Writing for the NYTimes, fashion critic Cathy Horyn fires a water pistol at First Lady Michelle Obama — I think it’s loaded with water and not a well gone dry — asking in reference to Mrs. O’s fab fashions: Is this how a modern, educated, working woman wants to be viewed in her first historic year — as a maven, an icon? Who’s Barbie now?

One first-lady fashion statement that has made waves: Sleeveless attire. (Mark Wilson, Getty Images / February 24, 2009)You say Barbie; I say modern-day Mamie, because Barbie’s no mom-in-chief. Then again, Michelle’s got more fashion zip than Mamie.

Horyn and I are speaking the same language, although I had my mid-summer reckoning, after Michelle’s trip to the Vatican. Until then I was salivating — cheering actually — for our own American version of Queen Rania, Carla Bruni Sarkozy or Sarah Brown.

She’s not coming, which is probably appropriate, given our behind-the-times place of women in American life. We’re not ready for Queen Rania.

The pundits are saying that it may be Michelle who’s called into strong woman, brainiac service on behalf of her husband, who may be in need of her Harvard-brain, alpha woman advice.

Let’s just say that FLOTUS is no Hillary Clinton — and that’s by design. Any number of folks will remind me that nobody elected Michelle Obama to be anything at all — not even a 21st century first lady, someone beyond mom-in-chief, as the vast majority of American women must be.

Reality is that the country loves Michelle, and so do I. Did I want more from Michelle Obama? Yes, indeed. Am I in the minority in wanting a fast-forward, in-the-trenches First Lady? Apparently so.

As for calling her Barbie — well that’s firing a stream of hot liquid below her big wide belt. Anne