“Paul Bedard wrote the article in the Examiner about Tom Sietsema’s article in the Post about Mrs. Obama and her arms.”
So was Sietsema’s original article really spin control to debunk the Joan Rivers quip from earlier in the week? Seems funny that his article should come out just a couple days after her comment got so much attention. And Ms. Rivers’ gaydar is better than anyone!
Alex Jones also talked about the Michelle / Michael theory on his Wednesday radio show. He tried to make it sound tongue in cheek, but he accurately cited the Youtube videos that came out a while ago, arguing that she is a tranvestite.
Sietsema may just be the kind of guy who likes to gush over Michelle Obama (but, yes it looks like he really is gay -- that seems to be a job requirement nowadays with arts/culture/entertainment writers on big city newspapers). It's hard to speculate about whatever else he may be, because -- like a lot of restaurant critics -- he doesn't let his face become public for fear restaurants will treat him differently if they know he's writing for a newspaper.
I'm pretty sure Michelle Obama isn't actually a man. Joan Rivers's jibe was funny, but wasn't it more about how Mrs. Obama looked, rather than whether she was literally a transsexual or transvestite? Also, if you wanted to do damage control, would you really praise Michelle's arms? Aren't MO's powerful "man arms" the very thing you'd want your readers not to think about? I think it may just have been that they ate at the same restaurant and Sietsma just couldn't keep from kvelling about it.