Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

The wowOwow Interview | 10/20/2008 5:00 am

Michelle Obama Tells Lesley Stahl: Some Won't Vote for Barack No Matter What

Michelle Obama, Election 2008, Campaigning, Lesley Stahl Interview, Politics
© AP

With only days before the election, wowOwow’s Lesley Stahl caught up with Michelle Obama …

Lesley: If you win, you’ll be inheriting an economy in as dire a condition as most of us have ever seen. Do you see a role for the First Lady in dealing with the psychology of tough times? What can a First Lady do?

Michelle: Leading us out of this economic crisis is the job of the next president. But the First Lady can help in crucial ways. She can be a bridge to communities across the country – talking with folks about their concerns, their struggles and their hopes for the future. Over the last year and a half, I’ve been hosting roundtable discussions with working women and military spouses, and I’ve heard countless stories from women and families who are having a really tough time in this economic downturn. They’re doing everything they can to make a good life for their families, but still, they’re slipping. 

I’ve really treasured these discussions. It’s been incredibly valuable to hear these women’s voices and their stories. As First Lady, I would keep these conversations going, and bring their stories back to my husband and his staff, because our president really needs to understand the challenges that working women and military families face, so he can enact policies that will truly bring change people really need to their everyday lives. In an Obama White House, those conversations will happen. We’ll keep talking and we’ll keep listening. I want to help women and families have more of a voice in our government. They deserve it.  

Lesley: As we come down to the last three weeks of the campaign, the polls are showing almost a "tipping point" slide toward your husband — with states usually thought of "rosy red" turning "berry blue." Do you trust the polls? Or do you think there’s some hidden racism?

Michelle: I think there are two conversations that have been going on throughout this whole election. There is the conversation that has been happening with the pundits about the polls and the campaign combat. And then there is the conversation that has been happening on the ground. The folks out there aren’t really interested in the horse race and the negative back and forth. They want to know about the positions that the candidates have on the issues. They want to hear how our next president is going to help this struggling economy.

And of course, there will always be people who won’t vote for Barack Obama no matter what. But there are also people who will not vote for John McCain no matter what. That’s always the case in politics. But we don’t focus on that. We focus on getting out the facts about Barack’s ideas and his positions on the issues, and the values that guide him.  

Lesley: Raising children as part of the First Family is a unique challenge. I actually covered Amy Carter’s first day at public school. Chelsea Clinton went to a private school, and seems to have had as normal an upbringing as is possible. What do you think about raising your girls in the White House? What are the pros and cons? And what kind of school are you thinking about?

Michelle: Barack and I have been really proud of how the girls have handled themselves throughout the campaign. They have taken this campaign in stride, in their own individual ways. They’ve learned a lot, and they’ve managed to have some fun, too, which is wonderful. And if Barack has the honor of serving as our next president, we will work hard to make sure our girls have smooth adjustment to life in Washington. That will be my No. 1 job. I’ve already had some great conversations with Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore and Caroline Kennedy, and they’ve all given me great advice on how to make sure that your kids stay grounded and whole — even in the White House. But you know, that comes later. For now, we are staying focused on getting out our message and getting out the vote for the Obama/Biden ticket. We are taking this experience one day at a time.

518 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Buh- Bye
the very opposite. i see gray areas everywhere. but i do believe actions speak volumes. i believe when you run a sexist campaign… there’s a pretty good chance you are sexist at the core. i believe when you compromise your values for career progression once, there’s a pretty good chance you will do it again. i believe personal sacrifice in the face of potential death is courage and honor under fire
By Buh- Bye on 10/20/2008 7:10 pm
f p
Now who’s running a sexist campaign? Are you talking about McCain because his views on women are certainly obvious—he has contempt for women which show in his serial adulteries and the way he has treated both his wives. And in his views on women’s choices over their own bodies and his very recent statement on liberal feminists in Missouri—that the guy you’re talking about? Tell me what do you know about courage and honor under fire? just curious. http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE2JCSH5p9r2GBkQWS9TWAMzmuvQD93UGB700
By f p on 10/20/2008 7:33 pm
Buh- Bye
Oh for crying out loud - this is an attempt to change the subject from Colin Powell. Frank, you said “Man I wish I had you self-righteousness and surety of people’s motives.” when I stated that Powell subverted the truth about the reason for going to war to fall in line with Bush’s wishes. Powell said himself on Jim Lehrer that he didn’t think it was the right thing to do. This was not a bad land deal he entered into. This was the lives of thousands of young Americans he put at stake. It does not take much of moral compass to understand that sending young men and women into battle based on lies is wrong. It is downright treasonous in my books. People are dead because of that decision and Powell played a major role in it. I think Marjorie made a strong point about the mentors that Barack Obama draws around him. Incendiary characters like Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Ayers. And men who willingly compromised their integrity to the peril of others, Powell. I rest my case.
By Buh- Bye on 10/21/2008 10:28 am
f p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_MRanG6kqU&eurl=http:// Check out McCain’s views on the liberal feminist agenda and Palin as antidite to this.
By f p on 10/20/2008 7:41 pm
Zera Lee
Powell was deliberately deceived about the veracity and completeness of the information given to him. The Bushies used his respectability and honor to sell their war, and here you are blaming the Iraqi war on it’s very first victim. How compassionate. Once he discovered the truth, it was too late to block the war. He did the only thing he could, he resigned. You do not know the information he had to go on or the pressure he was under, and yet you presume to judge him? We agree that the Iraq war was a mistake of monumental proportions, but we do not agree on the guilty party or the best way forward for the country. You seem perfectly willing to give McCain a free pass, and yet I have noticed that he thinks in military terms. He mentioned how he saved the taxpayers money on the air tanker contract, but he left out later scandals and corruption which resulted in the awarding of the entire contract being stopped and re-evaluated. He did not mention Star Wars, the Osprey, or exotic weapons from a wasteful spending standpoint. He even quotes military personnel for non-military situations. He likes to use military nuclear energy use as an example of safety, while ignoring the civilian safety history. How convenient. If anyone is going to get us into another unjustified war we cannot afford, or even provoke another war, it’s Mr. Preconditions and Gov. “I can see Russia”. IMO
By Zera Lee on 10/20/2008 10:29 pm
Susan B
Alias, out of respect for those who hold opposing presidential views to yours, could you drop the “Obamacan” reference? And if not for them, for yourself. It doesn’t give credence to you as thoughtful and open-minded person. I enjoy reading and thinking about your posts, but that particular term has the power to dismiss your comments. (However, referring to the press as “bobbleheads” is perfect!)
By Susan B on 10/20/2008 12:12 pm
Buh- Bye
I understand your dislike of that Susan. To me Obamacans are robotic bobble-heads who gobble up everything Obama does and says with total devotion, zero thought and aggressive defense of same. They differ from other Obama supporters who may support their candidate but are also able to criticize him when his policies are suspect or go off track, or when he reneges on a campaign promise. I am a huge Hillary supporter. But I screamed (literally) at the TV set the day she voted for the war. She was wrong. So was Biden. And so was Powell. The difference is, Powell was right on the front lines of this thing. In the west wing. He was - so he says - against the invasion. And still, knowing it was wrong, he took Cheney/Bush and Rumsfeld’s war to the floor of the UN, and to press outlets across the land to sell it. He actively pressed for the war. For Obama to support him now, to embrace him, to accept advice from him, is totally creepy. And Obamacans who genuflect at every little thing he does, worries the hell out of me. You know, yesterday I had a 20 year old college student in my office - who I assumed was in the tank for Obama. She informed me quite clearly that she was not, and that a lot of McCain supporters were flying under the radar, not putting up signs or touting their candidate because of the volatility of this election and the rabid nature of Obama supporters. I said that I thought Obama would win. But her opinion was that polls were off, because most of the polling was hitting Obama supporters. I guess we’ll soon see. (I’ll do my best to refrain from the Obamacans reference in respect to you.) :)
By Buh- Bye on 10/20/2008 7:15 pm
Susan B
I understand your line of thinking, and thanks for thinking twice before you use that term. I honestly don’t see what the big bruhaha about Powell is, other than everyone on the face of the earth seems to have been waiting for him to voice his support for one candidate or another. There’s a theory flying around that he feels screwed by the GOP, that they hung him out to dry and didn’t give him the “true” info re Iraq, and now he’s getting back at them. Stranger things have happened, I suppose. I just don’t know, and probably none of us really do, either. Rabid followers of any politician give me the willies. They need to get a life. Seriously. The polling … I wish there was no polling. It’s kind of like finding out the sex of your baby before it’s born. I’d rather wait until election day and be surprised. Human nature tends to want to know ahead of time. Why? But whatever would the pundits on cable talk about for two years without polling? Bah. McCain is really creepy, that’s my feeling. I can’t help but be bothered by him. He’s scraping the bottom at this point — spreading the wealth by adjusting the tax code, socialism? puleeese! Socialism is when the government has control of ALL the means of production and the distribution of product and capital. (I learned that in high school.) We’re not even close to adopting socialism. It’s just ridiculous. But it sure works on the uninformed, of which there are millions in this country. And how is that any worse than concentrating the wealth upward? Of course, I also know that there are plenty of others who have equal misgivings about Obama. No surprise. Anyway, too much drama. btw, I was and am a Friend of Hillary, voted for her in the primary. She needs to get rid of her husband and try again.
By Susan B on 10/21/2008 12:25 am
Buh- Bye
I LOVE her husband! No way does she need to get rid of him. We have plenty of socialism in this this country already. We have socialized military, roads, schools, etc., etc. And NOW we have banks! We would do well to add one more to the tally - socialized medicine. I’m all for socialized medicine. It’s backward not to have it.
By Buh- Bye on 10/21/2008 10:35 am
Susan B
We have socialized programs and organizations, not socialism. We also have fascist and theocratic ideologies at work in our laws and policies, but our country remains a democracy. That’s my point. I’m all for socialized medicine, too. Live in England and France for a while, and most of us would beg for the same thing here. What we have now in America is elitist medical care. Only the well-to-do can afford to get sick. I say, let the people who can afford it keep their “private” medical care, and give the rest of us an option to try another method. The one we have isn’t working. I am a great fan of BIll, too. And I still have great respect for his amazing mind and ability to connect with people. But I really think his tremendous ego ruined her bid for president. He doesn’t know how to be in the background.
By Susan B on 10/21/2008 10:55 am
Star Lawrence
What do you think of Sen Biden’s statement today that if they are elected, Pres Obama will be tested by foreign powers within six mos? I say—better not get elected, then.
By Star Lawrence on 10/20/2008 1:05 pm
f p
Of course he’ll be tested—you’d expect a free ride maybe—the econ situation is going to be test enough for all concerned on this planet—because it’s a global problem now and not just limited to here. So yes he’ll be tested—what president hasn’t been?
By f p on 10/20/2008 1:18 pm
Star Lawrence
Many are not being this sanguine—check the news tonight.
By Star Lawrence on 10/20/2008 1:36 pm
Luckyann Melnick
Personally I don’t understand why people express a fear of Obama being tested with international crisis and not of McCain being tested with the same thing. POW or no POW the man is a hot tempered bellicose guy. As Obama rightly pointed out, he sang bomb bomb iran - he looks toward military force as a first resort not a last resort and then on top of all of it, he has an abysmal record on veterans issues. Obama on the other hand has a unbelievable calm, an investment in diplomacy first and force last, and happens to have a very good record on veterans issues thereby putting his money where his mouth is. I can’t imagine how people could have watched the debates and this campaign and feel comfortable with McCain making the decisions. He does not have the temperament to make a good president.
By Luckyann Melnick on 10/20/2008 2:08 pm
Marjorie C.
Star: ‘…better not get elected, then.’ That would be too simple.
By Marjorie C. on 10/20/2008 2:06 pm