Ann, Ann, Ann. You should know better than to ever trust liberals. I knew when I saw the cover that it was done on purpose to make her look bad.
She looks fine. She is a classy lady and shows it.
The imagery, including what she wore (which she should have picked something with color), all designed to make her look shrill, sharp, emotionless/unfriendly, mean, etc etc, the liberal image of a conservative woman.
She needed a PR person to set that shoot up in her favor.
The hetero-pig part of me says, I like that she is on a cover of a magazine, but I wish it was a different magazine.
Something in bunny ears.
Bad, bad man. Get back in the 90's!
"Ann, Ann, Ann. You should know better than to ever trust liberals. I knew when I saw the cover that it was done on purpose to make her look bad."
Maybe she anticipated the same thing. and now her trap is sprung.
Poor Anne. But of course we have to be understanding of Time mag.
They bought that special lens just to make Bubba's private parts look bigger than all the rest of him for his photo.
No doubt having invested in that lens they just have to use it more than once.
Now they only question is--what will they enlarge with it when they photograph Hillary.
"... it was done on purpose to make her look bad"
puhleeeze .. if this is the worst she can look, mazel tov!
It's not the most flattering, but my God, it's not as if she ends up looking like Helen Thomas.