Salon’s continued descent: The First Lady’s rear end
posted at 9:15 am on November 18, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
How does one even begin to explain the continued existence of Salon? They spent the election season redefining puerile, with a nadir in September’s exploration of Sarah Palin’s “doability” by Gary Kamiya, accompanied by a photoshop of Palin as a dominatrix servicing a moose. Now Salon celebrates Barack Obama’s election by front-paging a paean to Michelle Obama’s butt. No, I am not kidding:
But what really thrills me, what really feels liberating in a very personal way, is the official new prominence of Michelle Obama. Barack’s better half not only has stature but is statuesque. She has corruscating intelligence, beauty, style and — drumroll, please — a butt. (Yes, you read that right: I’m going to talk about the first lady’s butt.)
What a bonus! From the ocean of nastiness and confusion that defined this campaign from the beginning, Michelle rose up like Venus on the waves, keeping her coif above water and cruising the coattails of history to present us with a brand-new beauty norm before we knew it was even happening.
Actually, it took me and a lot of other similarly configured black women by surprise. So anxious and indignant were we about Michelle getting attacked for saying anything about America that conservatives could turn into mud, we hardly looked south of her neck. I noted her business suits and the fact she hardly ever wore pants (unlike Hillary). As I gradually relaxed, as Michelle strode onto more stages and people started focusing on her clothes and presence instead of her patriotism, it dawned on me — good God, she has a butt! “Obama’s baby (mama) got back,” wrote one feminist blogger. “OMG, her butt is humongous!” went a typical comment on one African-American online forum, and while it isn’t humongous, per se, it is a solid, round, black, class-A boo-tay. Try as Michelle might to cover it with those Mamie Eisenhower skirts and sheath dresses meant to reassure mainstream voters, the butt would not be denied.
The Butt That Would Not Be Denied. Sounds like a bad movie from Roger Corman.
Perhaps this might suffice as passable Twitterpation, but Salon takes itself seriously. In its daily promotional e-mail, this piece gets top billing. Apparently, the butt discussion is the most serious thing happening at Salon today, which says plenty about Salon and its odd fixation on the pelvic junction.
Memo to the 13-year-olds running Salon: No one is threatened by Mrs. Obama’s rear end. I doubt that most people would have bothered to look at it, except for the cases of arrested development on Salon’s staff who can’t keep themselves from fetishing political candidates as sex objects. I seriously doubt that the Obamas put a single thought into how to frame her gluteus, apart from the normal vanity everyone has about their body shape.
Does anyone read Salon any more? If not, it’s not difficult to see why.
Update: Yes, I’m deleting comments referencing animals in comparison to Michelle Obama, and if they persist, I’ll start banning those commenters indulging in them. Apparently, some people have no sense of irony when commenting on a post criticizing Salon for fetishizing appearance.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
Apparently, you haven’t seen a picture of Hillary’s butt…
beththebaker on November 18, 2008 at 9:19 AM
Their’s junk in her trunk too, but I’m pretty sure that bomb in the back belongs to William Ayers.
BKennedy on November 18, 2008 at 9:20 AM
These are no doubt the same people who jeered at Hillary Clinton’s expanding girth and snickered at her pantsuits. Talk about your double standards! And God knows what they would have done to Cindy McCain if her husband had been elected.
Can we just leave the ladies alone for once?
rockmom on November 18, 2008 at 9:21 AM
LOL
katy on November 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Is Salon in line for a piece of the bailout pie? Last I heard they weren’t doing too well, and it appears that is the defining criteria.
a capella on November 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Yellow journalism at it’s best!
grapeknutz on November 18, 2008 at 9:24 AM
If you’re attracted to a nasty sneer, knock yourself out dude! Even when the woman smiles she looks like she’s about to bite someone’s head off.
crazy_legs on November 18, 2008 at 9:25 AM
Oh yeah! I might even begin to like Michelle, my belle, (not) if she makes big butts fashionable!
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:25 AM
The amusing thing about it is that the same people who were jeering Clinton’s legs would be complaining that Cindy McCain needs to eat a sandwich. The ladies cannot win.
Illinidiva on November 18, 2008 at 9:27 AM
I don’t recall ever having read Salon to begin with. Mad Magazine is more dignified.
rbj on November 18, 2008 at 9:27 AM
What I find amusing is that the new meme is that she has class, grace, and beauty…
Sorry, she is classLESS… moves like a tank… and speaking as a RetroSexual male, not attractive in the least.
This MSM adoration of the First Couple has now officialy reached absurd levels.
Romeo13 on November 18, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Ooooh! Do we now how a butt for our jokes?? Hahaha :)
(Damn good coffee this morning)…
Karen_VA on November 18, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Dag. “how” = “have”
Karen_VA on November 18, 2008 at 9:29 AM
Coruscating is misspelled. And it goes downhill from there.
qestout on November 18, 2008 at 9:30 AM
Why is it always open season on a womans appearance, good or bad? It’s incredibly juvenile and undignified.
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 9:30 AM
Well she does have a huge ass. I mean - it’s got have it’s own gravitational pull - albeit it’s effects are only felt by liberals.
God help us if she has red beans in the White House menu.
Exit question: Will Barack Hussein tax his wife for the massive carbon emission coming from his wife’s ass? If the American taxpayers are forced to pay for it - then the country is going to go bankrupt.
Mr Purple on November 18, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Fine, SALON! With stuff like this she is going to lose her pride in her country — after we tried so hard!
Princeton, Harvard, wife of a senator — what do you think it will take next time??
Pffffffftttttt…
IlikedAUH2O on November 18, 2008 at 9:33 AM
When the liberal media said that the Obamas are the “new” Camelot, making Michelle, my belle, the new Jackie, I was incredulous. However, that does mean that after Obummer’s term, his brother from Kenya could run for President.
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:33 AM
Doesn’t Michelle take the prize for ugliest First Lady?
Who would be number two?
albill on November 18, 2008 at 9:33 AM
Ohhhh, Mr. Purple, you are a bad man!
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:34 AM
Bawney Fwank is on!
lodge on November 18, 2008 at 9:34 AM
#2 ugliest 1st lady would be Mrs. Lincoln.
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:34 AM
C’mon Ed, it’s human nature to check out peoples’ bods. I do agree though, that it’s grotesquely unseemly to immortalize sexualized descriptions of our new First Lady on a high-profile, respected blog. It’s a particularly cynical way of generating traffic. They render cultural debasement disguised as a compliment.
RushBaby on November 18, 2008 at 9:35 AM
However, there is a ugly rumor that Chris Matthews wears her dresses when he is at home….if she becomes too unhappy, do you think? Naaaaa
IlikedAUH2O on November 18, 2008 at 9:35 AM
Only in comparison to the folks who voted for her husband.
Joan of Argghh on November 18, 2008 at 9:36 AM
OMG, I’m laughing, but feeling a little guilty about it.
Dee2008 on November 18, 2008 at 9:36 AM
It’s okay. Let it all out :)
Karen_VA on November 18, 2008 at 9:37 AM
Mrs. Obambi is fair game. She said some ugly things in the campaign. Totally unlike Laura Bush.
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:37 AM
These people are delusional. An anti-American man has been elected president, with an America hater as first lady and this chick thinks she needs to write about M. Obama’s ass.
Hey honey, if your hindquarters are lacking, ask Barack for a little ass redistribution.
darwin on November 18, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Salon is telling us that now blimp butts are beautiful?
petefrt on November 18, 2008 at 9:41 AM
Have I drifted into another dimension? This is now journalism?
right2bright on November 18, 2008 at 9:43 AM
#2 ugliest 1st lady would be Mrs. Lincoln.
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:34 AM
Whassa? Eleanor Roosevelt?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eleanor/
As for Mrs. Barack Hussein Omarxa…am I still a racist if I comment on her size fifteen (men’s size) feet?
Bishop on November 18, 2008 at 9:44 AM
Now things are going to get confusing.. When someone says “Look at michelles ugly a$$” we won’t know if they mean her butt or husband.
But she is the new Jackie O you know…
bullseye on November 18, 2008 at 9:44 AM
Taking shots at her appearance isn’t fair play. She certainly has said some ugly things and I’m no fan of hers, but making fun of her appearance, or glorifying her appearance, is something I’d expect from a group of 16 year olds.
Her speeches and interviews gives us loads of fodder to demonize her, if that’s what we want to do. But these types of comments are nothing to be proud of.
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 9:46 AM
Ohyeah, I completely forgot about Eleanor Roosevelt. Not pretty.
Michelle has big feet? Yeah, big feet & butts are all the rage!
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:47 AM
Unfortunately, yes … on both.
darwin on November 18, 2008 at 9:47 AM
Classless.
D2Boston on November 18, 2008 at 9:48 AM
Carolyn M: you are certainly right, this is a juvenile discourse. However, Obummer’s election is putting our country at great risk, domestically & abroad. We are the ones that actually understand that point & worry about it. We deserve our few moments of levity.
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 9:49 AM
Salon hasn’t been publishing much of anything worth reading for a very long time. Obscenity is the last gasp of any publication, a desperate attempt to scream loudly to turn heads. My guess is that they won’t be even trying to do serious writing anymore but will become a mish-mash of gutter pieces that ultimately speak to no one but the lowest common denominator.
bryanmyrick on November 18, 2008 at 9:50 AM
Obama worshippers are purely crazy.
Lynn2008 on November 18, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Chris Hitchens writes for Salon. He must be proud. lol
Cody1991 on November 18, 2008 at 9:56 AM
But seriously folks, I used to read Salon regularly back in the day, if only because it was a showcase for web typography and graphic design (it was funded by Adobe, makers of Photoshop and Illustrator). But Liberal Derangement Syndrome infected it, and they ended up using Photoshop (poorly) for the most crass of reasons: I was done with them when they ’shopped Ken Starr’s head onto another body to make him look like a gold-chain and Hawaiian shirt-wearing pornographer. The Palin ’shop was just the latest in a long series of such cheap shots.
The Clinton impeachment, man. It’s what snapped me out of my lifelong delusion that I was one of these liberals, but sadly a lot of people snapped in the other direction.
saint kansas on November 18, 2008 at 9:56 AM
Is that her butt or the broad side of a barn? I may give Obama a “honeymoon period”, (Nah- not really) but Michelle gets nothing- she’s hateful.
anniekc on November 18, 2008 at 9:56 AM
Hitting Bottom.
ronsfi on November 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM
“hitting bottom”. Hah.
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 10:00 AM
Eh, it may be teenage behavior but it’s also a sort of gallows humor. Obarfy is going to hammer this nation, we might as well go down swinging AND laughing.
Bishop on November 18, 2008 at 10:01 AM
LOL… why YES, and always has been… just before it was only seen in such great Publications as Swank Magazine… or maybe in the Letters section of Hustler…
Romeo13 on November 18, 2008 at 10:01 AM
It is so 90s to talk about baby’s got back. We went there with JLo and sir mix a lot. Pointing out that dark skinned women tend to have big posteriors and shouting that they are or should be proud of it is kind of like trumpeting the big afro of our time.
MargaretMN on November 18, 2008 at 10:02 AM
Memo to the 13-year-olds running Salon: No one is threatened by Mrs. Obama’s rear end. I doubt that most people would have bothered to look at it
I looked at it.
Now I wish I had not.
pabarge on November 18, 2008 at 10:03 AM
What? And that hasn’t been happening here with Sarah Palin? Please, Ed. Don’t be a hypocrite.
nukemhill on November 18, 2008 at 10:04 AM
I’m trying to see your point of view. So Michelle Obama is going to be the most influential person in the life of the next leader of the free world, our socialist President-to-be….
Yeah, ok, bring on the butt jokes. The world is ending anyway….
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 10:09 AM
CarolynM: now you’re getting into the spirit!
kelley in virginia on November 18, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Afros! I predict they’ll make a comeback. Everything old is new again…
Blake on November 18, 2008 at 10:11 AM
I wonder if she’ll do a cameo on 40inchplus.com ?
FLGulfCoaster on November 18, 2008 at 10:15 AM
Salon gives tabloids a bad name.
abinitioadinfinitum on November 18, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Err, that should be, they make tabloids look good and honest.
abinitioadinfinitum on November 18, 2008 at 10:18 AM
She’s soooo ugly and to even compare her to Jacqueline Kennedy, like some have done, is a disgrace to those with proper eyes
ricardoz on November 18, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Ah yes, Michelle Obama’s much-hyped intelligence. She as much as admitted that she was an affirmative action admit to Princeton (according to her, her HS advisors told her she didn’t have the grades or the SAT scores to gain admission to an Ivy — yet somehow she was admitted anyway), she majored in Sociology (enough said), and we’ve yet to hear an explanation for why she only lasted 3 years as an associate at the law firm that hired her out of law school (according to one relative, the firm “wasn’t a good fit” for her). Her career as a diversity pimp for a Chicago hospital appears to have come about as a result of her husband’s name and political clout in Chicago, and not from anything she had accomplished on her own.
Hillary Clinton is routinely criticized for riding on her husband’s coattails, yet she finished at the top of her class in Yale Law, and there’s no question that she earned her way there (and wasn’t given special preferences solely because of the color of her skin). And a wide load in the bottom half of the body makes Hillary a subject of ridicule, but is somehow a sign of great beauty in Michelle O? Seems to be more than one double standard going on here.
AZCoyote on November 18, 2008 at 10:27 AM
Ed, why didn’t you just ignore the event altogether? It’s not like you fostered a chorus of disapproval here.
Dusty on November 18, 2008 at 10:28 AM
Does anyone recall the celebration of Condaleeza Rice’s genuine intelligence, scholastic achievement, inimitable style (Those boots gave a powerful message!), her accomplishments as a pianist, her knowledge of professional sports, etc? I thought not.
For the last seven and a half years, she has been caricatured beyond credibility.
How can anyone celebrate Michelle Obama’s “corruscating intelligence” after reading her Princeton thesis? Rusted and inept in ideology, logic, and grammar are terms that I would use instead.
Oprah, The View, and the glossies have created the myth of Michelle Obama as a model for American womanhood, black or otherwise. What superficial measures we have sunk to!
Barack’s babies’ mama has provided to neither her daughters nor the nation a model of selflessness and personal generosity of spirit or pocketbook.
BTW Who paid for Mama O’s wardrobe, and how much was invested in her marketing to the public?
I attribute the size and spread of Michelle’s butt to her years of sitting on her behind, cutting and distributing pieces of pie to her specifications. Her resentments and self-absorption have weighted her seat too much for me to admire.
onlineanalyst on November 18, 2008 at 10:35 AM
Everybody Now!
“I like big butts and I can not lie
You other brothers can’t deny
That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung
Wanna pull up tough
Cuz you notice that butt was stuffed
Deep in the jeans she’s wearing
I’m hooked and I can’t stop staring
Oh, baby I wanna get with ya
And take your picture
My homeboys tried to warn me
But that butt you got
Make Me so horney
Ooh, rump of smooth skin
You say you wanna get in my benz
Well use me use me cuz you aint that average groupy”
Amadeus on November 18, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Glad to see Salon tackling the big issues. No pun intended.
vcferlita on November 18, 2008 at 10:36 AM
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 10:09 AM
You see? Now you can use humor to warm yourself after electricity and natgas become too expensive to afford, or after you are sentenced to a northern Michigan gulag for reeducation.
Bishop on November 18, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Hillary has a butt, and tree stump legs. So, the One’s wife has a big booty? Isn’t there other things to worry about besides a person’s Butt? Will I ever be able to cook a butt roast again?
sheebe on November 18, 2008 at 10:39 AM
What? And that hasn’t been happening here with Sarah Palin? Please, Ed. Don’t be a hypocrite.
nukemhill on November 18, 2008 at 10:04 AM
It’s not the staff of HA who have posting articles about Sarah Palin’s figure, only us arrested development commenters who have professed our desire to sit at her feet and be petted.
Relax and have a sense of humor for a bit, you will have plenty of things to wail about after Odummy takes office.
Bishop on November 18, 2008 at 10:40 AM
We’re already a decade into this type of stuff online — Remember former Time Magazine reporter Nina Burleigh’s story where she offered to service Bill Clinton over his support for abortion rights?
Compared to that, this paean to Michelle Obama’s caboose is weak tea indeed, though if Barack ever invites Kim Kardashian to hang at the White House with the First Lady, it will be interesting to read Slate to see Ms. Kaplan’s reaction.
jon1979 on November 18, 2008 at 10:42 AM
FIFY
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on November 18, 2008 at 10:43 AM
The problem is not her ars. It’s what’s in that (big) head of hers.
Schadenfreude on November 18, 2008 at 10:43 AM
It’s actually been the left who has paraded the over-sexualized Palin fetishes as well. Conservatives aren’t constantly talking about her breasts or whatever as you imply. She’s seen as simply a gorgeous complete woman.
Meanwhile, you know this Salon piece was run only after the editors rejected some MSNBC host’s detailed analysis of the hope represented by Obama’s package.
econavenger on November 18, 2008 at 10:53 AM
They are going to make her butt a congressional district.The district of Obamabutt and it will be eligible fo FEMA loans and other aid.
jellybelly on November 18, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Decide for yourself:
http://womenshistory.about.com/od/firstladiesus/ig/First-Ladies-Picture-Gallery/
“Modern era,” I’d say Eleanor Roosevelt.
All 1st ladies, I’d go with Abigail Adams.
Michelle isn’t first lady yet so I didn’t include her in my ranking, but in fairness, I don’t think she’s as bad as some of the others. However, she is NOT STATUESQUE. Audrey Hepburn was statuesque. Michelle is tall, but her posture is terrible.
Y-not on November 18, 2008 at 10:55 AM
LOL!
Karen_VA on November 18, 2008 at 10:55 AM
What a sad fucking lot.
You’re not racist, you’re pathetic. On behalf of decent people everywhere — Fuck you.
I am so over this objectification of women just because they are in the spotlight. It is no better applied to Governor Palin than it is to Michelle Obama or Helen Thomas for that matter.
We have national news figures actually commenting on what these women are wearing, what their breasts look like, what their butts look like? You’re like a bunch cretins at a slave auction squeezing the flesh and checking the womens’ hips for birthing ability. What about the combovers, fat bellies, horrible wardrobes, etc of most men on the Hill?
I hope you don’t die before you realize how shallow your existence is. Again, fuck you.
If any of you blowtards are game, I am fighting mad over this. Somebody set up a cage, location and time. Let’s just do it UFC style.
***
Save the tripe about being exempt from my ire because you’re a woman. You are not.
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Heh! Now that’s funny!
Seriously though, can’t we please (publicly anyways) keep the comments on women’s appearances out of the discussion? At least the women who are not making a living on their looks? Is it too much to ask…?
4shoes on November 18, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Well you’re certainly living up to your name…LOL
Dritanian on November 18, 2008 at 11:11 AM
For the next two months, the First Lady is still Laura Bush.
Let’s not rush things
sandspur on November 18, 2008 at 11:14 AM
Big butts were already fashionable in my ‘hood, but the Salon stuff is just…gross.
baldilocks on November 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM
The one on her head is even bigger
sigh
John The Baptist on November 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Now we have Laura Ingraham making Chewbacca sounds on her show at the mention of Janet Reno. Isn’t she a Cancer Survivor? Have you ever seen what some Cancer patients look like? Are they up for her and your ire too? Would it be OK if someone joked about her appearance when she was sick? No, it would not.
A waitress at my favorite beachside cafe is pregnant. During her pregnancy, she has had some acne. Her face had been completely unblemished. I smiled so big when I saw here and I was touched by the absolute glorious mechanics of the human body.
It’s not just skin deep people. Beauty is meant to come from within. That epidermal sheath we get all fixated on is just wrapping paper. The gift is inside. Dammit!
Vanity Kills.
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:19 AM
Oh lighten up, people. Some of these threads get pretty heated and ugly. Let this one be fun!
Karen_VA on November 18, 2008 at 11:19 AM
You write that yourself or did you just copy and paste from one of the other geniuses who ignore every detail of my comment to focus on my username?
Pretend my username is my skin color, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual preference or physical ability.
Get it now?
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:23 AM
[Y-not on November 18, 2008 at 10:55 AM]
Thanks for the link.
As for your selection of Abigail Adams, did you not look at Eliza McCardle Johnson? (same page, bottom right)
As for statuesque, how about Ellen Lewis Herndon Arthur? Seems to me she has a Bergman quality about her, at least from that picture.
Dusty on November 18, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Yeah, they are being nasty.
People who know me around here know that I’m not prone to playing the race card. And it’s true that the Obamas and their supporters play it night and day.
However, reading what’s written both here and at Salon made me think of the things that TRC specified. Mostly, though it made me think of how juvenile many of us have become.
baldilocks on November 18, 2008 at 11:25 AM
You are so disproportionately angry that I’m thinking you are a Muslim.
Uh-oh, did I just play the religion card?
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 11:28 AM
No, just the Stupid Card.
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:29 AM
Hey, that hurts.
How about the Funny Card?
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 11:31 AM
We’ve had plenty of First Ladies who weren’t beautiful. Fine. Many of the least attractive were beloved because of their other qualities.
What bugs me about Michelle Obama is that now we’re going to be required to pretend that this totally unattractive woman is somehow pretty, and even a fashion icon. She’s not, not any more than Barbara Bush was, and because she insists on dressing inappropriately for her considerable girth, even less so.
Saying it over and over won’t make it come true either although it seems that Salon will be the last ones to get that particular clue. It’s gonna be a long four years.
Gilda on November 18, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Where did that come from?
So all black people who disagree with you are Muslims now?
baldilocks on November 18, 2008 at 11:33 AM
I get what you’re saying here. But I disagree.
The only people required to do so are fake ones compelled by their own weakness to gain acceptance. The opposite of this, however, does not entail assaulting her for being sizable, tall, having a furrowed brow or dark skin.
Capisce? Capezio? Copernicus?
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:37 AM
Awarded :)
Karen_VA on November 18, 2008 at 11:39 AM
Who’s black? And who cares?
And thanks to Robert Spencer of http://www.jihadwatch.org for the “disproportionate response” line regarding Muslims. And I’m not going to do the PC thing of differentiating between radical Islam or the Taliban or uneducated impoverished Somalis.
CarolynM on November 18, 2008 at 11:41 AM
I think her ignorance is not race-based. She’d be just as tactless if I were white.
I don’t get too bothered by people attacking my beliefs as a Christian. I assume they are angry at God for something wrong in their own lives.
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:42 AM
I wonder if you put lipstick on dat azz if it will resemble a pit bull?
UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on November 18, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Fuck it. We’ll do it LIVE!
Let’s start posting pictures and settle this crap once and for all.
Here I am. Rock you like a hurricane.
The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:45 AM
You did know that TRC was black if you were reading closely and you were the one who played the Muslim card. However, if you didn’t mean it that way then I apologize.
baldilocks on November 18, 2008 at 11:46 AM
Are you upset by the flattering (if mostly untrue) description of Michelle by Salon or by the catty (if mostly true) comments by Hot Air posters?
This sort of thing has been going on for a long time — to men, too. I’m sure Zombie Nixon could tell us all a thing or two about the campaign trail.
Quick Google from this election cycle:
Personally, I am not a fan of comments about Hillary’s ankles or the sexualization of Sarah Palin, but candidates have been judge on their appearances for a long time. I think it’s harder for women candidates to be taken seriously on policy issues when their appearance becomes the focus.
In Michelle’s case, she is not a politician or a candidate. Her role as of January is primarily a ceremonial one. We don’t need to take her seriously on policy. Frankly, her looks are a lot more important than Sarah’s or Hillary’s or Barack’s. If someone read the media descriptions of Michelle, you’d picture a cross between Audrey Hepburn, Jackie Kennedy, and Halle Berry… when the reality is quite different.
And, most of us here loathe the woman because of her toxic personality. It’s quite natural to snipe at her over her looks. It seems to me that on Mitt threads and Huck threads, insults about their appearance often come into play.
Chill out.
Y-not on November 18, 2008 at 11:47 AM
BTW, Carolyn, I’m angry at the overtly nasty things said about MO’s appearance as I was at the things said about Governor Palin. It’s interesting, however, that the some of the comments regarding the former often take on descriptions which conform to stereotypes about the appearance of black people in general, don’t you think?
baldilocks on November 18, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Is it a Donkey-Kong butt? ‘Cause if it ain’t, it’s a wasted butt!
AubieJon on November 18, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Are you upset by the flattering (if mostly untrue) description of Michelle by Salon or by the catty (if mostly true) comments by Hot Air posters?
This sort of thing has been going on for a long time — to men, too. I’m sure Zombie Nixon could tell us all a thing or two about the campaign trail.
Quick Google from this election cycle:
Personally, I am not a fan of comments about Hillary’s ankles or the sexualization of Sarah Palin, but candidates have been judge on their appearances for a long time. I think it’s harder for women candidates to be taken seriously on policy issues when their appearance becomes the focus.
In Michelle’s case, she is not a politician or a candidate. Her role as of January is primarily a ceremonial one. We don’t need to take her seriously on policy. Frankly, her looks are a lot more important than Sarah’s or Hillary’s or Barack’s. If someone read the media descriptions of Michelle, you’d picture a cross between Audrey Hepburn, Jackie Kennedy, and Halle Berry… when the reality is quite… different.
And, most of us here loathe the woman because of her toxic personality. It’s quite natural to snipe at her over her looks. It seems to me that on Mitt threads and Huck threads, insults about their appearance often come into play.
Chill out.
Y-not on November 18, 2008 at 11:51 AM
There goes breakfast.
ex-Democrat on November 18, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »