Variation on a theme: she’s not calling them latently gay (well, actually, by calling it a man-crush, she is), she’s calling them latently misogynist in fawning over Fred’s square jaw and Mitt’s broad shoulders to allegedly diminish Hillary by contrast. Naturally there isn’t so much as a nod at the godlike masculinity with which the media endowed JFK and of course Billy Jeff, whose “rock star” sexual charisma was such as to invite public offers of oral from “journalists.” And naturally she cites Greenwald approvingly even though, per Ace’s post, he’s as shameless a hypocrite as they come on this subject. But here’s my favorite part:

Who doesn’t receive this kind of adulation? The Democratic candidates. Pundits don’t laud John Edwards’ perfect hair, they’re still focused on a $400 haircut. Barack Obama, according to Maureen Dowd, is “afraid of looking like a pretty boy,” and yet is “drawing attention for his more superficial charms.” And Hillary Clinton, according to Chris Matthews, has a voice which reminds “some men” of “fingernails on a blackboard.”

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? “Sure, they call him the Messiah — but not a manly Messiah.” Good lord.