Princess Michelle

[Bobinator]

Well, it seems we have ourselves a self-appointed princess-

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13827

[localmoco]

Re: Princess Michelle

Snopes.com says Michelle Obama's staff is about the same as Laura Bush's. It may be excessive, but it's not "unprecedented".

[cyleet99]

Re: Princess Michelle

Hillary: 13 attendants.
Laura: 15 attendants.
Michelle: 24-26 depending on who you ask.


24-15=9 more for Michelle than Laura. NINE MORE PEOPLE to take care of the First Lady and her business.

Looks pretty unprecedented to me.

But I cannot see why you need that many people and a million dollars a year to pay them.

[helen]

Re: Princess Michelle

I suspect that the article didn't take into account the Secert Service people that travel with the First Lady so that adds to the number of people that are attached to her.

For the current list the bottom 6 people are assistants to the other positions. So either in the past they used temporary help or felt that the work was too much to do with the people that they had back then.

It's hard to say on this, on one hand someone is hiring people to do work (whatever that may be), or maybe the positions had been planned and funded by previous administrations but only now they became active.

Plus the number of positions have increased over the administrations. Since Clinton had 13, Bush had 15, maybe Obama having 17 or 18 people would have been a reasonable increase?

[scrivener]

Re: Princess Michelle

I didn't read the article, but the First Lady's job (and it's a job; and it isn't always held by the spouse of the President) is to run the White House. It is quite possible that the job has grown in recent years so that extra staffers are required. As you know, the size of a job often grows with the competence of the person doing the job. I'd be inclined to give anyone in such a position the benefit of the doubt. I didn't like the way the media slammed Mrs. Reagan when she had the china replaced either. That's part of the job and I'm not one to tell someone how to do his or her job unless he or she is an elected official, in which case it's my duty to do so.

[Bobinator]

Re: Princess Michelle

I didn't read the article, but the First Lady's job (and it's a job; and it isn't always held by the spouse of the President) is to run the White House. It is quite possible that the job has grown in recent years so that extra staffers are required. As you know, the size of a job often grows with the competence of the person doing the job. I'd be inclined to give anyone in such a position the benefit of the doubt. I didn't like the way the media slammed Mrs. Reagan when she had the china replaced either. That's part of the job and I'm not one to tell someone how to do his or her job unless he or she is an elected official, in which case it's my duty to do so.

I highly doubt Michelle is working any harder than any other First Lady. At any rate, none of them wore $500 designer tennis shoes. Not to mention the family vacations they take every other month. I'm sure the Secret Service is really overjoyed. One thing is certain is that Bush saved a lot of $ because he didn't take up the game of golf or make celebrity appearances with Jay Leno.

[StinkyTheGrump]

Re: Princess Michelle

From Snopes.com -
"The 2008 White House Office Staff List, issued during the final year of President George W. Bush's tenure in office, includes sixteen different staffers with the words "First Lady" in their position titles - exactly the same number as that listed for Michelle Obama in 2009. If all staffers listed with "Social Secretary" in their titles are included as part of the First Lady's retinue (as was done with the Michelle Obama example), then Ms. Bush had at least 18 people working for her in 2008 (not including any of the various personnel listed only as "Staff Assistants," some of whom may also have worked for her directly or indirectly). Given that the size of the First Lady's staff varies over time (and Laura Bush reportedly had 24 staffers working for her at one point during her husband's eight years in office), it's fair to say that the size of Michelle Obama's staff is not "unprecedented," but rather on a par with her predecessor's."

Don't believe every chain email that gets sent out.

[cyleet99]

Re: Princess Michelle

Don't believe every chain email that gets sent out.

Who's reading chain emails? This came from another source; probably the inspiration for the erumors. And those folks called the First Lady's staff for the list.

[StinkyTheGrump]

Re: Princess Michelle

Who's reading chain emails? This came from another source; probably the inspiration for the erumors. And those folks called the First Lady's staff for the list.

There is a chain mail going around with the same information.


Edit: No one is questioning the veracity of the number of Michelle's staff, that's not the issue. The issue is that it is false to claim that the number on her staff is unprecedented.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Princess Michelle

Canada Free Press clearly identifies themselves on their masthead as "a conservative free press."

Why would anyone be foolish enough to expect fully-truthful, unbiased, spin-free reporting from any source that identifies its political bent right up front, no matter what side it is on? (It's tough enough to ferret out honest reportage from the media outlets that hide their political perspective.)

[cyleet99]

Re: Princess Michelle

Even though the CFP lists themselves as conservative, wouldn't you believe the listing of staff given by the staff themselves? The same information could easily be listed by any number of liberal or moderate sources.

Would y'all like that better?

I don't think this is a party-based argument, nor do I think this is conservative vs. liberal.

Leo, are you able to list any "fully-truthful, unbiased, spin-free reporting?" Who is honest and unquestioned? No sources I have ever seen fill that bill.

I may be wrong, but I would rather know who I am reading from up front than be looking over every "About Us" page and hope I recognize the unlisted bent.

[StinkyTheGrump]

Re: Princess Michelle

Like I said in my previous post the number of people that she has in her staff is not the point of contention (for me at least). According to the snopes entry Mrs. Bush had 24 at one time. On a side note I think that both first ladies had way too many people on their staffs and the president also has too many on his staff. But I also think that approx 30% of the gov could lose their job tomorrow with little more than a hiccup noticed by the rest of the country.

[cyleet99]

Re: Princess Michelle

I agree, Mr. Stinky!

Leo, I agree with you, too, in that we need good resources for reporting that are trustworthy. Everyone's got an agenda.

[buzz1941]

Re: Princess Michelle

The Obamas also have children. The last child in the White House was Chelsea Clinton.
What is also "unprecedented" is the number of death threats against the Obamas, hence, increased security.

[Bobinator]

Re: Princess Michelle

The Obamas also have children. The last child in the White House was Chelsea Clinton.
What is also "unprecedented" is the number of death threats against the Obamas, hence, increased security.

For good reason. He'd be safer in Kenya.