GOP Nominee 2012 - who will it be? - Page 53 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-09-2011, 03:31 PM   #781
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 03:42 AM
I don't find Michele Bachmann strange-looking in general, to me she just has a look I associate with certain N.-Euro white people--very shallow-set, large, clear bright eyes over strong rounded cheekbones, which can sometimes read to others as a 'perpetually wired' look (HRC, for one, has this too, actually). I agree the cover pic is particularly unflattering and that Newsweek almost certainly chose it for that reason; it's a quick and easy way of conveying, Here is an intensely polarizing person. Cheap tactic, sure, but it's not a highbrow magazine; a big part of their political coverage involves trying to capture personas as opposed to policies and how the public responds to them. Their politician covers often have a caricatured feel and that is inherently trivializing, to both the topic and the person.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 08-09-2011, 08:01 PM   #782
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:42 PM



And Obama said, Let there be light and there was light.

Not that I'm implying media bias or anything.
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 08-10-2011, 06:52 PM   #783
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Mrs. Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: pig farming in Bolivia
Posts: 7,219
Local Time: 08:42 PM
If Bachmann had been topless in that Newsweek cover, noone would be talking about her crazy eyes now would they?
__________________
Mrs. Garrison is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 08:49 AM   #784
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 09:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I think her eyes look a bit off.
You do? I don't, not in those first two pictures. Maybe my eyes are off. Just like Ramona she can't help it if she was born that way. I don't think her "rage" does that to her eyes. Anyway, that's all I have to say about it. I think Newsweek should do a cover all about Mitt's hair.

That's just what it is and I couldn't think of it-40 Year Old Virgin picture! Aha, Jon and I are of one mind and were really meant to be together

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewa...-you-newsweek/

It seems that Newsweek’s cover photo of Rep. Michele Bachmann has already proven to be a game-changer: it got Jon Stewart to defend the Republican presidential candidate for an entire segment– not an easy feat. Stewart blasted the magazine for deliberately finding an unflattering photo of the Congresswoman, arguing “you’ve got to go pretty far” to find an unflattering one, listing examples of Bachmann making “yelling into a bullhorn” look attractive, and giving editor Tina Brown a dose of her own medicine.

Stewart began his argument compiling evidence for why he rarely listens to conservatives when they complain that the “liberal” media is out to get them. “Conservatives hate the liberal media so much,” he joked, “they’re willing to accept arguments based on science!” Then he proceeded to do precisely that– attack an allegedly liberal publication for unfairly attacking a conservative. Don’t expect this to happen again anytime soon.

Just putting the photo up elicited laughter from the audience, and Stewart was clear to note the cover’s intention: “that’s a shit picture of Michele Bachmann,” he noted, “and clearly not an accidentally shitty picture.” He went on to argue that of all the things one can say about the Tea Party leader, “one thing you cannot say about Michele Bachmann is that she is not photogenic.” He then showed a variety of Rep. Bachmann photos that could, he joked, pass as “shampoo commercials” and made even the least attractive political activity look good. “You’ve got to go pretty far out of your way to find a crappy photo of Michele Bachmann, and you did,” he quipped.

Stewart then noted Brown’s argument that the photo was illustrative of the Representative’s intensity, which Stewart did not buy one bit. “That’s not an ‘I’m galvanizing the voters in Iowa’ picture,’” arguing instead that the cover looked like “the female version of The 40-Year-Old Virgin.’” “You used that photo in a petty attempt to make Michele Bachmann look crazy,” he scolded, suggesting instead, “that’s what her words are for.” He then put together a far “scarier” portrait of Rep. Bachmann– made entirely of her quotes. “Shame on you, Newsweek, and shame on your editor Tina Brown,” he railed, showing the least flattering photo of Brown he could find.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 11:58 AM   #785
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 09:42 PM

Maybe she skipped that part


Bachmann’s ‘Must-Read’ List Included A Book That Claims Blacks Were ‘Better Off In Nearly Every Way’ Under Slavery | ThinkProgress

In 2002, then-state Sen. Bachmann’s campaign posted a “must-read” list of books on her web site. Included in the list were the Declaration of Independence, The Federalist Papers, and a book titled, “Call of Duty: The Sterling Nobility of Robert E. Lee,” authored by J. Steven Wilkins. The Lee biography includes this apologetic passage:

Northerners were often shocked and offended by the familiarity that existed as a matter of course between the whites and blacks of the old South. This was one of the surprising and unintended consequences of slavery. Slavery, as it operated in the pervasively Christian society which was the old South, was not an adversarial relationship founded on racial animosity. In fact, it bred on the whole, not contempt, but, over time, mutual respect. This produced a mutual esteem of the sort that always results when men give themselves to a common cause.

The credit for this startling reality must go to the Christian faith.

Wilkins goes on to claim that slavery existed on a “relationship of trust and esteem,” that positive race relations may have progressed further if the pro-slavery South had won the war, and that Lee, despite being a slave-owner himself, “never held any animosity for blacks.”

After explaining the “cruelty and barbarism” of “pagan” Africa, he goes on:

The fact was (and is) easily demonstrable that, taken as a whole, there is no question that blacks in this country, slavery notwithstanding, were “immeasurably better off” in nearly every way [than they were in Africa].

In Lee’s view, however, emancipation could only be accomplished successfully if it was gradual. Time was needed for the sanctifying effects of Christianity to work on the black race and fit its people for freedom. [...]

Abolitionism was not the best answer.


The idea that the relationships between white slave owners and black slaves were not founded on racial animosity has no basis in history. Whites viewed themselves as inherently superior to blacks, who were bought and sold as property and, for population counts, were worth only three-fifths of a white person. The idea that sanctifying blacks through Christianity made them “immeasurably better off” than they would have been in Africa, meanwhile, ignores the utter loss of humanity caused by enslavement. It ignores the untold number of blacks who died on slave ships, the sale of blacks at auctions as if they were livestock, the families split up at an owner’s whim, and the loss of all basic human rights, not least of which was their own free will.

Bachmann has a history of using slavery analogies, and she has made multiple mistakes regarding American history already in her campaign. None, however, is nearly as disturbing as her love for a book that attempts to explain away the horrors of slavery by rewriting history to make it seem like it was a minor price to pay for the sanctifying favors whites did blacks by bringing them to America as slaves.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 12:00 PM   #786
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,720
Local Time: 06:42 PM
Who needs to rely on "she's got crazy eyes!" when she has so many crazy words?
__________________
corianderstem is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 12:14 PM   #787
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 08:42 PM
I've seen this thought process sprouting up more in conservative revisionist writings as of late.

We even had a poster in here that bought into an article about this. Slaves were treated like family.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 08-11-2011, 01:46 PM   #788
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
I've seen this thought process sprouting up more in conservative revisionist writings as of late.

We even had a poster in here that bought into an article about this. Slaves were treated like family.
Did liberals ruin yet another good thing in history?





Let's immigration reform comes up in the next year, too, so the GOP hopefuls really can alienate some more minorities.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 01:49 PM   #789
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 10:42 PM
Romney: Corporations Are People, My Friend. - YouTube
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 01:55 PM   #790
has a
 
kramwest1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Not a toliet wall
Posts: 6,939
Local Time: 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post



That's it. I'm incorporating myself in Mauritius.
Fuck this.
__________________
Bread & Circuses
kramwest1 is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 04:06 PM   #791
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 10:42 PM
Perry is going to announce he is running according to the latest reports.

Down to Perry and Mittens. Everyone else is already out of this race.
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 04:11 PM   #792
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 03:42 AM
That sucks. I REALLY want to see Palin try and talk about things and have a crack at answering a question. Don't deny me my entertainment!
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 05:19 PM   #793
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:42 PM
Palin won't run.

Quote:
“Corporations are people, my friend,” Romney said at one point, failing to silence protestors who continued to challenge him. “Of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?”

“It goes into their pockets!” some shouted back.

“Whose pockets?” Romney said. “People’s pockets. Ok. Human beings, my friend.”
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 05:39 PM   #794
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:42 PM
The answer is clearly someone with several screws loose and a poor grasp of reality in any and all forms.

I say this as someone who has developed Tory leanings over the past couple of years, due to the loose screws of the Canadian Left. But when it comes to batshit insanity, nobody can take the cake more than the U.S. Republican Party (the Democratic Party are a notable second place, though ).
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-11-2011, 07:27 PM   #795
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 10:42 PM
I don't like Perry for a lot of reasons. Too conservative, too public with his faith. But he did create a lot of jobs in Texas and that will appeal to many Americans.
__________________

__________________
Pearl is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com