The only reason I comment on her looks and style, or lack thereof, is the incessant and annoying attempt by the American mainstream media to portray her as attractive, glamorous and fashionable.
In a desperate and sad attempt, the American networks and magazines are trying to portray her as something she clearly is not. I was sickened by CNN's Wolf Blitzer's drooling description of her and have lost all respect for him as a journalist.
Michelle Obama isn't attractive and glamorous, anyone who has eyes, knows it.
Those who say different are lying and they know it.
Shame on Wolf and all those other so-called journalist who pretend that she is what she is not. It's time, as the old fable goes, to admit that this empress has no clothes.
To be cruelly frank, she isn't the least bit attractive and her gawky frame and hulking demeanour makes the dreadful clothes that she wears look even worse.
While the media fawns, the deadly silence from the real mavens in the fashion world is most telling. You know the old saying- If you can't say anything nice.....
Notwithstanding, some can't keep quiet. NPR and Fox contributor Juan Williams is one of the few to express what so many feel.
Michelle Obama, according to him, "...has this Stokely-Carmichael-in-a-designer-dress thing going"
Oscar de la Renta told Women's Wear Daily, "You don't...go to Buckingham Palace in a sweater."
But enough already! All of this shouldn't matter a whit.
Her intelligence (which she certainly has an abundance of) and the good she puts it to, should be the sole barometer of her success as Queen of America.
Queen of America?
Of course. That's what you can rightly call an unelected person who becomes the 'First Lady' of a nation.
The Commonwealth gets it's monarchs through inheritance and America gets it's sovereign queen by default.
The only difference between the Queen of England and the Queen of America is that the former gets her job for life, but without any power at all, while the latter rules for no more than eight years, but exercises enormous influence.
Both enjoy the largess of a fawning, supportive and subservient press. The queen is loved because she is the Queen and Mrs Obama is loved because she is the First Lady, period.
It's in this context that we can understand why the American media want her to be beautiful, graceful and glamorous too, it makes for great reporting.
I'm often asked by Americans (rather disparagingly), why we continue to tolerate a monarch.
I never flinch. I always tell them that America would be better off with a monarch so that they wouldn't elevate their elected president to superstar status.
Here in Canada and in the Commonwealth, we offer our Queen our unquestioned admiration, but judge our politicians by their deeds and not their position.
I take great pride in the fact that most Canadians cannot offer up the name our Prime Minister's wife or those of his children. They are largely irrelevant us. It's Stephen Harper who we elected, not his family.
It's true that when it comes to looks, fashion and glamour, Michelle Obama is no Jackie Kennedy.
But Jackie Kennedy was by all accounts, no rocket scientist and tolerated a philandering husband in silence to preserve her position. Is that a role model?
Looking at Michelle Obama last week, alongside Carla Bruni, the French President's wife, was a painful reminder of what the First Lady is not- pretty, fashionable and glamorous.
But Carla Bruni is an ex-actress and ex-songstress and not much of each. She is most famous for her nude photos. Is that a role model?
Perhaps Michelle Obama isn't all that pretty, nor that glamorous. Maybe she doesn't look like Claudia Schiffer in clothes, but perhaps, just perhaps, she is eminently qualified for her job.
She's smart, dignified and well educated. The media should stop pretending and start promoting her for all the good things that she is.
Michelle Obama - This Empress Has no Clothes!