Bio
Blogger, comedian, artist, activist, attorney, Catholic, pretentious urbanite, Social Media strategist, libertarian, observer, Rockabilly. Haiku.
 
 
 
 

Most Popular

Leave Jessica Simpson Alone!

  • Share This Post
  • Pin It
  • 8
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

I thought, at some point, the night that Obama was elected, that I would love blogging in the new year because his Presidency would provide ample fodder for someone as keen as I am to point out foibles. Initially, I was disappointed because, as it turns out, there are seventy kabillion other conservative bloggers all of whom tend to latch on to Obama's foreign policy naivete (I'm using the French word so as to avoid using the more complex, slightly more dangerous in terms of censorship American four-letter ones), lack of foresight, resemblance to Jimmy Carter (I even suspect we've found this President's Billy, though somehow I doubt his product would be beer)...you name it, its been covered. By a cacaphony.

But see, there's some things others just aren't qualified to cover. And when Obama decides to wade knee-deep into celebrity culture and criticize a mainstay of gossip pages and sports superstition enthusiasts alike, The Sun will be there, and so will I.

Lauer: Yeah, well -- let -- let me show you. This is the -- the current issue of -- of Us Weekly.

Obama: Right.

Lauer: And here’s a great picture

Obama: Oh, it’s beautiful.

Lauer: -- of -- of you and -- and Michelle and -- and your daughters. Now, the -- the reason I bring this up I think is funny. It’s a great picture.

Obama: Yeah.

Lauer: But I wanna show you the cover. Look what they did. They -- they took you off the cover.

Obama: Yeah.

Lauer: They took you out of it.

Obama: It -- it’s -- it’s a little hurtful.

Lauer: You got replaced by Jessica Simpson.

Obama: Yeah, who’s in a weight battle apparently. (LAUGHTER) Yeah. Oh, well.

Yes, its true, the cover of Us Weekly does call what Jessica Simpson is going through a "weight battle," so if he's just reading the cover verbatim, he's going to come up with some interesting results, namely that his wife is using Pottery Barn to decorate the White House, which is not only totally lame, its going way over budget for furnishings, as Pottery Barn routinely takes their design cues from the much cheaper and recession-friendly Ikea, retools the components and makes expensive versions of furniture you can buy for under $100 with no payments due for a year if you buy all of your furniture and accessories at once ($399 or more worth). But still, you're the President. Its time to learn what's appropriate to comment on and what you should be aware is over the top.

For example, talking about things that are relevant to your job? Always appropriate, even if you are discussing passing notes to Mahmoud "Skippy" Ahmadenijad in study hall asking to borrow his Members Only jacket and handbook on being a dictator. Talking about conservative talk show hosts? Unless they are somehow involved with things relevant to your job, be aware that all you are doing is making them more famous. Rush was about currently as relevant to my life as POGs; the era of manufactured outrage and good-ol'-boy political incorrectness went out around the same time Ann Coulter's Adam's apple started appearing again. Talking about celebrities? Also inappropriate. Jessica Simpson may or may not be engaged in a "weight battle" and she may or may not have gotten the memo that pants, particularly jeans, belted at the waist will always, without fail, make your rear end look huge. Maybe she needs a visit from Trinny and Susanna. Maybe she needs her shopping privileges taken away. Maybe she needs to lay off the doughnuts. Or maybe, just maybe, Jessica Simpson is happy exactly how she is. Only she knows for sure. Personally speaking, I don't really care as long as she fires whoever the hell bought her that belt and told her that she could wear a bra three sizes too small.

Frankly, I'm just happy she's wearing pants as opposed to leggings/tights/rompers, as that is more than I can say for about 97.5% of celebrities and 99.5% of the drag performers who live in my neighborhood.

But see, that's even beyond the point. Where is the outrage that Lauer and Obama bothered to go...there? What was the necessity of dragging Jessica Simpson into the mix at all? And -- let's be honest

  • 8
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
AllThingsToNoOne 5 pts

I saw that interview and knew it would end badly with Matt Lauer defending the President's remarks. I really can't read too much into it, although I do wish "tv people" who are supposedly serious newscasters would concentrate on the issues rather than the fluff.

AllThingsToNoOne ( http://www.youreeverwherethatimnot.blogspot.com )

sallyw 5 pts

I think it got all blown out of porportion, its difficult for the president to speak without being misinterpreted. I forget about dan quayle and the patato/potato/potatoe, haha. It that is one thing that a vice president has done that has cracked me up lol.

- Sally

<a href="http://www.erskine.edu/news/12.03.04/db.12.03.04.htm">Dana Blackhurst</a>

Lisse 8 pts

 This is fluff and nonsense.

Like Laurie, I also think he was laughing off the fact that he wasn't on the cover as well as the silliness that they did print in his place.

 This whole discussion is about as meaningful as a "terrorist fist bump."

- Lisse

@ Home in the World: International Adoption and Other Travels ( http://homeintheworld.typepad.com )

lauriewrites 6 pts

I don't think at all that he was looking for anything insightful. 

I read my letter to my body onstage in front of many of you good people despite debilitating anxiety and it's clear to anyone who sees me that I am....not small.  I am SUPER sensitive to attacks on women based on their weight, and that is why I read American Princess's post and even clicked through to the actual video of the show to see if I'd be outraged or not. I wasn't, surprisingly, given my low threshold for outrage in these situations.

I think that by saying what he said, in the off-hand way he said it, he gave no credence to what these dangerous publications say. There is an important distinction in that he was not making that statement about Simpson HIMSELF. He was presented with something stupid, and I think he made the right call. 

Lauer should be called out on this, not the president. (And lest I be accused of drinking the Obama-aid or whatever, I am so dying now for the opportunity to get seriously pissed off at him so I can really work out the 1st Amendment.) 

Laurie White

LaurieWrites 

lauriewrites 6 pts

It was a silly thing for Matt Lauer to do, which is nothing new for him, but I don't think there was anything degrading about the president's response. I found your comments about her bra and clothing more degrading, actually...oh, and the doughnut part, that was nice. I usually enjoy your insight and perspective, but this time I'm not getting it.

Seriously. If there was a there there I'd cop to it, but this seems like much ado about not very much.  The most relevant part is the last paragraph, because I do always pay attention when a perfectly attractive person is ripped apart for her appearance in a country where people must not be so interested in paying much attention to news that really matters. 

Laurie 

LaurieWrites ( http://lauriewrites.typepad.com )

Erin Kotecki Vest 5 pts

Obama read what it said on the cover of a magazine...and I'm supposed to be outraged, why?

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain ( http://queenofspainblog.com/ )

Denise 23 pts moderator

First, Matt Lauer should never have gone there. He was having so much fun bantering with the president that he stopped thinking. What really was the point of making a big deal about the Obamas not having the cover? Maybe he was hoping he could coerce the president into saying something he would regret (and I hope President Obama does regret it today) or maybe he was hoping he could coerce the president to say something really helpful and smart about how women are treated in the media.

And that's what set me off on this topic.

President Obama "read" the cover and folks laughed. He joined in the fun society has poking at women about their weight, whether he intended to or not.

There were many things he could have said, when Lauer took him down that road. He could have provided commentary on society and its treatment of women. He had an opening right there to say SOMETHING, ANYTHING that would indicate he isn't comfortable with a woman's weight being front page fodder for media.

Instead, he didn't give it his time or attention - he read the cover, he got the laughs and he went back to "work".

And yes, that pisses me off. And yes, I'm highly sensitive to situations like this (how can I not be, having read all of these Letter to My Body ( http://www.blogher.com/blogher-topics/body-image/l... ) posts?) And yes, I'm harder on him because he is the president and a "friend to women's issues".

~Denise
BlogHer Community Manager

Flamingo House Happenings ( http://www.flamingohouse.net/ )

Clamo88 5 pts

I don't think Obama meant anything by it.  It was just a stupid, off the cuff remark that had nothing to do with anything.  The cover could have just as easily said Angelina Jolie's Fashion Fiasco, or Cruise's Movie Flops.

I don't particularly feel sorry for Obama.  He's just experiencing what most people in the public eye do...someone taking something that any one of us could say without thinking or meaning anything, and making a federal case of it. 

People did this to George Bush all the time when he fumbled his words.  Many times people knew what he meant, but it was easier to go for the cheap joke or controversy. 

It won't be any different for Obama.

Heck....it's been over a decade and everyone still remembers Dan Quayle and potatoe. 

It's funny, but not really meaningful.

edited to add:  as an example..I just had to edit this post 3 times because of my typos...hopefully that doesn't mean everyone thinks I'm an idiot. 

Wheat Among Tares ( http://wheatamongtares.blogspot.com )