That’s how she looks all the time. It would be impossible to find a picture where she doesn’t look like that.
I’ve never seen a good picture of Pelosi either.
Have you ever seen any right wing media at all, by the way? They routinelys elct the worst pictures they can find of Obama, pelosi, Hillary, etc. You guys are such thin-skinned, hypocritical, whining little titty babies. That’s what Michele Bachmann looks like. I’ve seen her in person, and she looks even more insane in person. She IS insane. That’s what she is. If anything, Newsweek toned her down. In person, you can’t look her full in the face or you’ll lose your own mind too and start gibbering. When you look her in the eyes, you’re looking into the abyss.
You’re such an idiot; that is the positive spin. I think it’s great that they show the crazy woman as a crazy woman. This lady is so crazy, she make you look less crazy, and you’re as crazy as they come around here.
ok, addressing the P.S. - isn’t this a bit like…no, this IS exactly like the pot calling the kettle black. (we also call that ‘hypocritical’.) FOX ‘News’ does nothing but hatchet jobs on pols they don’t like. At least newsweek only puts up a crazy pic rather than fabricating outright lies AND using unflattering pics. in other words, quit whining unless you will hold your own facis…conservative media outlets up to the same scrutiny.
as for the P.P.S.: what leftie outlets are you paying attention to? All the ones I checked out were stopping just short of outright laughter at the stupid shit she said. Apparently ‘LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL, LMAO, PMROFLMAO’ isn’t a very readable article. Most centrist and liberal media outlets are more frightened by the fact that people can’t seem to realize that A) Bachmann has only a tenuous grip on reality, B) She is about as stupid a screen door in a submarine, C) she is one of the least Christian people in the current political scene, D) she is one of the most bigoted people in politics since Lester Maddux in his early years.
Well, OK, how? Did they tell the photographer “Don’t snap the picture until she looks crazy!” Well, if she *never *looked crazy, he couldn’t, now could he?
Was the photo “doctored”? In what way? Be specific, we are all anxious for your expertise in these things, given your position as the World’s Foremost Authority. I mean, if they snapped a picture of someone who clearly does *not *look crazy, what did they do to change that, without getting caught?
pikey pete - With regard to Fox, I’ll admit it isn’t exactly a bastion of truth and fairness. But it’s all the righties have. You guys have (and I’ve said this many times before) ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, Time, Newsweek, USA Today, 60 Minutes, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc., etc., virtually ad infinitum. So you can’t really point to Fox and claim that when it comes to media influence, Fox makes it a wash.
Not really very complicated luci, particularly with a woman like Bachmann who appears to have gotten some less than stellar eye work done. You simply look at all the photos that were taken and pick out one that makes her look like a loon.
See? Easy-peasy. Nothing to it. To a Newsweek editor it probably doesn’t even require conscious effort.
(And why are you asking me to explain how the photo may have been “doctored”? I never said it was.)
Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if the refusal to face the camera is Bachmann’s idea. I mean, it happens regularly when she’s on camera, too. Maybe she thinks it makes her look more Presidential.
Oh, please. Journalism is about as centrist as Hollywood. And for the same reason - they’re both magnets for people of inherent liberal sympathies. It’s just that in the news business, pretense has to be made of impartiality. But it’s impossible to be impartial in fact, and so their bias always comes through one way or another. And lately, certain major elements of the news media have gone public with their innate liberalism and declared that they’re giving it full rein. MSNBC, Time and Newsweek have all stated their intent to begin fashioning their news and commentary to appeal to their largely liberal viewer/readership. I suppose at the very least they should be congratulated for their honesty, as all the other outlets I mentioned all still try to put up a pretense of being objective.
ok, as a journalist, I find this to now be highly insulting. you see we have to take these college courses in these old timey things called ethics. We spend a lot of our college hours learning how to be unbiased. Most of us take those ethics we were taught very seriously. As a journalist who is ‘boots on the ground’ so to speak, I have yet to encounter any liberal bias amongst my peers, or amongst the editors I have worked with. My only explanations for this perceived liberal bias is that A) reality is notorious for having a liberal bias, B) apparently only liberals actually read more than a headline ergo they will be the largest readership demographic, and C) if it doesn’t agree with what you think, it must be inherently liberal. Now please, I am asking nicely, stop regurgitating conservative, anti-media propaganda. I’m not asking for cites or anything, but why don’t you offer some constructive views which are original and not what the neo-cons have programmed you to say.
Oh yeah, if you want to know what a hatchet job would look like, this is a hatchet job: Che-Gue-Petey User Profile | DeviantArt I apologize for the crudity of the photoshopping, but I was working quick and dirty on this one.
