Now that her arms are covered up, what will the Watchers report on now?

Well this time it’s her sneakers.  It seems Michelle wore $500 kicks to a food bank.  That’s what all the fuss is about.  For real.

I mean, she’s the FLOTUS! What is she supposed to do, wear chonkletas to prove she’s one of the people?

Wearing expensive sneakers when you’re the First (M.F.)  Lady Of The (M.F.) United States is not a crime. HOWEVER … pairing them with those creeping capris? There’s your reason for outrage, folks.

Love you Michelle, but that is NOT a good look. Maybe you should have worn the chonkletas, then nobody would have cared and this photo wouldn’t be splashed across the internets.

At least the ankles aren’t ashy. Imagine the firestorm THAT would have set off! (Don’t even play black people, you know you would have been all over that, sending her Vaseline and Palmers’ Cocoa Butter. Or both. )

What say the people?

Yay
My male opinion. . .
This is not news nor a negative reflection on her – she is our FIRST LADY . We want her to look good, feel comfortable, and represent us as well as she does. Would you send the Queen of England to the Bronx in a pair of $15.00 sneakers? NO. So why the First Lady?

Oh my God, Michelle Obama is wearing expensive shoes to a help the poor event! Next thing you know she will be taking a Chauffeur driven limo with Secret Service Agents as body guards. And I bet she flew in a private jet and maybe even a helicopter on her way to the event! What did you expect the First Lady of the United States to wear, Keds and old jeans?

Let’s see: If the First Lady does things to help the poor, but does it while not being personally poor herself, she’s nothing but a hypocrite? Is that it? Better that she spit in the face of the poor, and denigrate them, while wearing stuff from Wal-Mart.

Better that her husband, the President of the United States, implement policies that screw the poor and the middle class and deliver more dollars into the hands of the already extremely wealthy. I think that no matter what Michelle Obama does, media types like you will always find a way to claim it shows “hypocracy” . (sic)

Because we all know that she should have put on a pair of $90 JcPenny’s sneaks before feeding the poor. Or perhaps some old, worn out (with a hole in the toe) sneaker for feeding the poor. I mean we must dress for the occasion, right? LOL. It’s not like anyone wouldn’t have noticed had she slipped on some cheap sneaks because every one knows she’s rich already. They would have said she was trying to play the crowd.

And if she goes to give a talk the site of some natural disaster like a hurricane, she should rip her dress so that she is fit for the occasion. hehe.. Point is, what she wears does not change her status. And most NORMAL people wouldn’t expect her to alter clothing.

Nay
Didn’t you get the memo? You are supposed to comment only on her buff arms and J Crew sweater not her size 14, $450 shoe encased feet.

If she wants to wear $540 sneakers – which are incredibly ugly, by the way – that’s fine with me, but she and her husband should quit telling the rest of us to sacrifice. They apparently don’t know the value of setting an example.

You don’t go to a (pre-programed ) helping out the poor photo-op in coture footwear. It’s either bad judgment or a total disconnect.

What’s your opinion?