USA Today...

[susan]

in my Opinion; it is disrespectful to our President, and to the First Lady to describe them in this ambiguous way. without a qualifier for such a random sort of judgement the correlary is inappropriate. it would appear the writer is making fertilizer the topic, rather than attempting to caption the photo in a meaningful way.
in other words....a back hand slam. if the writer intended to say something nice, it would have been easy to do so. if we are left guessing at the meaning, it is clear the writer had nothing nice to say.
these are professional writers; paid to make their meaning clear. when they do not, it is like the writer who answers the hollywood question "does this actor have any talent?" with " he was kind to his mother."
Ron is probably right in his thinking. there is, however, an honor code concerning writing about or speaking of the President of the United States that requires one to be concise, even if not always complimentary.
english composition 101. i'd be willing to bet the writer took the course. i conclude that if the writer is a supporter he is hiding it well.
susan