When images of Jean Paul Gaultier-clad First Lady Michelle Obama on a $75,000-a-day Spanish holiday hit the wires, controversy was bound to erupt back home. Her carefully crafted image as "everywoman" was blown.
In addition to the high cost, the evolving justifications for the trip offered by the White House's flack were just as dizzying.
First it was a private, mother-daughter trip that press secretary Robert Gibbs refused to comment on.
Then, the White House said she was paying for most of the trip, but that the taxpayers would pay for some of it because she'd be meeting with the King and Queen of Spain. The East Wing's final justification was that the First Lady traveled to Spain to comfort a friend who'd lost her husband.
The spin revealed that the White House had a public relations problem: After attempting to further the notion that she was just the woman next door, it couldn't help that the First Lady looked positively royal. That only cemented the suspicion that she is far fancier and higher maintenance than she, or her handlers, would like us to believe.
"The First Lady is doing her part - and then some - to be an ambassador of total glam when she travels. Have you ever seen a First Lady looking quite so now?" Glamour magazine asked.
I don't know about Glamour's perception of now, but currently 14.6 million people are unemployed. Now is a time when people are losing their homes. Now should be an era of restraint, a time to spread the wealth around, according to the First Lady's spouse.
The backlash from her vacation also showcased an antithesis to the story line of moderation and humble roots that Michelle Obama has sought to perpetuate.
"We like to joke that the South Side of Chicago is our Kennebunkport," she said to Vogue in 2008. Months later, she stepped out in $540 Lanvin sneakers to volunteer at a food bank. The disconnect was obvious.
MOOCHELLE My Belle
