Anyone who's seen the C-SPAN pictures that drove the Givhan story would agree Hillary wasn't exactly playing Carmen Electra. It was a marginal story based on marginal evidence (although you'd have to think that if Mitchell's trying to stay on Hillary's good side, she would go back and edit the "microscopic evidence" line). But it's as bizarre as a Barry Bonds comparison for Hillary's campaign to insist that the liberal media is hostile to her, that she's a pioneering victim of their male-chauvinist-pig attitudes. Here's the relevant part of the NBC transcript:
ANDREA MITCHELL: this was used—seized upon by the Clinton campaign in an e-mail from her campaign...
TIM RUSSERT: In a fund-raising letter.
MITCHELL: ...in a fund-raising letter by Ann Lewis saying that this is exactly what women have to put up with. And if Hillary Clinton connect—can connect with women and say, "You see what we have to put up with? This is the way they trivialize us," it helps her on—in just about every level...
EUGENE ROBINSON, Washington Post, [former editor of their Style section]: ...let me jump in and, and offer a word in defense of Robin Givhan, the Washington Post columnist who wrote the cleavage column, as her former boss. You know, you either cover fashion or you don’t. And, and I think it’s some—it’s legitimate to argue that, that you shouldn’t worry about fashion, but, you know, it’s the way we present ourselves to the, to the world, to others. We make decisions every morning on what we, what we put on and how—what what sort of image we want to project. And, unfortunately, in our society, women are scrutinized in a way that men aren’t. I mean, what, what did John Edwards wear at the YouTube debate? What did Barack Obama wear...
MITCHELL: She arguably—if you look at the Senate floor any day of the week, if you look at the floor of the House of Commons when a new Cabinet minister was speaking who had a far more low-cut neckline...
ROBINSON: Yes.
MITCHELL: ...this was so marginal. This was like microscopic evidence of, of an—of...
HARWOOD: I’m going to defend that column, too.
MITCHELL: ...inappropriate attire.
HARWOOD: I’m going to defend that column, too. When you look...
ROBINSON: It’s—I don’t think...
HARWOOD: ...at the calculation that goes into everything that Hillary Clinton does, for her to argue that she was not aware of what she was communicating by her dress is like Barry Bonds saying he thought he was rubbing down with flaxseed oil, okay?
MITCHELL: That...
CHUCK TODD, NBC political analyst: It was 3:30 -- whoa, whoa, whoa. It was 4:00...
MITCHELL: Sometimes a blouse is just a blouse, to paraphrase...
RUSSERT: OK. I’m going to move on to South Carolina.
If Harwood weren't in Russert's stable of NBC pundits, I'm betting Russert wouldn't have cut out of the conversation so quickly, as if to say "John, you really stepped in one, and you're lucky I saved you from further elaboration on the oil-rubbing comparison."
For the people not following the Barry Bonds story, the San Francisco Chronicle explains that Bonds told a federal grand jury that if took steroids, he did it unknowingly:
Bonds testified that he had received and used clear and cream substances from his personal strength trainer, Greg Anderson, during the 2003 baseball season but was told they were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm for arthritis, according to a transcript of his testimony reviewed by The Chronicle.
UPDATE: On his own Political Capital blog at CNBC.com, John Harwood links here and explains his Meet the Press remark. He stands by it all, but concludes by complimenting Hillary (no hard feelings, Hill?):
The clothing choice by Sen. Clinton, which Givhan wrote about, was not inappropriate. To the contrary, like most other choices Sen. Clinton has made in her campaign thus far, it was smart. It was a small, endearing step that enhanced the former First Lady's ability to come across as a normal person --extraordinary as she actually is.
