Ladies and gentlemen, I give you The Hill newspaper. For those of you declasse hippies not in the know, that’s the paper all the staffers and congresscritters read.

You see, this week’s edition pimps a feature called “The Hill’s 50 Most Beautiful.”

Hollywood for ugly people? We report, you decide. There are some good looking people here, but if this is the top fifty, um. . . well, I’ll go soothe my eyes someplace else, I guess.

Now, this week, of all weeks, what with everyone up to and including John Lovitz calling Abu Gonzales a liar, you would think that The Hill might finally lay out the current constitutional crisis we’re in fact embroiled in way past our eyeballs, instead of, you know, going all high school yearbook for the chattering nabobs of “I feel pretty?”

But of those 50 capitol hotties, get this: none listed are gay or lesbian (hat tip to the Blade Blog).

ExCUUUUSE ME?

Have you ever been to Capitol Hill?

Last time I went wandering the halls with emptywheel, my experienced DC eye saw about as many lavendar lovebugs as probable hets. This is not just conjecture: I recognized faces from the town’s gay bars from back in my single days a few years ago, when I used to frequent such places in order to, er, discuss health care policy.

If they ever staged a gay walkout on Capitol Hill, the whole place would shut down, and everyone knows it, from the security staff to the Speaker’s office, most certainly including the editors at The Hill who ran with this Oh So Very Serious Story.

So, who put the “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule on this frivolous story that ran in place of an actual examination of the executive branch’s naked attempt to make null and void a co-equal branch of our government?

Was it the people at The Hill newspaper, or instead, was it the closeted, uptight and underground capitol pink network itself (“Just say you’re dating a woman, sweetie, and you can send this article to you mother!”)? Inquiring minds want to know.

Um, on second thought, who cares? I want my constitution back.