BillsNYC Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 Did she ever really have a chance with sexist reporting? Not that I wanted her...but jeez. This is the first article that popped up on Google News. http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=5656295 "A Look Back at Hillary's Year in Pantsuits"
KD in CA Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 It's not sexism. It's uglism. If she was hot it would be "A look back at Hillary's year in skirts" and she'd be cruising toward the Presidency.
Wacka Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 She finally got rid of "Old Crusty"? (The black pantsuit she wore all the time)
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted August 26, 2008 Posted August 26, 2008 She finally got rid of "Old Crusty"? (The black pantsuit she wore all the time) And here if you forgot what it looks like.... http://www.afischerphotography.com/specialevents0016.html Problem is she never consistently lost that disdained expression implanted from dealing with Bill
finknottle Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 I'm not overly sympathetic to the sexism double-standard; it's a double-edged sword that also gave her an advantage. I *am* more bothered by the double-standard exhibited in her contesting Obama's coronation. The pressure put on her by the media to bow out early, and the trashing of her, her supporters, and their motives, was fairly unprecedented. By way of example, the newly beatified party favorite Ted Kennedy didn't withdraw from his challenge to (sitting) President Carter until the end of the convention, despite being easily eliminated in the delegate count! http://www.nypost.com/seven/08272008/posto...ight_126276.htm
drnykterstein Posted August 27, 2008 Posted August 27, 2008 I'm pretty sure that is a magazine made by women, for women. So if women can be sexist against other women... then fine whatever, have it your way.
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 She finally got rid of "Old Crusty"? (The black pantsuit she wore all the time) By no means am I a Hillary supporter, but why the double standard? Men wear the same old suits all the time... And not a single peep. What is the difference between what Hillary wears and what her male counterparts wear? IMO, it is no different when a guys decides to wear different ties.
Wacka Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 By no means am I a Hillary supporter, but why the double standard? Men wear the same old suits all the time... And not a single peep. What is the difference between what Hillary wears and what her male counterparts wear? IMO, it is no different when a guys decides to wear different ties. When she had her book tour, she would always show up in a black pantsuit. She must have had a closet full of them. Of course the joke is that it's the same one.
KD in CA Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 By no means am I a Hillary supporter, but why the double standard? Men wear the same old suits all the time... And not a single peep. Puh-leeze. All candidates take their share of lumps. That's life in the big leagues. The only double standard is the whining sympathy that she gets when faced with criticism that no male candidate is afforded. She's gotten a total free ride because she's a woman. She'd be nowhere near a Presidental race if she was a guy.
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 Puh-leeze. All candidates take their share of lumps. That's life in the big leagues. The only double standard is the whining sympathy that she gets when faced with criticism that no male candidate is afforded. She's gotten a total free ride because she's a woman. She'd be nowhere near a Presidental race if she was a guy. I agree. But, her clothes she wears? At least pick on her for the other many things that she is a screwball about. How much more conservative can she get with clothing choices?... No different than the suit a male wears, sans the tie... With her instead of tie color... It is the whole freaking pant suit. Are we in high-school?
/dev/null Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 When she had her book tour, she would always show up in a black pantsuit. She must have had a closet full of them. Of course the joke is that it's the same one. Would you rather Hillary showed up in a pink haltertop with the words "Too Drunk to F#ck", a pair of short shorts with "Juicy" written across the ass, and those oversized sunglasses that Paris Hilton likes to wear? Oh, and Hillary's haltertop and shorts are of course both cut low so the world gets a glimpse of her Tramp Stamp
KD in CA Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 Are we in high-school? You ask that after eight years of 'nosepick', 'pretzel', 'nu-cu-lar', 'chimp' and all the other 3d grade insults that the nozzle-nuts of this board could think up? indeed
Keukasmallie Posted August 28, 2008 Posted August 28, 2008 Agreed...the comments on her clothing are simply off the mark. In fact, she's a fat-thighed, bug-eyed, self-aggrandizing B word who continues to bilk the residents of NYS by masquerading as a US Senator. She styles herself as ready to make nation-changing decisions, but she can't even resolve her personal situation vis a vis Billy-guy? What a phoney! Yeah, that's what she is....
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 but she can't even resolve her personal situation vis a vis Billy-guy? And you know this how? It just eats at people that she stayed with the man. Damn if she does, damn if she doesn't. That is (stay together) what one is supposed to do in a "Christian relationship." What did you want her to do, break down and go all Tammy Faye Bakker? Seems things are pretty well resolved, no? They were from day one. Wow... We are really scratching at the bootom of the barrel now.
Keukasmallie Posted August 29, 2008 Posted August 29, 2008 I don't "need" her to do much of anything...except maybe go away.... However, in terms of her relationship with Billy-guy, I believe she should have taken a very specific public stance on her relationship with him, not just let time and the flow of events lead the public to assume whatever is politically in vogue at the moment. (I don't care if she's with him, or not; although being with him might save some other woman from having to suffer him on a long-term basis.) It appears to me that her response to his infidelity was managed by her people, calculated by the mood of the times, and massaged to be vanilla as needed at the moment. Not the way I would like to have elected officials respond to a "crisis." I believe that response to personal crises telegraph potential responses to public, official crises. I also think that by virtue of his having been President, she owes the nation even more explanation of his "role" in her political life. When one enters public life, I believe that person has higher standards to fulfill. As HST said, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."
Recommended Posts