And Hillary Clinton, according to Chris Matthews, has a voice which reminds “some men” of “fingernails on a blackboard.”

I remember a rumor floating around circa the release of Hilary’s autobiography (that major booksellers everywhere somehow managed to neglect filing under “Fiction”) that Sharon Stone was being considered to play Her Worshipfulness in a TV movie. Listen to that voice on the campaign trail and watch some “E/R” reruns and you’ll realize that no one other than Laura Innes (“Dr. Kerry Weaver”) should ever play Hil.

If we decide based on a wet t-shirt contest, does that give the advantage to Hillary, or does that handicap her campaign?

JadeNYU on July 6, 2007 at 8:28 PM

Neither. It depends on whether the retrieval of the snuke up her sniz is successful or not.

wheelchair (of course, I’m also sure he can take his “Great Society” and shove it).

Point of information

FDR was New Deal, JFK/LBJ was Great Society right?

You know like George Michael and Elton John

Didn’t they both do a version of “Don’t Let Your Son Go Down on Me”?

The thing about Fred is that he is so very Fred.

If we decide based on a wet t-shirt contest, does that give the advantage to Hillary, or does that handicap her campaign?

JadeNYU on July 6, 2007 at 8:28 PM

AAAaaargrrg!! Terrible mental image, Jade.

- The Cat

JWS on July 6, 2007 at 7:31 PM

I’m electing someone I want to cuddle with. Isn’t that what this is all about?

e-pirate on July 6, 2007 at 8:13 PM

If we decide based on a wet t-shirt contest, does that give the advantage to Hillary, or does that handicap her campaign?

I, for one, applaud our new, fabulous looking overlords.

urbancenturion on July 6, 2007 at 7:49 PM

No worries.

Of course, I have to admit I tend to go for the tall, skinny physique (more like Obama) than the manly man physique.

So, I guess I am so edwards anyway. :)

Of course, I think the fact that our media outlets are discussing the hair/shoulders/bodies/etc of our presidential candidates is ridiculous anyhow.

I’m so sure that FDR was a decent war-time leader because of how manly he looked in that wheelchair (of course, I’m also sure he can take his “Great Society” and shove it).

Who cares if the President is fat or thin, male or female, black or white. I just want a President that makes sound decisions.

Meh…at least Edwards isn’t tying-up air traffic getting coiffed on the tarmack at LAX a la Bill Clinton.

JetBoy on July 6, 2007 at 7:20 PM

dude, you just gotta give him a chance…

…when you can just as easily elect a manly man

where? WHERE?

…but Mitt makes up for that by having the physique of the manly man

you are so edwards /sarc

They accuse the journalists of ‘being gay’ for manly men, and then complain that none of the Democratic front runners get the same ‘gay man-love’…..

…Perhaps that’s because none of the 3 Dem front-runners are manly men (no, it has to be bias! It HAS to be).

Hillary is a woman and can’t afford to be manly as, one of the things that her supporters point out as a reason to elect her is the fact that she’s a woman. If she tries to be ‘manly’, there’s no reason to elect her (unless we want to get into her policies, which her team seems to want to steer clear of) because, why elect a manly woman when you can just as easily elect a manly man.

Obama is a tall, skinny guy that they are promoting as intellectual and a uniter. Cowboys (the archetypal manly man) don’t wax poetic and bring the bad guys to the table for a talk. They walk in, assess the situation, take out the bad guys, and leave without ever saying a word. He doesn’t have the body type to be a manly man and, in an effort to counteract the fact he doesn’t have a lot of leadership experience (political or private sector), they are playing up the ‘professorial’ side of his personality. Professors are great, but they aren’t manly men.

As for John Edwards, he’s the closest to qualifying as a manly man (and they know it, which is why he’s posing brokeback style on the cover of Men’s Vogue). However, his $400 haircuts are way more metro than manly. Now, people can bring up helMitt at this point as I’m sure he’s probably not getting an $8 cut at the local barber shop (although, most of the LDS men I grew up around could be a bit cheap when it comes to things like that, so, it’s also possible that his wife cuts his hair) but Mitt makes up for that by having the physique of the manly man and being a business man (which is the white-collar version of a MAN’s job – all the football stars at my highschool ended up majoring in business – they love those mergers and acquisitions). Add the pretty-boy hair to the fact that he sends his cancer-stricken wife out to fight his battles for him and you’ve got a man that’s not qualified to be a manly man.

I don’t know about the rest of the Dem candidates (for some reason, Bill Richardson strikes me as a potential manly man) but none of the front runners work for that meme and the press knows it.

If lovin’ Fred! is wrong; I don’t wanna be right.

lorien1973 on July 6, 2007 at 7:02 PM

I totally agree. Remember how the Goracle was so worried about his bald spot in 2000? And the network cameras wouldn’t show him much from the back?

Meh…at least Edwards isn’t tying-up air traffic getting coiffed on the tarmack at LAX a la Bill Clinton.

Is she actually complaining about media attitudes towards a guy whose press coverage has been so glowing, even the leftists at Slate feel compelled to mock it?

Heh. They tried to make Obama out to be “sexy”, but let this serve as evidence that they have failed. He’s a goofy looking geek and a fraud.

Where is that brokeback song about Fred! that everyone enjoyed so much?