Posted by Amanda Marcotte November 13, 2007 in Asides, Images
Salon has an article up about presidential candidate spouses by Rebecca Traister, and while Rebecca (naturally) mentions Bill Clinton in her article, for some reason his famous mug didn’t make the cut on the illustration. I’m forced to call bullshit on the picture, though the article itself is a delight.
18 Responses to “Where’s Bill?”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Hmmm, when I saw the picture on Salon I immediately started looking for Bill myself.
Leaving the spouse of the front runner out seems like an odd thing to do, almost as if there was some overriding reason to do it, something I can’t put my finger on…. It’ll come any minute, I’m sure….
The article was terrific, but I had the same initial reaction to the picture–where, in a picture that accompanies an article that uses the gender-neutral “spouse,” thus bringing attention to the fact that for the first time there’s a major female candidate, is the man most likely to be considered the “First Husband?” He didn’t have to be up front in the picture, though that certainly would have made sense, given his star power, but he should have at least been included.
Bill should be front and center with a big grin on his face with saliva coming out of his mouth.
Fred Thompson’s wife is Julianne Moore?!
“Bill should be front and center with a big grin on his face with saliva coming out of his mouth.”
…and the outcry from Althouse and the rest of the Anti-Clinton brigade would be deafening…
At the risk of sounding pharmaceutically stupid …. Elizabeth Edwards rocks!
I checked the letters for the column and Joan Walsh cops to the mistake:
Obviously the best remedy would be to fix the graphic, but admitting the mistake is a good start in my view.
Fred Thompson’s wife is Julianne Moore?!
Actually, that’s Kucinich’s wife.
As for why Bill’s not in the picture, the simplest explanation is that the editors of Salon wanted to save Ann Althouse the trouble of blogging about all the other spouses’ breastesses.
They were going to put Bill in the picture, but they were understandably concerned that he couldn’t be around that many women and not sexually harass at least one of them. You understand.
Bye, Observer. You officially have nothing useful to say that’s not slander.
In addition to calling the pic on the absence of Bill, it also looks as if the older, less conventionally attractive spouses are in smaller pictures near the top/back. Look specifically for the grey hair.
I saw that yesterday and had the same thought.
Can you image the wide angle lens needed if they wanted to sling in all of the ex-wives, too?
Bravissima!
Louise: And most of said ex-wives would be the exes of those famblee-values Republicans. OTOH, while Kucinich has been married more than once, Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are all still with their first spouses. So which is the famblee-values party again?
And count me in as another fan of Elizabeth Edwards. I loved her so much when she spoke out in favor of gay marriage - and when she stood up to Ann Coulter. She was one of the few with the ovaries/skirt/intestinal fortitude to do that.
Mrs. Kucinich is really really hot.
I hear she has a tounge stud, though that could just be rumor.
to leave out bill in such a picture just illustrates how gender biased we are when conceiving of a president or presidential candidate’s spouse. we automatically think “woman” and not “man.” even when that “man” is bill clinton, former president.