Instead of finding a suitable photograph of good taste and respect,
Newsweek opted to look deep into its archives and publish a photograph
Palin, and all of her supporters, inherently find disrespectful. You
can see they have forced Palin to expose her taut stockinged thighs,
bulging from her tight shorts and accented by a sultry red jacket.
Such photographic manipulation of an innocent woman is downright
deplorable.
Sarah updated her FaceBook on this grievance and traumatizing
experience:
Newsweek
Share
Mon at 7:59pm
The choice of photo for the cover of this week’s Newsweek is
unfortunate. When it comes to Sarah Palin, this “news” magazine has
relished focusing on the irrelevant rather than the relevant. The
Runner’s World magazine one-page profile for which this photo was
taken was all about health and fitness – a subject to which I am
devoted and which is critically important to this nation. The out-of-
context Newsweek approach is sexist and oh-so-expected by now. If
anyone can learn anything from it: it shows why you shouldn’t judge a
book by its cover, gender, or color of skin. The media will do
anything to draw attention – even if out of context.
- Sarah Palin
Hopefully after we elect Sarah as president in 2012, we can force
Newsweek to either publish headlines as dictated by Sarah or shut
their doors for good. Any news rag that disrespects proper people in
this manner has no place in our country.
http://christwire.org/2009/11/president-sarah-palin-victimized-by-sexist-newsweek-cover/
Tell Sarah to close her eyes and recite her handler's paragraph on the mic -
let's see if she can.
Oh, that's right - no mics. I forgot. But heck at least she never needs a
teleprompter!
Is someone suggesting that Palin didn't pose for that?
> Is someone suggesting that Palin didn't pose for that?
Newsweek cruelly used a pre-politics photo.
You know, the same way demagogues pull statements from /Dreams of my Father/ out
of context.
But I don't see why Sarah's handlers want to draw attention to a mag cover
saying Sarah is "bad for the gop and the rest of us"...
>>> Hopefully after we elect Sarah as president in 2012, we can force
>>> Newsweek to either publish headlines as dictated by Sarah or shut
>>> their doors for good. Any news rag that disrespects proper people in
>>> this manner has no place in our country.
>>>
>>> http://christwire.org/2009/11/president-sarah-palin-victimized-by-sexist-newsweek-cover/
>> Is someone suggesting that Palin didn't pose for that?
>
>
> I'm no defender of Palin, but I read this picture was lifted from
> Runners Magazine pre-VP run.
while she was governor of alaska? so she was posing in her role as GILF?
Pre-politics? The front cover says it was taken June 2009. More like
post-politics.
>
> You know, the same way demagogues pull statements from /Dreams of my Father/ out
> of context.
>
> But I don't see why Sarah's handlers want to draw attention to a mag cover
> saying Sarah is "bad for the gop and the rest of us"...
It's all they have. She's done, and the only person who doesn't seem
to know it are a small gaggle of wingnuts, whom she's fleecimg for
every dollar she can get. I say, good for her...
No, it was taken in June 2009, according to Newsweek and Runners World.
On which planet? Certainly not earth.
> Future President Sarah Palin is rightfully reeling this week, after
> Newsweek exposed the cover for the feature they are doing on the
> former Alaska governor.
>
> Instead of finding a suitable photograph of good taste and respect,
> Newsweek opted to look deep into its archives and publish a photograph
> Palin, and all of her supporters, inherently find disrespectful.
It's archives? They got it from a photographer who did the spread this
past June.
As far as "disrespectful" goes, the headline on the page is "How do
you solve a problem like Sarah?" Yet all you pervs can see is the
photo.
Respect is automatic when you first meet someone. When they blow it by
showing disrespect for others, as Palin has, it's her job to earn it
back. Quitting a job the voters of Alaska gave to her is not a good
way to do that.
Ah, so you agree... there's no way she'll ever be president of the
UNITED STATES. I'm assuming you must mean that, since the United
States doesn't allow politicians to shut down magazines.
>
> http://christwire.org/2009/11/president-sarah-palin-victimized-by-sex...
Oh, bullshit.
Palin approved the photo, then, when it was revealed, she started
raising hell about it. This is the way Palin operates -- pile lie
upon lie. She knew exactly what she was doing -- she can play the
victim -- whine, whine, whine -- Katie Couric ambushed her -- that
mean ol' Brian Williams asked her mean ol' questions -- and now the
people at Newsweek aren't treating her with respect.
And, you know what??? You dumb-as-dirt rightwingers are falling for
it.
Jesus but you people are dense.
Would you care to explain the meaning you are ascribing to the term
"lifting"?
Did Newsweek violate any intellectual property rights? Wasn't Ms.
Palin aware that her picture was being taken? Does she realize that
she is a public figure or not? Does she understand the meaning of "it
goes with the territory"?
The fundamental problem with that bitch is that she refuses to abide
by the Most Fundamental of American Principles:
You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
You cannot put the tooth paste back in the tube.
President Obama was photographed shirtless and he (as a person with a
fully functional brain) will never commit the idiocy of complaining.
-Ramon
> Palin approved the photo, then, when it was revealed,
> she started raising hell about it.
I am going further than you, Ole' Kickin': IT MATTERS NOT whether Ms.
Palin approved the picture in question or not. That is totally
irrelevant. She DOES NOT have a veto right upon any picture (unless it
were taken by a camera hidden in her bidet) whatsoever. Had someone
taken a snapshot of her retarded (*her* words, not mine) infant,
drooling, I would side with her.
Last time I checked Newsweek is not part of her campaign committee or
book publishers, the only organizations upon which she can have power
of picture approval.
So Sarah: You are entitled to use your looks and sex appeal whenever
it is convenient? Well, let me use my sex appeal, wink back at ya'
while I tell you: It doesn't work that way, dear. Perhaps all those
professors allowed you to pay for your passing grades in your favorite
currency, but what you are selling America is not buying.
-Ramon
-Ramon
Comments: Sarah wanted decency as a norm for all readers,and she
doesn't like her photos which looks lustful,is that wrong?How come
corrupted minds just shows that they are corrupt?Why don't they hide
their own follies when giving comments?
If Ms. Palin desires to have the authority to decide what pictures (or
herself or anybody else's) should be published, and which are just
lustful enough, I understand Newsweek, Playgirl and other magazines
and media have openings. She would have to quit politics as a
requirement, though.
Just like when she was inquired about the duties of the vice
presidential, she doesn't even comprehend the contents of her current
job's description.
-Ramon
>
>>> Hopefully after we elect Sarah as president in 2012, we can force
>>> Newsweek to either publish headlines as dictated by Sarah or shut
>>> their doors for good. Any news rag that disrespects proper people in
>>> this manner has no place in our country.
>>>
>>> http://christwire.org/2009/11/president-sarah-palin-victimized-by-sexist-newsweek-cover/
>> Is someone suggesting that Palin didn't pose for that?
>
>
> I'm no defender of Palin, but I read this picture was lifted from
> Runners Magazine pre-VP run.
Apparently is was not pre-VP, but it doesn't really matter. She posed
for it.
> Apparently is was not pre-VP, but it doesn't really matter. She posed
> for it.
Her career is to be both the jingoist headline on the cover of a tabloid ... and
the Page 3 hottie.
I'd put her in the "Dingbats Lost" column.
==
She certainly has appeal in the tabloid crowd.