Posted on 10/02/2015 8:27:13 PM PDT by glabbe
Megan Kelly did a segment on Friday with Chris Stirewalt and Howard Kurtz where they blasted an article by the NY Time on Melania Trump. The consensus was that the article was condescending and would have never been done on a democrat. They also agreed that Melania had done nothing to deserve such treatment.
(Excerpt) Read more at video.foxnews.com ...
Those two at the same desk? Now, THAT would get ratings...
Do you have my post confused with someone elses? I tore down no one.
I did not denigrate Meagain Kelly in my comment, or anyone else, but I criticized the work product of Melania Trump and the fact that America, in this age, just doesn’t care anymore about who keeps their clothes on and who does not.
I said it (her bosomy photos) won’t sell in some circles, but the push back will probably be minimal over the long term, because few think modesty matters. I said the Trumps were surely prepared for trouble, with the bosom of Mrs. Trump now a publically known commodity.
He builds luxury hotels. I work with designers who specify exactly this type of interior for luxury hotels and residences, not unusual to me.
“in this era it probably won’t be much or last. Modesty is so passe.”
Good point. I expect that the loudest critics go home with their homosexual lovers and do disgusting things. (But that’s OK.)
I am afraid you are correct. There was a time someone like Trump could be regrettably rejected for a presidential run, on account of his wife’s half nude “modeling” career, and his obvious support and tolerance for it. He married her, they have a fine son, and he appears with her socially, with her nearly absent a top on.
I personally think it disgusting, though she is very beautiful, and embarrassing that Trump has no standards of modesty for the women in his family. But no one else is going to care, for very long anyway.
Heck, it may even bring voter support, what do I know, as voters may see them as “real”, in the normal style of the day and hip enough to vote for, on those grounds.
Aww, thanks. :)
I usually get a lot coming to me, of which I am usually quite guilty. I always like your work on FR, so I aspire to stay in your good graces.
Well, it’s hideous. Just because it cost a lot of money doesn’t make it attractive. Hey, I’ll vote for The Donald even if he wants his home to look like the lobby of Caesar’s Palace in Atlantic City.
But I still haven’t forgiven him - nor will I - for gilding General Sherman.
“Well, it’s hideous.”
Agree with you, e.g., I’ll vote for The Donald even if his chosen style is ultra gaudy. I couldn’t truly live in that environment; it would freak me out. It doesn’t exactly invite you to put your feet up, get cozy, and relax.
I figure I can overlook the negative of the gaudiness weighed against the over-achieving, productive, decent, children he’s raised. Compare them to Chelsea who has no skills, but is “successful” anyway because she has a pulse.
i think there is a different reality of the function and purpose of gaudiness.
Remember, Donald is a salesman and what he shows is what he perceives his customers as wanting or aspiring to.
Gold leaf and marble sell condos and buildings
Perception trumps reality
My husband shrugged and suggested maybe his wife decorated his office and he decorated the home. On the other hand, Russians are generally gaudy, too...
My wife once said upon entering one such place: "Look, Bubba won the lottery!"
I know other's disagree but gaudy says Elvis to me; whether it's overdone velvet or gold leaf.
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.