Last Post 67 days, 14 hours Ago
I was just talking to a Relative and he just informed me of a little movement that has been going around in his neck of the woods that was started by a CNN video interview.
He informs me that this past week there has been local discussion and even polls that ask if First Ladies should receive a Salary. This was started on the 15th of Dec in the CNN Student News section. There was a Video that was posted in this section with a Reporter discussing the possibility of a Salary for the First Lady.
Here is the Transcript of the Video:
AZUZ: Before she was first lady, Laura Bush worked as a teacher and librarian. Former first lady Hillary Clinton was a lawyer. Betty Ford even a theatrical dancer! When they moved into the White House thought, they all left the professional world to take on a new role. Some folks question whether that position should be paid. Alina Cho examines the issue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALINA CHO, CNN REPORTER: She'll make history as the nation's first black first lady. But even before her husband's historic win, Michelle Obama was a powerhouse in her own right: an Ivy League-educated lawyer with a six-figure salary. In a month, she'll be moving into a new home and a new full time job, working for free.
ROBERT THOMPSON, PROFESSOR, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY NEWHOUSE SCHOOL: I think most Americans, when they hear the phrase "first lady," still think china patterns, tours through the White House.
CHO: Jacqueline Kennedy won an Emmy for her TV tour of the White House. William Howard Taft's wife, Helen, attended Cabinet meetings, but she said only to keep her husband awake. Nancy Reagan had her "Just Say No" campaign. Then, came Hillary.
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON, (D) NEW YORK: I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession.
CHO: Hillary Clinton redefined the role of first lady, taking on health care, traveling the world. Yet she was never paid a cent.
LISA CAPUTO, FMR. PRESS SECRETARY TO HILLARY CLINTON: We used to joke that we were a moving public works project. Wherever we would go, there would be new roads paved, literally. She defined that role for herself, and I think in many ways helped pave the ground for future first ladies.
CHO: Like Michelle Obama.
THOMPSON: More and more, presidents are going to, I think, have spouses who actually come to the job with a life, with a career. And the kind of things that they do might, in fact, be useful things to employ.
CHO: But a salaried first lady? some say the pay is in the perks: big fancy house, first-class travel, elegant dinners. So, what does the current office holder think?
FIRST LADY LAURA BUSH: No, I don't think it should be a paid post. The spouse of the president is not an office holder; we weren't elected.
Now I would say out of everyone that was quoted on the interview, First Lady Laura Bush has the best understanding of the Constitution. Now we don't know everything that was said by those that were interviewed, but the quote from First Lady Laura Bush was right on. No Elected Officals Spouse is entitled to a Salary. None.
But this little interview has spurned a Movement, at least in my Relative's neck of the Woods in Illinois, that Michelle Obama should get a Salary. Their reasoning is that she had a $300,000 a year job before her husband got elected, so she should get compensated for the fact that she is losing it.
Now there is nothing from the Obama Campaign or the Transition Team or even Michelle Obama herself on this. They are NOT involved that I know of.
But the fact that this Movement has not only gained support, but is growing is a very disturbing Trend.
We can only hope that if Michelle Obama gets wind of this that she does the right thing and says no.
But only Time will tell....
| Member Comments | Total Comments: 8 |
|
|
AnswerMan
Dec 28, 2008 | 8:20 PM |
|||||
|
Patch_W_Adams
Dec 28, 2008 | 9:53 PM |
|||||
|
the4thstooge
Dec 29, 2008 | 8:32 AM |
|||||
|
AMOM
Dec 29, 2008 | 8:50 AM |
|||||
|
Pooks
Dec 29, 2008 | 12:25 PM |
|||||
|
countrygrl2
Dec 29, 2008 | 3:47 PM |
|||||
|
dannbetty
Dec 30, 2008 | 6:40 PM |
|||||
|
RetiredPro
Jan 2, 2009 | 9:03 AM |
|||||
|
|||||
www.poedpatriot.blogspot.
com......................
"But war, in a good cause, is not the greatest evil which a nation can suffer. War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice – a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice – is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other." - John Stuart Mill
Member Since: 4/30/2008