“In my own life, in my own small way, I have tried to give back to this country that has given me so much,” she said. “See, that’s why I left a job at a big law firm for a career in public service, “ - Michelle Obama

Michele Obama does not get paid to serve as the First Lady and she doesn’t perform any official duties. But this hasn’t deterred her from hiring an unprecedented number of staffers to cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession. Just think Mary Lincoln was taken to task for purchasing china for the White House during the Civil War. And Mamie Eisenhower had to shell out the salary for her personal secretary. The bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by John Q. Public:
1. $172,2000 - Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)
2. $140,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Policy And Projects For The First Lady)
3. $113,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (Special Assistant to the President and White House Social Secretary)
4. $102,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications for the First Lady)
5. Winter, Melissa E. (Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
6. $90,000 - Medina, David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
7. $84,000 - Lelyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
8. $75,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)
9. $70,000 - Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Projects for the First Lady)
10. $65,000 - Burnough, Erinn J. (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
0A 11. Reinstein, Joseph B. (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
12. $62,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator For The First Lady)
13. $60,000- Fitts, Alan O. (Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)
14. Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
15. $52,500- Mustaphi, Semonti M. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary To The First Lady)
16. $50,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special Assistant for Scheduling and Traveling Aide To The First Lady)
17. $45,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence For The First Lady)
18. Tubman, Samantha (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)
19. $40,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
20. $36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant t o the Social Secretary)
21. Bookey, Natalie (Staff Assistant)
22. Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
Copyright 2009 Canada Free Press.Com
canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12652 http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12652 http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12652
There has never been anyone in the White House at any time that has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life. One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense, when even Hillary, only had three; Jackie Kennedy one; Laura Bush one; and prior to Mamie Eisenhower social help came from the President's own pocket.
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One to Europe."

Inappropriate or justifiable? You decide...

22 people as staff for the First Lady does not sound absurd to me. And both you and I know that those total combined salaries mean absolutely nothing in the grand schemes of this economy, and they are just numbers that people are throwing out there so some news station or newspaper has a story and ratings.

Personally, I don't care about any of this. How many times did the Bush's use AF1 to fly back to Crawford and how do those numbers compare with these salary totals? Not trying to start a war here, but ALL presidents, their wives, their families, cost the US taxpayer TONS of money. If people don't like it, then lets not elect a president.

Personally, I really like Michelle Obama, and think she's a step off the beaten path in terms of first ladies, and I like the fact that she's more vocal than Laura Bush, but not as brazen as Hillary. Does she have a career in politics? Probably not, but she's doing in a good job in my opinion and seems to be well educated. I'm not embarrassed at all to call her the First Lady of the US.

UAL

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): You decide...

Doesn't look much different from Laura Bush.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/about...weekly/stories/2007/whsalaries.htm


Maybe this thread should be locked because it is just been proven untrue!

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 1): ALL presidents, their wives, their families, cost the US taxpayer TONS of money.

   And while 22 staffers does seem a little much, I think it's a reflection partly of the times we're in, and partly of Michelle Obama herself. It's a reflection of the times because she knows she's under a public microscope, and she needs the staff to make sure that things don't go awry on that end. It's a reflection of herself because, so far, she's been more active than Laura Bush has (not that I'm criticizing Ms. Bush for it - they're just different sorts of people), and that requires more assistance.

-Mir

Sounds about right. I have alot of respect for Michelle Obama. She is natural and she comes across as someone who actually cares unlike previous first ladies.

You should see how much the Irish criminals... ( Politicians ) cream off us !! The Irish leader apparantly gets paid more than Obama.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 2): Doesn't look much different from Laura Bush. http://www.nationaljournal.com/about...s.htm

Here is Mrs. Bush List....

McBride, Anita B. Assistant to the president and chief of staff to the first lady $168,000.00

Harder, Cherie S. Special asistant to the president for domestic policy and director of project of the first lady $108,000.0

Niemiec, Sally M. Press secretary to the First Lady $90,000.00

Miller, Sonja M. Deputy chief of staff to the first lady $84,700.00

Ballard, Deanna M. Director of scheduling for the First Lady $75,000.00

Underwood, Carrie P. Deputy director of policy and projects for the First Lady $65,000.0

Wallace, Charity N. Director of advance for the First Lady $65,000.00

Marshall, Misty C. Director of correspondence for the first lady $59,700.00

Etter, Marisa L. Deputy director of scheduling for the First Lady $50,000.00

King, Kristin N. Deputy director of advance for the first lady $50,000.

ineweaver, Lindsey M. Special assistant and personal aide to the first lady $47,500.00

Rawson, Kimberly D. Executive assistant to the chief of staff to the First Lady $46,200.00

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Laura Bush one

More then "one".. you decide..

Quoting OA260 (Reply 4): Sounds about right. I have alot of respect for Michelle Obama. She is natural and she comes across as someone who actually cares unlike previous first ladies.

Oh? Care to name a few?

Quoting OA260 (Reply 4): who actually cares unlike previous first ladies.

Don't let Hillary Clinton hear that!  

Actually, Laura Bush is quite intelligent, and when she spoke on the Myanmar Crisis she was quite eloquent, totally caught me off guard. Though, she seemed to take a back seat. But there are lots of first ladies who have done quite a lot....the only one I quesion, and probably because of my age, was Barbara Bush. Not sure what her cause was, and for that matter, Laura's, though I know Laura was into education.

I also think you'll find a difference between the Republican First Ladies and what are considered their duties, and Democrat First Ladies, and what are considered their duties, based on political ideology. Though, I hope that is changing.

UAL

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 2): Maybe this thread should be locked because it is just been proven untrue!

I hope not. Its proof of certain people who are willing to fling poo without considering that they might be splattered too.

Ahh to be so blind!

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 8): hope not. Its proof of certain people who are willing to fling poo without considering that they might be splattered too. Ahh to be so blind!

This goes both ways.

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 7): Don't let Hillary Clinton hear that!

LOL.. she was nice but no where near Michelle IMHO.

At least we have it, she could have pulled a Cheney and refused to release the staff list.

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 5):

I may not remember alot of high school math but if I remember some I think that

22>12

If I did that right then Michel's 22 is greater than Laura's 12


Michelle costs us: $1,256,000
Laura costs us: $910,000

Michelle is alot more high maintenance and requires 10 more people than Laura.

At our budget. Grated the difference is 340,000 but has 10 more people than is necessary.

Let's not forget Joan Quigley, for you youngsters, that was Nancy Reagan's Astrologer in Chief!

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 12): I may not remember alot of high school math but if I remember some I think that 22>12 If I did that right then Michel's 22 is greater than Laura's 12

The original post:

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense, when even Hillary, only had three; Jackie Kennedy one; Laura Bush one; and prior to Mamie Eisenhower social help came from the President's own pocket.

ONE.. that is not 12, Why didn't the first one reported 12? but one? does it cast doubt on the impartiality entire report?

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 12): may not remember alot of high school math but if I remember some I think that 22>12 If I did that right then Michel's 22 is greater than Laura's 12 Michelle costs us: $1,256,000 Laura costs us: $910,000 Michelle is alot more high maintenance and requires 10 more people than Laura. At our budget. Grated the difference is 340,000 but has 10 more people than is necessary.

That isn't really the point is it?

The OP stated:

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Laura Bush one

Which was untrue. Regardless of the math the OP is flawed and just flamebait.

It's kind of funny watching the reaction of people over a half million dollars, the same people who said the $100 million in cuts Obama asked for at his first cabinet meeting was a drop in the bucket and just a publicity stunt.

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 12): At our budget. Grated the difference is 340,000 but has 10 more people than is necessary.

What do you know about what is necessary for the First Lady of the United States? Was Laura's 12 necessary?

On average, Laura's staff made $76,000/year

On average, Michelle's staff makes $54,000/year

It's a sign of the times as someone said before. Michelle Obama, by nature and the fact that she's the first black first lady, was always going to be more center stage than Laura ever was. Thus, the need for more staff, even if they are paid less.

UAL

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Great Recession

Um you know what year it is right?

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Policy And Projects For The First Lady

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Special Assistant to the President and White House Social Secretary

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications for the First Lady

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady

All of these are to the Pres and 1st Lady...

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): You decide...

Sounds like you posted this to bitch rather than discuss..

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 12): At our budget. Grated the difference is 340,000 but has 10 more people than is necessary.

So Laura Bush sets the bar for what is necessary?

As other poster have shown her budget is not much more than was previously the case. Wasteful? Yes. End of the world? Shockingly, no.

YOWza

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 13): Let's not forget Joan Quigley, for you youngsters, that was Nancy Reagan's Astrologer in Chief!

Haha there was a program on her a few weeks back. She made some decisions! It was on History Channel.

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 12): If I did that right then Michel's 22 is greater than Laura's 12 Michelle costs us: $1,256,000 Laura costs us: $910,000

12 for Laura? Try 18 at a cost of $1.4 million. At any rate, Factcheck has debunked this one a good bit.

http://factcheck.org/2009/08/michelle-obamas-staff/

Hahaha

"A blog post from Chicago Sun-Times reporter Lynn Sweet on July 6 put the spotlight on "What Michelle Obama’s Staffers Earn." The staff of TheLastCrusade.org, a Web site that describes itself as a place "where you can engage in the life and death struggle against the forces of Islam, apostasy, moral complacency, cultural relativity, and the New World Order," then took the information and posted a piece claiming that the first lady had hired an "unprecedented number of staffers" to "cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession." That piece was also posted on the conservative Web site CanadaFreePress.com under the byline of Dr. Paul L. Williams, who runs TheLastCrusade.org. That post has become part of a chain e-mail that some of our readers have passed on to us, and the e-mail expands upon Williams’ post, falsely claiming that some recent first ladies have had only one or three staffers."

http://factcheck.org/2009/08/michelle-obamas-staff/

So I guess this article that the OP posted was from some website called, "TheLastCrusade.org." Nice EA772LR

I love how everyone is a "director"...
Anyway, name of this position: "Deputy Associate Director bla bla bla" is just plain silly.

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 14): ONE.. that is not 12, Why didn't the first one reported 12? but one? does it cast doubt on the impartiality entire report?

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 15): Which was untrue. Regardless of the math the OP is flawed and just flamebait.

I should not be flamed for someone elses mistake. EA7772LR was pointing out that those sites say Michelle: 22 Laura: 12. Its a general honest mistake he shouldn't be flammed for.

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 21): http://factcheck.org/2009/08/michelle-obamas-staff/

Quoting Garnetpalmetto (Reply 20): http://factcheck.org/2009/08/michelle-obamas-staff/

Which brings up to these sites.

Hillary: 19 Democrat
Michelle: 24 Democrat
Laura: 18 Republican

Using that sire and a little high school math,

24<19<18

Hillary and Michelle have too many people period. Granted Laura does too ill be the first too admit that. Still its a little over kill 24...

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 23): Hillary and Michelle have too many people period

Who are you to make that asseement?

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 23): EA7772LR was pointing out that those sites say Michelle: 22 Laura: 12. Its a general honest mistake he shouldn't be flammed for.

EA said that Michelle had 22 and Laura Bush one.

It is flammable mistake because the purpose of the thread was to bash Obama and it proved wrong.

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 23): Hillary and Michelle have too many people period. Granted Laura does too ill be the first too admit that. Still its a little over kill 24...

Dude, this article the OP quotes came from a website that wants to fight against Islam and is scared there is a coming "New World Order." It's a right-winged religiously charged website which has an obvious bias.

YOU, have no idea what it takes to run a white house, nor do I. The mere fact that Michelle Obama is the first black First Lady creates some obstacles and challenges that need to be addressed from a personnel standpoint. Who are you to say how many employees are too much and how many aren't? And how, (trying to go beyond your understanding of high school math), do you come up with the correct figure?

UAL

As YOWza pointed out several do not work the First Lady exclusively. As near as I can figure it nine of the people mentioned do not work exclusively for the First Lady, four split time between the President and the First Lady and five are White House staff positions not exclusive to the President or First Lady. Additionally six listed people do not show any salary so there is something wrong there and they can't be properly accounted for.

Based on this and splitting the cost/time of the dual (Pres/First Lady) positions you could arrive at number of 15 people working for the First Lady at a cost of $978,200.00. (If you used averages in the "costless" positions the total rises to 1,162,000.00).

Tugg

To all the above posters, I didn't write the original post. I will try to provide a link with the person(s) who wrote it. Pardon me for not italicizing the entire post   

Quoting Mt99 (Reply 5): More then "one".. you decide..

Touche!!! And Michelle has made herself a valuable asset to the President in the overseas diplomatic trips, case in point is her warm personal relationship with Queen Elizabeth (Britain is still our greatest partner) and generating widely positive foreign press. I think she's worth every single penny of the budgeted monies.   

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): But this hasn%u2019t deterred her from hiring an unprecedented number of staffers to cater to her every whim and to satisfy her every request in the midst of the Great Recession.

so, you'd rather those she employs be on the unemployed list?

I am not a US tax payer so what she is costing is none of my business.

Other than that, what do I think?...
I find Michelle Obama is ugly looking. Not a pretty face.  





I will take Princess Stephanie or even Caroline any day over Michelle Obama.   

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 24): Who are you to make that asseement?

A tax paying American who does not want my money being wasted on unnecessary over payed employees.

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 25): Dude, this article the OP quotes came from a website that wants to fight against Islam and is scared there is a coming "New World Order." It's a right-winged religiously charged website which has an obvious bias.

And the website that says Laura Bush had 18 is a Left wing Obama loving, democrat charged site that has an obvious bias.

Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 24): It is flammable mistake because the purpose of the thread was to bash Obama and it proved wrong.

And how so. No one here has given one legitimate reason why she needs 24 people too work for her. Granted some of their duties are shared with Obama that still leaves people that work and serve only her. I could see her maybe needing 2 people at best as a personal secretary and a travel coordinator. Like I said I also think Laura had too many people under her to so i'm not just bashing Michelle.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 27): To all the above posters, I didn't write the original post. I will try to provide a link with the person(s) who wrote it. Pardon me for not italicizing the entire post

So you read an article off the internet with no idea who wrote it, assumed it was true, and posted it on here? I guess the fact that it's from "a conservative free press" must be proof enough that it's factual.

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 30): I am not a US tax payer so what she is costing is none of my business. Other than that, what do I think?... I find Michelle Obama is ugly looking. Not a pretty face. Wow!

ugghhh what a brutal post.

She is better than almost every first lady out there.

Quoting EA772LR (Thread starter): Inappropriate or justifiable? You decide...

Don't care about her. Whatever. I care about the man sitting behind the big desk and worry about his highly questionable policies.

The one thing the right does NOT need to do is go after her like the left did/does against Sarah Palin. They should be focused on the man at the desk, not the wife. When it comes to politics, she's a nobody.

Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 34): The one thing the right does NOT need to do is go after her like the left did/does against Sarah Palin.

pardon my ignorance, but why wasn't Palin fair game? she was running for the 2nd highest job in the land, and you some how think she was above scrutiny?

Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 34): They should be focused on the man at the desk, not the wife. When it comes to politics, she's a nobody.

Sarah Palin was fair game. She wasn't going to be the "First Lady." She was going to be 2nd in command, if elected.

UAL

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 30): I will take Princess Stephanie or even Caroline any day over Michelle Obama.

I'll take Carla Bruni Sarkozy, the first lady of France. Or even Queen Rania of Jordan. However, don't you think inner beauty is more important?  

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 31): A tax paying American who does not want my money being wasted on unnecessary over payed employees.

Did you mind when your money being wasted transporting George W. to Crawford, TX, too many times?  

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 35): ardon my ignorance, but why wasn't Palin fair game? she was running for the 2nd highest job in the land, and you some how think she was above scrutiny?

Quoting Ual747 (Reply 36): Sarah Palin was fair game. She wasn't going to be the "First Lady." She was going to be 2nd in command, if elected.

Let me be more specific:

They do not need to go after Michelle, as in not using the same tactics ala Sarah Palin.

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 30): I will take Princess Stephanie or even Caroline any day over Michelle Obama.

Surely you jest? These two:



Over Michelle? I find our First Lady perfectly acceptable compared to those two biddies.


And you should watch your manners better and not make derisive comments when none are called for. I had a better opinion of you before that post.

Tugg

I don't trust anyone who tells young people " don't go into corporate world". May not be any thing wrong with her .. but to me its a alien world she lives in. She happily took big bucks for corporate doners ... then turns around and goes commie on them. weird

I heard that speech last night .. the one where she is yelling ... BARACK WONT LET YOU DO THINGS LIKE WE ALWAYS HAVE ! BARACK WILL SAVE YOU FROM ...whatever it was . It was weird and she defiantly seemed full of the Barack kool aid. Just sounded classless.

Quoting Afterburner (Reply 37): I'll take Carla Bruni Sarkozy, the first lady of France. Or even Queen Rania of Jordan. However, don't you think inner beauty is more important? Smile

Being the 1st Lady, I agree, inner beauty is more important than a pretty face.

In any event, other than a big staff (arguably) she is a good 1st Lady and really hasn't done anything to indicate otherwise.

Pssh. nah. Michelle Obama is gorgeous. She looks great.
I couldn't care less how much money she spends on staff.. Those numbers were probably drug up by Fox News.  

I love Michelle Obama. She's got great style, is glamorous and classy, and is a wonderful representation of our country.

And I like Laura Bush too (although I LOATH her husband.). She is very classy as well. I was impressed when she came out and defended Michelle against unfair attacks in the press.

Quoting Tugger (Reply 39): Over Michelle? I find our First Lady perfectly acceptable

She looks GREAT in those pictures! Love it!   

Quoting Tugger (Reply 39): And you should watch your manners better and not make derisive comments when none are called for. I had a better opinion of you before that post.

  

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 30): I find Michelle Obama is ugly looking

She is very pretty actually and far better looking than the other two you mention.

Quoting Tugger (Reply 39): Surely you jest?

Now those two Woman are Ugly. They should be in a Kennel.

Quoting OA260 (Reply 44): She is very pretty actually and far better looking than the other two you mention.

Cosmetic surgery can do wonders nowadays. Looking at that first Michelle Obama picture it is undeniable that she has had some work done on her face. The difference being that Steph' never had any plastic surgery done (not even after being in the car crash that killed her mother) neither did Princess Caroline.

Just remembering their late mother I do not think they need it.

http://newcritics.com/blog1/wp-conte.../uploads/2007/09/grace%20kelly.jpg

http://www.divasthesite.com/Acting_Divas/Grace_Kelly.htm

Not counting the countless number of hours Stephanie is spending on her FigthAids Monaco charity.

http://www.fightaidsmonaco.com/eng.htm

I will more than gladly leave you the Obamas and I will keep the Grimaldis and their historical legacy. My choice is made.

  

Don't take it as if I don't wish on Barack Obama to restore the economy in the U.S. I hope he will be successful. Whether I think the wife is good looking is a totally different story.

I really don't give a hoot about her. I think her staff is too much, and is indicative of her and her husband's feelings about the need to cut down on wasteful spending. Every time I hear her speak I get the impression she has a BIG chip on her shoulder.

Really, couldn't care less.

Quoting 7324ever (Reply 12): Michelle is alot more high maintenance and requires 10 more people than Laura. At our budget. Grated the difference is 340,000 but has 10 more people than is necessary.

Just because she has ten more people than Laura doesn't mean that those ten people are unnecessary. She has different objectives than Laura did, and that requires a different sort of staff.

-Mir

Given that this thread has drifted wildly off-topic and a number of posts have had to be removed, it's probably best that we call it a day.

-Gofly