This post is misleading nonsense. The author cites factcheck.org as a primary source. Unfortunately, factcheck.org makes it clear that Ms. Obama's staff is not unusual give the size of staffs kept by other first ladies.
Its actually quite twisted. Some hack makes up a non-story on thelastcrusade.org ("where you can engage in the life and death struggle against the forces of Islam, apostasy, moral complacency, cultural relativity, and the New World Order,"qutoed from factcheck). The non-story tries to insinuate the the staff is unusually large and made up of "attendants" that do the first lady's hair and nails. It is easy to see how intellectually dishonest the article is when the only comparisons it makes to other first ladies are to Eisenhauer and Lincoln!
So, this non-story gets some traction, and it is picked up by factcheck.org, which basically reports that the actual number of staff is slighly higher than reported, but that it is not an unusual size for recent fadministrations. Then, the same hack writes a new story on a CFP, which cites factcheck and essentially says, "its worse than we thought, and factcheck.org agrees".
Boooooogus. Aren't there enough real political differences to discuss?