Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

At Least There
Wasn't Cleavage

Former Sen. John Edwards praised the Clintons during Monday night's debate, but he called the fashion police on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's outfit.

"I'm not sure about that coat," Edwards said.

Clinton was wearing a bright coral jacket and black pants -- a typical look for her, and a more modest one than the low-cut camisole and jacket she wore on the Senate floor last week, revealing cleavage.

After Edwards's comment, Clinton froze for a moment, before eyeing him and saying pointedly that it was a good thing the debate was almost over.

"I actually like Hillary's jacket," offered Sen. Barack Obama. "I don't know what's wrong with it."

--Anne E. Kornblut

By Post Editor  |  July 24, 2007; 7:50 AM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , The Debates  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Rudy's Bragging.
Is He Right?

Next: Obama Girl Reviews the Debate

Comments

suzeq's comment demonstrate just how isolated she is from most
Americans. Like the tens of millions without health insurance and the rest who can't trust their insurance to pay when they're sick.

She doesn't think it matters who gets elected.

But of course it does.

That's why insurance companies donate millions to their candidates.

Posted by: joelpatt | July 25, 2007 6:55 AM | Report abuse

Has the Washington Post political coverage really sunk to the level of discussing a candidate's jacket and major stories on cleavage?

Where are Woodward and Bernstein?

Posted by: collings | July 25, 2007 3:05 AM | Report abuse

this is where i think political analysis gets too cumbersome and nuanced. edwards's quip was obviously just a joke. a jab merely intended to lighten the atmosphere. i seriously doubt edwards had deep concerns and ruminations about hillary's fasion choice...

Posted by: hanys85 | July 24, 2007 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Wow, you all missed the point. He was saying there wasn't anything he did not like about her. He actually had to find something to dislike, so he chose the jacket. Nothing just a joke, don't make it something it's not.

Posted by: db3197 | July 24, 2007 3:40 PM | Report abuse

God I hope the media tires of commenting on the Democrats clothing & hair. But seeing as how they've already made fun of the Democrats I think it high time they moved onto the Republicans. What about Mitt and his makeup, hmmmmm? Or how about Rudy and his cross dressing? Why don't we pound those stories for awhile. And then hopefully once the media has everyone covered then maybe we can move on to substantive issues.

Posted by: pmorlan1 | July 24, 2007 3:04 PM | Report abuse

WARDROBES for THEATRE PRODUCTIONS -- Certainly an issue, certainly studied, certainly an option for discussion.

It has come to some of us that the tunic-style coats/jackets that Senator Clinton favors seem to lower her (physical) center of gravity (not gravitas), giving her an upside down pyramid look.

Even the 'dress for success' folks who educate us about job interviews might offer the comment that the Senator's height could be emphasized with a shorter jacket in a less 'lurid' hue.

Part of the props for this theatre ARE the costumes. These CNN 'debates' are so blocked and staged that ANY commentary on the production is worthwhile and appropriate.

The assigned roles are being played out to the fullest; we won't see many changes on this stage. We won't hear many astute ideas put forth; it's all about the play.

Posted by: suzeq | July 24, 2007 2:53 PM | Report abuse

God help us all when this moron takes over the presidency. Make plans to leave the country during her eight year romp. They are bound to steal whatever they missed during the first reign of terror.

Posted by: djudge1 | July 24, 2007 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I think Sen Edwards' comment about Sen Clinton's jacket was simply a friendly way of responding "playfully" to a "playful" question....nothing more....nothing less...though, of course, the media's too self-serving to let anything innocent stay that way!

PRAF

Posted by: patemail310 | July 24, 2007 2:29 PM | Report abuse

I think Sen Edwards' comment about Sen Clinton's jacket was simply a friendly way of responding "playfully" to a "playful" question....nothing more....nothing less...though, of course, the media's too self-serving to let anything innocent stay that way!

PRAF

Posted by: patemail310 | July 24, 2007 2:29 PM | Report abuse

What's with the Washington Post's obsession with Clinton's cleavage?

Posted by: mherckis | July 24, 2007 2:19 PM | Report abuse

Why does Senator Clinton's attire call attention to itself? (The jacket was garish.)

I notice that when Mrs. Edwards speaks
her clothes are just there...they're not something one really pays much attention to...I'm a Clinton supporter but I think she needs clothes that fade into the background permitting her formidable mind
to hold forth on the issues of the day.
This may sound scandalous but I think she should consistently dress conversatively and let that Marilyn Monroe pout with
that blonde hair, creamy skin, and red, red lips win our hearts.

Posted by: rkritter | July 24, 2007 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Why does Senator Clinton's attire call attention to itself? (The jacket was garish.)

I notice that when Mrs. Edwards speaks
her clothes are just there...they're not something one really pays much attention to...I'm a Clinton supporter but I think she needs clothes that fade into the background permitting her formidable mind
to hold forth on the issues of the day.
This may sound scandalous but I think she should consistently dress conversatively and let that Marilyn Monroe pout with
that blonde hair, creamy skin, and red, red lips win our hearts.

Posted by: rkritter | July 24, 2007 2:09 PM | Report abuse

I'm totally with Edwards - she always wears pink she looks much better in blues but I'm glad she didn't wear black. Made her look softer - but the pink really washes her out. Too it was so bright it really distracted from her face which is what you want people paying attention to in a debate, right?

That said - ten bucks says the conservative media turns this into an Edwards Fashion-ista girlyman extravaganza.

Posted by: alicescheshirecat | July 24, 2007 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"low cut camisole"... Is Ann K. trying to further this myth? Lordie, I looked at the tape on C Span of Hillary that day and to say she was wearing something "low cut" is silly and quite an exaggeration. But hey, this is the paper that had Ceci Connally exaggerating EVERYTHING about Al Gore in 2000, so why not expect that from the post in 08 and from Ms Kornblot who also seems to have that ....edge...

Posted by: holdencaulfield | July 24, 2007 12:17 PM | Report abuse

I am actually one of the few thirty-something women who unabashedly calls herself a feminist and after at first bristling with hardwired affront, I laughed and decided I liked it. She was dressed differently than the men on the stage, that coat called out for some kind of attention--to ignore it would be more gender insensitive, like asking people to be "color-blind" instead of talking abou treal race issues, and the fact that Edwards said it and they could all laugh actually showed how much of a non-issue it is. Women and men often have differences, frequently superficial, so its better fro the equality of woemn when these differences don't matter anymore and we aren't scared that someone might mention gender and sex in politics--look at Anna Ilona Staller for goodness sakes, the US needs to get over its Victorian self.

Posted by: AttyMom | July 24, 2007 11:45 AM | Report abuse

I really hope this conversation stops about Hillary's attire. Its completely inappropriate.

Posted by: erinmcgigs | July 24, 2007 9:52 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company