hat do Chris Rock and Linda Kaiser, a sixty year old church secretary from small-town Pennsylvania, have in common? They both seem to think that Michelle Obama’s apparently outspoken and assertive nature will be a burden to her husband as president. Rock joked that as a black woman, Michelle Obama was going to have a hard time being first lady because there’s “too much shuttin’ up in that job.” He goes on to say: “imagine tellin’ your black wife that you president? ‘Honey, I won, I’m President!’ ‘No, we President! And I want my girlfriends in the cabinet!’ ” Linda Kaiser expresses a similar sentiment in explaining why she preferred Cindy McCain to her democratic counterpart, “Cindy seems like she’s laid back and not trying to run her husband…It’s nice to have a brain, but they should let their husband be president.” Michelle Obama certainly made it clear she had a brain by freely expressing her sometimes controversial opinions—for a number of Americans, that was just too much.

To begin with, there was the issue of her college thesis. Michelle Obama argued that Princeton was a fundamentally exclusive college environment. She described that, as a black woman, she often felt like a visitor on campus, and that she would “always be black first and a student second.” This criticism of one of America’s most respected universities was attacked as unjustified by many people. Surely Princeton is, and was (in’85) devoid of racism, just like the rest of our country, right?

Then, at a campaign rally in Madison, Wisconsin, Michelle admitted that, “for the first time in [her] adult lifetime,” she was truly proud of her country. She saw her husband’s success as a sign that people were finally ready and “hungry” for profound change.

Finally, she angered many Americans with her refreshingly honest assessment of current American life during a speech in a church: “we’re a divided country, we’re a country that is ‘just downright mean,’ we are ‘guided by fear,’ we’re a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day.” Heads nodded in the pews. “Folks are just jammed up, and it’s gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I’m young. Forty-four!” At this point, the soon-to-be first lady became a serious liability to the campaign. The allegations that she had begun to turn off potential voters begged the question: why?

Sure, some of her comments were harsh, but that didn’t necessarily make them false or out of line. President-elect Obama said similar things himself, without experiencing the same backlash. People seemed to agree with him when he said at a campaign speech in March of last year, “We’ve got a tragic history when it comes to race in this country. We’ve got a lot of pent-up anger and bitterness and misunderstanding.” And in the end, Michelle’s underlying message was hopeful: despite the problems she saw in America, she believed in the power of change.

Not surprisingly, however, Michelle stopped making controversial statements several months into the campaign. She began to talk almost exclusively about her family in an obvious effort to “soften” her image, in one instance saying: “I also come here as a mother; that is my primary title, mom in chief. My girls are the first thing I think about when I wake up in the morning and the last thing I think about when I go to bed. When people ask me how I’m doing, I say, ‘I’m only as good as my most sad child.’ ”

And yet, Michelle Obama has also been criticized for this “mom in chief” portrayal. Some people think it’s a step backwards in terms of gender equality. Michelle Obama has a bachelor’s degree from Princeton and a law degree from Harvard. She was a successful lawyer, and non-profit sector executive before she hit the campaign trail with her husband. Critics are insulted that such an educated and accomplished woman thinks of herself primarily as “mom in chief.” I disagree, but take issue with her new persona for different reasons. I think it’s perfectly fine for her to think of herself, and to act primarily as a mother to her children. Born in’98 and 2001, Sasha and Malia Obama are unusually young to become an acting president’s daughters. Ten-year-olds require the kind of parental care that an acting president simply can’t provide, so it makes sense that Michelle Obama feels obligated to play a more active role in her daughter’s lives. I admire Michelle’s willingness to consider her daughters’ well being as her number one priority. We’ve all seen what fame can do to young children. I imagine that most mothers in her position would do the same. But what about fathers?

In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama comments on the different set of expectations for him and his wife. “No matter how liberated I liked to see myself as . . . the fact was that when children showed up, it was Michelle and not I who was expected to make the necessary adjustments…Sure, I helped, but it was always on my terms, on my schedule. Meanwhile, she was the one who had to put her career on hold.” Given that Mr. Obama is going to be president, I see no problem with Mrs. Obama primarily being a mother to their children. However, I do see a problem with the fact that from the get-go it was her, and only her, who was expected to make huge sacrifices for their children.

Think of all the squandered talent of mothers who feel they have to give up their personal aspirations because their husbands won’t meet them half way, and make sacrifices of their own for the sake of their children. Obama seems like a forward-thinking guy, but even he didn’t feel the need to make any significant career sacrifices for his wife, or his children. It was always on his terms, and on his schedule. I don’t mean to suggest that he selfishly neglected his children, but he was able to pursue his lofty goals because he knew that they would always be taken care of when he was too busy. Knowing this, Michelle Obama is even more impressive. She became highly successful in her own right while being primarily responsible for the young Obama children.

Why didn’t Americans initially like Michelle Obama? To put it bluntly, the public saw her as too strong and independent to fit their ideas of a proper first lady. People only became comfortable with her when she stopped talking about her opinions on unsettling issues, and started talking about how she was going to be a great mother to her kids. But it should go without saying that she will be “mom in chief.” She shouldn’t have to prove herself as a mother in order to be accepted by this country as an adequate first lady.

Instead of initially turning away from Michelle as an active first lady, we should have jumped at the opportunity to have an intelligent, educated, outspoken woman in the White House, a woman who was comfortable sharing even her contentious ideas. The gauntlet of public opinion that previously threatened the Obama campaign has forced her to stick to the things people are comfortable with. Sadly, for a woman, those things don’t extend far past the domestic realm. Nowadays a newsworthy story about the future first lady is about her latest fashion triumph or failure, or her commitment to the role of “mom in chief.”