A Model of Style and Substance
Thursday, March 19, 2009 at 1:03 PM 
Photo Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque As we wrote yesterday, Mrs. O is hosting a series of events today in celebration of Women's History Month. Mrs. O welcomed a star-studded cast of guests to the Diplomatic Room at the White House this afternoon, as the group prepares to visit with students in the Washington, D.C. area. The First Lady looks particularly chic today, wearing a Zero + Maria Cornejo jacket in Evening Raffia, paired with slim black pants and a new floral brooch. (The jacket, which Mrs. O also owns in a blue wool, has been worn before, featured here.) "This was one of my dreams," the First Lady shared in her remarks. "I couldn't have imagined this a year ago. But as we started moving towards this trajectory and it became increasingly clear that Barack Obama might be the next President of the United States and as I started thinking about the kinds of things I wanted to see happen, this day was one of those things. Gathering an amazing group of women together and going out, and talking to young girls around the country. This is part of that dream." See the full remarks below: Update: As part of the day's events, Mrs. O visited with a group of junior and senior high school students at Anacostia High School in Washington, D.C. Students asked the First Lady a series of questions, covering everything from her background to her make-up.
“There’s no magic to being here,’’ Mrs. Obama said. “What I want you to know is that my parents were working class people. I had a mother, for example, parents, who told me, ‘You don’t worry about what anybody else says about you. You don’t worry about that teacher who you think is not treating you fairly or what your friends are saying.' All that matters is where you are and where you want to be.’’
Read more about the event at The Caucus.
Zero + Maria Cornejo in Outfits
Reader Comments (65)
Finally! Michelle is rocking some heels! My Girl! I truly have absolutely nothing bad to say about this look.
Dress: Gorgeous
Jewelry: Classic
Makeup: Superb
Hair: Amazing
Shoes: Rocking
Look: Timeless
Thank you Mrs. T and all those who foster lively, spirited, but respecftful blogging on this site.
@ Brook
I went looking for Michelle Obama bumper stickers and found a couple good ones with "Michelle for First Lady". (Also found a few shall we say, not so good ones that you're better off avoiding). Hope this helps.
http://bumperstickers.cafepress.com/item/michelle-for-first-lady-sticker-bumper/298051706
http://bumperstickers.cafepress.com/item/michelle-obama-for-first-lady-sticker-bumper/298388724
@ LeahD. Thank you for the link to Mrs. O's welcome speech at the White House this evening. I enjoyed not only the way she looked (her make-up is lovely!), but everything she had to say. She is doing such a great job of giving hope and inspiration and practical advice to young women of color and others who need it. By providing her own example, her reminder to "give back" is also being heard and will be followed I'm sure.
beautiful idea. As young people we need strong role model with values who inspire us and who represent.
Thanks to everyone who gave links to the welcome speech by Mrs. O.
I love the simple beauty of a strand of pearls, especially on mocha-colored skin. So pretty.
A very first lady look with a Mrs O twist - I think she looks fabulous, love that shade of black/grey. Desiree looks nice but its clear Mrs O's flotus.
Desirée Rogers is far more than a "stylish" woman, though she certainly is that! She is an extremely successful business woman, with a CV that makes Michelle's look like she just got out of school.
Frankly, I doubt very much that she is any more to the forefront than other social secretaries, though, if she is, that's the White House's choice. I think that she is simply covered and photographed more than others have been simply BECAUSE she is so high-powered and stylish in her own right. Don't forget, she was profiled in Vogue before most of the country had ever even heard of the Obamas.
The social secretary role is a behind the scenes one-
Don't care how great Ms. Rogers' resume reads, she shouldn't have accepted this job if it didn't meet her obvious need to be seen.
If it's beneath you, then don't take it. it's a simple as that. This role is a protocol heavy one and has to stay that way.
She should have sought another job better suited to her much touted CV. Sorry.
Posh Tater: No need to diminish Michelle in a bid to raise Desiree's stocks.
You could have made your point about Desiree without the Michelle comparison.
Lane -
Since people all over this blog before me were comparing the two, I don't see any reason I shouldn't follow suit. And it does NOT diminish Michelle in any way to point out that someone else has more professional accomplishments. They are different people with different strengths and I'm sorry you can't see that.
Emily, I can't imagine where you got the idea that Ms. Rogers thinks the job of social secretary is beneath her. It's quite a powerful position. I have the impression that some folks hear "secretary" and think of a mousy subordinate. That's not what this job is about.
Hyde Parker: If you can't tell that your comparison was quite belittling of Michelle, you'll never get it then.
And I have looked up the social sec's C.V; Not terribly impressive - Mostly political appointments courtesy of her former husband's family connections etc.
Lottery director..? Whoopi doo!
Another thing Hyde Parker, you insult everyone here by assuming that nobody else knows what a white house social secretary does -
For goodness sakes! Ann Stock was the Clinton white house secretary: Classy, smart, dignified, effortlessly sophisticated but most importantly infinitely discreet.
She executed every white house event *invisibly* with the precision and finesse of a solid professional. Didn't mean she wasn't recognized as the mastermind behind those successful parties, but she understood the discretion required of that position so well.
I'm afraid I don't see what the problem is with Ms. Rogers, as she so clearly defers to Mrs. O. Personally, I'm happy someone so strong in her own right is in this role; she's a perfect "right hand" to the First Lady. We don't criticize Rahm Emmanuel when he serves in that role to the President, so why should we condemn Ms. Rogers for it?
Social secretaries have been both anonymous and famous in their own right throughoput history. Mrs. T did this piece on Letitia Baldridge, one of the most famous social secretaries ever. http://www.mrs-o.org/?p=3544
It's not demeaning the First Lady to say she's got an incredibly strong person backing her up. She's the one who chose Ms. Rogers, after all. Why criticize the choice?
From the Huffington Post at the time Rogers was appointed by Obama (the article also mentions that she is a friend of both Barack and Michelle Obama). It is clear that this is a strategic appointment. Not your average White House social secretary.
"This appointment sends a strong message that the Obamas want to use the White House strategically, to maximize its use in a way that is consistent with their philosophy -- [to] open it to a broader range of people, " said Valerie Jarrett, an Obama intimate and friend of Rogers's who also will work in the White House. "Desirée is a heavy hitter -- she comes with her own range of contacts from around the country. She's close to Michelle and she knows everyone who will be working in the West Wing, so she will be able to create a synergy."
HER HAIR LOOKS AMAZZZZINNGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!