Posted on 08/07/2011 6:09:05 PM PDT by PROCON
The August 15 issue of Newsweek has a cover story about Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.).
If Gawker is right, she's not going to like the picture the magazine used:
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Little doubt why this rag sold for the grand total of US $1 not so long ago.
This is not the first time the lame stream print media has engaged in such character assassination.
No....I work in photography and art... they intentionally put a picture of her where her eyes are not natural—it is very easy to flatter people or make them look hideous....anyone—even a younger Brad Pitt. I could easily do it to the most beautiful people—make them look stupid, ugly, etc—just by the right angle, lighting, or when they blink a certain way.
This reminds me of the time they narrowed the irises of a politician a few years ago......to shape them slightly to a more oblong shape to get a more demonic, satanic look. Forgot who it was.
They may have even photoshopped the whites of the eyes around the pupils. Bachmann is a beautiful woman, it is hard to make her look hideous and this is definately unflattering and done on purpose.
The media is owned by the homosexual mafia and she has to be destroyed for her husband’s position on their digusting behavior—he dares to think it is—funny—disgusting. Got to make Michelle look unattractive to children so they will think her ideas are unattractive. Heaven forbid children believe the truth—that homosexual activity is disgusting, disease-causing, sick and unnatural and has nothing to do with love—just pure selfish lust.
The Alinsky conditioning to demonize anyone who isn’t on their band wagon of group think is really getting old and people are starting to understand digital photography and photoshop Their house of cards WILL fall down.....it is just a matter of when.............. Leni Riefenstahl 101
It's all NewsReek has left, and they're not very good at hiding it.
It's all NewsReek has left, and they're not very good at hiding it.
But, they don’t need to hide it considering they are pandering to their audience of kooks and anti-American A-holes.
I was the one, years ago, that posted a screen grab of Susan Estrich and posted it on FR........
The ramifications of it's posting are still reverberating throughout the internet......
I stand by my assertion that MB looks her usual self in the mag cover pic.
They hate her so much, they willingly sacrifice their credibility to feed the urge to snark and get street cred with their comrades.
Ha ha—that is great! You have to admit though, it was HARD to make Susan Estrich look good! AND sound good!
I will reiterate that for any photograph, you can flatter someone or not, and they “chose” to not flatter Bachmann. Why—because of the homosexual mafia. If they liked the messenger they would have even put a halo in the background.
It would be much, much easier to make Bachmann look beautiful, than Susan E. although I could even make Susan E. look beautiful.
Yes, we discussed the Sarah Palin cover a few weeks ago.
BOTH covers, if they weren’t actually altered by photoshop
or some more conventional techniques, are obviously designed to create the most negative images possible, throwing in completely biased verbiage like “Queen of Rage”
in thousand point type——I wonder how many Michele Bachmann pictures they had to go through to find one that
“damning” , even if they DIDN’T alter it.
The beat goes on.
The Lamestream Media should die a VERY painful death, but please, sooner rather than later-—let’s not drag it out....
All these publications, as well as the talking heads, should have “(D-Media)” put after their name. So Newsweek (D-Media), or Katie Couric (D-Media).
And it’s totally tabloid when you don’t get a studio shot of a politician for your cover.
It took a lot of photoshopping to make a beautiful woman like Bachmann look like that.
We have eyes, we know what she looks like.
We don’t have to rely on a bankrupt rag like Newsweak to show us.
That’s SOP. they hvae been doing this at least as far back as Barry Goldwater, adn probably before that.
That’s SOP. They have been doing this at least as far back as Barry Goldwater, adn probably before that.
Did Michele actually agree to this article? Not that I find the photo objectionable, but what possible gain is to be had from of all far-left media NEWSWEAK??
Did she learn nothing watching Palin? For crying out loud.
The media is your enemy and the enemy of all conservatives, Congressman Bachmann. Don’t cooperate with them.
(facepalm)
And yes, it was intentional.
“Pretty lame finding the worst picture you could find. I guess Newsweek ran out of halos after they used them all for Pr Obama”
This is from the comments at the linked Village Voice site. THE VILLAGE VOICE!
Maybe this smear IS too obvious to even work.
Nevertheless you have to question Bachman’s smarts for even dealing with these people at all.
On another thread people were saying this was Ed Rollins sabotaging her campaign. But why would he sabotage his own candidate? The Manchurian campaign manager? Isn’t that a little tin-foil-hat-y?
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.