Who's to blame for pantsuits?

Robin Givhan's article this weekend about Hillary "the-human-color-wheel" Clinton and the pantsuits was unnecessary for the package and said absolutely nothing that Robin hasn't said at least twice before in her column, but nonetheless I read it and had a couple chuckles - mainly because Hillary's so manly. So here's some of the less boring of the boring droll:

The mind, so easily distracted by things mauve and lemon yellow, strays from more pressing concerns to ponder the sartorial: How many pantsuits does Hillary Clinton have in her closet? And does she ever wear them in the same combination more than once? (Here I have to say, "What?!?" Givhan's clearly never seen my blog and how Hillary wears the same thing 10 times in one week...)

[Pantsuits] can be flattering, although not when the jacket hem aligns with the widest part of the hips (hypothetically speaking, of course). Does she even have hips? (Oh Robin...)

Is even considering the senator's clothes a kind of chauvinistic assault? ... With the male candidates, the nuances of their attire matters ... but with Clinton, one must first get past distractions such as that pink blazer — the one John Edwards didn't like so much — before the details can be considered. What would possess a woman to wear a jacket the color of a geranium in full bloom and then imply she doesn't want anyone to notice or comment on her clothes?

Yes, a woman can still be taken seriously, viewed as tough and celebrated for her ideas even if she is wearing a sunshine yellow suit. But someone, somewhere, is also going to notice that she is dressed like a solar flare. (She said it, not me, but ditto!)