You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
Very nice duds!
Did this Lifestyle section run the same kind of articles after the 2001 and 2005 inaugerations? Bill G.
ruphinaJan. 22, 1310:46 AM
Did this Lifestyle section run the same kind of articles after the 2001 and 2005 inaugerations? Bill G._____________--Were you around in the 80's? Is so, you have a very poor memory to even ask that question. The press was continuously abuzz about Nancy Reagan, her gowns, state dinners, White House decorative updates and even the White House China.
Didn't ask about the Reagans or Clintons, I asked about 2001 and 2005. Todays "mainstrem" press is way more blatantly liberal than it was 30 years ago. The Reagans were products of Hollywood- oF COURSE they were expected to play dress up. The Obamas are from a background distinctly separate from that kind of glitter. It just seems forced to try to make them into fashionistas. BTW, I DO think the dress was good, and the coats her daughters wore on Sunday were VERY classy. Michelle's checkered blue thing that looked like someone cut and pasted some old luggage... not so nice. Bill G.
Gosh no mention of the cost??? I thought the Obama's were for "the people" look like they are for "the rich".
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
Poll: What concerns you most about teens on social media?
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2014 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks