Hillary Tries to Bank on Cleavage

Nice.

Few political fundraising e-mails have ever carried the subject header “cleavage,” but White House hopeful Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign sent a solicitation to supporters Friday with the attention-grabbing header in order to decry a recent Washington Post article devoted to the New York Democrat’s chest — and raise campaign cash in the process.

“Frankly, focusing on women’s bodies instead of their ideas is insulting,” Ann Lewis, a senior adviser to Clinton, wrote in the e-mail. “It’s insulting to every woman who has ever tried to be taken seriously in a business meeting. It’s insulting to our daughters — and our sons — who are constantly pressured by the media to grow up too fast.”

To be fair, there is also a lot of focus on Edwards’ hair, Romney’s makeup, Bush’s ears, etc. 

1. While teaching in Vegas, one of my students went to one of her rallies at a different high school.  The student just couldn’t get over how ugly Hillary was- she said she had black teeth.
   I don’t know, I would never would vote for Hillary, but to judge her by her looks is kind of cooky, but people do.  And notice, she started showing cleavage after the Mrs. Edwards crack about Hillary acted like a man.  Yep, that’s showing them.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 28, 2007 at 0128 hrs




2. Give me an f’ing break.  Black teeth.  Yeah, presidential candidates always forgo Crest whitestrips as a matter of course.  Their handlers dig that.

   And where are the scathing criticisms about silly and/or inflammatory Republican fundraising messages?  I guess they just don’t do this kind of thing, eh?

   Posted by scott on July 28, 2007 at 0915 hrs




3. I’m just saying that is what the student said.  Maybe she didn’t brush after lunch.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 28, 2007 at 1352 hrs




4. Funny, Billary shows up with teets in tow immediately after Bizleth Edwards calls her on her femininity.
   That is the post scott.
   Comment on the post.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 29, 2007 at 0005 hrs




5. I’m sure you think you’re being clever, but I don’t even understand what any of that’s supposed to mean.

   Posted by scott on July 29, 2007 at 0805 hrs




6. Frankly, I don’t get it either Scott.  I think the point he was trying to make, however, was that the post was about Hillary’s latest fundraiser.  Certainly others of both parties have had silly/inflammatory messages and if you had brought up a silly one by a Republican, you would not have been rebuffed.  This blog may specialize in ridiculing Democrats, but it does a pretty good job of ridiculing Government in general. 

   Your partisan generalizations often overstep the parameters of the original post.  This induces ripostes which many times are of a personal nature because, in effect, you have made it personal. 

   Now this may be your purpose, (then I can say you are very good at it) but your comments are just as often filled with comments like ‘I am looking for a reasonable and thoughtful conversation’.  I am not sure which purpose you truly want, but I will say you are good at one and not so good at the other in this blog.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 30, 2007 at 1652 hrs