The more things change, the more they stay the same, huh? This week in history, waaaayyy back in 1980, then-presidential candidate Ronald Reagan's children were featured in People magazine — fast-forward to 2008, and while Obama is in Israel meeting with top Israeli and Palestinian leaders on his plans for containing the nuclear threat from Iran and building peace in the Middle East, his daughters are getting their time in the mag.
In the Reagan kids' profile (which has a hilariously vintage feel) daughter Patti scandalously admitted to the question of whether she would vote for her dad, "gee, uh, I don't know — maybe I wouldn't vote for anybody. I'm really kind of antipolitical. I just get the newspaper and turn to the comics." Gee? Too good. In the profile, Patti, 27, was living at home "until I can find a new apartment."
Michael on the other hand was fully engaged as a campaigner for his dad, despite that his age (35) made his dad look ancient — and scandalous with his blended family. He said, "I suppose it makes Dad look old, having older children. Headquarters may feel it's embarrassing if Maureen and I are in the forefront, and the real kids [the two by Nancy] are not. Sometimes I've felt like I was fighting to volunteer."
And this! After talking about Ron's love of ballet, the piece included the quote from dad, "he's all man—we made sure of that," and the article goes on to say, "in fact, young Reagan seems thoroughly heterosexual." Oh, 1980. You're so cute!
All in all, it's kind of a shock to see how unmuzzled the kids were during the campaign — not produced in the least.
Though the Obama girls are decidedly younger than their Reagan predecessors, they gave out the goods, too. To see what they said, read more.
The magazine said that the girls have a "youthful zeal" and "manners" and though there was no talk of ballet; Sasha takes tap and gymnastics to Malia's soccer and drama.
They have to make their own beds, mom says, "doesn't have to look good, just throw the sheet over it," and the big rule, "no whining, arguing, or annoying teasing." Moooooooommm! What fun is that?
For chores, the girls get $1 a week, which dad has to pay back wages on sometimes, "I'm out of town for weeks at a time, so Malia will say, 'Hey you owe me for 10 weeks.'" All in all, Obama says the girls "have a wonderful life in Chicago. So I'm sure there's a part of them that won't be heartbroken if things don't work out."
Theory
Sofa Workshop
Buffalo
"The likely Democratic presidential nominee and his wife are determined that his bid not disrupt the normal, happy childhood of their daughters." (from the linked article)
It seems to me that People is actually going against Obama's wishes by featuring the girls. Just from the linked article (but I will have to do a little more investigating, it seems like the girls weren't actually interviewed and like the interviews with Senator and Mrs. Obama could have been excerpts from old interviews. Does anyone know if clearance/access was given specifically for this story?
1Hmm. That's cute--it sounds like they're no spoiled brats
I still stick by what I've said before, however: I'm more interested in the candidates than their offspring.
2I always forget to close my parentheses! I meant, "Just from the linked article (but I will have to do a little more investigating), it seems..."
3They're so adorable.
4I don't know lilkimbo. I thought after Obama's girls were on Access Hollywood (or ET, I forget which), he said he wasn't going to put them through that again.
"I'm more interested in the candidates than their offspring."
5True Dat
Exactly, bleached. I remember him doing that, which is why I'm thinking that the girls weren't actually interviewed for this.
6Cute! They seem adorable, but I also think Megan McCain is darling.
7I miss ronny and nancy
8Still another flipflop! This infuriates me, as a parent, politics completely aside!
After that Access Hollywood interview, BO made excuses about how they caught him off guard when they requested it, and he really shouldn't have agreed to do a family interview, and wouldn't do it again.
Even if they didn't directly interview the girls, the mere fact that they appeared in People is bound to be disruptive to their daily lives.
9Cute, but sad that he will be gone for 10 weeks at a time.. Guess that's just part of the deal..
10Once the pictures and quotes are out there, any publication can slap together a story with them - this hardly counts as a flip flop. I'd worry more about Brangelina's kids, or Jon & Kate's 8 and the microscopes they're under.
11It's an official interview from my standards because on People's website it says "Photo Exclusive" and it is an interview with the Obamas. I really was hoping they would learn from the Access Hollywood interview in which Obama himself said no more interviews with the children/about their personal lives. I feel for the kids because they are just that kids.
Hopefully, the media and American public can remember that, but I doubt it.
12haha not my standards, understanding. Don't watch Project Runway and type
13Brangelina have been quite faithful about shielding their kids, for the most part. Actually, as celebrity parents go, I'm fairly impressed.
I don't watch Jon and Kate, but they chose to put their kids out there, that's on them. I haven't heard them express regret and profess to quit the program, though, so at least they're consistent.
Unlike the Obamas. So your point again was...?
14"The Obamas opened up to PEOPLE – first, at the family's three-story home in Chicago in June, and again on July 4, at a park in Butte, Montana" Both times BEFORE the Access Hollywood interview aired, and BEFORE Obama said no more interviews.
15No flip-flop. And my 7-year old nephew can identify Brangelina's kids, so I'm not sure I buy your claim that they've been shielded.
Thanks for that time line, I didn't account for printing and distribution time.
Brangelina haven't put their kids out on public display, the paparazzi have stalked them. Different situation entirely. Besides, I think they get more attention because of the unconventional family structure. The whole blended family / multiple international adoptions thing even intrigues me, and I'm not a celebrity watcher.
16I'm a fan of international adoptions, but to be perfectly up front I worry if I did adopt a child from another country, I would take heat from people who either think Americans should only adopt Americans or who would think I did it because it's a trendy celebrity thing.
17You would take some heat Torgleson, no matter how you did it - I adopted a good five years before Angelina and people still say 'oh like the stars' (Michelle Pfeiffer got her kid just before I got my call).
18I think I first read a book about international adoptions when I was 8 (some Scholastic Book about a family of 12) and wanted to do it ever since. I've only got the one, and she was born in Maryland.
There's a lot to watch with international adoptions, to make sure the whole thing is ethical and concerns about the child's early psychological treatment - I always wonder how Pax adjusted to the Jolie-Pitt house after 4 years in an orphanage. My daughter came to me at 3 1/2 months and had some issues that even 4 years later caused doctors to ask what I knew about the first couple of months.
If you ever do adopt, read up on it and talk to people who have done it (and will be honest with you) first.
Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.