Last week WAPO fashion writer Robin Givhan sparked a mini-scandal when she wrote a column dedicated to the quick flash of cleavage Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton displayed during one of her speeches on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Now the issue has come up again, as Howard Kurtz discusses the fallout from the original article.
Weirdly enough, this is a case of life imitating art. As I reported almost a year ago, sculpture Danial Edwards has created a topless vision of Hillary, "A Presidential Bust", which the artist hopes will instigate "a discussion about sex, politics and celebrity". Furthermore the question of "Hillary's hotness" was raised even earlier by actress Sharon Stone, who claimed that Hillary might simply be "too sexxxy" for the Whitehouse.
Nor should Canadians be complacent, for our own politics are not above such trivial concerns. I have argued in the past, and indeed correctly, I think, that Gerard Kennedy was denied the Liberal Leadership, not over matters of policy, but because of his hair. He simply possessed too much of it, and it was too soft and too lustrous, for the Liberal Party establishment. They feared his hair, and what the effect might be were Gerard to go before the people of Canada with hair that was, on the whole, so much better than average. Would Canadians connect with a hair God, or would Gerard seem elitist and out of touch?
Sadly, and for the same reason, Quebec MP Pablo Rodriguez will never lead the Liberal Party. He is simply too hot, and his hair too extraordinary, for the position.
Too Sexxxy To Lead