticism had turned off moderate and independent voters.

“They are going to try to make her a focal point of the campaign,” Lehane said of Michelle Obama. The McCain campaign will likely avoid attacks, but independent expenditure groups “will take selectively used phrases, manipulate and exploit them.”

The biggest concern for McCain, said a Republican media consultant, “will be controlling renegade county chairmen and people who have a tendency to be less disciplined about the right thing to say."

“This is an area where people have to be extremely careful," said John Brabender, who is serving as an informal adviser to the McCain campaign. "Voters have grown to believe that spouses are often well off-limits.”

Campaign aides said they expect Michelle Obama to maintain her schedule of several days a week on the campaign trail, at least until her daughters finish the school year. They view her as Barack Obama’s best character witness, introducing him as a father and a husband, and making connections with other women, particularly as the campaign attempts to lock down Clinton voters.

Tucker Bounds, a McCain spokesman, said the Arizona senato is “committed to running a respectful campaign” that is focused on the issues. Bounds, however, did not respond to a request for comment on Eagleburger’s remark.

“She is more likely to be an issue during the slow summer months than the real campaign after Labor Day,” Brabender said. “It is a distraction that campaigns can just not afford.”

[ghostdog8]

I, along with the majority of Americans,am convinced that Borack Hussein Obuma isn''t qualified for anything.

[ghostdog8]

Hillary said it best, "If you can''t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen".

[nanc12]

Now, let''''s talk about rational, posting, want to?
Posted by RowdyWicca

If you''ll recall, Rowdy, I told you last night that you won that argument. You have convinced me that I should no longer think Hillary is qualified for anything.

[rowdywicca]

Never said they were my words, dipwad! And again who the hell are you? Go take your KRAP and stuff it!
Posted by RowdyWicca

LOL - Another lucid, intellectual post.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by nanc12 at 01:46 PM : Jun 16, 2008

OK, How about this one! You who deem yourself intelligent, krap all over Hillary Clinton for months spreading every viscious rumor that abounds trying to PROVE your point she''s not fit for office.

And then you come out and decide she needs to be a Supreme Court Justice! The highest judicial office in the land can be trusted to this total crook that you''ve trashed for MONTHS!

Now, let''s talk about rational, posting, want to?

[nanc12]

Never said they were my words, dipwad! And again who the hell are you? Go take your KRAP and stuff it!
Posted by RowdyWicca

LOL - Another lucid, intellectual post.

[rowdywicca]

Posted by RowdyWicca at 02:05 AM - copied from Larry Johnson blog
Posted by RowdyWicca at 02:10 AM - What the heck was that? A Hillary & Obama debate last night? Did you cut and paste the wrong post? LOL
Posted by RowdyWicca at 02:25 AM - Copied from LA Times article

Rowdy, if you''''re just going to cut and paste, you can at least credit those you are copying from, instead of making it look like those are your words.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by nanc12 at 10:30 AM : Jun 16, 2008

Never said they were my words, dipwad! And again who the hell are you? Go take your KRAP and stuff it!

[kailumego1]

Obama''s an excellent choice for America.

[kailumego1]

cryhavoc2 the marginalization has to do with the "glass ceiling" that still exist for blacks.

I''m merely stating it''s more difficult for educated blacks to earn wages or obtain high-level positions comparable to whites, and the last I checked blacks make around 67% and Asians 82% to that of whites.

[kailumego1]

I might be off marginally on those figures, I''m quoting off the top of my head, from what I remember.

I''ve also read several articles which stated post-graduate blacks have a harder time finding a job than whites, which post-graduate blacks are more likely to obtain employment in the blue collar field after graduation than whites or Asians.

Unfortunately, "institutional racism" still exist, but not in all cases, but it does still exist.

That''s what Michelle Obama wrote in her thesis, the marginalization of educated middle-class blacks in corporate America.

I have a lot of post-graduate family members that have told me some horror stories about how African Americans are treated in upper-level professions, e.g. computer programmers [IT], engineering, marketing, business administration, legal, M.D., etc.

Likewise, I''ve been told favorable stories by some family members in professional positions, so it goes both ways.

Now in Obama''s case he''s had an advantage over a lot of skilled professional educated African Americans, because of his diverse upbringing.

However, the marginalization still does exist, I''m only stating facts I''ve learned from the numerous sociology and ED classes I''ve taken.

Likewise, from my own personal experiences, when I dared to venture out and take certain classes at my university, classes where the student body was predominately Caucasian, I felt the marginalization by the students ostracizing themselves as to let me know I wasn''t welcome here.

[nanc12]

Posted by RowdyWicca at 02:05 AM - copied from Larry Johnson blog
Posted by RowdyWicca at 02:10 AM - What the heck was that? A Hillary & Obama debate last night? Did you cut and paste the wrong post? LOL
Posted by RowdyWicca at 02:25 AM - Copied from LA Times article

Rowdy, if you''re just going to cut and paste, you can at least credit those you are copying from, instead of making it look like those are your words.

[rowdywicca]

How can you say this about a man who is the presumptive nominee for POTUS???? HOW IS HE MARGINALIZED? I think maybe America has come quite a ways in apologizing for past racism, and I think it''''s time for all to give up this obsolete racial prejudice of any sort, by law the country has, those that continue to rage over it maybe have a bad habit to get rid of. On both sides of the question.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by cryhavoc2 at 04:03 AM : Jun 16, 2008

Does that mean that I have stop blaming the government and all the rich people and all the ethnic cultures because the world won''t let me have a lamborghini? You know, because I want one the damned world should make one affordable enough for me to have it! This old ''97 Miata just doesn''t cut it for my lifestyle here in this old farmhouse on the edge of town.

The audacity!

[neoconrcrazy]

attacks on obama''s wife by GOPers (greedy-old-perverts) show just again how low-life these neocon politicians are -

but what else can they do?

they''re ruined the economy, started unnecessary war, got alot of people killed on lies and misrepresentations, so we''ll just have to let they scream at the passing train and be thankful if they never, ever again, return to power.

[kailumego1]

minnick8 obviously you''re extensive research or advanced sociology classes has not given you much insightfulness to how ethnically-heterogeneous societies is economically/socially/politically lethal.

I have a degree in psychology/sociology/anthropology/history, which I''ve did considerable research on ethnic-heterogeneous societies and economic stagnation.

[rowdywicca]

Barack Obama%u2019s willingness to meet with the leaders of rogue states such as Iran and North Korea %u201Cwithout preconditions%u201D is a naive and dangerous approach to dealing with the hard men who run pariah states. It will be an important and legitimate issue for policy debate during the remainder of the presidential campaign.

Consider his facile observations about President Kennedy%u2019s first meeting with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, in Vienna in 1961. Obama saw it as a meeting that helped win the Cold War, when in fact it was an embarrassment for the American side. The inexperienced Kennedy performed so poorly that Khrushchev may well have been encouraged to position Soviet missiles in Cuba in 1962, thus precipitating one of the Cold War%u2019s most dangerous crises.

Such realities should cause Obama to become more circumspect, minimizing his off-the-cuff observations about history, grand strategy and diplomacy. In fact, he has done exactly the opposite, exhibiting so many gaps in his knowledge and understanding of world affairs that they have not yet received the attention they deserve. He consistently reveals failings in foreign policy that are far more serious than even his critics had previously imagined.

[rowdywicca]

What is implicit in Obama%u2019s reference to %u201Ctiny%u201D threats is that they are sufficiently insignificant that negotiations alone can resolve them. Indeed, he has gone even further, arguing that the lack of negotiations with Iran caused the threats: %u201CAnd the fact that we have not talked to them means that they have been developing nuclear weapons, funding Hamas, funding Hezbollah.%u201D

This is perhaps the most breathtakingly naive statement of all, implying as it does that it is actually U.S. policy that motivates Iran rather than Iran%u2019s own perceived ambitions and interests. That would be news to the mullahs in Tehran, not to mention the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah.

It is an article of faith for Obama, and many others on the left in the U.S. and abroad, that it is the United States that is mostly responsible for the world%u2019s ills.

[kailumego1]

gaprddesc I''m ready for a debate any time and any where, on American policies as if relates to the African American dilemma, but unlike you in order to understand the racial dynamics within this country you have to first understand Eurocentric discourse as it relates to Africans or any other ethnically-fractionalized society.

And denial, I don''t think so, it sounds like you''re more in denial than me, because I choose to think outside the box and look at the "whole" picture and not just selected pieces, for that you''re no better than those white folks you have castigated.
I choose to examine the xenophobia that exist between African Americans and use the regression hypothesis as it relates to African Americans in this society.
Because after all, considering the enormous strides "Civil Rights" leaders and activists like A.Phillip Randolf, W.E.D. DuBois, Martin Luther King, Fannie Lou Hammer, Eda Wells, Rosa Parks etc. have made African Americans have taken great strides backwards, notwithstanding.

You talk a good talk, but you conveniently dance around the truth, in which your poignant comments don''t reach far enough into the scope of racial dynamics in America.

[kailumego1]

In order to understand why African Americans remain socially/economically stagnant you have to research into the "collective consciousness" of both Euro-Americans and African Americans.

And examine the reasoning why African Americans continue to be circumscribed socially/economically/politically, while a white majority enjoys prosperity. The disenfranchisement of African Americans lies within Euro-American''s philosophy towards the African race.

So it''s important to examine how Africans and African Americans have played a pivotal role in buttressing Euro-American hegemony over Africa that led to the confiscation of valued resources.

The pivotal role I''m speaking of is ethnic-fractionalization, and since you''ve mentioned Native Americans, you should be able to juxtapose the colonialization of Africa with that of Native Americans, as it relates exploiting existing animosities, weakening internal resolve, and enabling Euro-Americans latitude to conquer entire nations and civilizations.

[kailumego1]

Considering both Africans and Native Americans are of ethnic-heterogeneous societies, this laid the foundation for European invasion, enslavement, and exploitation of valued resources.

And if you''re, as smart as you''ve implied, then you''ll reach beyond your limited scope of reason,to also juxtapose Western Europeans with the Eastern European societies, to see how these comparisons can provide further insight into why Africans, Native Americans, Asians were vulnerable to Western European invasion.

Cohesiveness, technological growth, and homogeneousness is what has kept Western Europeans way ahead of Eastern Europeans, Asians, Africans, etc.

Examine what''s occurring in Northern Africa and in the Middle-East, the religious factionalism that has polarized these regions and led to bitter violence.

The African American prosperity is a lot more complicated than changing the "collective consciousnesses" of white Americans it is an endemic problem within the African American discourse.

So, if you have an insightful solution to a complicated dilemma, by all means discourse.

[rowdywicca]

Maybe she should have said %u201CIf Barack doesn%u2019t manage a decent debate performance, then it%u2019s over%u201D.

And his performance last night was his worst debate performance ever.

Once again, he was completely overshadowed by Hillary%u2019s strong and commanding performance. She looks and sounds presidential while Obama and the rest shrink in stature when they share a platform with her.

I don%u2019t know who the GOP nominee will be but whoever it is will also suffer the stature gap when they debate Hillary. After 6 = disastrous years of the Bush administration %u2013 Americans want competence. And that%u2019s exactly what Hillary offers!

[rowdywicca]

know for a fact that Barack and Michelle Obama would like the tape of her blasting %u201Cwhitey%u201D during a rant at Jeremiah Wright%u2019s church to never see the light of day. They are worried, appropriately so, about the damage this tape will inflict on the Obama campaign. They can be certain of one thing%u2013the tape will hit the blogosphere and TV land come October if Obama is the nominee.

How do I know? I have learned from someone in touch with a senior Republican over this holiday weekend that a major McCain backer has a copy of the tape in addition to the one controlled by the Karl Rove folks. McCain%u2019s supporters are not about to cut Hillary a break. They believe that John McCain stands a better chance of beating Barack rather than Hillary. That%u2019s why they are holding the video. They realize showing it now would likely boost support for Hillary and erode support for Obama among the Super Delegates. Simply put, McCain wants Obama.