DotMoms

The Kitchen Cabinet: First-Family values, dents and all

By Julie Kirtz Garrett

Are we ready for flawed family values in the White House?  --- uuh yes.

The New York Times Magazine tackles "First-Family Values" in a piece by James Traub, who writes, "In 2009, for the first time, we could have a president and spouse who live like the rest of us."

Are we ready for that? Probably.

I suspect voters learned a long time ago the so-called Perfect Couple is an illusion, whether they live in the White House or down the block.

Traub writes, "Those many Americans who have been knocked around by life (43 percent of first marriages end in divorce within 15 years) might appreciate a White House couple with a few dents and dings."

Traub describes the current First Couple as "a throwback couple like Rob and Laura Petrie from 'The Dick Van Dyke Show'." So let's have some fun. Laura and George Bush are to Dick and Laura Petrie as Barack and Michelle Obama are to Bob and Emily Newhart?

Can you think of any other political couple/sitcom couple match-ups?

Julie Kirtz Garrett is a writer and television reporter. She lives in Washington, D.C., with her husband and three children.

The Kitchen Cabinet: Because I said so

In a piece headlined "Clinton and Female Ambition," The New York Times reports that at a campaign event this morning, Hillary Clinton spoke about President Bush's approach to foreign policy. She said:

"It seems to me that the Bush diplomacy is just, 'Go and do what I tell you to do' ... That doesn't work with your children. That doesn't work with the rest of the world."

Now she tells me.

She was also prepared for a question at last night's debate that was never posed.

"Last night I thought I might be asked the question, 'Well, Senator Clinton, people say that you are ambitious, what do you say to that?' " Mrs. Clinton told a ballroom packed with more than 1,000 women (and a few men) in midtown Manhattan. "I was going to say, 'I assume you'll ask all the men.' "

Clinton told the group voters will ultimately choose a President they want as commander in chief. So, here's a dilemma: How do you convince voters you'd be a strong commander in chief without appearing too commanding for a woman?

The Kitchen Cabinet: Is she a woman or a Clinton?

Newsweek's new issue on "The Bill Factor" raises some interesting questions about Hillary Clinton's candidacy and whether she's "the first woman," "the second Clinton" or (obviously) both.

Jonathan Alter's column seems to represent the confusion about which factor will become most critical to Clinton's candidacy. First, he suggest it's less about gender: "The threshold question for voters is less about putting the first woman in the White House than the second Clinton."

Then, he seems to suggest family (i.e. the Clinton dynasty) is separate from and more important than gender: "In fact, family -- even a dysfunctional family -- often trumps gender, as the election of wives and daughters as heads of state in highly patriarchal countries like India, Pakistan, Argentina, Indonesia and the Philippines attests."

In the end, he admits, "The impact of gender is as much of a wild card for Clinton as our dynastic ambivalence." Possibly because you can't separate gender and the role it plays in our perception of families -- especially the former First Family.

Anna Quindlen's column captures the complexity more clearly:

"The truth is that Senator Clinton has a woman problem, but it's not the one we all might have envisioned decades ago. Certainly there may be Americans who covertly balk at the notion of a female president, despite what they may tell pollsters. And every time Clinton is described as calculating or ambitious, you realize that such words are never used for male politicians because for them both traits are assumed -- and accepted. Old habits die hard. In the first Republican presidential debate, moderator Chris Matthews asked the contenders how they would feel about having Bill Clinton back in the White House. In a single sentence he turned the Democratic front runner into the Little Woman, a mere adjunct to her husband."

Hillary Clinton as a candidate is a woman, a wife, and a mother. If she wins the nomination, she may not be the first female nominee anyone expected. Why? Take your pick: She's a pushover in public about her marriage, a shrew in private; She's too cold, too calculating, too controlling. But then, what do we expect of a nominee for President?

Perhaps we expected the first female nominee to be more like Carol Moseley Braun (who ran for the nomination in 2004) or Elizabeth Dole (2000) or Pat Schroeder (1988) or Shirley Chisholm (1972) or Margaret Chase Smith (1964)? 

Why do we expect or hope a female nominee will be different than a male nominee? Is it naive to expect more (or less) of a woman? Is it revolutionary?

DotMoms Daily: Texting teens, opting in, and more

Photo: Kevin Clark, The Washington Post

In family-related news now:
> For texting teens, an OMG moment when the phone bill arrives (Washington Post)
> Teaching children about money (CBS)
> Single mom wins $1 million lottery (MSNBC)
> When stay-at-home moms go back to work (Newsweek/MSNBC)
> Senator Clinton's "woman" problem (Newsweek/MSNBC)

In family news this week:
> Test can tell baby's sex 6 weeks into pregnancy (AP/MSNBC)
> Kids' brains offer glimpse into life's learning curve (AP/MSNBC)
> Teaching kids label literacy (ABC)
> Boston suburb goes on a diet, slims kids (AP/MSNBC)
> Prescription drug use up in teen girls (WebMD)
> Cartoonist: From Bloom County to Moms on Mars (NPR)
> Does raising children bore you to death? (ABC)
> Where did all the baby sitters go? (Christian Science Monitor)

The Kitchen Cabinet: The "Mommy Party" and campaigning spouses

Here are some headlines and excerpts related to gender and politics:

A Mom Running to Lead the Mommy Party (New York Times)

"Mrs. Clinton is, in essence, a mom running to lead the Mommy Party for all the other mommies (and daddies, too, to be fair), proposing policies that flow from her own insights on how the government does and does not help families. Health care, education, global warming, energy independence, anti-terror efforts, global peace initiatives, disease research: Everything can be traced back to being able to say, the kids are all right."

Spouses Take to the Podium for '08 (ABC)

"Political spouses are no longer just cheerleaders on the sidelines. They are successful women -- and this year there's a man -- in their own right, who have to balance career, family and the expectations that go along with being a political spouse.

"Michelle Obama, the wife of presidential candidate Barack Obama, has already had her fair share of press for balancing career and her role as political spouse and mother. ...

"Her trips to New Hampshire have been day trips; she's flown from the family home in Chicago in the morning and returned the same day. She's often said that she believes it's important to be with her daughters for breakfast, and be home again at night.

"Some spouses are determined to help their partners win, even if they're combatting a terminal illness. John Edwards has pressed on with his campaign, with wife Elizabeth at his side, even after his campaign announced that she had an incurable form of bone cancer. ...

"And she's not the only one pressing on in a spouse's campaign despite daunting responsibilities and obstacles. Ann Romney, the wife of Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts who's seeking the Republican nomination, has a whopping five sons, five daughters-in-law and 10 grandchildren. She also has multiple sclerosis.

"Carolyn Weyforth, deputy communications director for the Romney campaign, said, "[Ann Romney] spends as much time as possible on behalf of her husband out on the campaign trail."

"To see her family, Ann Romney coordinates campaign stops coincide with family time, getting family members to come out on the stump with her. ...

"While people will never vote for a candidate based solely on his wife or family, the family helps create the image of the candidate, according to Bowman. The difference now is that political spouses have never had a greater opportunity to shape that image."