By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Former First Lady Michelle Obama will not attend President Trump’s upcoming inauguration, a departure from typical precedent. This decision contrasts with the attendance of other former presidents and their spouses, including George W. and Laura Bush, and Bill and Hillary Clinton. While former President Obama will be present, Michelle Obama’s absence follows her previously expressed criticism of Trump and his rhetoric. Her non-attendance also follows her absence from a recent memorial service for President Jimmy Carter.
Read the original article here
Michelle Obama’s decision to skip Donald Trump’s inauguration isn’t surprising, given the deeply strained relationship between the Obamas and the Trumps. It’s a move that resonates with many, particularly those who find Trump’s presidency and his rhetoric deeply objectionable. The absence of decorum and bipartisan respect, particularly evident in Trump’s own actions, such as skipping President Biden’s inauguration, sets a precedent. It’s easy to understand why someone might not want to participate in an event celebrating someone they fundamentally disagree with.
The decision feels particularly poignant considering the history between these two families. The level of personal attacks and the inflammatory rhetoric directed at the Obamas during Trump’s presidency created a climate of animosity that makes a show of unity difficult, if not impossible, to convincingly achieve. The numerous unsubstantiated claims and conspiracy theories surrounding the Obamas, often fueled by Trump himself, undoubtedly played a role in this decision.
Furthermore, the political climate itself contributes to the decision. The feeling that civility and respect have been discarded as political tools by one side makes attending a celebratory event for that side seem pointless or even counterproductive. Many would argue that participating in such an event would be akin to endorsing behavior they find abhorrent.
Beyond the political considerations, there are also more personal reasons to consider. The safety and well-being of the Obama family are certainly paramount. Given the history of threats and harassment directed at them, it’s entirely understandable that a decision might be made to prioritize their safety above attending a largely symbolic event.
The media coverage surrounding this decision is interesting, too. It highlights the ongoing polarization and the intense focus on every action of those involved in the highest levels of US politics. The sheer volume of commentary, ranging from supportive to critical, reflects the deeply divided nature of the current political landscape. This incident might be less about the specific event and more about a symbol of broader political and social division.
Some argue that Michelle Obama’s absence is a statement in itself, a silent protest against the kind of politics Trump represents. Others, however, view the act as petty or overly dramatic. This diverse range of opinions further underlines the depth of division present in the American political scene.
The comparison to Trump and Melania’s absence from Biden’s inauguration is frequently drawn. It’s a point often made to highlight the hypocrisy or lack of consistency in upholding traditional political norms. While both instances highlight a breakdown in traditional protocol, they represent different contexts and motivations, highlighting the subjective interpretations surrounding the actions of prominent public figures.
Ultimately, Michelle Obama’s choice is her own. It’s a personal decision influenced by a complex interplay of political, personal, and security considerations. While some might criticize her decision, others understand and even applaud it as a demonstration of personal conviction and prioritization of her family’s well-being. The sheer volume of discussion surrounding this decision, however, indicates its significance as a reflection of a broader societal divide. This incident, whether intended or not, has become a talking point that underscores the lack of unity in contemporary American politics.
The intense reaction to this seemingly simple act reinforces the idea that Michelle Obama’s actions, like those of other prominent figures, are heavily scrutinized and interpreted through the lens of partisan politics, often overshadowing the personal considerations that may truly be at play. It is likely this decision will continue to be debated for years to come.