Hillary, Politics & The Beast of Beauty
Did you know that this blogger finds older women who don’t have plastic surgery, get Botoxed or otherwise try to hold back the inevitable consequences of physical aging more attractive than those who look like they walked off the set of Extreme Makeover?
No, you probably didn’t. But then that shouldn’t matter.
Mind you, I believe that a woman can do or not do whatever she damned well pleases with her appearance, and an older woman certainly has more than earned that right. Which brings me to the brouhaha surrounding this photo of Hillary Clinton. In a moment.
You probably also didn’t know that Mrs. Clinton is not my type. Not that that should matter either.
I have been around Mrs. Clinton a few times, including up close twice. She not only isn’t a classic beauty, which is okay and wouldn’t keep me from voting for her, but she doesn’t project an inner beauty, which also wouldn’t keep me from voting for her but is a disqualifier in my own beauty book.
I’ve been smitten by women who wouldn’t be confused with a 60-something Julie Christie but radiate a beauty from within that is quite transfixing. (Christie does both, at least on the screen.) Mrs. Clinton leaves me cold, while the photo’s initial publication at the Drudge Report website with malicious intent leaves me disgusted that the old double standard is alive and thriving in Campaign ’08.
Please click here to read more at Kiko’s House.
4 Responses to “Hillary, Politics & The Beast of Beauty”
Shaun, I’m amazed. A fondness for older women are something else we happen to have in common.
As for Her Highness, for whom you have exhibited a healthy, normal lack or withholding of respect:
The eyes are the windows to the soul.
LOOK INTO HER EYES. You will (or should) be repelled.
I respect her capability and competence (just as I do not stupidly underestimate the Iranians or the Chinese as our adversaries). I do not respect her politics or her dishonesty or her viciousness or her power-lust or her secrecy obscession. (worse than Nixon or Cheney)
as opposed to that beacon of freedom, honesty, fair play – Rudy!!!
“I do not like her dishonesty or visciousness or her power-lust or her secrecy obscession (sic). (worse than Nixon or Cheney).”
You can dislike her all you want, but factually this comment is absurd to the nth degree. Did you live through Nixon? You could not have and be able to make this comment unless you also are poorly informed on the factual history of that era and what Nixon did. Same goes for Cheney. If you think if she had been President after 9-11 that (1) we would torture, (2) she would have chosen to invade Iraq, or (3) habeus corpus would have been indefinitely suspended, you are sadly sadly mistaken my friend. I just dont share that view at all.
The 1990s refutes your statement.
* * *
Yes, a RINO, who along with someone from (gag; alien; instant DQ) Massachusetts is hardly a serious alternative to the Democrats, just a more lightweight version of them. I’m still waiting for the Republican Party to offer us more demanding, smarter voters something of substance that is positive and constructive.