The Top 40

SHe forgot to mention ugly as well

No need to get angry...she's just being difficult.

http://youtu.be/8m0pXReP8GQ

Who cares....

If she doesn't like being portrayed as "an angry black woman", she should stop being one.

"Lighten up Francis . . ."

Truth hurts.

Try to imagine Laura Bush displaying any one of those faces. Simply not possible!

Michelle Obama is not angry. Sullen, envious, irritated, arrogant, disgusted, annoyed, smug, sneering, outraged, vituperative, enraged, resentful, rabid, murderous and bitter maybe, but not angry.

The many faces of an evil woman.

Remember, Wookies tear off arms when they lose.

Wow! Those pictures make that woman look like she's mad. Not angry. Mad as in, insane.

Michelle Obama has acted like she feels like an ENTITLED person. Her mechanism and vehicle may be race and or gender, but the shoe fits.

If you look at the history of Michelle Obama it’s of interest to note that after graduating law school she went to work for a Law Firm in 1988. She left in 1991. Let that sink in for a minute.

Most young associates who go to work for a law firm realize that the first 2-3 years are pure drudgery and the next few 1-5 years are for building your reputation in your chosen specialization.

Your first year you are doing scut work and preparing to pass the bar. You’re not even a lawyer for most of your first year. THEN you have to LEARN how to PRACTICE law - because, despite Hollywood movies to the contrary, law school is theory, precedent, and a money sucking vacuum that is in serious need of overhaul.

Apparently during her first or second year (this is from memory) she commented that there were few black faces and not enough black partners in the firm. She was barely beyond her J.D., had just passed the bar, and was broadly hinting (IMO) that they needed to “get this train moving” and do some affirmative action.

Now, that’s MY TAKE on it – but I have grown up knowing quite a few lawyers, and can say this: Any first or second year associate who starts to make noises about how they SHOULD be moved up, (hint: you guys have a racial issue and need to promote minorities : meaning ME) is not going to do well.

Law firms who take Harvard Law grads are making an investment. They are not going to see any real production out of them until year 3 or 4. There are exceptions, but it’s really rare. If you hire some associate and they can’t make the cut, they usually “seek employment elsewhere” – but it’s just polite lawyer speak for saying “the reality did not match the potential promise”.

For a law firm to hire a Harvard Law grad, keep her and pay her, while she studies for the bar, and then her go, if she is some legal stud (or studdette) after 3 years is idiotic. They just gave that associate a crash course in law and are getting no return on their investment.
But, Michelle stayed there for 3 years, and the firm and she parted ways. She then went into “public service” as “an assistant to the mayor”. 28 years old, barely able to practice

and she’s advising the mayor? On what?!

That’s not some red hot legal stud who blazed a trail – IMO that’s someone who found out the law firm world of grind and dues was actual WORK. Who then started to make noise about “not enough black faces at the partners table” and, think about this for a good minute or two, let Michelle know her future there wasn’t bright. A racially motivated black lawyer who had serious affirmative action issues – and they let her go – it was a gamble of pay now or risk a lot more later.

Now – again, to be clear, much of this is based on my knowledge of how some law firms work, what it takes to make it the first few years out of law school, and the mutually beneficial relationship between associate and firm that exists – and how Michelle basically washed out.
And then went into “public service” – and whose private sector work included farming out poor folk to local clinics instead of having the hospital she worked for see them (and pay for them) and being given a raise for saving the hospital money.

Screw her what her political party is, or who her husband is, or if she has a (D) or an (R) next to her name. IMO she’s an entitlement junkie who used gender and race to achieve what she lacks in talent. Doing that for herself if one thing. Doing it while “believing in ‘social justice’ and ‘helping people of color’” and then throwing those very people under the bus medically is pure self-absorbed mercenary behavior.

She’s a phoney.

Thanks, Steven; interesting commentary on a beginning law career. (Stuff I didn't know!) Susan Lee