The unfair quips about Clinton’s demeanor

GOP national Chairman Reince Priebus’ tweet about Hillary Clinton appearing angry and not smiling during the recent national security forum proved that the chairman is clueless. And sexist.

Mr. Priebus condemned Ms. Clinton for maintaining a serious demeanor about a serious subject. Since when is that a bad thing?

Besides, an earnest appearance does not mean one is angry. The absence of a smile does not suggest that one is uncomfortable. The lack of a chummy presentation does not mean one is defensive.

If Ms. Clinton had smiled at the forum, would she have been criticized as a lightweight, not serious enough, or trying to appear to the audience as nice as the girl next door?

Ms. Clinton is not the girl next door. She is not your common, everyday ordinary woman any more than her opponent, Donald Trump, is an ordinary man. Able politicians spend years honing their craft, which is a sober one. Americans do not want or need googly-eyed or giggly leaders.

How many pictures have you seen of Lincoln, either Roosevelt or Woodrow Wilson smiling?

Of course, some politicians are back-slappers and some are more solemn. But a smile didn’t make John Kennedy witty and a frown didn’t make Richard Nixon paranoid. Can we get to the substance?

Attack Ms. Clinton on emails or positions. Give her a break on her appearance.

And though Mr. Trump isn’t exactly all smiles, neither candidate is on the ballot because of looks, appearance or good teeth. That’s an election they hold in high school.