ForumGarden

When JFK was elected President, Jackie's every clothing pick and jewlery choice was a topic for discussion.

Do you think Michelle will make a similar impact on what women wear?

I find it interesting that there are articles written about the meaning behind the color choices of what Michelle and her girls wore when Obama accepted the nomination for President.

That the choice of clothing and colors were planned, there is no doubt. This was a momentous occassion and tapes and pictures from that night are now saved in the history of our nation.

I can't say as I know what she looks like, but judging by powerful, influential woman,

Jackie kennedy, princess Di etc and the way they set trends.

I would say 100% yes.

Meet Mrs. Obama.

Attached files

We had an article about this in the British press today.

I have to say, she does not inspire me in the slightest nor did Princess Diana.

The one true icon of style for me was Jackie Kennedy.

I am really sorry folks but i think that Michelle Obama is nothing special. She does not have that 'wow' factor we look for in a woman.

The only reason i ever looked at Sarah Palin, was to wonder how much her clothes had cost John McCain.

Michelle Obama has nothing to dazzle us with any more than Nancy raegan or Barbara Bush.

Anyway, will any one care what she's wearing when her husband is screwing America up??

oscar;1048327 wrote: We had an article about this in the British press today.

I have to say, she does not inspire me in the slightest nor did Princess Diana.




Be still my heart. I cannot believe you were not impressed with Princess Di. I thought everyone loved her.

Kindle;1048333 wrote: [QUOTE=oscar;1048327]We had an article about this in the British press today.

I have to say, she does not inspire me in the slightest nor did Princess Diana.




Be still my heart. I cannot believe you were not impressed with Princess Di. I thought everyone loved her.


I'm sorry but NO, not all of us were lulled by Diana. I am a woman but i believe Diana styled herself on Jackie. Jackie set the blue-print for women all over the world. She was in a class of her own and a trend setter of this century. By comparisom, Diana was a cheap Impression of her.

Grace Kelly is where they all learned how it could be done, she's the archetype.

oscar;1048343 wrote: I'm sorry but NO, not all of us were lulled by Diana. I am a woman but i believe Diana styled herself on Jackie. Jackie set the blue-print for women all over the world. She was in a class of her own and a trend setter of this century. By comparisom, Diana was a cheap Impression of her.


Ohhhhhhhh. I hate hearing you talk like this. I have always been so intrigued with her. More so after she died when all the good she did was talked about.

spot;1048348 wrote: Grace Kelly is where they all learned how it could be done, she's the archetype.


Yes, i forgot about Grace Kelly. She had beauty as well as style and grace but fashion wise, i think she was more elegant, where as Jackie was the trend setter, the icon.

Kindle;1048350 wrote: Ohhhhhhhh. I hate hearing you talk like this. I have always been so intrigued with her. More so after she died when all the good she did was talked about.


I am sorry but i am only being honest. I won't go into my reasons for dis-liking Diana here but a lot british women feel the same as myself.

Diana changed over the years. I loved her when she first married Charles but after the divorce, we saw another Diana.

She did a lot for charity and she was very much loved here but I'm just saying that not everyone feels the same about her now as they did in the beginning. That was her doing... not the British monachy. :(

I was also intrigued with Grace Kelly.

Odd isn't it. Both of them are dead of tragic circumstances.

oscar;1048356 wrote: I am sorry but i am only being honest. I won't go into my reasons for dis-liking Diana here but a lot british women feel the same as myself.

Diana changed over the years. I loved her when she first married Charles but after the divorce, we saw another Diana.

She did a lot for charity and she was very much loved here but I'm just saying that not everyone feels the same about her now as they did in the beginning. That was her doing... not the British monachy. :(


If I may ask. Were you not disturbed by the Camilla situation? Could this be part of what caused her 'change'?

Kindle;1048360 wrote: If I may ask. Were you not disturbed by the Camilla situation? Could this be part of what caused her 'change'?


Prince Charles admited on live T.v. that he had been having an affair with Camilla while married to Diana. I believe Diana truely loved Charles to her dying day and it is a tragic story akin to any greek tragedy.

While Grace kelly remained the dignified Princess, sadly after the divorce, Diana became an attention seeking desperate. It was that i believe that killed her. She was always out to 'shock' the monachy through the press and that is just not the done thing in Britain.

The house of Windsor has a long history of cutting anyone off that falls from grace. They did it with Edward 8th and Wallis Simpson, they did it with the Duchess of Argyle, they did it with Sarah ferguson, to name only a few.

Diana had fallen from grace and i believe that losing her HRH title and not being in the public eye made her all the more desperate for fame, hence the relationships with the like's of Dodi Al-Fayed.

To the British monachy, Diana was nothing more after the divorce than the mother of the queen's grandson's.. one of which may be a future king of England.

While the world tutted about Charles and Camilla, Diana was having her own affairs. Having said that, i would and will not ever accept Camilla as a Queen of England should Charles take the throne. She is a cart horse with bad teeth for one.

I, myself do not believe that Charles will take the throne given the British dis-like for Camilla. My humble opinion is that he will abdicate and Prince William will succeed Queen Elizabeth the 2nd.

oscar;1048391 wrote: Prince Charles admited on live T.v. that he had been having an affair with Camilla while married to Diana. I believe Diana truely loved Charles to her dying day and it is a tragic story akin to any greek tragedy.

While Grace kelly remained the dignified Princess, sadly after the divorce, Diana became an attention seeking desperate. It was that i believe that killed her. She was always out to 'shock' the monachy through the press and that is just not the done thing in Britain.

The house of Windsor has a long history of cutting anyone off that falls from grace. They did it with Edward 8th and Wallis Simpson, they did it with the Duchess of Argyle, they did it with Sarah ferguson, to name only a few.

Diana had fallen from grace and i believe that losing her HRH title and not being in the public eye made her all the more desperate for fame, hence the relationships with the like's of Dodi Al-Fayed.

To the British monachy, Diana was nothing more after the divorce than the mother of the queen's grandson's.. one of which may be a future king of England.

While the world tutted about Charles and Camilla, Diana was having her own affairs. Having said that, i would and will not ever accept Camilla as a Queen of England should Charles take the throne. She is a cart horse with bad teeth for one.

I, myself do not believe that Charles will take the throne given the British dis-like for Camilla. My humble opinion is that he will abdicate and Prince William will succeed Queen Elizabeth the 2nd.


I appreciate the insight. I too have great distain for Camilla and no respect for Charles whatsoever. I hope you are correct and he abdicates allowing Prince William to become the next King. My feeling, however, is he really, really wants to be king and he will have it regardless of the peoples wishes.

Time will tell.

Kindle;1048420 wrote: I hope you are correct and he abdicates allowing Prince William to become the next King.


Back in the Treason Act of 1351 what you're doing here was made punishable by death - it was high treason to imagine the death of the monarch and here you are both discussing what should happen after exactly that. I'll be very annoyed if they've repealed it.

My apologies.

That was rather insensitive of me.

Kindle;1048420 wrote: I appreciate the insight. I too have great distain for Camilla and no respect for Charles whatsoever. I hope you are correct and he abdicates allowing Prince William to become the next King. My feeling, however, is he really, really wants to be king and he will have it regardless of the peoples wishes.

Time will tell.


Charles would be an extrememly unpopular monach. I think he knows that. Meanwhile, the queen has the throne superglued to her backside and is going no-where. I think she's out for Queen Victoria's record and some more. I do highly respect our Queen. She is a wonderfull role model of dedication but it's unfortunately, the dis-functional family around her that let's us all down.

I think your right in that Charles would have dearly loved to be King of England and i think when he wen't public about Camilla on live tv, he must have known that it would damage him. However much palace officials try to get us to accept Camilla, we just never will.

If Diana had put her seatbelt on that night, maybe she'd still be here. Such a trival thing really in hindsight.

JAB;1048531 wrote: Charles totally lost it with me with that tampon comment of his. :rolleyes:


I'm with you.

He and Bill Clinton, with his comments on his "Monica dipped cigars", are very similar. I don't know why either one of them feels the needs to share this stuff with the public. :yh_sick

I'm not a girly girl so I really don't pay much attention to the average woman. And they wouldn't influence me in any way since I tend to do my own thing.

Kindle;1048857 wrote: I don't know why either one of them feels the needs to share this stuff with the public. :yh_sickYou cannot be serious, surely. The quote comes from a private cellphone conversation which was illegally taped by a "Scanner enthusiast" on December 18th, 1989 and subsequently printed by every tabloid on the planet. What you should be disgusted by is the invasion of privacy by all concerned.

spot;1048919 wrote: You cannot be serious, surely. The quote comes from a private cellphone conversation which was illegally taped by a "Scanner enthusiast" on December 18th, 1989 and subsequently printed by every tabloid on the planet. What you should be disgusted by is the invasion of privacy by all concerned.
I have to say that i agree with you Spot. I too were disgusted at the tapping of Charle's phone, but it was the content of the conversation that opened our eyes to him and Camilla... Sordid and cheap.. Yuk.

They also tapped Diana and i also have to reach for the sick bucket, hearing her saying 'Squidgy'.

Going from memory alone, was The News of The World Editor in a spot of bother of late for tapping Prince Harry and Prince William's phones??

I remember the scanner enthusiast. He was apparently in his shed when he picked up the call. :wah:

sunny104;1048860 wrote: I'm not a girly girl so I really don't pay much attention to the average woman. And they wouldn't influence me in any way since I tend to do my own thing.


When i was little, i was very influenced by Jackie Kennedy. I thought she was the Queen of America but then i was merely a child. :wah:

I too am not influenced by the way women dress. I choose my clothes purely out of what i like and what i think suit's me, not what some-one dictate's is fashion.

Every Christmas, Mr oscar buys me clothes and trie's so hard to get me into some-thing other than black but i end up just not wearing them.

Practicality comes into a lot of it. I do buy men's clothes for walking the dogs etc but i do love a little black dress with some bling accessorie's. :-4

spot;1048919 wrote: You cannot be serious, surely. The quote comes from a private cellphone conversation which was illegally taped by a "Scanner enthusiast" on December 18th, 1989 and subsequently printed by every tabloid on the planet. What you should be disgusted by is the invasion of privacy by all concerned.




I might have known that once, but could have forgotten.................. :-3

What about the Clinton info? Was that from Bill's lips or a person illegally prying?

Kindle;1049257 wrote: I might have known that once, but could have forgotten.................. :-3

What about the Clinton info? Was that from Bill's lips or a person illegally prying?


If i remember correctly, there was no invasion of privacy with Clinton... Just a disgruntled former Intern who had a severe dose of 'Hell Hath No Fury like A Woman Scorned'.

Who the heck keeps a sperm stain of her dress for ten years?? That told me one thing and one thing only. She had every intention of keeping it for use in the future. Clinton was a fool but she had spite and malice.

Good for Hilary for her dignified dealing of the whole story.

oscar;1050171 wrote: If i remember correctly, there was no invasion of privacy with Clinton... Just a disgruntled former Intern who had a severe dose of 'Hell Hath No Fury like A Woman Scorned'.

Who the heck keeps a sperm stain of her dress for ten years?? That told me one thing and one thing only. She had every intention of keeping it for use in the future. Clinton was a fool but she had spite and malice.

Good for Hilary for her dignified dealing of the whole story.


Whatever is good old Monica doing these days............

I think she finished her education and is successful now.

Kindle;1049257 wrote: I might have known that once, but could have forgotten.................. :-3

What about the Clinton info? Was that from Bill's lips or a person illegally prying?


Neither - I'm quite sure President Clinton's never been quoted on it in his life other than in disgraceful attempts at jokes.

The information came from Kenneth Starr's Report to Congress on testimony from Monica Lewinsky relating to her inappropriate behavior with the President. And if you'd like my opinion on what she did, keeping DNA evidence of the event for years suggests to me that she was out for what she could get from the start.

spot;1050196 wrote: Neither - I'm quite sure President Clinton's never been quoted on it in his life other than in disgraceful attempts at jokes.

The information came from Kenneth Starr's Report to Congress on testimony from Monica Lewinsky relating to her inappropriate behavior with the President. And if you'd like my opinion on what she did, keeping DNA evidence of the event for years suggests to me that she was out for what she could get from the start.


How is it that you are able to have so much info at the ready?

Kindle;1050200 wrote: How is it that you are able to have so much info at the ready?


I have an Internet connection and I can ask Google to show me relevant pages. Sometimes it's to get confirmation of what I know so that it's not just me claiming something when I make a post, I have evidence to show for it. More often it's to find out.

I used to use books more often but they're slower to access and harder to quote from.

spot;1050209 wrote: I have an Internet connection and I can ask Google to show me relevant pages. Sometimes it's to get confirmation of what I know so that it's not just me claiming something when I make a post, I have evidence to show for it. More often it's to find out.

I used to use books more often but they're slower to access and harder to quote from.


Thanks for sharing. I just tried that on my computer and that is way cool. I can't believe I didn't notice this before.

It is so exciting learning new things. Thank you again.

Kindle;1048279 wrote: When JFK was elected President, Jackie's every clothing pick and jewlery choice was a topic for discussion.

Do you think Michelle will make a similar impact on what women wear?

I find it interesting that there are articles written about the meaning behind the color choices of what Michelle and her girls wore when Obama accepted the nomination for President.

That the choice of clothing and colors were planned, there is no doubt. This was a momentous occassion and tapes and pictures from that night are now saved in the history of our nation.


Well, some time has now passed since we last speculated on Michelle's impact on the fashion industry. What do you think now?

Aretha's hat sure make a sensation at the inaguration. The designer is making a $170 copy of this $500 creation. Do you think hats might come back in style for women? Michelle hasn't worn any yet (perhaps due to her height), but there is always tomorrow......................