I'm sorry, how are successful millionaires supposed to dress? They're nice shoes. She has good taste (or, at least, her stylists do).

Do you know how much money her husband made on book sales alone last year? Who cares if they spend their money on expensive clothing--or, more likely, who cares if she wears expensive clothing that is given to her by boutiques that appreciate the free advertising?

Would it upset you to discover that every corporate executive wears expensive footwear? Would that make corporate America "out of touch"?

Jesus Christ, it's not like they're made out of panda hide.

500 dollar shoes to a food bank? How touching.Shes really down with the struggle.

Let see if I have this right.

Government employees telling the public how they can spend their own money = pure evil.

The public telling government employees how they can spend their own money = OK.

Got it.

Wealth envy at Wizbang is no surprise to anyone.

The problem with Panda Hide shoes is they would probably wind up looking like the old black and white saddle shoes and what fun would that be? I'd kind of be interested in a belt or boots made from Manatee hide though.

It's not really the cost, IMHO, of Mrs. Obama's foot wear. It is the tone-deafness of it. It has long been considered in-sensitive to dress up or wear new expensive clothing to help out at soup kitchens, food banks etc. Most people dress down somewhat so as not to ruin good clothing or offend the clients. Then again most volunteers go to work and help, not for a photo-op.

And if those $540 shoes were being worn by a Republican at a food bank, all those liberals here sniffing at Lorie's post would be crying foul.

Someone worth tens of millions of dollars during a recession in 21st century America is hardly Marie Antoinette telling the starving, disease-ridden masses of Paris to eat cake (which she never actually did).

And Matt, you don't seriously have a problem with Michelle Obama promoting volunteerism, do you? I thought conservatives were all about voluntary selflessness! Would you prefer that she ban photographers from taking photos of her doing good things?

And if those $540 shoes were being worn by a Republican at a food bank, all those liberals here sniffing at Lorie's post would be crying foul.
6. Posted by Kim Priestap

Kim, Lorie's thesis belongs in the "seconds" bin for wholesale by the pound, or for inclusion within a Mystery Bag providing there are cheap toys and colorful stickers included.

Conservatively yours.

I'd be thrilled if Mrs. Obama was truly promoting volunteerism. I read it as promoting oneself as being sympathetic. Other first ladies, of both parties have done the same thing, I understand it is part of the job. I'd like to see some substance though.

I would like to see Mrs. Obama put 8-10 hours a day in at a food bank or soup kitchen to promote volunteerism. "Do as I do." Let's see her work without eating because there isn't enought to feed the volunteers as well. Let's see her devote 5% of her millions to support a local food bank. Maybe she could go through the white house pantry and give most of it away to the D.C. families in need, leaving just enough to keep her family going. Maybe she could convince Congress to cut some of that stimulus to food banks instead of the greedy banks.

Geez, libs, you guys completely missed the point of the post. Shock there, huh? The point is hypocrisy. HYPOCRISY. Michelle said $600 was nothing when it came via a Bush policy, but Obama touted his $400 as huge relief. She has on more than one occasion ($600 earrings, $540 shoes) seemed completely oblivious to how insensitive flaunting of her wealth might appear to many during tough economic times, yet she gets no criticism from the enchanted media or from any of you.

I am old enough to remember George H.W. Bush being criticized for being out of touch with Americans struggling in a tough economy because he didn't know how much a gallon of milk cost. (Maybe many of you remember the media criticizing Rudy for the same more recently.) It doesn't matter that it is not very likely the President of the United States is going to be going down to the local grocery to do his own shopping. It was the symbolism the media nailed him on. I thought it was very unfair, but if they are going to do it to Bush, they should do it to Obama as well.

Consider the HYPOCRISY of those on the left who peddle class warfare 24/7, yet won't acknowledge the symbolism of wearing a pair of $540 shoes in a photo op during a recession when the wearer of the shoes is a Democrat.

I think it is fine for her to have expensive clothes and to wear them wherever she wants. It is her money. But the hypocrisy on the part of the media, and other liberals, is astounding.

If some of you were not so bitter and close-minded, reflexively attacking anyone who does not bow at the alter that is Obama, maybe you would be able to see that. I don't get it. You guys won. The White House, the Senate, the House and soon the Sup Ct. Why are you so dour? Why can't you acknowledge the double standard?

If a Republican did the same thing you know most of us on the right would roll our eyes and say "What a dumb move" We would think it was fine for them to spend their money any way they wanted, but would at least acknowledge it was not good politics and that it would feed into an "out of touch" storyline. But you guys can't even do that.

Hey, the guy, Obama, and his wife, and his team, are human. They screw up just like any other mortal. Why can't you at least admit that when it is blatantly obvious? I seriously don't get it. Why so touchy and unwilling to acknowledge reality?

You appear to have struck a nerve Lori. Our 'progressive friends' suddenly have no problem with the abject display of wealth. Weren't these the same people screaming about those "multi-million dollar mansions" occupied by CEO's?

Remember the Sarah Pain flap? Double standard?

Nawwwwwwwwwww

She can wear anything she likes. More power to any woman to buy what they like if they can afford it.

However, it the same old double standard. She gets praise for being a fashion icon, where as someone like Sarah Palin got critized because money was spend on her clothing to look good during the elections.

Truth be told, as far as looks and fashion go Sarah leaves Michelle O in the dust. That is not being mean, just plain old truthful.

You can put fancy shoes on a pig, but it's still a pig.

Just for fun, Google "ceo excess" and see all the media and Dem outrage over CEOs spending their money. I forgot the Palin example. Perfect!

Now if she could just find one of those fashionable $800 paper bags to cover her head she'd be the bomb.

To make matters worse, she spent $540.00 on shoes that are incredibly UGLY!!

I hear she was voted one of the 100 most beautiful people by People Mag/Rag. The thing is "beautiful" in their sense is both face and body, not personality.
Come on....MO face & body beautiful...just shows how the media is kissing up to these two.

Lorie, in your post, you blast her for the insensitivity of buying/wearing the shoes in such times, while in your follow up comment you criticize the media and liberals for their failure to criticize her as they would a Republican.

The latter I agree with but argue that it's simply another case of their double standards, another case of dog not chasing car. As for the former, we're supposed to be the ones in favor of the of people to spend their money on what makes them happy, so I can't back you on the post.

Mag: Palin wasn't spending her money so it's not quite the same thing.

I wonder if she'll wear those shoes while out in her make believe White House farm?

#19
True, but I believe the clothes were given back.

Funny, but I seem to recall a lot of acrimony and hatred and wealth-envy from the Obama supporters when John McCain appeared wearing $520 Ferragamo loafers.

Where is that acrimony, hatred and wealth-envy from the leftists now that Michelle Obama is buying $540 sneakers?

Spin your way out of that hypocrisy.

You all are missing the point, not enlightened enough I guess. Nothing to see here. Move along.
We are all RAAAACIST for questioning Mrs. Dear Leader's choice in any way.
Those shoes are enchanting. I just got a chill up my leg.
/sarcasm. \hurling

Let them wear cake.

She has all the grace and charm of a housebrick, but not half as smart.

My favorite part of the story is that she wore them to FOOD DRIVE!!! $540 for some fugly sneakers. How many cans of corn does that buy?

oops-I meant "wore them to A food drive."

But really, the point of this story is really more the double standard (re: both Palin and Mccain), and less that she is wearing $540 fugly sneakers to promote food bank giving while running around pretending like they understand the rest of us.

I'm sorry, how are successful millionaires supposed to dress? They're nice shoes. She has good taste (or, at least, her stylists do).

Air Force 1=The point of this article
The Statue of Liberty=your head.

It ain't the volunteerism that's bothersome, it's the sheer hypocracy of the (liberal, okay that's redundant) press.

Compare and contrast:
"A week in John McCain's Shoes"
http://tinyurl.com/6693s6

This is why our country is in the situation that we are, companies charging over $500 for a pair of sneakers and this first lady buying them.

Can anyone realize how many pair of shoes $500 can buy, so that children that have to go barefoot, can buy?

I am sick and tired of reporters saying that Michelle Obama is so great!

Maybe Michelle also needs to know about Leather Up, a super-discount motorcycle clothing supplier. I bought three pairs of excellent quality motorcycle boots there for around $35-60 a pair that each had retail values of about $200 each. I wear one comfortable $35 pair most of the time. But wear my high top fire and flame design boots with steel toes when I want to look hardcore. Those boots sure make any cowboy boots look real sissy. And the price was right. If I'm anything, it's a bargain hunter.

Don't be coy. The point is not that she wore the shoes; the point is that her husband's campaign rode on "the friend of the working man" motif alongside it's "John McCain is so out of touch" rhetoric. You who bought it-- bought it. And for whatever reason you're still buying it. Whether we're Republican or Democrat, the rest of us refused delivery months ago!

First, ever heard of "taxation without representation"? The people VOTE for government; government works for us. Therefore, we have a right to tell the government how to spend OUR tax dollars; we're the ones who go to work to support the government.

The government telling the people how to spend our money is antithetical to a democracy.

Which is why this is so laughable. Obama pretended to be outraged at the AIG bonuses, which were contractually promised employees, and rails on about the "two Americas" - the haves and the have-nots - decides the government must turn us all into have-nots for the sake of "fairness", but doesn't really seem ot let the rules apply to himself, or any of his appointments or other government buddies. In other words, if the Obama government didn't assume it was in charge of dictating how WE spend our money (especially those "evil" wealthy folk), 99.9% of us wouldn't give a crap what kind of shoes Michelle Obama wears.

It's the hypocrisy, stupid.