[Hibernius Druid]

Nothing silly about it, Pope Sinkspur. The President's smirk is irritating to many of his supporters, not to mention his enemies and the "undecideds" who just may swing the general election.

In this age of image consultants, it's something that should have been eliminated long, long ago. Since you like to come across as a logician, why serve up the false dichotomy of "smirk" vs. "dour horse-face"?

I'd like to see President Bush re-elected, or was my nuancing too subtle for you?

[sinkspur]

The President's smirk is irritating to many of his supporters, not to mention his enemies and the "undecideds" who just may swing the general election.

It it irritates his supporters, it's because they're looking for something to be irritated about.

After all that Bush has done on the war on terrorism, if that's all that the "undecideds" are focusing on (Bush's looks), he's done pretty well.

And, who the hell cares what his enemies think?

I just think it's silly for a Bush supporter to expect him to change something about his expression that he is obviously not going to change!

[sinkspur]

Since you like to come across as a logician, why serve up the false dichotomy of "smirk" vs. "dour horse-face"?

Nothing false about it.

If Kerry weren't so botoxed-up, he might smile more.

Or, maybe not.