Posted on 07/10/2007 2:15:19 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sunday's New York Times contains an article about the 2008 race that poses a different question than most other commentary thus far. It's not asking if America's ready for a woman president, or a Mormon, or an African-American. It's asking whether America's ready for a trophy wife.
The wife in question is Jeri Kehn Thompson, 40, who's married to Fred Thompson, the 64-year-old former "Law and Order" actor and Republican senator from Tennessee who's expected to announce a bid for the presidency. The Times describes her as having "youthfulness, [a] permanent tan and bleached blonde hair" and asks whether "so-called values voters" -- i.e., conservative Republicans -- would "accept this union."
This probably won't come as surprising to Kehn Thompson, whose age and appearance have earned her Internet abuse and a comment by Joe Scarborough asking if she "works the pole," during a segment about striptease workouts. But that doesn't mean it's excusable. (And as the Times put it, "It is hard to imagine a man, however handsome, suffering similar insult.")
Here are my questions: Why should the couple's age difference be blamed on the woman? (Fred was presumably a big part of that decision, too.) What does the appearance of a first lady have to do with her husband's bid for the presidency (or vice versa)? And, as always, why should a woman need to defend herself against accusations that she's a "bimbo" just because she's attractive? Even the Times plays into this, pointing out that Kehn Thompson is a former Senate aide and a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee -- as if her blondeness needs to be offset by professional accomplishment. And, continues the Times, "she is not a homewrecker." Thanks. What, exactly, does that have to do with her husband's run for president? Even if their marriage had been preceded by an extramarital affair, why should Mrs. Thompson be the one on the defensive? Wouldn't that reflect just as poorly -- if not more so -- on her husband?
What's more, it seems as if people's obsession with Kehn Thompson has less to do with her objective age or attractiveness than the fact that she's with an older man. After all, Michelle Obama is a vibrant 43 -- not too far past Kehn Thompson, and an attractive person to boot. And yet no one's asking whether Michelle's too hot for the White House (perhaps those people are too busy asking whether she's too black for the White House). Yes, a 24-year age difference does turn heads, and yes, any candidate with a "trophy" spouse is going to attract attention. But why must the attention always focus on the woman?
The Times' headline was "Will Her Face Determine His Fortune." Let's hope that if push comes to shove, it's actually his capabilities, not his wife's appearance, that determine whether Thompson's fit for office.
There is nothing wrong with her dress. I wore a similar dress (Sea green/embroidered with little seed pearls-loved it) to a black tie event...must Republican women wear burkas for crying out loud!
Remember when the media types said Judge Roberts children were ‘creepy’ because they wore traditional childrens clothing and are blonde (I think). Republicans can do nothing right in the eyes of the media except lose elections.
too sexy for the White House?
“I’m Too Sexy”
Right Said Fred
I’m too sexy for my love too sexy for my love
Love’s going to leave me
I’m too sexy for my shirt too sexy for my shirt
So sexy it hurts
And I’m too sexy for Milan too sexy for Milan
New York and Japan
And I’m too sexy for your party
Too sexy for your party
No way I’m disco dancing
I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the catwalk
Yeah on the catwalk on the catwalk yeah
I do my little turn on the catwalk
I’m too sexy for my car too sexy for my car
Too sexy by far
And I’m too sexy for my hat
Too sexy for my hat what do you think about that
I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the catwalk
Yeah on the catwalk on the catwalk yeah
I shake my little touche on the catwalk
I’m too sexy for my too sexy for my too sexy for my
‘Cos I’m a model you know what I mean
And I do my little turn on the catwalk
Yeah on the catwalk on the catwalk yeah
I shake my little touche on the catwalk
I’m too sexy for my cat too sexy for my cat
Poor pussy poor pussy cat
I’m too sexy for my love too sexy for my love
Love’s going to leave me
And I’m too sexy for this song
I do remember that attack on Roberts’ children!
Thanks for reminding ~ those kids were darling, too, and sooo patient.
The little son was borderline ornery IIRC and really cute.
Sorta' different things, usually; in the one case you are trying to hide what you are doing from the public eye, in the other you are out front about it: "I don't care what people think".
And one thing to ask is:
"Which sort of behavior- private or public - is more subversive of "conservative" "social" or "family" values".
Of course, as noted some of the responses above, some people have no problem with it at all, as long as it's in the context of marriage.
I have my doubts, though, that this argument is likely to be entirely convincing to women who can imagine themselves as the the first or second wife of a thrice married man.
FWIW, IMO this is largely a class thing.
For many years you were most likely to see this combination at either end of the income range; poor younger women would marry older men of often also modest means for stability and a modicum of security, and rich men would marry younger women for status or personal satisfaction. Meanwhile the "middle class" value was that you stayed married for life, usually in a relationship where the woman was a few years younger than the man. (For middle-income families, this was usually the best strategy economically - divorce was a economic event from which one or both partners often never completely recovered financially).
Lately, as standards of living and disposable income (especially of upper-middle class professionals) has risen and SS and Medicare have somewhat reduced the economic risks of divorce, you are seeing an increase in the number of "middle-class" Americans - mostly men - who are willing and able to start "second families" in their 40s, 50s and 60s - behavior which was previously the province of the rich and the poor.
(I'm not. BTW, saying that economics drives everything in such decisions, especially at the individual level - only that it's quite important in determining "values" and "moral standards" at the group level).
Such remarriage to yonder women are still socially traumatic, though - when you see three or four such couples out to diner together (at least in my Mid-West city) you will most often see older men paired with younger women, you rarely see groups where the men and women are randomly assorted by age, or even where you have men in their 50s and 60s and the women a mixed group such as two women in their 30s and two women in their 50s and 60s.
Now, this puts Thompson in a tricky spot.
The romantic life he's been leading (dating other entertainers and then marrying a younger woman) is that of a certain section of the very well to do - successful entertainment figures. The voters he's trying to reach, however, are members of a more conservative middle and lower-middle class.
All I can say, is what I told people who had any remarks about the difference in our ages when my husband and I were married, “shut up, it is no ones business except ours”.
Yes-how you could find fault with such adorable kids is beyond me, but of course they were a conservative’s children.
Is she conservative? If so, can she run instead of Fred?
Is she conservative? If so, can she run instead of Fred?
Perhaps she can run instead of Rudy and/or Mitt. They certainly are not conservative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.