Robin Givhan takes wanking to levels not seen since David Broder predicted in January ’06 February ’07 that Bush would rebound in the polls. It’s hard to know how to start with this wankfest. Maybe with her describing Juan William’s comparison of Michelle Obama to Stokely Carmichael thusly?
The vitriol has flown at those, such as journalist Juan Williams, who have suggested that she can be too aggressive or dour in some of her speeches.
Or, how about this segment of Noonanesque lunacy?
For all the wide-eyed Michelle-Obama-is-just-like-us rapture because she wears Gap, the reality is that those Main Street frocks in her closet make her position only more vertiginous. Audiences feel they have an intimate relationship with this person they’ve put atop a pedestal, and they are more visceral in their defense of her.
The photograph of Obama on the March cover of Vogue adds to that false sense of public intimacy. Unlike the portrait of Clinton that appeared in December 1998, there’s nothing especially regal or grand about Obama’s image. Clinton wore a boat-neck ball gown by Oscar de la Renta when she broke the Vogue cover barrier. Obama wears a sleeveless sheath. Clinton’s formal photo could just as easily have been an oil painting by a modern-day John Singer Sargent. Obama’s picture has the self-consciously relaxed quality of something that might appear on a Facebook page.
Obama’s champions act as if they know her, that they understand her and she them. All that passionate support, however, comes at a price. They have wrapped her in a protective cocoon that could soon border on smothering. It is a place where normal human failures are denied, reasonable criticism is met with a ferocious defense, bad hair days don’t exist and dimwitted attacks can’t simply be ignored.
Anyone want to help me out and tell me what point Ms. Givhan is trying to make?
Is it nothing more than a desire to see Michelle Obama taken down a peg?
Can an icon have a cranky day in public — and have that crummy mood noted without it launching boycotts, blogs and a thousand dissertations on the stereotype of the angry black woman? It may be that she cannot.
Still, one wishes that some close Obama friend would step forward and do for her what she pointedly tried to do for her husband early on in the campaign. Tell the world that she doesn’t put away the milk. That she skips the weekly pedicures. Debunk the mythology. Or at least try.
What mythology?
and can anyone tell me from an English professor’s point of view, what in the hell that Jessica Simpson segment is supposed to do?
wandering insults???
written as a true wapo fool. lets rip the O’s any way we can. And remember- this is only the first three weeks!
I mean, you can’t even compare her to the founder of the Black Panther Party without people asking you, “WTF?”
What did you expect? Open welcoming arms from the Beltway punditocracy? She’s an African American woman who is smart, highly educated, hard working and a great Mom to her kids. Of course they’re going to go after her. Oh, and she’s a Democrat, too. Case closed.
They can’t say it, but they really, really, really want to…
Seems to me they said it.
follow the fashion of Mrs O and revive brain after reading givhen locura
sorry redo link. here it is. lots of nice pix and info about the young designers whose creations she wears
Mrs O
Oscar’s got it right – but if you ask me, there’s nothing that gets the winger’s goat more than an uppity woman.
It’s simple – jealousy. Some people are absolutely posessed by it, and can’t help putting it on display.
I suspect the myth is that Michelle’s a natural beauty, she’s smart, and people love her.
The photograph of Obama on the March cover of Vogue adds to that false sense of public intimacy.
Oh puh-le-e-ezzzeee!!!! Like there’s a single celebrity in the entire frakin’ world who doesn’t do exactly the same thing?!?!?
Has this woman not read a single magazine from the supermarket check-out line for the last 20 years!?!?!
Why not give Robin a Life Time Achievement Award for Wankery and forget about her
She IS a wanker. Thank you for blasting this wretched woman.
Juan Williams is a Sambo who insulted the First Lady with lies, and has been doing so the entire campaign season. To defend the First Lady doesn’t make me a sychophant.
Hedda Hopper would have been right at home writing columns about Washington for WaPo or the NYT. Gossip and speculation is all the columnists know how to do. Most recent case in point, Gay Stolberg’s piece on Larry Summers in the Times this morning. Fluff masquarading as a reporting.
It’s just god-awful. It really has come to pass that the Washington Press (and their beltway constituency) believe that the actual substance of governing is too complicated for the Great Unwashed to worry about. They have incorporated the business model to government. After all, we don’t worry about how our shaving cream works, as long as it seems to do the job. It’s not our business to know. On that model, it’s not our business to know how government works, either.
Did anyone mention that this woman is the Fashion Editor at WaPo and perhaps that is why the piece is a trite and meaningless whim of foul-minded elite (aka FASHION).
To add the Fashion editor to the ‘punditocracy’ is giving too much credit to her craft.
She is simply applying her previously winning formula to a new subject with 0 real analysis or understanding of the facts of things. Truthiness and all that.