We cannot shrink from this issue any longer!
What is she signaling, geo-politically, by this shift? I, myself, detect a distinct DeGeneresque look about it. Clearly, this is a shift away from the vaguely bouffant, “Stand by your man”-Tammy Wynette look. This probably represents a more activist approach to “womens issues”.
Others may see a more pert and “kicky” style, expressing a forlorn regret for lost youth, and a tilt away from the Palistinian position. Or does it represent a rejection of fashion, a certain, oh, I don’t know, je nais se quois?
Clearly, there is little hope of harmony in the Republic, or any opportunity for bi-partisan action, until this is clarified in the public mind. The Nation, as usual, looks to us, the seers and pundits of the revered SDMB, to guide and instruct. We dare not shirk our duty.
Hillary’s New?
You meant “New 'Do,” then?
Oh.
I thought you might have meant “Hillary’s new stuff, $200K worth at least, that she accepted in the form of gifts last year.”
As Democrat and moderate Chris Matthews noted on “Hardball” this evening, Richard Nixon had to go on TV in 1952 and give his “Checkers speech” for the same thing - accepting gifts from monied interests to live beyond your means and your wage as a public servant, the questionable ethics and the potential for quid pro quo coming out of it.
In Nixon’s case, it was only about one-tenth the amount Hillary received that caused the controversy. But I never could figure out those C.P.I. adjustments.
And as far as her 'do? It looked like she forgot to rinse the conditioner from her hair. Her hair has been getting smaller as her time in Washington has increased. I predict by the time she runs for Prez, she will have the Susan Powter look.
Her new look has drawn something of praise from, of all people, Matt Drudge.