Read other letters about this article
So why was the power of the conference ignored by everyone but the prospective first lady, the most marginalized of any political actor? (And P.S. Why is she marginalized, anyway?)
Is this so hard to understand? The "First Lady" is "marginalized" because she is not a political actor or a politician any more than other political spouses. She is at best a stateswomen by custom. It is not sexism that marginalizes this "position," it is sexism that we haven't had a female president. If Clinton won the presidency, as she came fairly close to doing, we wouldn't have a first lady at all, we would have a first gentleman.
Or was the writer talking about Michelle Obama personally?