Sarah was featured in a Runner's World story a while back, complete with pictures of her stretching, warming up, tying her shoes by (presumably) Lake Lucille, AK. She looks great in the warm-up pants, for a woman who's had 5 kids .. ahem, ... ok.
In the Newsweek cover pic, she is adopting the traditional cheerleader/beauty contestant pose, hand on hip, slightly bended knee. come hither look; being Sarah, there is of course a flag involved. That flag is there to give a message, isn't it? It's a prop to her patriotism. The Blackberry, is another prop ... it's there to tell the viewer that Sarah is connected, busy, always ready to share or receive information.... a pair of moccasins peek out from a shelf behind her to remind us of her love of Alaska: an Army hanging complete the 'set' of who Sarah is, what Sarah does and what Sarah loves. Fair enough. She chooses the props, we get the message.
Imagine the surprise of anyone who lives on this planet, when Sarah complains (whines, really) about Newsweek using that pic on their cover! SEXIST, she cries!
From her OFFICIAL Facebook page, Sarah says:
"When it comes to Sarah Palin, this 'news' magazine has relished focusing on the irrelevant rather than the relevant," she wrote. "The Runner's World magazine one-page profile for which this photo was taken was all about health and fitness - a subject to which I am devoted and which is critically important to this nation. The out-of-context Newsweek approach is sexist and oh-so-expected by now. If anyone can learn anything from it: it shows why you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, gender, or color of skin. The media will do anything to draw attention - even if out of context."
Sexist? Come on ... first, she POSED for this picture, posing like an aging cheerleader who is too self-centered to know she is way past the High School look.
So, she would have us believe that the photo of her in 'shorts', is there only to send a picture of health and fitness? Ahhhh .. Sarah, you really do think we are all blinded by your self-exagerated beauty, don't you?
AND .. when did Sarah start referring to herself in the 3rd person??? Is she now 'royalty'??
But ... Sarah is all about her sex appeal, so why is it a surprise that a 'sexy' picture of her is a cover?
Can you imagine Hillary Clinton 'winking' to the audience and her opponents in a Primary Debate? Red Naughty Monkeys heels? There still ARE standards of professionalism, both for men and women .... people who want to be taken seriously, understand this. Did the campaign spend over 100K dressins/grooming Sarah because the image doesn't matter? Of course not: we ALL understand that it does.
As far as I'm concerned, Sarah can wear whatever she likes, and pose however she likes, but she can't COMPLAIN when people see her for what she is. If Newsweek chooses to use a picture of Sarah that conveys the 'sexual' Sarah, in large part it's because that is a big part of what Sarah projects.
I don't remember who said this, but it's true: If she looked like Golda Meir, nobody would pay attention to the dimwit, she knows that, we all know that.