So last week, columnist Kathleen Parker desperately tried to convince anyone who would listen how John McCain ended up choosing Sarah Palin as a running mate.
Her conclusion: He was hypnotized by her hotness.
Parker then went on to cite a scientific journal, which suggests that attractive women possess the ability to cloud men's minds so much so that they fail to assess future consequences of their present day decisions.
To this, I might I add: duh.
Any guy who spent 100 bucks buying a round of "appletinis" for a bunch of temporary secretaries at a Friday's while his cable bill goes unpaid can attest to this.
But is it a bad thing? Should Palin be offended by Parker's attempt to insult her?
The fact is, physical attraction is a potent weapon — a superpower, if you will, like seeing through walls and dresses. So if you have it, why not use it?
Seriously, if Palin's good looks were able to mesmerize McCain into choosing her, imagine what she can do to Ahmadinejad, who only sees hot chicks when he orders porn at hotels near the U.N. If her shapeliness can achieve what Stingers cannot, I say hooray.
And look, aren't the Democrats making the same case for Obama — that he's so yummy, he can sit down with just about anyone, without preconditions and convince them through his sheer adorability that the U.S. is now 200 percent more cuddly?
The only difference? Sarah's got two boobs. With Biden, Obama's only got one.
And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Madeleine Albright.