Columnist apologizes for calling Huckabee Sanders a ‘chunky soccer mom’

A columnist is apologizing after writing an “insensitive” description of White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

Los Angeles Times columnist David Horsey said that critiquing Sanders’s physical appearance was “insensitive” and doesn’t meet the standards set by the newspaper.

“I want to apologize to Times readers — and to Sarah Huckabee Sanders — for a description that was insensitive and failed to meet the standards of our newspaper,” Horsey wrote in a letter attached to the revised column.

{mosads} 

“It also failed to meet the expectations I have for myself. It surely won’t be my last mistake, but this particular error will be scrupulously avoided in my future commentaries. I’ve removed the offending description,” he wrote.

The column was edited to remove the description on Friday. An original version of the column claimed that Sanders “does not look like the kind of woman” President Trump would choose for his press secretary.

“By comparison, Sanders looks more like a slightly chunky soccer mom who organizes snacks for the kids’ games,” Horsey wrote. “Rather than the fake eyelashes and formal dresses she puts on for news briefings, Sanders seems as if she’d be more comfortable in sweats and running shoes.” 

“Yet, even if Trump privately wishes he had a supermodel for a press secretary, he is lucky to have Sanders,” Horsey wrote in his original column.

Political commentators on Twitter quickly defended Sanders and sharply criticized the paper.

“Find me anything written about Sean Spicer, Josh Earnest or Jay Carney that begins with two paragraphs about his appearance and body shape,” wrote USA Today’s Steve Reilly.

“Easy fix: Women should just ask David Horsey what they should look like bf voicing political opinions. Bc feminism,” wrote pundit Mary Katharine Ham.

The newspaper apologized for the description in a short editor’s note now attached to the article.

“A description of Sarah Huckabee Sanders at the top of the original post did not meet Times standards,” the paper wrote. “It has been removed.”