I can't understand what the big deal is about the photo. The story in my paper today -- a VERY liberal paper, BTW -- clearly says Bush met with her earlier. It also clearly says she seemed to have a different attitude then.
Pictures have a way of bringing an event home to some people. For example, Bill Clinton said he had an improper relationship with Monica, but there are those who still defend his sorry butt on that matter. However, a picture of him doing the ol' human humidor trick would flip a lot of those defenders (Well, maybe. These are libs I'm talkign about.).
That's the new spin.
First she claimed that she showed up in Crawford because she wanted to meet the President.
Then when it came out that she had met with him already, she claimed that he treated their initial meeting like a party and he was very arrogant and aloof.
But she had said he was very respectful at their meeting and she came away thinking he was sincere and a man of faith (paraphrasing).
Now she's merely come to a different conclusion. The lies and spinning never ends! Typical DemonRat!
It's a big deal because this is an image oriented society. This photo clashes with the woman outside the ranch. It shows a man markedly different than she describes.
Right or wrong, the adage about a picture conveying a thousand words has some truth to it. It can displace lies far swifter that refuting those lies by mouth.