Slate isn’t even trying to hide it anymore.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
19 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
You can’t be picky when it comes to allies.
Every little speed-bump that slows Hillary down helps, right?
Not sure you’re helping either, frankly.
Tru Dat.
Hide what? It sounded to me like an article defending her against the idiots that can’t wrap their small brains around a woman in power.
Her judgement is another matter.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-is-botching-this_569808a9e4b0778f46f8b31b
Ah. I like that.
It seems a valid criticism. It was ever thus; Hillary’s notion of expediency aligns with my notion of betrayal.
Weird. White and pink collar female employees have been wearing pantsuits to work since at least 1973. I know because I had a cute blue and white pinstripe pantsuit with a vest and it was never viewed as “lesbianish.” They did fall out of favor a couple of years later as polyester took over the mid-price range women’s clothes and polyester pantsuits looked like crap. (The late ’70s were a difficult period for women to look stylish and professional. That’s one reason why the DVF wrap dress and “dress for success” look (with the stupid bows) took off.)
Hillary has crap style taste, but only an idiot would ever mistake her clothing choices for that of a stereotypical lesbian. Off-the-rack dresses, and to a lesser extent skirts, aren’t cut for certain body types. And women that for a variety of reasons view, or are told, that their legs are unattractive stick with pants except on formal occasions when a long dress is appropriate.
“polyester pantsuits looked like crap.”
So did men’s polyester suits. Think Herb Tarlek from WKRP IN Cincinatti. Most of my suit-wearing life I wore gray pinstripe wool suits or black or dark blue. I DID have a wonderful light blue sharkskin suit when I first graduated college, custom tailored by a little old Jewish tailor in the Loop who chain smoked and looked like he just took a wrong turn in New York’s Garment District and would up in Chicago. I still wish it would come back into fashion. It was GORGEOUS!
Never could understand professionals coming to work in jeans and sweat shirts. To me, “casual” means I took off my coat and tie.
Addressing the larger point, I am absolutely FLOORED that anyone thinks businesswomen must wear skirts or dresses. Is this 1951?
Mid-late ’70s men’s polyester leisure suits looked like crap, but generally they weren’t worn in offices. Dress suits continued to be made from natural fibers in that period. (Sharkskin suits were too shiny and passe by then as well.) However, slacks and jackets for men did begin to become acceptable office attire (with a tie of course) during those years and polyester blends for both gained acceptance later on.
I remember those years well because Brooks Brothers was the only place I could find decent silk or cotton blouses but for didn’t carry business suits, skirt or pants, for women. (I considered going to the boy’s department, but the buttons are on the wrong side and boys don’t have any hips or boobs.)
Bought the sharkskin suit in 1968 when I was promoted from GS-7 to GS-9. Of course, I couldn’t wear it to the office. I also bought a yellow 1968 Mercury Monterrey convertible. I got a lot of flack for driving that. One old timer actually told me that government employees should only drive gray or black sedans. I suppose that’s true if the agency you work for is the KGB.
The suit cost $125 which was quite a bit of money in 1968. The car was $3552 including Illinois sales tax (no trade in).
Not that pricey in ’68 for the suit but the car was. (I bought a ’54 VW bug that year for $125.) Not easy to remember that the cost of clothing back then compared to wages was much higher. Quality in fabric and construction were also higher; so, clothes lasted longer which meant fewer overall purchases. And some of us had no choice but to sew most of our clothes.
Well, you are comparing a 14 year old used car to a new car. And Mercury was considered a midline comparable to Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Dodge. I knew I had a good deal when the best deal I got on the Mercury was $100 better than the best deal I had been offered on a comparable Ford. I could have had an even better deal. The Dealer had a Park Lane (top of the line) convertible with a four speed in stock that he offered me at a savings to ordering the Monterrey. This was in May. He explained that someone had ordered the car with a bench seat and a four speed. He was required to put down a $500 deposit for the oddball combo and then didn’t take delivery. Salesman claimed it had been sitting on the lot for six months. I was tempted. The Park lane had an even bigger engine. But my wife of eleven months put her foot down. “I don’t care what car you get, what engine, what color or anything else. except for two things, it must have an automatic transmission and it must have power steering.”
Have yet to meet a man that didn’t always get a good deal on a new car purchase. That’s what car salesmen are there for.
Or caught a huge fish!
If I was ever told any fish tales, I’m not aware of it. The fishermen I’ve known seemed to be into catches and not so much about the size. But size is an objective measure and easily quantified. Unlike “a good deal on a car” which is almost exclusively subjective.
I don’t expect politicians to look like George Clooney, and I don’t expect women who are politicians to look like Clooney’s wife.
Don’t get me started on Slate. A site not worth visiting if every there was one.
Does anyone actually care about this story any more? It’s been around since Bill was being impeached.
This is why a female Presidential candidate will have some sort of coattails, regardless of her being a ClintonTM.
Progressives that consider themselves progressives have an opportunity to plan accordingly. Or wish and hope Sanders gets the nomination, and then complain.