You mean, like posting these pictures on the internet where they get far more publicity than they ever would otherwise, and using them to comment on "the Left" as a whole?

And no, I don't mean you, since you merely linked to them. (Comforting to be "differentiated" in this way, isn't it?)

Another way of looking at this:

I think that capital punishment is an immature way to deal with criminals, not to mention infinitely distant from the actual words of the founding teacher of the religion most of CP's adherents in the US claim to follow. You can make the case that the people in the pictures are ugly, but you can't claim that they are harmful except aesthetically. (Frankly, I've seen hooters that big in Playboy, only lying down so they don't sag.) I can make the case that execution kills someone, and so is harmful in a fundamentally undeniable way. I can also make a very good case that anyone who supports capital punishment is Christian in name only.

If you want to put aesthetics up against ethics, I'm ready for you.

As for the original article, I think it's dandy that the President exercises. I also think that Publius has hit the nail on the head. I have met reformed addicts, beginning when I was a teenager and continuing to the present day, who have put some other behavior in the place of the addiction, and used that behavior in an extreme way. Prayer and evangelism, exercise, obsessive cleaning...

What I don't agree with is Tammy's extension of one man's opinion piece to a depiction of the entire Left. But her object is not truth. Her object is to ridicule anyone who thinks there's something wrong with the President.

But she herself wouldn't think so shallowly about personal behavior, of course. Not much. To wit:

During my time with the National Organization for Women one of the (many) things that disturbed me during national board meetings was the fact that many of the women seemed to be allergic to bathing, and especially frightened of the concept of “grooming.”

The simplest things reveal you are in a room full of unhappy people—many were significantly overweight, and by grooming I mean engaging in the simple act of running a brush though your hair, brushing one’s teeth, visiting a dentist if need be (at least on occasion), and simply caring enough about yourself to at least attempt to appear healthy.

Yeah, that describes Gloria Steinem, all right.

Tammy has recognized in someone else's words the thoughts she has already thunk in her own head.

She fails to define "many" in terms of membership numbers, attempting to make it look like "most". She claims to know whether someone brushes her teeth or not. And she defines people as repulsive based on how fat they are. Hey, Tammy -- have you looked at the not-exactly-trim Barbara Bush lately? Is the First Mom repulsive too, or is only Left fat offensive to your sensibilities? When bringing up Bill Clinton's heart surgery, why was Dick Cheney, who has also evidently lived a high-calorie lifestyle before his heart problems manifested themselves, not mentioned as well? Is only arterial placque on the Left a moral failing?

She goes on to characterize the entire Left as undermining civilization through improper grooming activities based on unfortunate encounters with body odor and bad hair days. She then has the gall to criticize someone who commented that Judge Roberts's children's appearance at a photo op (a carefully orchestrated public presentation) was "old-fashioned".

And you support her position with "a lot" of empirical evidence. "A lot" is one picture of many instances, not many pictures of one instance. Your "a lot" and her "many" ought to have lunch, just to see whether they'd need more than one table.