What Is It With Women Who Never Wear Skirts?

I’ve been following the political debates and sound bytes from south of the border and I’m struck by the fact that I have never seen Hillary Clinton wear anything but pants. This gives me pause. Don’t get me wrong, I think a suit can look flattering on a woman, as long as she is fairly slim. But, if you are short with a fat ass it looks awful. I’m thinking, what is she trying to hide? Is she afraid to wear a skirt, because she is bow-legged, knock-kneed or pigeon-toed? Is it varicose veins? Flabby thighs? Too skinny? Does she want to be seen as macho? In charge? To circumscribe Tony Soprano, I gotta say, short people with big butts simply don’t look good in pants, like they’re trying to be a grown-up, but instead they look like a dork. So what’s the deal here?

My guess is, they had a focus group on what her image should be and they decided on pants. Not that that should matter when deciding who’s going to answer that all important 3:00 am phone call.

And what’s the matter with a skirt. Margaret Thatcher didn’t have a problem with a skirt, or a purse, for that matter, and she kicked plenty of butt. Ditto for Golda Meir. But then Hillary is about image, not substance. She isn’t in their league.

And another thing, what’s this with the photo-op slugging back shots of rye? Canadian rye, no less. And here she is berating NAFTA. My guess is the message is: “Look at me, I’m just like you.” Would drinking rye wearing a dress send a mixed message? Would it make her seem less one of the boys? Not that she would ever be mistaken for one of the boys. Is she going to light up a cigar next? I hope it’s not a Cohiba. Her wearing the pants in the Clinton household didn’t stop old Bill from dunking his cigar into places no real smoker would ever think of sticking his stogy. She couldn’t control the big Bubbah, how can we expect her to control those conspiring Republicans, never mind terrorists.

It's a good thing she lost.