For Libs Even Lipstick is Political
Mary Katherine Ham via Michelle Malkin led me to an Estee Lauder ad where has-been comic Sandra Bernhard, promoting it’s M.A.C. brand lipstick uses the term, “…little freaked out, intimidated, frightened, right-wing Republican thin-lipped b****”. They have since edited that portion out of the ad. Wow! Even makeup is political with these people.
First off, Sandra Bernhard is a DOG. The kind you can’t even drink pretty. So I’m not sure how much lipstick she’s gonna sell to anyone except for women who say, “If it can make her lips look good, it’ll definitely work for me.” Secondly, speaking from experience as a former Democrat, Republican women are by far the hottest women I’ve ever been around. It was one of the great fringe benefits when I switched parties and started going to Republican meetings. Trust me guys, the Dem meetings don’t look nearly that good.
The Cottilion has much more great insight on this story that’s definitely worth the read.
Welcome to Cotillion readers to chez Diva readers and Wizbang Bomb Squad. While you’re here take a look around and see if you like what you see. If so, please come back and visit us often! 
UPDATE: Here’s the original video. Take a look and compare it to the newly edited one at MAC. LOL.
Posted by Falcon
August 16th, 2006 at 2:52 am
I have a better adjective for her, Falcon: Coyote ugly.
August 16th, 2006 at 4:36 am
I saw that commercial and quit watching after a few minutes. That poor woman was born in the ugly nest of the ugly tree, fell down and hit every branch, crawled back up to the nest and did it over and over again.
August 16th, 2006 at 11:19 am
Falcon
“The kind you can’t even drink pretty.”
Hilarious, can I use it?
And you’re right Jeanette, she found the tallest ugly building and jumped right on her face. It doesn’t help that her entire personality/schtick is nasty too.
August 16th, 2006 at 11:52 am
[…] Others blogging: Villainous Company, Fausta, MementoMoron , Hooah Wife, She Who Will Be Obeyed, Pink Cosmopolitan on the Right , Hang Right Politics, MVRC, Mary Katherine Ham via Michelle Malkin, The Stout Republican UPDATE: Girl on the Right has let me know that there is a “contact us” menu at MAC - pull the ‘question” menu down and select “other issue” - let them know how you feel (of course keep it polite but be firm). […]
August 16th, 2006 at 11:56 am
MAC Spokesperson Says: …little freaked out, intimidated, frightened, right-wing Republican thin-lipped bitch
That’s right, Estee Lauder’s little boutique brand M.A.C. Cosmetics’ pouty mouth spokesperson Sandra Bernhard is promoting “PlushGlass” by mouthing off and insulting Republican women. Here’s the words: “…little freaked out, intimidated, frigh…
August 16th, 2006 at 12:57 pm
I don’t think liberals really want to get into a contest of pretty with conservatives.
Conservatives embrace womanhood, and liberal women try to give a cheap imitation of men.
Note to liberal women: Angry is always ugly.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:12 pm
MAC Spokesperson Says: …little freaked out, intimidated, frightened, right-wing Republican thin-lipped b*tch
That’s right, Estee Lauder’s little boutique brand M.A.C. Cosmetics’ pouty mouth spokesperson Sandra Bernhard is promoting “PlushGlass” by mouthing off and insulting Republican women. Here’s the words: “…little freaked out, intimidated, fright…
August 16th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
Why do I envision women attending Democratic party meetings as wearing no make-up, not shaving their legs or underarms? Probably go braless too. Have long stringy hair wearing floral skirts.
August 16th, 2006 at 8:55 pm
Well, I have to admit to thin lips and not wearing make-up by personal choice since I saw a friend in high school put so much on she must have had to use a chisel and hammer to take it off. Occasionally some lipstick and blush, but very rarely.
I do, however, shave my legs and underarms. I even use deodorant and wash my hair daily. I only go braless in the house when I’m in my sleeping clothes.
Now, first it was short people by Kathy and now people with no make-up from COgirl. Are you guys absolutely positive I’m not a misfit?
August 16th, 2006 at 10:03 pm
I’m only 5′ 1/2″. I’m not wearing make-up now.
But I do shave my legs and underarms.
August 16th, 2006 at 10:37 pm
OK Ladies!- Too much information.
Let’s just agree that conservative women pay attention to the differences between men and women, and liberal women minimize the differences.
That explains why a baboon faced woman like Sandra Bernhard with crooked stained teeth and the attitude of a middle-schooler on steriods struts across the screen describing herself as fabulous.
In her dreams.
As to shaving, if she does as well at that as she does brushing her teeth - a baboon face is not her only baboon feature.
Estee Lauder will never get another dime from me.
August 16th, 2006 at 10:50 pm
Kathy! TMI?
I don’t use Estee Lauder anyway. Some of the women in our office building poured it on and smelled to high heavens all day. Make-up looked a bit thick too, but you got to do what you got to do when you’re old and pruny-looking from too much sun. I use Mary Kay products. When I use them. Right now the dermatologist has me pretty restricted. I guess my face affects my feet!
August 16th, 2006 at 10:54 pm
To get back on topic: Conservative women love and respect their partners, whether husbands or boyfriends. We don’t try to be the man but let him take the lead in things of importance.
Libs want to be the man in every respect. They respect no one but other libs and that’s questionable.
Never minding looks, in my book Conservative women and men are much more attractive.
August 16th, 2006 at 11:39 pm
I use Mary Kay. Not the cleansing products - I use Proactiv in that department instead,-, but the makeup is smooth and does the job quite nicely.
Besides, would any Mary Kay ad campaign feature a “woman” with a grudge? I don’t think so. Not a company headquartered in TX, at least.
Besides, men never liked the Bernhardt types, anyway.
August 20th, 2006 at 9:44 am
Actually, I think the add was right on target. The right wing is under attack. To be thin lipped, intimidated, scared even is to be a republican today. And rightfully so if the response to the ad is to condemn the actress as a dog. What does that have to do with anything? That is the most shallow, elementary school type response imaginable and indicative of the collective wisdom and vision of the right. I’m a bit suprised that you didn’t recommend bombing them.
August 20th, 2006 at 11:18 am
Tom,
To not point out the irony of an ugly woman (body and soul, mind you) in a make-up ad would be to ignore the obvious. And to not expect that response to an ad so hostile and obnoxious is itself naive and immature. Before you jump up on your little soapbox of self-righteousness, you ought to consider the instigator (hint: the left), and begin condemnations there. The sad truth is that if you had condemned the ad and our response, you would have some high ground, and I wouldn’t have responded.
As for thin-lipped, intimidated, and scared representing the Republican party, I genuinely don’t know where to begin. Who started this idiotic thin-lipped analogy? I never heard it before the dog in the ad used it, so I’m going to assume the left is trying to start another fun trend like “Da Bomb.” Last time I checked, our party was confronting the Islamofascists, and your side was calling for “nuance,” “talks,” and “understanding.” If Democrats don’t absolutely embody intimidated and scared when faced with our enemy, the words have no meaning whatsoever.
Now move along, and whimper back to your friends at whatever left-wing website you stumbled here from. I’m sure they’ll endlessly reassure you that your misguided views reflect reality, and you’ll eventually muster up the courage to come visit us again. I hope by that time you’ll have learned to think before you speak.
And please do remember, you’ve just had your behind handed to you by a twenty-year-old right-winger*, and I hardly represent a third of the collective Republican wisdom and virtue of others at this site. To choose to respond here so mightily, and not on a more serious thread, only exemplifies your weakness of character.
* Full disclosure: I’m twenty-one on Wednesday.
August 20th, 2006 at 1:27 pm
Rory,
Wow! Where do I start to respond? I am a very rich, white, republican businessman who honestly finds the sentiment embodied in your (yours and the others on this site) responses to be immature and indicative of a retreating, beaten ideology. As to your age, I hardly find that relevant, except to explain the weakness of your logic and retort. I mean, assuming that because I don’t echo your hate speech I am a liberal moron who needs to skulk off somewhere is a typical, knee jerk reaction of someone (or some group) that has no rational, moral or ethical ground to argue from - so demonize the person who dares disagree.
Now, how again is calling the actress who read the line written for her a dog and railing about how you can’t even get drunk enough to screw her a reasonable and obvious comment? You were upset someone dissed you as tight lipped and scared and struck back in a juvenile manner without even thinking it could be right. It was right. We, the republicans, rightfully waged war on the “islamofascists” as you put it but lost our way in meglomania in invading a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with the war on terror. Then, as our failures mounted, we dug in deeper, and deeper, unable to admit we were wrong and becoming more and more thin-lipped. We abandoned our committment to fiscal conservatisim; smaller, open government; and our commitment to national defense (by giving up on Osama). I’d say we ought to be scarred. We are going to be totally destroyed by the democrats in the fall unless they totally destroy themselves in their bumbling rush to november.
Also, how is an add from a large cosmetics company, who is presumably run by rich, white, republican males, be an attack from the left? Are you seeing demons in the shadows?
So, no I don’t condemn it or find it offensive. I think it is indicting. I did only just find your site and was honestly shocked at the purile mishmash of the comments. If I and other rational people don’t call you on your shockingly irrational behavior, shame on me. And please don’t respond by calling me names, since it only reinforces my point. Try logical discourse. And if I don’t find any here, I will go off in search of republicans who can recognize our mistakes and get back to governing sanely, soundly, and with a committment to our ideals.
August 20th, 2006 at 2:33 pm
tom,
Drop the charade. No one here will believe that you’re a Republican. Liberal trolls have been playing that theatre for years now, and it’s difficult to find a genuine Republican who won’t spot the game from a hundred yards back. Especially if you’re here proclaiming yourself a “rich, white Republican businessman.” No good Republican describes his or herself that way. We’re humble. It’s what separates us from you left-wingers.
I’m amused by your post, and I’d like to respond in depth, but I’ve got things to do today, and I’ve already been courteous enough to embarass you once today. So I’ll try to be succinct and go quickly point-by-point instead:
A. My response to your post was my first one on this thread. Have the common sense to realize that before you make generalizations.
B. You find weakness in my logic and retort, but you’re unable to point to specific examples of such. We educated sorts call this a logical fallacy. Specify your argument and elaborate on individual points. Like I am doing right now.
C. I’m happy for you that you seem to have discovered such important truth in a lipstick ad. Thin-lipped Republican bitch! How could I not have seen it before? Blessed be Sandra Bernhard and Estee Lauder, beacons of knowledge!
D. Calling Saddam’s Iraq anything other than a terrorist state is an insult to the thousands who fell victim to Saddam’s biological attacks. Your (dare I say) nuanced terminology of “sovereign nation” belittles any sad attempt you’ve made to appear a Republican. These are far-left Democrat talking points, friend. Not even RINOs subscribe to them.
E. Yes, this administration did give up on the principles of fiscal conservatism. But I’ll take shades of Reagan over clones of LBJ and Clinton any day.
F. Did you honestly just attempt to imply that rich, white people do not represent the majority of powerful Democrats in this country? Who are you kidding? And your assumption that a company must be run by a rich, white Republican is at best terribly prejudiced, and at worst simply racist. Still pretending to be a Republican? Sorry — you’re failing horribly.
G. Whether or not you “only just found” our site, or found the comments here not to your taste is irrelevant. You chose to reply here (on a four day old thread) because it was an easy target and you don’t have the guts to reply on a serious thread. Pretending that casual comments about an ugly Democrat are indicative of the broader Bush-supporting Republican masses is a joke. You’ve not made one point — not even a bad one — since you got here.
H. Read through this post and my last one. I’ve called you no names, but had no mercy in pointing out your mistakes. I’m sure you’d like me to call you names, so you could use them as an excuse to avoid any real debate, but you won’t get a free pass from me.
As to your final statement, good luck and godspeed. Logical debate is plentiful here, but since you don’t agree with our points, you’ll of course ignorantly claim that it isn’t logical, and scurry away to some place more receptive to your game. We won’t miss you.
I would lastly like to ask that any further response on this thread take care to avoid using this new term “thin-lipped” as if it makes any sense. It doesn’t. Despite what Sandra implies, two pounds of lipstick does not make a person more courageous than another. It makes them cheap tramps, or people that have no idea how to properly apply make-up. I’m not surprised that Democrats came up with such an inane analogy.
August 20th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
Calm down, Rory.
tom - don’t get me started, or I WILL make the necessary steps to ban you like the troll you are sounding more and more like.
And, unlike “thin-lipped bitches”, I DO NOT take excrement from anybody… not even you.
You are a liar.
August 20th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
Hey, who isn’t calm?
Don’t worry. When I’m not calm, I’ll be swearing incessantly.
It’ll be easy to spot.
August 20th, 2006 at 10:00 pm
YESSSSS! I win hands down! You cannot counter a single point of order here and make a huge show af A, B C, D… without a single logical argument. How sad! The problem you are having is that I am, despite what you conjecture, very much the rich, white republican yet I am about to be named anathema (read - exiled to you illiterate types.) I have an opinion and have stated it, contrary to your rhetoric. This is indicative of the sordid state of affairs in the republican party. Here we go! Yes, despite your doubts,
I am a very rich (greater than $25M) self made republican patriot. I have no qualms in making generalizations about the current state of affairs.
However, the implication that because Saddam was a tyrant made him a target of the war on terror is ludicrous. If that were to be so, why not invade North Korea, Iran, Somalia, China, et al? Afghanistan was an accomplise to the september 11th attack and a safe harbor to Al Queda. Iraq was not involved. What part of “not involved” do you no understand?
Yes, I did imply that the majority of rich, white businessmen and women are republican. Please consult the demographic studies. Poor people, and upstart holywood types, are democrats. Rich, powerful people are republicans. That is why we don’t favor change or evolution of any sort. That is why we tend to be christian. We like to hear a spiritual message that reinforces the belief system that we already hold. That is in North America. In the rest of the world, this egocentric world view becomes not only inane but irrelevant.
To hide behind enumeration is pathetic. Tell me why attacking the republican world view as “thin lipped” is less than accurate and I will debate you. Otherwise shutup and admit defeat.
August 20th, 2006 at 10:14 pm
Sorry, Tom. I’m afraid you’re the only one who thinks you’re looking positive on this thread. You’re a fraud.
I’ll spare you any more embarrassment by simply ignoring you until you get bored and move on. Have a good night.
August 21st, 2006 at 1:02 am
I don’t give a damn if you are rich or not! Riches do not make wisdom, IMHO.
And you’re proof of it, tom.
Go ahead: give your money to the Dems. It’s a worthless abyss, after all.
August 21st, 2006 at 1:13 am
Tom,
Why are you talking of a point of order? Who said Roberts’ Rules were in effect on this blog?
Secondly, you have insulted every member of this blogging team except me by calling them illiterate.
Let me start: COgirl—degree(s) in engineering. Very successful in her career and retired a number of years before her 53rd birthday. Hardly illiterate.
Kathy—degree in chemistry. Co-owns a business with her husband and is an environmental chemist. Very successful in what she does. Hardly illiterate.
newton—degrees in language and foreign studies, computer science, live at home mom to be because she married an engineer and doesn’t need the income. Hardly illiterate.
Falcon—Just completed his college studies while working and tending to a family. Has started his own business. Hardly illiterate.
Rory and Hailey—Both intelligent college students. Hailey will be leaving for Scotland in a couple of weeks for a semester of study. Rory is an accomplished writer who loves literature. Neither one qualifies as illiterate. Both get excellent grades in their colleges/universities. Dean’s list material here.
Kimsch—Working mother who served her country and was disabled as a result. Taking college courses while she tends to her husband and three children, and gets good grades, I might add. Hardly illiterate.
Jeanette—High school graduate who worked hard and retired before the age of 50. Now you can call me illiterate if you wish and I won’t argue with you. But don’t ever call my team mates illiterate again and expect your comment to stand.
This illiterate has two children, each with high IQs. One has her master’s degree and is successful in what she does. The other chose not to finish college and is doing well. Both are very intelligent. They have produced four children between them and the ones old enough to have had their IQ measured (one will soon be five) measure 144, 145 and 146. They had to get their intelligence somewhere and since my children are not illiterate I assume my genes contributed to it.
The more mature in age members of this team do not live in poverty and yet we don’t brag even to each other how much money we have or how our portfolios are doing. I know Hailey comes from a family that is successful and I’m assuming Rory does too. We are all down to earth people. We don’t quote how much money we wish we had the way you do.
I know ugly when I see ugly. I’m not blind and one of the most beautiful women I ever knew struck me as the ugliest woman I had ever seen when I first met her. It was what was inside that made her beautiful to the extent that’s all I ever saw in her face. Yes, I know ugly when I see it and I’ve just seen it in your posts.
I have thin lips. I was born with thin lips. I like my thin lips. Now, say something that proves your intellect or call me ignorant or illiterate if you must, but lay off the others.
August 30th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
Politicizing marketing does not sell products. Think Dixie Chicks. I will not be called names or have my views denigrated and still buy the company’s products. Period. That is all this is about. The company may put anything in its ads that it wants, but there will be financial repercussions. Again, think Dixie Chicks.
I just e-mailed Kenneth Cole (handbag and shoe company) regarding an ad in the September 2006 issue of Vogue magazine on pages 210-211. It reads, With the government recording personal phone calls, our rights aren’t the only thing on the line. Are you putting us on? - Kenneth Cole
The answer is no. I will never again buy another product from that company again. There is no coming back from this. There is a connection made in the ad between the political viewpoint and use of the product. The Dixie Chicks learned this lesson the hard way. It appears that there are companies that are not just in business to make money, but to make statements. State away…there WILL be financial repercussions for picking a side, so to speak.
August 30th, 2006 at 5:19 pm
[…] This was Jeanette’s response to a too-proud-of-himself-and-his-riches commenter who thought nothing before insulting all of our individual and collective intelligence. I know ugly when I see ugly. I’m not blind and one of the most beautiful women I ever knew struck me as the ugliest woman I had ever seen when I first met her. It was what was inside that made her beautiful to the extent that’s all I ever saw in her face. Yes, I know ugly when I see it and I’ve just seen it in your posts. […]