“Her Thighness, Hillary Clinton!”

(Future President of the United States?)

Why is it that female politicians are frequently described by their looks and not by their positions and actions? If looks were the only criteria, Halle Berry would be President of the United States  and Sarah Palin would be……………………… Sarah Palin.

“I quit! Give me a million bucks!”

What is it about America and female politicians? Barbara Boxer hears that her hair is so “Eighties?” Does that mean that Carly “I screwed HP out of millions” Fiorina is a better candidate because her “hair is perfect?”

(Homage to Warren Zevon.)

Give me a freakin’ break! Golda Meir was far, far from being pretty. Did she do a good job as Prime Minister of Israel? Margret Thatcher would have gone home alone, even at closing time, at her local pub. Hell, she would have gone home alone at closing time in the House of Lords.

Benazir Bhutto was an attractive woman. They killed her. They killed  Anna Politkovskaya in Chechnya, too.  Indira Gandhi was also assassinated in India in 1984.

Why is Palin considered to be “hot” and Hillary is not?

Well, if attractiveness is the criteria, then Sarah is a little higher on the scale than Hillary. After all, she is about twenty years younger and has had a “boob job.”

If brains are the criteria, then Hillary is way ahead and Sarah is somewhere around ………………………… dead last.

Would Farrah Fawcett have made a good president?

Would Jayne Mansfield been a good president – she had great boobs.

Should we have voted for Beyonce Knowles?

Hillary Clinton is smart, dedicated, analytical, understanding and a great asset to the Obama administration. If it were not for the “Clinton baggage” I would have supported her for the 2008 Democratic nomination for President.

But time has taken a toll on her body. The boobs have sagged a bit and the thighs are a bit larger now.

Will America vote based on cup size or will America vote based on who is the best candidate for the job?

Lately, I am thinking that America is more concerned about boobs than results.

And yes, there are many jokes in that last statement.



William Stephenson Clark

17 Comments

Filed under American Society

17 responses to ““Her Thighness, Hillary Clinton!”

  1. I think America will continue to vote for the little letters beside the names, and as a result we will always elect too many boobs. Sadly, some will be female, others male!

  2. Being a heterosexual female, I am not influenced by boobs in any way. My husband is the only man that I have ever met that has come totally clean about being prone to a “boob mania” (as I would define that term, men who lose all ability to reason when in the vicinity of a nice set of boobs).

    I would not vote for Hillary Clinton because she is too conservative; even more so than her husband whose conservative financial policies while president contributed to the woes of our economy today. What this country absolutely DOESN’T need is another conservative President. Unfortunately, many people thought they were voting for a liberal in 2008 and they were very wrong. Conservative half-measures have contributed to our economic woes. We need a liberal. Hillary isn’t a liberal.

    • indypendent

      I think Hillary is a seasoned politician and she knows where the bread is buttered.

      With that said…

      Who do you think would be a popular enough liberal to get their hat into the ring and not be smeared by the Conservatives?

      I think the majority of the country is moderately leaning towards the right. And the past few decades of the far right-wingers of the Republican Party has driven alot of people into the majority of moderates, but are they leaning more towards the left now? I don’t know.

      And, as usually, it is going to be the independents that decide this election.

      • IMHO the last thing this country needs is a “seasoned politician.” They have done enough damage, thanks.

        And I don’t believe it matters whether there is a popular enough liberal to not be smeared by conservatives because the cons smear Obama as a liberal –they will do that no matter who runs. It is a tactic that only works with the mindless zombies on the right. The country thought they were voting for someone with new policies and a more liberal political leaning–they weren’t. Obama hardly changed anything.

        So, would the country vote for someone who self-identifies as a liberal? I think they would if the person had good ideas and integrity and would not change into a minion as soon as that person was elected.

        Case in point: no matter how much propaganda and misinformation was spread, the majority of the people polled wanted healthcare for all. It didn’t happen because we had a conservative leader who never championed it and we have conservative minions in the Congress who are beholden to the health care industry for their bread and butter.

      • wicked

        I can’t blame Obama for things not getting done. There are some Blue Dog Dems that can take some of that blame, and the party of NO takes most of the rest. The problem I’ve seen with Obama is that he wanted to”reach across the aisle.” How many times does it take to get smacked before realizing the Republicans don’t want to play?

        We’ve been saying for years that Dems need to grown a spine. Let’s face it, being Mr. Nice Guy has resulted in more failure than we want to think about.

        It’s time to get tough. In fact, it’s past time. That goes not only for Congress, but the White House, too.

        (I do agree that Hillary is way too conservative.)

    • To clarify, I don’t blame Obama ONLY, but I do blame him. His healthcare platform was pretty much what was eventually passed. He never supported medicare for all or universal health care. When it came time to start the debate, it started right of center and pretty much stayed there. Had it started far left of center, perhaps through debate, it would have ended up being a little left of center. As it is, we didn’t get much change; certainly not the kind of change that is going to be meaningful to the working class.

      Obama started out by picking cabinet members who policies and political leanings were not that far removed from the ousted party. Larry Summer and Geitner were both Wall Street insiders and supposedly “reformed” supply-siders. He could have picked someone with a more liberal point of view, but he isn’t a liberal. And the policies that they put in place were not liberal. Et voila! We are mired in (seemingly unending) recession and ridiculously high unemployment!

      We could have had some meaningful financial reform and a MUCH better stimulus package, but instead, the administration started out right of center and ended up right of center. Which is playing out exactly the way cons wanted it to; now they can all point to a worsening economy and say, “Where did the money go?” “Are you better off today than you were in 2008?”

      Conservative half-measures start at the top and trickle all over the working class.

  3. indypendent

    Why do certain Republicans think they are being so clever when they call Hillary ‘her thighness’?

    They sound like a bunch of 5th grade boys in the locker room all giggling.

    But, what do I expect from this bunch of immature neanderthals? These were the same ones who laughed at Rush calling Chelsea the White House Dog.

    I noticed in the We blog last Friday some cutesy Republican said such a clever thing as he heard the AKC was a sponsor of Chelsea Clinton’s wedding.

    I just shook my head in amazement when I read that comment. To think, after all these years this neanderthal is still thinking that is so cute and clever.

    That is beyond sad – it is pathetic.

    • wicked

      Indy, they are a bunch of 5th grade boys in the locker room. Mentally, that is. Too much testosterone made them look bigger, that’s all.

  4. indypendent

    Oh, have you noticed all the bellyaching from Republicans about the cost of Chelsea Clinton’s wedding?

    And this coming from the folks that believe people should be able to make all the money they want and to spend it anyway they want. I guess that is only true if you’re a Republican?

    Besides – at least Chelsea did not have a baby first, get engaged and then shop around for a reality television show. Now that would be tacky.

  5. My hubby professes to be “a leg man.” He says he can watch both comin’ and goin’ and they all go up and make such a nice ass of themselves.

    I never said he had any ‘couth,’ or accused him of being suave and debonair.

  6. WSClark

    The “boob test” extends throughout politics. It would be virtually impossible for some of our past leaders to get elected today because they are not sufficiently attractive.

    The comments you see made about female political figures are more extreme, but some of the same attitudes are applied to male candidates as well.

    It says a lot about our society and how shallow we have become that there is even such a thing as the “boob test.”

    More and more women, of both Parties, are running for and winning office, so the trend will likely continue.

  7. tosmarttobegop

    Way back when I said that those who thought that war was always the answer had the mentality of the school yard bully. Well this also goes along with that, same age mentality.

    It is certainly her looks that is an appeal for Sarah Palin, at least for the older men who wish their middle aged wife looked like that. But how to explain the female supporters?

    What they wished they looked like her?

    We as a country does seem to be moving toward a less mature mentality.
    Flash and show being more important then sustenance.

    If the questions were would you want to have sex with her or be married to her?

    Many would more want a one night stand with Palin then to spend their life with her.

  8. indypendent

    Maybe all this emphasis on the outside beauty is a result of all our celebrity obsession our country seems to have an insatiable appetite?

    But I still think this only applies to women, though.

    Because if it applied to men, who can explain Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck,Bill O’Reilly and numerous others?

    • tosmarttobegop

      “Because if it applied to men, who can explain Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and numerous others?”

      Gay under-aged boys prostituting themselves in the small Caribbean islands.

      And the influence of the maker of Viagra?

  9. indypendent

    Paula – I understand what you’re saying and I agree. That is what I meant about Hillary being a seasoned politician – she knows she HAS to coddle the corporate masters and they like the conservative ideology because it brings them what they desire the most -money.

    The trouble as I see it is this: People say they want someone who is honest and will shake things up. But when it comes down to really getting those things – alot of those same people who were for it in the beginning are now suddenly against it.

    We’ve got this attitude of ME-ME-ME in this country and that has got to change.

    Jimmy Carter was honest and told us straight-out that we needed to get off the dependence of oil and put on a sweater if we got cold.

    He got laughed out of office and those corporate masters took over – again.