hipocrates

The big question for me is what sort of character takes posed PR photos for one group and the weirdest paparazzi ambushes of the other group and puts them up for comparison. If someone really thinks his women are prettier, he'd have the guts to do a fair comparison.

Here, for example, are the five GOP women in the Senate and the twelve Dems. I'd say they're fairly comparable on looks. My strongest reaction is that if we dumped the 83 men and let these 17 take over, we'd probably be better off!

If you summed up the IQs of the women in those pictures by Rep vs Dem, which do you think would be higher?

Anonymous wrote:Michelle Bachman? Doesn't everyone refer to her as crazy-eyes?

She does have los ojos locos, but then again the rest of the group is beauty queens, talk show hosts, and talking heads. In other words, she's the only one who didn't get her job on looks.

Michelle Bachman? Doesn't everyone refer to her as crazy-eyes?

GOP -- the party that nominated Dan Quayle because he was sure to attract women's votes with his boyish good looks.

The only difference between pretty and petty is the R!

Anonymous wrote:Geesh.. When you show them back to back... The dems in these pix are not too easy on the eyes.. Just sayin..

Then again only one of your ladies actually managed to hold a job in the federal government. Seriously, Carrie Prejean? Who are you pairing her up with, one of the two Secretaries of State maybe? Or a Speaker of the House?

But if you want to put your entertainers and models up against our entertainers and models, I'm sure we are going to win.

Geesh.. When you show them back to back... The dems in these pix are not too easy on the eyes.. Just sayin..

are there any DCUM's in the politics forum or is it just DCUD's?

Anonymous wrote:

Wow, you think Hasselbeck is ready to be Secretary of State?

Anonymous wrote:why do all lib women look so damn ugly

Why do all conversative women come across as being so uneducated?

said OBGYN needs an acid resistant lab-coat.