The end of the year (world?) can be a good time to reflect on all of the happy times of the last 12 months, like gym sessions with Desmond Tutu, victories in world domination, and whatever is actually going on in this photo. Perhaps it is also an appropriate time to consider the past year’s mistakes and contemplate lessons learned. Not for our FLOTUS, of course, because she is too good for that second thing. She is pretty pleased with 2011 and has decided to close out the year the best way she knows how: in fancy clothes, on an island far away from most of the poor people.
It wouldn’t be a vacation without a Michelle Obama wardrobe controversy! Let us see what we have this time:
Michelle Obama successfully managed to rile U.S. taxpayers with her lavish $4m family jaunt to Hawaii this Christmas.
But it seems her expensive taste has not stopped there, as her vacation wardrobe has proved to be equally lavish.
Though the First Lady has only been spotted on a couple of occasions since arriving in Kailua, Oahu, some sartorial analysis of her fashion choices has revealed that her outfits have been consistently high-end.Related video
There is nothing that can ruin the holidays for this country quite like a “high-end” FLOTUS. America prefers its FLOTUS to be like its Christmas gifts: picked up off the floor of a Kohl’s Department Store bathroom. America certainly does not want Michelle Obama wearing skirts and dresses that allegedly cost $2,000. In poor people terms, that’s like a thousand lottery tickets!
Many consider Mrs Obama’s penchant for expensive fashion labels at odds with her position as an everywoman who identifies with the average woman.
One comment on the Naked DC site read: ‘She claims to be a champion of the poor and a fellow bargain shopper, but yet, here she is, sporting a dress that no unemployed American can afford.’
That is not entirely Michelle Obama’s fault. She was going to spend the whole week in the unemployed American uniform (Pajama Jeans and a Slanket) but the Hawaii air is just a bit too humid for that. [Daily Mail]Related