Times Obsessed With Michelle Obama’s Arms

By
From left, Karl Lagerfeld, Dries Van Noten, and Hussein Chalayan. Photo: Getty Images

There's no shortage of news to opine about these days, with the economy in the gutter, multi-billion-dollar stimulus packages (plural), wars (also plural), the unemployment rate at its highest since 1983, Hillary Clinton, stem-cell research ... we could go on for days and not even mention fashion! But the New York Times is obsessed with Michelle Obama's bare arms. She cannot go sleeveless in peace. Several days ago they symbolized everything we don't know about Michelle. Now they symbolize America's can-do spirit! Maureen Dowd writes:

Let’s face it: The only bracing symbol of American strength right now is the image of Michelle Obama’s sculpted biceps. Her husband urges bold action, but it is Michelle who looks as though she could easily wind up and punch out Rush Limbaugh, Bernie Madoff and all the corporate creeps who ripped off America.


David Brooks told Dowd, “She’s made her point. Now she should put away Thunder and Lightning.” He didn't like the Narciso Rodriguez plum dress Michelle wore in the chambers, which apparently caused one congressman to call her "babe."

All this chatter has possibly led Michelle to wear more sleeves, which frankly don't always look as good on her. Take the layered ensemble (pictured here) she wore last week to speak about women in the military. She looks unnaturally buttoned-up and stuffy. Michelle's arms might make the Times uncomfortable, but the only thing they symbolize is that if you work out, you can look good. Now that America could stand to embrace.

Should Michelle Cover Up? [NYT]