Maybe Fox News’ Todd Starnes Has a Creepy Thing for Michelle Obama

Image courtesy of

Image courtesy of

Todd Starnes is a radio host for Fox News Radio, a frequent guest for Fox News shows, and a columnist for – you’ll never guess – FoxNews.Com. He’s also a prolific Twitter user and Facebook updater. Like his colleagues, he’s an unapologetic liar, an open misogynist and a barely hidden racist. Oh, and while some conservative Christians don’t trust him and call him on his bs, he received the Board of Directors Award from the National Religious Broadcasters. The award “is designed to encourage excellence in production service to the community, faithfulness to the mission, commitment to the Gospel, and personal integrity.”

Oh, and judging by his Twitter feed, Mr. Todd Starnes really has a thing for the First Lady of the United States, Ms. Michelle Obama. Not in a healthy way, either. He’s obsessed. If you may, take a journey with me (Trigger Warnings for all sorts of assholeness). Shall we look at the evidence?

Mr. Starnes likes to know where Ms. Obama is all the time and where she’s going. He takes pride in the myth that he’s paying for the Obama’s vacays. A sort of pride I doubt he made a deal out of during the last administration. It’s kinda stalkerish, really.

Mrs. Obama is certainly fond of vacationing on the taxpayer dime.

Mrs. Obama is promoting Obamacare in Miami — and by promoting Obamacare I mean vacationing.

The American taxpayers are sending Mrs. Obama on a vacation to China – along with her daughters and mother. Your welcome, Mrs. Obama.

Mrs. Obama is heading to China. It’s a round-trip ticket.

Who traveled more — Michelle or Hillary? #frequentflier

Be warned: Mrs. Obama will be appearing on today’s “Puppy Bowl” — she’s promoting her “Let’s Move” program.

Guest to Mrs. Obama’s party given orders: “No camera, no photographs.” What don’t they want us to see?

What is she wearing? Starnes MUST know!

CNN: Mrs. Obama’s dress cost around $12,000

THIS RT @gatewaypundit: SIMPLY STUNNING: Michelle O’s Dinner Dress Cost More Than Annual US Poverty Level

[Because he’s cared about wealth inequality before and has always criticized the Bush and Reagan outfits before them]

Obama and Mrs. Obama to attend Mandela memorial service in Johannesburg.

[ He then tweets about how he doesn’t recall Obama visiting Maggie Thatcher’s funeral, of course.]

Obama and the Mrs. visit with people fasting for illegals. I hope they don’t smell the turkey on their breath.

[Note: Starnes likes to throw around derogatory ethnic slurs. Because he’s a White Supremacist.]

He, like many, many white conservative men, is affixed on the posterior of black women.

Mrs. Obama; “Whatever you do, do it until your butt comes off.” Pardon me?

Mrs. Obama: “We have all failed at something, and it’s been big, embarrassing failures.” Anybody want to take this one?

Report: Michelle Obama’s dietary habits — the butt of conservative jokes

In a twist of apparent submissive wish-fulfillments, Starnes continually refers to Michelle Obama as “Her Majesty” and suggests that she’s “bossy.” I’m sure he has a special room for these tweets.

Her Majesty Queen Michelle Obama takes in Spiderman Musical. Spidey salutes Queen Michelle during the show. #loyalsubject

Mrs. Obama wants to ban the word “bossy.” hahahaha – now that’s funny – hahahaha – no really — hahahaha —

Entire airport shut down to accommodate Her Royal Majesty Queen Michelle

Her Royal Majesty, Queen Michelle #SOTU

Now, some may look at the obvious-but-sideways attraction that Todd Starnes has for the first black First Lady of the United States and draw the conclusion that there is yet hope for humanity under the idea that sexual attraction equals love. But it surely doesn’t. As feminist writer bell hooks put it, There can be no love without justice.” And to Todd Starnes, Michelle Obama is two steps below a person, deplorable un-equal.

Obama is a woman. And to the patriarchy, and particularly misogynists like Starnes, that means she is already less than human. To misogynists, women serve largely as sexual objects and baby-making machines. They are not intelligent, whole beings with wills and control over their own bodies. This is why conservatives fight so hard against Equal Rights Amendments, against feminism, against reproductive rights, against equal pay and full medical coverage. Women are not to be trusted, they say, unless they conform to the stereotype, the boxed-in woman. And even then, they are not to be trusted or respected. Women are emotional and rash and don’t know what’s best for them. That is why men must make their healthcare choices for them.

Now, combine that with the fact that Ms.* Obama is black. And here we come into some more ludicrousness. Because the White Supremacist sees the black person as a mere brute, an animal – and a particularly sexual one. The black male is seen as a threat to the white male’s hold over his white female counterpart. We are reminded of the scene from the KKK propaganda film The Birth of a Nation, where the savage black male preys a white woman until she jumps off a cliff and the noble Klan comes to exact revenge. This is the reason for the lynch laws of the land – Emmit Till, for instance – and was one of the primary charges used by White Supremacists against Trayvon Martin. I was told several times by white men that Trayvon’s offense was peering into white women’s windows (no proof notwithstanding). The black man, to the White Supremacist, is a constant threat against the sexuality of the white man.

The black woman, however, is viewed as the unattainable object of sexual desire. All Women of Color are viewed by the White Supremacist as exotic, as exciting and new objects. Black women – because they are doubly viewed as less-than-human – are seen as highly sexualized objects for racist white male lust. This is the relationship of Thomas Jefferson who supposedly “loved” Sally Hemings. This was the relationship of Southern Gentlemen in the Slave Holding South to the black enslaved women whose lives they “owned.”  White Supremacists (and Todd Starnes is a White Supremacist) believe that they should still own human beings as property and are jealous of the fact that a highly intelligent, strong, engaged black woman is so successful in front of the world. And so they are awfully confused.

Notice that a black woman’s body is always under the microscope in popular culture and dissected disapprovingly. Beyonce’s outfits and body were subject to white male criticism during her Super Bowl performance in ways the male athletes (whose clothing is even tighter) or male rockers (who often, mind you, wear cod pieces) never are. If she had dressed more conservatively, would that have mattered? Again, we refer back to Ms. Obama.

But make no mistake, the kind of confused frustration that these men take out on Ms. Obama are not only directed at her and are not just existential. There are policies and practices kept in place that have a direct and hard effect on women of color. Just over a fourth of black women live in poverty in the US (and Latina women trail just behind by 1.5 percentage points). And the Starneses of the US would like to increase those numbers if they can.

We must resist.


*Notice that Starnes makes a point of using the “Mrs.” title, which only works for women. Men have no such designation to identify them as married or single. Because men are not seen as property to be marked as such.


When he’s not riding both his city’s public transit system and evil mayor, Jasdye teaches at a community college and writes about the intersection of equality and faith - with an occasional focus on Chicago - at the Left Cheek blog and on the Left Cheek: the Blog Facebook page. Check out more from Jasdye in his archives as well!


Facebook comments

  • Pipercat

    Naah, he’s just plain, creepy…

  • Sandy Greer

    President Obama has single-handedly brought, from beneath the white sheets, all the ‘haters’ on The Right into the light of day.

    Something no other Lefty has been able to accomplish.

    Ugly as it is, I’d rather see Hate openly (even proudly) displayed – where we can all get a good, long, look at it – and decide for ourselves, what kind of world we want to live in.

    • Pipercat

      This featured miscreant is a light version of Todd Kincannon.

  • strayaway

    Criticizing a first lady’s looks is out of bounds but I’m not sure what taxpayers are getting for all of Michelle’s trips we pay for. Even if a first spouse’s trips were national business, no one elected a first spouse. Payments should therefore be made by the Obamas or their contributors. Then, such costs wouldn’t be a matter of discussion. Why can’t she just fly first class instead of taking Air Force 1 when she wants to go shopping without her husband in Spain? My one hesitation with saying that is that I remember how when Jackie Kennedy went to France and South America and gave speeches, she wowed those nations and created so much good will that it seemed a bargain for taxpayers to have paid for her trips.

    • Sandy Greer

      I think the criticism of President & First Lady stems from dislike. That it doesn’t matter if/where/how often, or by what means they travel. If they didn’t vacation at all, I am quite certain they would be criticized for displaying a ‘holier than thou, nose to the grindstone’ attitude.

      They will be criticized simply for drawing breath, any given day. And that’s the truth.

      Some in this country even resent their children receiving protection, at taxpayer expense.

      Most criticism, ESPECIALLY when personal, has less to do with the person being criticized, than it does with the one finding fault.

      I don’t mind my tax dollars going towards a First Family vacation. Not for this president, not for any previous presidents, and not for future presidents. Whether I vote for that president or not, I don’t begrudge their trips.

      • strayaway

        I was wrong bout Michelle’s trip to Spain. I found a Huffington Post article that said she paid for her own rooms and food on the trip. The only thing taxpayers has to pick up was the $467,000 for the plans and secret service detail. Article titled, ”
        Michelle Obama Spain Trip Cost Taxpayers $467,000: Judicial Watch”
        That’s the unjustified spending I mentioned. I don’t care if she flies on state trips with her husband. That’s expected. But to go off on her own trips and bill the taxpayers so much; that’s too much like Marie Antoinette.

      • Sandy Greer

        My understanding is the Secret Service is in charge. That it’s easier to protect the First Family on Air Force One than on a commercial flight. And that, no matter WHERE the First Family goes, so will the Secret Service.

        Imagine the consternation, if members of a First Family were taken, and held for ransom of God knows what. And yet, there is criticism by gun nuts (who want guns in every school) that First Daughters are protected by Secret Service.

        The alternative is not to vacation at all. But First Family would be criticized for that, as well.

        They will be criticized, by those who dislike them, for each and every little thing they do. No matter what.

        BTW, I commend you for admitting you were wrong. I would’ve ‘upped’ your post, save for the ‘unjustified spending of Marie Antoinette’. Provocative, considering there are some in this country would indeed, harm the First Family.

      • strayaway

        I have no problem with the President’s annual $400,000 salary. I do have a problem with our own Marie Antoinette blowing $467,000 on a shopping trip and billing it to taxpayers. You make a good point about the responsibility of the secret service. However, why can’t taxpayers be reimbursed for such frivolous trips? If the Rolling Stones put on a concert in Madison Square Gardens and hired a bunch of off duty NYC policemen, they would pay the police for their services. Presidential spouses should do the same. Some of these trips have nothing to do with State business. Presidential spouses who squander such taxpayer fortunes earn themselves low likability ratings.

      • Sandy Greer

        Don’t know what to tell you; I’ve already said I don’t begrudge First Family vacations, even when I don’t vote for the president.

        ‘Low likeability’? That’s a laugh! If the president satisfied critics in this (or any) area, his detractors would merely find another objection: They are never going to like him.

        Comparisons of Michelle Obama to Marie Antoinette are used with deliberation by The Right, as an incitement to Hate – with full knowledge some in this country would be satisfied with nothing less than death for the First Family.

        ^^^I’m giving you benefit of doubt, here, that you didn’t know that. Whereas, if I disliked you, I would assume the worst, that you meant what you said.

        Whether we give benefit of doubt (see the good) or assume the worst (see only bad) is entirely dependent on whether (or not) we ‘like’ a person to begin with.

        See what I mean? 😉

      • strayaway

        One can at the same time respect Michelle Obama for being a good mother and sending her daughters to the best of private schools while disliking her extravagance. I approve of her promoting healthy food for the nation’s children too. I don’t even mind that she acts like she is royalty at Versailles as long as she does it with her own, or her supporters’ money. My favorite presidential wives, for comparison, were Jackie Kennedy and Rosalynn Carter. Jackie was awesome as a presidential wife and I really liked Rosalynn Carter as a person. I disliked Gerald Ford’s wife and Nancy Reagan.

      • Sandy Greer

        Finally, something I can vote up, LOL

        Glad you can see ‘good’ in First Lady. But surely you’ve heard the criticism of her ‘Nanny State’ healthy food promos? AND criticism of their ‘elitist’ choice of private school education, as well.

        ^^^Goes to MY point: There will be criticism, no matter WHAT they do/don’t do.

        Jackie was my fave, too. As a girl, I watched her tours of the White House. We all wanted to be her. But you’ve heard she only slept on sheets once, and if she took a nap during the day, they had to be changed again? Appears even our favorites have their extravagances. 😉

        I can’t say I ever disliked any First Ladies. OR presidents, really. Though I might have disliked some policies.

      • noah vail

        the number 1 thing that the right hates about the Obamas is their color..pure and simple…never a word about Laura’s trips or anyone elses for that matter..they take less vacation time than any first family since reagan,,look it up

  • lisa johnston

    dear Jasdye, we all have the right to our own beliefs and opinions; that being said, i respect yours . i just have one request of you,,, will you please not paint ALL white conservatives with the same broad brush by calling them racist. I am a female conservative, bible believing, gun owner who just so happens to be born of the cuacasion race and there never has been a racist bone in my body. Myself and fellow believers in Jesus Christ know that there is only one race, the human one and we all come from the same blood. The reason we dont like the president and his wife is a simple one,,he’s a liberal who is turning America into a socialist country. that’s it,,,no other reason. Please consider that not all of us are racist as you may think. sincerely, lisa j

    • Lori Toupal-Price

      Well said, and thank you.

    • noah vail

      but it’s that 99% who are racists and haters that are making the rest of you look bad

  • Lori Toupal-Price

    My heavens, do you actually believe all of your lies, misrepresentations and smears? Wow, what a huge line of bullcrap this article is.

  • Nancy Knowles

    Whew! I bet your childhood was fun!!! Not sure which parent, or both, but you’ve got some real issues there!