|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:12 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| The wife of the President is extremely influential if he allows her to be. |
There, I fixed it for you.
You're welcome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| The wife of the President is extremely influential if he allows her to be. |
There, I fixed it for you.
You're welcome. |
And Barack allows his woman a lot of free range. She will be influential. Count on it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
Well, in terms of character development, I think Elizabeth's bout with cancer is quite relevant. As for what you said about the dubious relevance of having a career, I must agree. But Elizabeth's presentation and the things she has said have revealed things about her that I like (I like her FAR more than her husband). Michelle's presentation and the things she has said has revealed very little about her except that she's really proud of her country now that her husband has a chance. Oh, yes, and she understands the plight of working people because she experiences the rising cost of summer programs for her children.
|
Christ almighty, what is it with you Americans and your obsession with the presidential family?! Is this a recent thing, some sublimated longing for monarchy rearing its scaly head out of the mists? |
No. The wife of the President is extremely influential if she wants to be. You think Hillary Clinton didn't influence Bill? Its like a cabinet position, except you sleep with the President, and have the President's full trust. |
Fair enough. But then I guess I could ask why it seems to be a peculiarly American(or perhaps small-r republican) phenomenon for the top guy's wife to have so much influence that people worry about her credentials. I'd say that in Canada, the PM's wife is regarded as being little more than a celebrity. I don't really recall people debating how much influence she has on policy.
I dunno. Maybe the PM's wives really do have all this enormous influence, and Canadians are just too naive to see that it should be an issue. I'd be hard pressed to think, though, of one major decision made by any PM that historians have claimed was significantly influenced by his wife.
Gopher wrote:
| Quote: |
Some of us, in fact, would like to know exactly what -- or at least more or less what, especially its tone -- Michelle Obama would whisper into Barack Obama's ear were they to win power.
|
When the issue is put that way, I can see the point. If the wife of the prime minister were known to be a neo-nazi, for example, it would raise questions about what sort of people the PM is drawn to, as well as the kind of advice she might give him. But Kuros was critiquing Michelle's career resume, not her political ideology or intelligence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
One more thing...
If attention to the First Lady's career etc is justified by her influence on the president, does this also apply to other levels of government? I don't see why it shouldn't. If I'm someone who really worries about politics at the state level, for example, should I be inquiring as the what sort of career a gubernatorial candidate's wife has?
And do Americans tend to have these sorts of debates at all levels of government?
(Not to sound like a smug Canadian here, there are a million oddball things about the Canadian system I don't like, starting with the senate.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| You know, I don't even know what Stephen Harper's wife looks like, and I'm a pretty avid follower of Canadian politics. I think she was blonde. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
I recognize that Michelle Obama is intelligent and has had an outstanding career. My only interest in her is her true ideology, and how exactly this would come into play if Barck Obama won the election, and what exactly she would advise him re: decisions A, B, and C...
| On the other hand wrote: |
| I'd say that in Canada, the PM's wife is regarded as being little more than a celebrity. I don't really recall people debating how much influence she has on policy. |
You are discussing that which Candians "regard" and "debate." But I get the impression that you remain unsure about it yourself. And Mithridates comes here to prove your point by stressing that he knows nothing about the Canadian Prime Minister's wife. I see this, as you suspect, as yet another indicator that Canadians do not understand reality or would rather deny reality in the interests of defining themselves as different than Americans. And, in any case, as I suggest here, I strongly suspect that you recognize, at least privately, that in nations such as Ameria and Canada, a political leader's wife often wields all kinds of influence, only informally and usually behind-the-scenes.
| On the other hand wrote: |
| And do Americans tend to have these sorts of debates at all levels of government? |
The only time Americans come together and vote on a single issue is the presidential election. Ours is a presidential republican democray, and not a parliamentarian democracy. The president and his wife (or "and her husband," however this may be) command much authority and influence on a wide range of issues. Therefore we scrutinze them.
It is not always fair. Just ask Colin Powell.
Last edited by Gopher on Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:20 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I see this as another indicator that Canadians do not understand reality or would rather deny reality in the interests of defining themselves as different that Americans. |
Well, I don't think it's a matter of Canadians going around and saying "Hey, we're so much cooler than those Americans because we don't ask questions about the leaders wife". The issue, to the extent that there is an issue, just doesn't get framed that way.
| Quote: |
| And, in any case, I strongly suspect that you recognize, at least privately, that in nations such as Ameria and Canada, a political leader's wife often wields all kinds of influence. |
Yeah, I think I'd agree with that, in many cases. But I still don't quite see how it relates to the questions that Kuros was asking, which dealt with Michelle's career history. Unless a First Lady's career was in a field related to something that the president oversees(and here we are pretty much talking about economics, military, and foreign policy), I don't get how examining her employment record is really gonna tell you anything about the kind of advice she will give her husband.
Nancy Reagan is regarded as having pushed Ronnie into signing an arms control agreement with the Soviets, right? Now, if anyone had examined her career history prior to the 1980, would they have been able to foresee that she would take that position? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
While it is true that Canadians have a "not America" identity, sometimes we are just generally interested in the inner workings of the American political system. It would never occur to most Canadians that the ideas of the PM's wife should be an election issue, largely because it wouldn't occur to most Canadians that ideas should be an election issue.
The whole election process in the United States is quite the show to watch, and there are many different layers that one can choose to watch. Most Canadians choose to focus on the Daily Show level of political discourse, where the absurdities of network news are over emphasized and smugly giggled at. Har Har, surely we don't act like that! This makes us feel better about ourselves. I don't think OTOH is in that camp. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have never placed On the Other Hand in that camp.
As far as Kuros's views go, you will have to await his response, On the Other Hand. I hope I have already made my reasons for discussing Michelle Obama clear enough.
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Nancy Reagan is regarded as having pushed Ronnie into signing an arms control agreement with the Soviets, right? Now, if anyone had examined her career history prior to the 1980, would they have been able to foresee that she would take that position? |
She, and a small collection of insiders that she led, dominated Reagan's thinking and actions on multiple cabinet appointments, especially on the White House staff. In other words, she very much influenced who the people would be who surrounded and talked to Reagan.
And let us not leave out the astrologer. Some people would probably liked to have known that before voting Reagan into office, I imagine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The president and his wife (or "and her husband," however this may be) command much authority and influence on a wide range of issues. |
I do find it interesting that you talk about the "president and his wife" as an undifferentiated coupling, as if they both have the same position.
| Quote: |
| The only time Americans come together and vote on a single issue is the presidential election. |
Yes, but other, lower-level elections, must surely occupy a prominent place in some people's concerns, depending on what issues are of interest them. Take real estate developers, for example. They would probably pay a lot of attention to municipal elections, because it's city councils that make the decisions on zoning and whatnot. So, if a bunch of condo tycoons are gabbing about the upcoming city elections over lunch, are they likely to devote a lot of time to wondering about the wives of the mayoralty candidates? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
She, and a small collection of insiders that she led, dominated Reagan's thinking and actions on multiple cabinet appointments, especially on the White House staff. In other words, she very much influenced who the people would be who surrounded and talked to Reagan.
|
Yeah, but was there anything about her prior career that indicated what sort of appointments she would be recommending? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
There would certainly be something in her private career, in the choices she has made on this or that, and why she made them, that would give us some indication on her inner thinking re: "America." I have done no homework on this, however, and can say nothing more than I have heard enough that I would like to know her true, inner worldview, and what she would do once in power, through and in cooperation with her husband.
| On the other hand wrote: |
| I do find it interesting that you talk about the "president and his wife" as an undifferentiated coupling, as if they both have the same position. |
In many cases that is exactly what it is. The best example I can think of are William J. and Hillary Clinton. Also, FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt and, as we have discussed, Ronald and Nancy Reagan. No doubt Barack and Michelle Obama would be another such couple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| And let us not leave out the astrologer. Some people would probably liked to have known that before voting Reagan into office, I imagine. |
Point taken. But you know, part of me really leans toward thinking that astrologers and whatnot basically just function as glorified pop psychologists, who basically end up just giving you the same advice that any reasonably competent listener would. Let's say Nancy Reagan hadn't gone to the astrologer for advice. She'd probably just have gone to see some Beverly Hills Jungian instead. Or called up some of her old sorority sisters and gone for martinis.
And I gotta say, Goph. I'm a little surprised to see you arguing for what I always regarded as an oversimplified leftist view of the Reagan White House, ie. "Aww man, it was just an senile old hack film star led around by his wife and her fortune teller, hey anyone got any good jelly bean jokes!!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| There would certainly be something in her private career, in the choices she has made on this or that, and why she made them, that would give us some indication on her inner thinking re: "America." |
Yeah, that's true. But that doesn't really relate to the length of her resume, but rather to the decisions that she made while in her various jobs. But as you say, that's a point that I can argue with Kuros. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was right, she was blonde:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Spouses_of_G8_leaders%2C_July_2006.jpg
There should be a simple way to determine the amount of interest per capita by country.
"George Bush": 27.7 million
"Laura Bush": 2.6 million
so that makes 10 to 1.
"Barack Obama": 59.1 million
"Michelle Obama": 2.7 million
that's 21.9 to 1.
"Stephen Harper": 2.4 million
"Laureen Harper": 5,630
which comes out at 426 to 1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
