• Favorite

• 
  Ginger!
• Last Online: May 22 2012
Discussion Started on Aug 27 2009 at 11:30:08 pm
Discussion
I think there are a million more important things to worry about than what the First Lady is wearing!!  This isn't 1950....it's 2009 for pity's sake!  This is yet another maddening example of the media scratching the bottom of the barrel for something so-called "newsworthy"....which it wasn't.  We need less media and more tolerance.
reply+
• view
• report
• reply
 
• 
  Jilly M.
• Last Online: Sep 30 2009
Discussion Started on Sep 02 2009 at 11:09:10 pm
Discussion
Of course she should wear shorts.  How ridiculous that people need to concern themselves over such trivial things.  We are not living in a third world country.
reply+
• view
• report
• reply
 
• 
  junehussey
• Last Online: Feb 02 2012
Discussion Started on Oct 22 2009 at 08:44:54 am
Discussion
What I think is more ridiculous is the media's obsession with her arms. Her ARMS for crissake. How demeaning. Don't journalists think the First Lady has more to offer up than Old Navy fashion trends and bearing her arms in public? Really.
reply+
• view
• report
• reply
 
• 
  Mark in Idaho
• Last Online: Apr 01 2011
Discussion Started on Nov 01 2009 at 09:04:14 pm
Discussion
I just wish she would stop wearing prints that make her hips look like Dumbo's elephant ears flapping in the breeze. There are much more presentable fashions for someone who's 'got back.' Maybe J-Lo needs to give her some fashion advice.

I can't remember a worst dressed First Lady. I am usually fashion neutral when observing most women, but there is a limit.

And please, no running nekid through Yellowstone. She'll scare the wildlife and the tourists.

reply+
• view
• report
• reply
 

• ---

top of page ^