House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is on the May/June 2010 cover of the DC magazine “Capitol File,” and conservatives are all worked up that the photograph of her may have been airbrushed. The Washington Examiner has a piece titled “Cover girl Pelosi looking rather … airy in D.C. glossy”:

If you haven’t managed to score a copy of the May/June 2010 edition of Capitol File magazine (typically flanked on every table or bathroom at any D.C. social function) you’ll notice the cover girl Nancy Pelosi looking particularly young.

Celebrity plastic surgeon Dr. Ayman Hakki of Luxxery Medical Boutique in Waldorf, Md., said although he believes Pelosi has had work done (specifically Botox of the frown lines, fat injections, a mini face-lift), the image is not the product of additional plastic surgery.

“There is airbrushing around her eyes, her upper lid has been airbrushed to make it look like there is less fat on the inside,” Hakki told Yeas & Nays. “And there is airbrushing on the line of her jaw.”

The story was touted on Fox Nation and featured on the Drudge Report:

Drudge doesn’t seem to sense any irony in the fact that next to his Pelosi story is a picture of former First Lady Laura Bush’s book cover, which also looks less than 100 percent natural. ThinkProgress spoke to a couple of graphic designers who said that there definitely was some airbrushing done to the Laura Bush photograph. (View a larger version of the cover here.)

Additionally, in the past, conservatives have advocated more airbrushing of female politicians. They were outraged when Newsweek featured a picture of Sarah Palin that showed her natural features. So basically, airbrushing conservative women is acceptable, but airbrushing Democratic women is ridiculous.

While people debate the merits of airbrushing magazine shots, it’s a common practice and certainly not a scandal that says anything about the person being photographed.

Hillary Clinton is breaking from tradition by making her first overseas trip as Secretary of State to Asia. She is expected to stop in China, Japan, South Korea, and likely somewhere in Southeast Asia. Last month, Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that she was particularly interested in visiting Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim-majority country and the place where President Obama spent part of his childhood.

Today, Drudge prominently links to an AP story about Clinton’s trip. Here’s his photo and caption highlighting the story:

Drudge seems to have deliberately chosen a picture of Hillary that hints at Asian stereotypes — slanted eyes, arched eyebrows, and prominent teeth — to pair with the caption that she’s “feeling Japanese.”

This, unfortunately, isn’t the first time that Drudge has played up ethnic stereotypes:

Another day, another shrill Drudge headline. On Monday, Drudge put up an unflattering picture of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), accompanied by the headline, “PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY.” His conservative fans in Congress, of course, quickly went on the attack against the sensible family planning provision in the House economic recovery package, and in an effort to compromise, President Obama agreed to drop the provision.

Drudge’s newest attack today focuses on the legislation’s provision to help prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases:

Democrats may have eliminated provisions on birth control and sod for the National Mall in the “job stimulus” — but buried on page 147 of the bill is stimulation for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases!

The House Democrats’ bill includes $335 million for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

Aside from the fact that many conservatives are squeamish about giving money to anything associated with sex, they seem unable to grasp the concept of preventive care and how it can help lower government health care spending. The $335 million provision to help stop the spread of STDs is part of a Prevention and Wellness Fund in the economic recovery legislation.

In 2006, CAP President and CEO John Podesta and Jeanne Lambrew — who is now a top health care adviser in the White House — proposed a similar idea. This fund would support clinically-proven prevention and wellness strategies that, in the end, would not only improve Americans’ health and productivity, but also lower U.S. health care costs. As Podesta and Lambrew explained:

Preventive health care service could reduce government spending on health care. If all elderly received a flu vaccine, health costs could be reduced by nearly $1 billion per year. Over 25 years, Medicare could save an estimated $890 billion from effective control of hypertension, and $1 trillion from returning to levels of obesity observed in the 1980s.

Some reasons that increased funding for STD prevention specifically will ultimately save the United States money:

– Increase workforce productivity. More than 56,000 people become infected with HIV/AIDS each year. The CDC estimates that the new infections cost the country $56 billion in medical care and lost productivity.

– Lower health industry costs. STDs, some of the most preventable diseases, cost the U.S. health care system as much as $15.3 billion annually.

– Lower federal government costs. The federal government is expected to spend $12.3 billion on HIV/AIDS-related medical care in 2009.

What’s more disturbing is that a new report by the CDC finds that the spread of the most common STDs — which are more likely to hit women and minorities — are on the rise. Obama has made clear that the economic recovery package is about getting people back to work; it’s hard for people to work if they’re struggling to get care for an infection.