What was wrong with the clothes, I thought they were such great outfits.
The kids were dressed perfectly, unlike the womans field hockey team, whose members mostly wore flip-flops to meet the President. I guess some fashinista thought the kids would look better in hip huggers and middies.
no doubt you are female
I did too. It was extremely refreshing they were not dressed punk-ish (is that still what they call it?) or too casually. Someone in the media called it "retro." Nothing is wrong with RETRO!
Well the little girl's belly was not bared, the little boy's pants were actually around his waist, there were no piercings, tatoos, their hair looked to be their natural color, etc.
Bottom line, the left does not recognize class and good taste when they see it.
>>>What was wrong with the clothes, I thought they were such great outfits.>>>
They didn't have the five year old outfitted with hip hugging pants with the words "Hot Stuff" written across the hiney with a tummy shirt or the boy in pants that drooped so low it showed his underwear and the shoes I refer to as 'lazy shoes' as they have no shoelaces, just puffs air to get them to fit. Don't think I'm joking, I shop for a four year old, eight year and nine year old and they have these clothes and PUSH them. I refuse to let my daughters where anything where attention is emphasized on their prepubscent butt. Other parents are not so caring.
This is Robin Givhan, the fashion editor of The Washington Post, at the CFDA 2004 Awards. Can you believe she had the audacity to criticize the dress of Mrs. Roberts and the children at Judge Roberts' nomination? Ms. Givhan does not appear to have much fashion sense or talent. The dress is unbecoming, unattractive, her slip is showing, and her shoes, if not outdated, should be! The Roberts', in contrast, were well dressed and their clothes were becoming. You cannot say the same for Ms. Givhan!