Skip to comments.Help Ann Coulter strike back: post YOUR "distorted" picture of the TIME magazine editors here
Posted on 04/18/2005 3:14:45 PM PDT by RonDog
click here to read article
And from www.time.com/time/covers:
COULTER RIPS MAG PHOTO 'DISTORTION'
Posted by MisterRepublican
On News/Activism 04/18/2005 9:09:12 AM PDT · 158 replies · 5,436+ views
The Drudge Report ^ | April 18, 2005 | Matt Drudge
Ann Coulter on Time's cover WND columnist subject of 6,000-word story, strange photo
Posted by Evolution
On News/Activism 04/18/2005 4:39:06 AM PDT · 70 replies · 2,675+ views
WordNetDaily ^ | 4/17/05
Idiots at TIME Mag Fall for Protest Warrior Satire (Ann Coulter pic)
Posted by tgslTakoma
On News/Activism 04/17/2005 2:35:59 PM PDT · 236 replies · 17,152+ views
TIME ^ | April 17, 2005
ANN COULTER TO BE ON COVER OF TIME MAGAZINE ACCORDING TO NEW DRUDGE
Posted by RaceBannon
On News/Activism 04/17/2005 3:58:47 AM PDT · 320 replies · 11,343+ views
Drudge Report ^ | 04/17/05 | Matt Drudge
Politics aside... Give that poor woman a cheese burger! She would be even more fetching with a little meat on her bones.
I just got Slander and Treason from the library today. Started Slander. It's very enjoyable.
At least Time didn't give her the partially back-lit/lit from below/shadowy "sinister Republican" cover treatment that conservatives usually get.
|COURTESY ANN COULTER|
Coulter dressed for the August heat at a softball game in the Hamptons, on New York's Long Island
I would do it if I knew how. All I can do is post a picture from Google and put a caption on it. Sorry.
Vindictive is good. Petty is not involved.
Give that poor woman a cheese burger!
She can have mine
At least Time didn't give her the partially back-lit/lit from below/shadowy "sinister Republican" cover treatment that conservatives usually get.And, as Maceman posted on a previous thread:
Remember what they did with Rush Limbaugh's cover?
What is up with all the liberal ads up on Conservative websites as of late? Only the Google Ads, I notice.
She was stupid to enter the lion's den in the first place. Lesson learned Anne. Don't feed the beast.
Forget it Ann....your a babe. Even if my wife cant stomach you(lib. reasons for that).
Never thought she did not know or approve; in which case, it does make it a 'hatchett' job of sorts and really more thnan rude.
That said, I kind of wish she had gone along with; and not given even one Lib; more pleasure than they deserve.
1. Ann does not look that bad. Her face looks pretty, her legs look long. These are her strong suits anyway. This isn't her best or her sexiest picture, but she wouldn't have liked it (and most feminists wouldn't have liked it) if she were posed to make her look gorgeous or sexy instead of intelligent and newsworthy.
2. Part of the weirdness is her fault for wearing those witches' shoes. Pointy-toed shoes, however fashionable, do not make any woman's feet look smaller.
3. I would think that anyone who has her picture taken as often as Ann and is as media-savvy as she is would know that this picture was shot with unfavorable lighting and at a bad angle. No woman should EVER sit in a chair of that style. No woman should ever permit herself to be shot knees-first; there is no way to deal with that camera angle gracefully. When you spend a lot of time being photographed you usually realize this kind of thing.
I think the problem is that she's so lovely and photographs so well that she may not even have realized that it's possible to take a less-than-wonderful picture of her, so she wasn't as careful as she might have been. She trusted this photographer who is a representative of the MSM--always a mistake. I learned long ago never, never, never to trust people from the mainstream media. Never. No matter how nice they are. Just don't do it.
. . .missed that. . .
They did it to Ralph Reed too.
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.