Only his makeup artist knows for sure
Did he ask Edwards’ hairdresser for a $400 haircut to go with the makeup job?
So it turns out McCain paid a Hollywood makeup artist over $5500 for a makeup job. I’m thinking maybe, before the 60 Minutes appearance, because there were a lot of closeups, and he looked surprisingly young for a 72-year-old torture and cancer survivor.
Anyway, $5500 is just about the combined value of… both my cars.
I just love bs that means nothing.
Posted by james old guy on 09/25/08 at 05:30 AMTalk about lipstick on a pig.
Posted by gerry rosser on 09/25/08 at 09:05 AMOK James, I’ll spell it out for you. There’s at least two things this particular BS means.
One is that if it takes more than five thousand bucks worth of Hollywood makeup to make John McCain look like he doesn’t belong in a nursing home, then he’s too old for the world’s most stressful job. He won’t make it.
(I would also really like to know of McCain is taking cholinesterase inhibitors. Seems very relevant to the job.)
The other is, the next time some winger is all het’ up over someone paying attention to how they look (Bill Clinton and John Edwards have both taken hits based on their attention to hair) they can just shut the hell up.
Gerry - LOL!
Posted by George on 09/25/08 at 10:20 AMGeorge
Its your blog you can say what you want. I am surprised you didn’t have a link to your source. If you think 5000 bucks is high for a Hollywood makeup job then your way out of touch. All of that is smoke and mirrors anyway for you to make fun of a man who was crippled defending the very liberty you are now using to insult him. I expected better.Posted by James Old Guy on 09/25/08 at 10:40 AMI don’t think $5K is high for a Hollywood makeup job. It’s probably about average. The fact that he needed one is important, though.
Source and I assume you’ve heard of Google.
It is not an insult to say that John McCain is too old for the job. Lately McCain seems to have gone back on principles he has held for years - he is changing and flip-flopping all over the place all the sudden. That is a very bad sign in an elderly person.
Last night I saw a National Geographic special on the biology of stress. One of the studies they cited showed that parents raising handicapped children aged 6 years for every year, during their children’s early years. This is not subjective, it is medically relevant and verifiable changes to the body. Surely the job McCain is interviewing for is more stressful than that. Have you not noticed how the presidency ages those who hold the office? McCain has had significant physical challenges in life that did a lot of damage to his body, and he is at the upper end of mandatory retirement age for any high-stress job you can name.
You expected better? I expect better - I expect a president who won’t get less and less able to do the job, while his loyal keepers keep it a secret from the public. I expect somebody wide awake in the office.
Posted by George on 09/25/08 at 10:51 AM“Crippled defending the very liberty you are now using to insult him.“ Quoting “James Old Guy” above.
This clause is wrong on so many fronts. It implies that freedom of speech should be limited by someone else’s war injuries. It implies there was something about the Viet Nam war which protected American liberties. It implies that being injured in war imbues someone with special virtues and rights. It implies that being shot down flying a fighter-bomber is a qualification for public office.
I, for one, do not believe one’s war record has any bearing on one’s fitness for office (and I include Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Eisenhower in that view).
Posted by gerry rosser on 09/26/08 at 07:12 AM
Next entry: Marcy Kaptur kicks ass on the blank check
Previous entry: Barack Obama on the financial crisis