Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Palin as Newsweek cover girl again (Sexism, thy name is jourbalist)
The Washington Post's Post Partisan ^ | July 11, 2011 | Jonathan Capehart

Posted on 07/11/2011 9:16:57 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

As celebrity glamour shots go, Sarah Palin’s cover photo on this week’s Newsweek is danged good! The best-selling author and reality-TV star looks young and vibrant. Her devil-may-care countenance aided and abetted by the wind conspicuously blowing hair back. And while her outfit might be laid back, there’s no doubt she’s in total control. But when Palin’s cover shot is viewed through the prism of presidential politics, it’s a dud.

Folks want to be able to envision someone sitting in the Oval Office.

They don’t necessarily want to envision them in the pages of Esquire magazine’s “Sexiest Woman Alive 2011” or Maxim. She can’t possibly be taken seriously as a presidential contender dressed like that, especially since this is the second time she has graced Newsweek in a less-than-presidential pose. But let me move away from the superficial to the substance of what the half-term governor has to say in the Newsweek interview. I’m particularly incensed by the lunacy of her comments on the impending default of the United States.

“It is not the apocalypse,” she said, and questioned the need for the urgent negotiating sessions Republicans and Democrats were conducting in search of a debt-limit agreement (ongoing at press time). “The fact is that we have $2.6 trillion in revenue coming in, and if we just use some common sense there — take that revenue, service the debt first, take care of national priorities — we don’t have to increase debt.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: debtceiling; freepressforpalin; newsweek; palin; sarahpalin; trademark; whackwapo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
So now Jonathan thinks Gov. Palin is the editor of the only worth $1 magazine Newsweek? And ever hear Mr. Obama referred to as "half-term Senator Obama" or "failed" community organizer? He's both, of course.
1 posted on 07/11/2011 9:17:02 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“jourbalist”

Is’t that what some Gay people are?


2 posted on 07/11/2011 9:22:38 AM PDT by bluecollarman (searching .......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“jourbalist”

Isn’t that what some Gay people are?


3 posted on 07/11/2011 9:22:57 AM PDT by bluecollarman (searching .......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Capehart knows nothing about Sarah Palin or why millions of people are supporting her. He needs to chill out...maybe go to a Liza Minnelli concert or order some new drapes.
4 posted on 07/11/2011 9:29:28 AM PDT by JPG (Sarah is ready to rock 'n roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

But ,But a Democrat sitting and smoking crack is OK!


5 posted on 07/11/2011 9:30:21 AM PDT by Cheetahcat ( November 4 2008 ,A date that will live in Infamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Jonathan is openly gay so he cannot have the appreciation for a beautiful woman that straight men can. And Sarah Palin is one beautiful woman.
6 posted on 07/11/2011 9:31:28 AM PDT by bwc2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bluecollarman

You’re thinking about Gerbalists...you devil. They are usually teabaggers, too, not so co-incidentally.


7 posted on 07/11/2011 9:32:11 AM PDT by jessduntno (Liberalism is socialism in a party dress. And just as masculine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JPG

Capehart is holding out for Boy George. I guess the term “sugar daddy” caught his attention.


8 posted on 07/11/2011 9:34:27 AM PDT by alstewartfan ("One day he just washed up on the shores of his regrets. May his soul rest in peace." Al Stewart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bluecollarman

“Jourbalist” is perhaps the greatest term ever coined to describe a homosexualist reporter.

Freegards


9 posted on 07/11/2011 9:34:29 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cheetahcat

Oh, Democrats have made good, bad and bad, good. EVERYTHING they do (which leads to nihilism, dysfunction and destruction of civil societies and freedom) is, of course, good.


10 posted on 07/11/2011 9:34:36 AM PDT by savagesusie (Virtue is a habit of the mind, consistent with nature and moderation and reason. Cicero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
There is nothing wrong with this picture.

At all.

11 posted on 07/11/2011 9:35:52 AM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bluecollarman

12 posted on 07/11/2011 9:37:08 AM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Folks want to be able to envision someone sitting in the Oval Office.
They don’t necessarily want to envision them in the pages of Esquire magazine’s “Sexiest Woman Alive 2011” or Maxim.

Oh yeah, like this?

Or this?

13 posted on 07/11/2011 9:37:24 AM PDT by babyfreep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
They don’t necessarily want to envision them in the pages of Esquire magazine’s “Sexiest Woman Alive 2011”

That, by itself, is a howler. Libs turn every single one of their presidential candidates into a sex symbol. Obama was portrayed as a sex symbol. Back in 92 Clinton and Gore were portrayed as sex symbols. Its a constant pining for another sexy, young, liberal John Kennedy clone. And remember how the Libs got all hot and bothered about JFK, Jr.--a stupid Himbo if there ever was one--running for the Senate or Congress in New York.

The rest of the article is typical Lib garbage that has been repeated over and over and over. Not worth talking about.

14 posted on 07/11/2011 9:38:18 AM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound

Ok ... Why no wedding band? Did they air brush it out?


15 posted on 07/11/2011 9:39:05 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

These poor fools don’t even realize time, actual time, has passed them by....no one cares what they say or write.....they are only talking to each other


16 posted on 07/11/2011 9:41:32 AM PDT by The Wizard (Madam President is my President now, and in the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Interesting, now that you mention it. I wonder why, too.


17 posted on 07/11/2011 9:44:55 AM PDT by babyfreep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Click the Bear Butt

Searching Everywhere For New Monthly Donors

Sponsoring FReepers will contribute $10
For each new monthly donor

18 posted on 07/11/2011 9:46:44 AM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

I’ve seen lots of pictures of her without a wedding ring.


19 posted on 07/11/2011 9:54:19 AM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

She does not normally wear a wedding band.


20 posted on 07/11/2011 9:55:56 AM PDT by NoKoolAidforMe (I'm clinging to my God and my guns. You can keep the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

IMHO, the left-wing slant is not about her picture, but the headline above it: “Murdoch’s Watergate”. Could the lib media be trying to link Palin with popular (negative) attitudes about Watergate? Maybe, just my 2$ (inflation and all).


21 posted on 07/11/2011 9:57:55 AM PDT by Gothmog (I fight for Xev)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

His article is stupid, no doubt, but the photo shoot WAS designed to show Sarah anything but Presidential. As I mentioned on an earlier post there is not one photo in a suit, in a meeting or, quite telling, with any other people. We may enjoy the beauty of the pics, but make no mistake, Newsweek was not trying to make Palin look like a serious candidate.


22 posted on 07/11/2011 9:58:52 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I wonder if this might be part of Newsweek’s agenda? Portray Sarah in such casual settings that it’s hard to picture her sitting in the Oval Office. I thought it was a little strange that there were no photos of her looking more official or “Presidential”, unless not all photos have been posted online.

It’s nothing new that libs are, in fact, racists and sexists.


23 posted on 07/11/2011 10:00:07 AM PDT by ChocChipCookie (Jonah is my patron saint.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

She doesn’t always wear it. Go back and look at the Rolling Thunder photos; didn’t have it on then.

Someone has a thread that has other pics from the photo shoot (2 different outfits). The other photos when she’s wearing the cover outfit don’t show a wedding band either.


24 posted on 07/11/2011 10:01:32 AM PDT by Spirit of Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210

I wonder if, in fact, other photos were taken, but these are the ones Newsweek decided to include. I don’t know if she was given any approval rights regarding which photos were chosen and which was on the cover. I have personal experience of dealing with these types of people, only to have my words twisted to mean the opposite of what was said. In my case, I didn’t have any rights at all, but maybe Sarah did. Or not.


25 posted on 07/11/2011 10:04:04 AM PDT by ChocChipCookie (Jonah is my patron saint.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Spirit of Liberty

I remember hearing her say that Todd had it in his pocket because sometimes it hurt when she was shaking hands with people.
I do realize, before you point it out, that she was not shaking hands in these photos.


26 posted on 07/11/2011 10:08:33 AM PDT by GlockLady (Remember when we were taught HOW to think, not WHAT to think? (Author Unknown))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound
There is nothing wrong with this picture.

Newsweak put that over-sized picture there for people who despise Palin and for people who are undecided about her, not for her most fervent supporters.

27 posted on 07/11/2011 10:09:06 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Maybe the writer prefers this look?


28 posted on 07/11/2011 10:10:28 AM PDT by newzjunkey (Buy your own breadsticks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I think they put her on the cover because they know she sells magazines. They can’t sell them with the content they have, so they put Sarah on the cover in hopes some people with pick it up and actually buy it.


29 posted on 07/11/2011 10:14:47 AM PDT by LibertarianLiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Newsweek website shutting down next week.
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/07/newsweekcom_will_cease_to_exis.html


30 posted on 07/11/2011 10:20:09 AM PDT by GlockLady (Remember when we were taught HOW to think, not WHAT to think? (Author Unknown))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spirit of Liberty

No worries then.

I don’t wear mine while doing a brake job or wiring.

Just checkin’ the media.


31 posted on 07/11/2011 10:21:31 AM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitur: non vehere est inermus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: NoKoolAidforMe

Well, I never knew that. Thanks!


32 posted on 07/11/2011 10:21:31 AM PDT by babyfreep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Monica’s view from under the desk in the Oval Office.


33 posted on 07/11/2011 10:21:45 AM PDT by Palladin (Sarah Palin in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I sent the below article to my email list taking out any references as to who wrote it. I asked them to guess who wrote it and what they thought. A few people have only heard a soundbite from Sarah followed by negative comments about her. I'm curious to see what people think of her ideas rather than letting the media make up their minds as to who she is.

Barack Obama’s big government policies continue to fail. He should put a link to the national debt clock on his BlackBerry. The gears on that clock have nearly exploded during his administration. Yesterday’s terrible job numbers should not be a surprise because it all goes back to our debt. Our dangerously unsustainable debt is wiping out our jobs, crippling our economic growth, and jeopardizing our position in the global economy as the leader of the free world.

Xxxxxxxxxxx I had to deal with facts, even unpleasant ones. I dealt with the world as it is, not as I wished it to be. The “elite” political class in this country with their heads in the sand had better face some unpleasant facts about the world as it is. They’ve run out of money and no amount of accounting gimmicks or happy talk will change this reality. Those of us who live in the real world could see this day coming.

Back in January 2009, as xxxxxxxxxxxx, I announced: “We also have to be mindful about the effect of the stimulus package on the national debt and the future economic health of the country. We won’t achieve long-term stability if we continue borrowing massive sums from foreign countries and remain dependent on foreign sources of oil and gas.” Then I urged President Obama to veto the stimulus bill because it was loaded with absolutely useless pork and unfunded mandates. Everyone knows my early and vocal opposition to that mother of all unfunded mandates known as Obamacare starting back in August 2009, and many recall my objections to the Federal Reserves’ inflationary games with our currency known as QE2 from November 2010. It’s a matter of public record that I did not go to Harvard Law School, but I can add.

The same “experts” who got us into this mess are now telling us that the only way out of our debt crisis is to “increase revenue,” but not by creating more jobs and therefore a larger tax base; no, they want to “increase revenue” by raising taxes on job creators who are taxed enough already! As Margaret Thatcher said, “The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” That’s where we are now. Hard working taxpayers have been big government’s Sugar Daddy for far too long, and now we’re out of sugar. We don’t want big government, we can’t afford it, and we are unwilling to pay for it.

This debt ceiling debate is the perfect time to do what must be done. We must cut. Yes, I’m for a balanced budget amendment and for enforceable spending caps. But first and foremost we must cut spending, not “strike a deal” that allows politicians to raise more debt! See, Washington is addicted to OPM – Other People’s Money. And like any junkie, they will lie, steal, and cheat to fund their addiction. We must cut them off and cut government down to size.

To paraphrase Hemingway, people go broke slowly and then all at once. We’ve been slowly going broke for years, but now it’s happening all at once as the world’s capital markets are demanding action from us, yet Obama assumes we'll just go borrow another cup of sugar from some increasingly impatient neighbor. We cannot knock on anyone’s door anymore. And we don’t have any time to wait for Washington to start behaving responsibly. We’ll be Greece before these D.C. politicians’ false promises are over. We must force government to live within its means, just as every business and household does.

We can’t close our $1.5 trillion deficit overnight, but we must get as close as we can as soon as we can. Little nibbles here and there over 10 years (spun to sound like they’re huge budget cuts) aren’t anywhere near enough. I know from experience that cutting government spending isn’t easy. As xxxxxx, I made the largest veto cuts in my state’s history, and I didn’t make many friends doing it. But we will never recover, we will never get free of devastating debt, unless we make tough choices now. We don’t hear talk like this from leaders in D.C. or from those running for office because they say what they think we want to hear rather than what must be said.

We are in desperate need of real leadership, but President Obama’s solution to everything is to grow government by borrowing more money, spending more money, printing more money, and taxing our job creators. He once said that he “believes in American Exceptionalism…just as the Greeks believe in Greek Exceptionalism.” Well, the path he has us on will make us just as “exceptional” as Greece – debt crisis, stagnation, permanent high unemployment, and all.

As we approach 2012, there are important lessons we can learn from all of this. First, we should never entrust the White House to a far-left ideologue who has no appreciation or even understanding of the free market and limited government principles that made this country economically strong. Second, the office of the presidency is too important for on-the-job training. It requires a strong chief executive who has been entrusted with real authority in the past and has achieved a proven track record of positive measurable accomplishments. Leaders are expected to give good speeches, but leadership is so much more than oratory. Real leadership requires deeds even more than words. It means taking on the problems no one else wants to tackle. It means providing vision and guidance, inspiring people to action, bringing everyone to the table, and with a servant's heart dedicating oneself to striking agreements that keep faith with our Constitution and with the ordinary citizens who entrusted you with power. It means bucking the status quo, fighting the corrupt powers that be, serving the common good, and leaving the country better than you found it. Most of us don’t see a lot of that real leadership in D.C., and it’s profoundly disappointing.

But let me tell you where real hope lies. It’s not the hopey-changey stuff we heard about in 2008. Real hope comes from realizing how God has blessed our exceptional nation, and then doing something about it. We have been blessed with natural resources, hardworking entrepreneurs, and a Constitution that preserves the greatest form of government ever devised by man. If we develop those natural resources, allow our entrepreneurs to keep and invest more of what they earn, and adhere to the time-tested truths of our Constitution, we will prosper and endure.

But first and foremost we must tackle our debt. We don’t have the luxury of playing politics as usual. We need real leaders who will put aside their own political self-interest to do what is right for the nation. And if they don’t emerge… well, America has a do-over in November 2012.

34 posted on 07/11/2011 10:21:45 AM PDT by Linda Frances
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GlockLady

LOL Pointing that out didn’t occur to me. I could probably come up with half a dozen good reasons for it not being there, from she was a bit bloated that day to it was at the jewelers for cleaning/repair.


35 posted on 07/11/2011 10:30:46 AM PDT by Spirit of Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: babyfreep

Exactly what leapt to my mind. Especially the Gore cover with carbon credits stuffed in his shorts to create the illusion he has a penis.


36 posted on 07/11/2011 10:33:03 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChocChipCookie

Certainly she had the right to decline the shoot. She has enough money to hire her own photos and send them to Newsweek.

By now she should know that everyone outside of a few folks at Fox are Democrats and are not going to do anything that’s in her best interest. Did she think she was being photographed by impartial photo-journalists? McCain did that and he ended up getting a monkey taking a dump on his head.

I love the photos. She makes a great pin-up girl. And isn’t that just the way they’re treating all the female Republicans, lovely bubble-heads?


37 posted on 07/11/2011 10:37:03 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Jon, you’re big boys and girls. You have a free choice of news to cover. And you choose to cover Governor Palin. And this is her (or our) fault how, exactly?


38 posted on 07/11/2011 10:37:59 AM PDT by RichInOC (Palin 2012: The Perfect Storm.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Wasn’t there some bathing suit shot of 0bama that had the left swooning? For all their pretty words the left are the most sexist people on the planet.

Cindie


39 posted on 07/11/2011 10:39:18 AM PDT by gardencatz (Proud mom US Marine! It can't always be someone else's son.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound

She sure can!!!!

40 posted on 07/11/2011 10:48:24 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gardencatz

...and the most sexually depraved. (Weiner, Clinton, Frank, Edwards, etc.)


41 posted on 07/11/2011 10:50:30 AM PDT by Palladin (Sarah Palin in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

She’s a lean, mean fighting machine!


42 posted on 07/11/2011 10:53:08 AM PDT by Palladin (Sarah Palin in 2012!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

“Oh, Democrats have made good, bad and bad, good. EVERYTHING they do (which leads to nihilism, dysfunction and destruction of civil societies and freedom) is, of course, good.”

I think they prefer to be called Commies or Reds,Sick people!


43 posted on 07/11/2011 10:57:39 AM PDT by Cheetahcat ( November 4 2008 ,A date that will live in Infamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

For someone who rails against the “Lame Stream Media”, she sure does a lot of photo shoots for magazine covers.


44 posted on 07/11/2011 11:15:35 AM PDT by Ace of Spades (Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
His article is stupid, no doubt, but the photo shoot WAS designed to show Sarah anything but Presidential. As I mentioned on an earlier post there is not one photo in a suit, in a meeting or, quite telling, with any other people. We may enjoy the beauty of the pics, but make no mistake, Newsweek was not trying to make Palin look like a serious candidate.

She's at home with the family in July. A time to relax. There are plenty of pictures of her dressed professionally and if she runs, she will have to show that image. I'm not worried about it; the article was half-way decent and of course the photos were stellar. (See all the photos here: Sarah Palin's Cover Shoot)

Now talking about dressing professionally, we almost had this as the first female candidate to run for president:


45 posted on 07/11/2011 11:20:43 AM PDT by CedarDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CedarDave

Oh my, that’s painful. I have to go and wash my eyes out with soap.


46 posted on 07/11/2011 11:33:34 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Here’s the email I sent to Mr. Capehart:

“Dear Mr. Capehart:

Regarding your article http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/sarah-palin-as-newsweek-cover-girl—again/2011/03/04/gIQA0xqo8H_blog.html:

Your changing of this statement ““... especially since this is the second time she has given Newsweek a less-than-presidential pose” to this “... especially since this is the second time she has graced Newsweek in a less-than-presidential pose” is unacceptable for a self-proclaimed Pulitzer Prize winner.

Here’s the research that needs to be referenced in a MUCH more powerful way in your “correction:”
http://www.runnersworld.com/photo/sarahpalin/ (read the Editor’s Note)
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/11/18/palin-photographer-breached-contract-with-sale-to-newsweek/

I’ve already emailed Matt Lewis at The Daily Caller, who perpetuated your misinformation in his piece. He had the professionalism to amend his article to reflect the truth. And I’m glad he still has your original wording in his piece - so your cowardly lack of professionalism and integrity is visible for all to see. http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/11/capehart-palin-can%E2%80%99t-possibly-be-taken-seriously-as-a-presidential-contender-dressed-like-that/

I apologize for being combative. But since you tout yourself as a Pulitzer Prize winner in your WaPo biography, I should think you have higher standards than to print articles without doing the proper research. Or, even worse, to know the truth and to purposefully obfuscate it when it is pointed out to you.

Lewis at The Daily Caller showed his professionalism by making his correction clear to all readers. Are you a professional? Or is it time to return that Pulitzer? I think I’ll email him again to thank him again for showing his professionalism - and to point out to him your lack thereof.

Thank you.”


47 posted on 07/11/2011 12:12:12 PM PDT by hrh40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: NoKoolAidforMe

When you spend that much time cleaning game, working on machinery and other outdoor pursuits, you would generally be inclined not to wear your wedding ring.


48 posted on 07/11/2011 3:00:45 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ace of Spades

Please provide Names and how many of the Magazine covers she has done for the LAME STREAM MEDIA?

We know that Newsweek pocketed a ‘Runners World’ magazine picture for their cover but ‘Runners World’ is not the LSM.

We know that she did a photo shoot back in the early days as governor for Vanity Fair - Ok

And She did one at the time of her Resignation for Time magazine -ok

another please?


49 posted on 07/11/2011 7:27:46 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Poor little Jonathan Capehart, he of the owl glasses, outsized head, undersized stature and narrow shoulders. Did his mummy mistreat treat him as a child, did those mean girls laugh at and beat him up in puberty?

He can now go back on PMSNBC with the forlorn Morn Joe, Mika the vacuous, and all the usual lefty suspects that migrate in and out like so many gerbils on a cage wheel. With this terrific Palin hit piece, they will clap him on the back to congratulate for what they pass off as brilliant wit, from a half wit.


50 posted on 07/11/2011 8:59:02 PM PDT by Sea Parrot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson