Are you there God? It's me, Monica.

OK, so I stole the title from a headline in the Atlantic. But anyway, look at the portrait of Bill Clinton, from this Washington Post article, and tell me if it seems like a normal depiction of a president. I'm no art expert, and I don't believe I'm a total pervert, but do you know what I'm saying? Is that not an unusual painting? Between the necktie, the fireplace, and the odd perspective in general, what is one's eye drawn to?



I looked through the National Portrait Gallery for other presidential portraits, and of those (official) portraits, only a few men are shown from head to toe - I believe only Lincoln, JFK and Jimmy Carter. And Lincoln and Carter's jackets are buttoned, unlike Clinton's. (JFK is not wearing his jacket. I know.)

So perhaps I'm overanalyzing, but it seems Clinton has been simplistically painted as a guy who was involved in certain acts in the White House.

A few updates on a hot topic:

1. The whole thing reminds me of when Wonkette pointed out when the William J. Clinton Foundation was using scare quotes a bit haphazardly with the term "internship program." The program description used the phrases "intern positions" and "[h]ands-on experience."

Wonkette weighs in today, mostly to point out Clinton looks drunk.

2. I'm getting off subject here, but this also reminds me of a curious statue of Abraham Lincoln in Cincinnati. Lincoln, of course, was never impeached for lying sexual infidelities, but this bronze piece nonetheless has an odd misogynistic overtone.

That picture doesn't do it justice, but look below at the authoritative pointing finger:

Stay down, woman!