Topic category:  Partisan Politics

The predictable media message after last night's debate among eleven Republican presidential hopefuls is that Carly Fiorina put Donald Trump in his place for cruel marks about her face.

While Rolling Stone was following Trump around, Trump reportedly said: "“Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?! I mean, she’s a woman, and I’m not s’posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?”

During last night's debate, Fiorina said: “You know, it’s interesting to me, Mr. Trump said that he heard Mr. Bush very clearly, and what Mr. Bush said. I think women all over this country heard what Mr. Trump said.”

Trump's response: “I think she’s got a beautiful face and I think that she’s a beautiful woman.”

Trump's original remarks about Fiorina's face are much better appreciated after watching Fiorina's face during the three-hour debate.

Trump was not opining on whether the 61 year old Fiorina's face reminded him of faces of Miss Universe winners.

Trump wasn't talking about Fiorina's complexion.

Trump wasn't talking about Fiorina's cheek bones.

Trump was opining on whether Fiorina's face was the kind of face Americans want in their President.

That's what Trump said.

Trump didn't say Fiorina's face is ugly, but he surely suggested it is off-putting and, as usual, he had a point.

Trump was talking about Fiorina's facial expression.

Trump's comment was not politically correct, to be sure, but it was NOT baseless.

Fiorina's facial expression often is displeasing.

Blogger Scott Adams astutely commented before the debate (blog.dilbert.com/post/128776840091/trump-engineers-a-linguistic-kill-shot-for-fiorina#ixzz3lMRi0p56):

"... I’m going to come right out and agree that Fiorina’s face was bothering me. But I never would have voiced that opinion without Trump going first because it sounds terrible. I wouldn’t want to be associated with the thought. [Note to Outragists: The first sentence in this paragraph is the one to take out of context. You are welcome.]

When I say Fiorina’s face bothers me, I am not referring to her looks in general. She looks fit, stylish, and attractive to me. But she does have what I call the angry wife face when she talks politics. Guys, you know the face, which is usually paired with a tone of disapproval. It is your greatest nightmare. It is the face that says you did not do a good job, at whatever."

During the debate, Fiorina's dour, even hostile, facial expression never called to mind the sunny disposition of President Ronald Reagan, or the playful wit of President John F. Kennedy, or even the upbeat dispositions of "Happy Warrior" Democrat presidential candidates Al Smith or Hubert Humphrey.

Fiorina appears dour or hostile, and Americans want a cheerful President.

To be sure, there are understandable reasons for Fiorina's lack of cheerfulness.

Fiorina herself said it was not "God's plan" for her to deliver any children.

Fiorina's business career was highly lucrative for her, but ended badly.

Wikipedia:

"In 2004, HP fell dramatically short of its predicted third-quarter earnings, and Fiorina fired three executives during a 5 AM telephone call. In early January 2005, the Hewlett-Packard board of directors discussed with Fiorina a list of issues that the board had regarding the company's performance and disappointing earning reports. The board proposed a plan to shift her authority to HP division heads, which Fiorina resisted. A week after the meeting, the confidential plan was leaked to the Wall Street Journal. Less than a month later, the board brought back Tom Perkins and forced Fiorina to resign as chair and chief executive officer of the company.

"The company's stock jumped on news of her departure, adding almost three billion dollars to the value of HP in a single day."

"Under the company's agreement with Fiorina, which was characterized as a golden parachute by Time magazine, and Yahoo! Fiorina was awarded a severance package valued at US$21 million which consisted of 2.5 times her annual salary plus bonus and the balance from accelerated vesting of stock options..... According to Fortune magazine, Fiorina collected over US$100 million in compensation during her short tenure at HP."

Fiorina's talent for accumulating great personal wealth did not immune her from personal tragedies.

Fiorina acquired a couple of step daughters when she remarried and one of them died in 2009 at 35 after struggling with alcoholism, substance abuse and bulimina.

On February 20, 2009, Fiorina was diagnosed with breast cancer. She had a double mastectomy, chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

Next, Fiorina quickly pursued high political office, albeit unsuccessfully.

In 2010, Fiorina ran in California for the United States Senate. Apparenly her chemotherapy had made her braver. She told supporters ,"I have to say that after chemotherapy, Barbara Boxer just isn't that scary anymore."

Then Fiorina lost to Boxer by 10 points.

Fiorina won't achieve her goal of debating Hillary Clinton for the presidency unless she appears to cheer up and assures Americans that she'll do a much better job for them than she did for HP.

Michael J. Gaynor

Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.

Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.

The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.

Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.

Gaynor's email address is gaynormike@aol.com.