Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

linuxman

(2,337 posts)
9. A first lady not acting on something hardly constitutes responsibility.
Thu Mar 10, 2016, 04:08 PM
Mar 2016

She was by no means proactive on certain issues, but then again, she was only the presidents wife in the end, not a policy maker. She chose to focus on drugs, not stuff like LGBT issues which are a much bigger thing today. It was a different time, and our own current president had regressive views on gay marriage until very recently. I think it's nice when first ladies have a thoughtful and productive cause. At the time, we were in a drug fueled nightmare of crime and murders. She felt that was important. AIDs was barely understood at all and was a developing issue. I try not to wear my hindsight goggles too long when examining past figures. You can't have it all. History will remember the drug war as a failed venture. AIDS is an ongoing threat. I'm not sure anyone had perfect 2016 knowledge of that at the time. I just don't see the need to sulk over a president's wife having a mourning period, I suppose.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»we are having 3 national ...»Reply #9