These two women are running for the U.S. Senate seat from California. Ms. Boxer is the incumbent (hoping for a fourth term) and Ms. Fiorina is the businesswoman turned politician. The only reason I watched this debate last night on TV was because it followed the news and I was too lazy to get up from my chair and change the channel. (I do not control the clicker in my house.)
Naya Rivera from the TV Show "GLEE" showing off her high school prom dress and coiffure.
First of all, there’s nothing wrong with Barbra Boxer’s hairdo. Neither she nor Ms. Fiorina chose the flirty-n-fun up-do as the actress Naya Rivera did at this year’s Emmy awards ceremony last week in LA. So in the battle of the hairdos, it’s a neither-win.
Let’s move on to more important issues: what they wore. Ms. Boxer wore a frumpy gray suit and white blouse with a pointy collar. A tad librarian-ish.
Ms. Fiorina wore a steel blue suit with jeweled buttons. Even though the outfit gave off a St. John-ish “going to the country club for lunch” air, at least she had sense enough to dress down from her Armani-wearing days as CEO of Hewlett-Packard.
Boxer-Fiorina televised debate on 9/01/10. The facial expressions say it all. (Photo courtesy of the LA Times.)
Ms. Boxer wore a muted-metallic necklace and no earrings (or I couldn’t see any). Ms. Fiorina wore a rhinestone-type brooch and dangly earrings. The earrings sparkled (in the TV lights) and jiggled when she moved her head. Too distracting. (Big goof on the part of her stylist.)
I hope the earrings were NOT diamonds (like the kind she used to wear at HP), as the average California woman does NOT wear diamond earrings—because we cannot afford them!
Give the edge to Ms. Boxer, as she looked more down to earth if not boring. And more importantly, looked more like one of us.
Didn’t catch their shoes—drat! If I had to guess: Boxer = Easy Spirit. Fiorina = Ferragamo.
Ms. Boxer had a more pleasant demeanor. She sounded more at ease and confidant. Her voice projected friendliness. You can tell she is more experienced in this kind of forum and better handled.
Ms. Fiorina came across as more strident and humorless. Her voice had a tinge of defensiveness in it. She seems like the over-achieving girl in high school who thinks she’s entitled to be class president. On the positive side, she’s intelligent, earnest, and well prepared on the issues.
As far as who said what and the barbs that were exchanged, you can’t believe the jabs either women threw at each other. Politics is about spinning the truth.
But the truth of the matter is:
Ms. Fiorina did a lousy job running Hewlett-Packard. The purpose of a business is to increase shareholder wealth. Under the Fiorina Reign, stock value decreased by half. In addition, she eliminated 30,000 jobs—OUCH! She deserved to be fired. For Ms. Fiorina to run on her record as a successful businesswoman is ludicrous.
When she was terminated, I know for a fact (from business associates) that the HP rank-and-file cheered. Note to Ms. Fiorina: When you piss off the lower ranks of your employees it is NOT a good thing. In addition, if you were such a terrific businesswoman, why did no other company hire you?
Lastly, Ms. Fiorina supports the repeal of Roe v. Wade. ARE YOU FRAPPING KIDDING ME?!
Ms. Boxer is a career politician. All politicians are liars. All of Congress is corrupt as they work for special interest groups—NOT the American people. I know for a fact that Ms. Boxer is not friendly in particular and certainly not to the “little people” (as my niece was an intern for her in Washington, DC).
Washington, D.C. is a cesspool of corruption. Ms. Boxer is not the solution to clean it up. She is part of the problem—as slimy as the rest.
She supports Obama’s mandatory insurance coverage forced on Americans who can’t afford it (or like me, who don’t want it), which involves penalties and oversight by the IRS. ARE YOU FRAPPING KIDDING ME?!
The winner of this debate? NEITHER. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils.
America desperately needs a third party—and not those kooky tea drinkers either.
How about a party of normal people, dedicated to enacting legislation that helps the MIDDLE and LOWER CLASSES ONLY, and agrees to term limits. That’s who gets my vote.
