Michelle Bachmann crazy photo
Jon Stewart who is certainly not a Michelle Bachmann fan took Newsweek's editor, Tina Brown to task for using such a crazy photo of her on the cover of the magazine, He cited the photo above to point out that Michelle can be very photogenic calling it fit for a "shampoo advertisement".
He then compared her magazine photo with the picture of Steve Carrey on the DVD cover of "The 40 year old Virgin"
I was thinking about the decision to use the photo on the magazine cover. In their discussion, the news staff must have realized that using this photo would galvanize Michelle Bachman's fans as they defend her against such a blatant attack on her.
Jon Stewart pointed out that the magazine article would have been more effective if they just used a normal photo, and then highlighted her comments over the years.
The photo of her is funny but the look on the face of the guy in the lower left makes it an instant classic.Quote: EvenBobOMG, thats hilarious! I really don't like her and I can't pinpoint why. She's too agressive, I think, and it makes her look like she's trying too hard to be a man..
BTW: Michele with one l. Get used to it, it's going to be a long primary season.
in her mouth in public when she's running for president? Almost as
funny as this:
This one pic sunk the whole campaign of Dukakis. What the hell were
his handlers thinking? He looks like a pure doofus.
And so do their wives:Quote: zippyboyTo be fair, many folks eat hot dogs.
Quote: zippyboyTo be fair, many folks eat hot dogs.
But it has a totally different connotation when a woman does it.
..or Ladybird BachmannQuote: EvenBobBut it has a totally different connotation when a woman does it.
Quote: pacomartinI was thinking about the decision to use the photo on the magazine cover. In their discussion, the news staff must have realized that using this photo would galvanize Michelle Bachman's fans as they defend her against such a blatant attack on her.
Jon Stewart pointed out that the magazine article would have been more effective if they just used a normal photo, and then highlighted her comments over the years.
I think those statements are wise. But I'm not sure true believers like Brown think that way. If reports are true, it appears Obama's campaign strategy is to utterly pursue Brown-like attacks on the opponent - no "normal photos" or "highlighting of comments" to be found.
Limbaugh says that liberals can't defeat conservatives in the marketplace of ideas, which is why Brown's tactics and Obama's apparent attack strategy are so ubiquitous on the left. Granted, it happens on the right, but when the right does it, it's not on the cover of Newsweek or the like. And - fair warning - citing some right-wing rag to counter this point means you acknowledge Newsweek and its like are left-wing rags of the same stripe as the one you cite.
But, if Stewart's comment ends up carrying any influence, it will be interesting to see left and right ideas debated in the marketplace according to Limbaugh's challenge. And, it would be interesting to see which set of ideas wins that debate.
Not being American I don't really feel qualified to comment on matters of US democracy in action but I get the feeling that even here on this board (the rest of the United States notwithstanding) the primaries and the race to the White House will come down to what it always does - partisan politics and nasty attacks. Democrats think the Republicans stink and Republicans think the Democrats are going to ruin the country. Just reading some of the posts made on this forum it's clear on which side of the fence a number of members sit and like usual, it will be nothing more (or less) than a bunch of bickering, nitpicking and name calling. People get into fights over which news network (CNN vs FOX) is more biased and to which side they lean. Just cast your vote and keep quiet I say.Quote: ItsCalledSoccer
But, if Stewart's comment ends up carrying any influence, it will be interesting to see left and right ideas debated in the marketplace according to Limbaugh's challenge. And, it would be interesting to see which set of ideas wins that debate.
Quote: TheNightflyand the race to the White House will come down to what it always does - partisan politics and nasty attacks.
It was far worse in 1900 than now. They said truly awful and mostly untrue
things about opponents and got away with it.
Quote: pacomartinJon Stewart pointed out that the magazine article would have been more effective if they just used a normal photo, and then highlighted her comments over the years.
If they wanted to scare people, they should've photoshopped her (in a very dignified way) into the Oval Office with something akin to the Christian Coalition standing behind her. That would scare me. They don't need any Frankensteinien picture.
Quote: rxwineIf they wanted to scare people, they should've photoshopped her (in a very dignified way) into the Oval Office with something akin to the Christian Coalition standing behind her. That would scare me. They don't need any Frankensteinien picture.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerBut I'm not sure true believers like Brown think that way.
Limbaugh says that liberals can't defeat conservatives in the marketplace of ideas, which is why Brown's tactics and Obama's apparent attack strategy are so ubiquitous on the left.
I don't think the use of anything imaginary was what Stewart meant, but it is what Limbaugh means. Limbaugh also says that liberalism is only successful in imagination-land. As much as you probably disfavor him, you're proving him right. And this doesn't do anything to further the cause or address the problem Stewart identifies. Again, I'm not sure true believers think that way.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
I forget who the personality was who recently said the USA would be better off if major outlets like "Time," "Newsweek," "MSNBC," etc just admitted they had a lieral bias and quit trying to pretend they are impartial. Same person said we would be more like the Brits where this is how the news is run but the press is still free.
In the USA this would leave 80%+ of the media chasing the 25% or so of the market that is liberal-leaning. Not sure how the balance is in G.B. Sooner or later more outlets would see a bigger market on the center and right and we could have some balance.
Thing is, it backfired, Limbaugh laughed at them and his ratings went higher than ever.
Quote: cclub79Remember when they photoshopped smoke coming out of Limbaugh's mouth, made him look menacing, and asked "Is (he) good for America?" No? http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2rush_limbaugh1.jpg
Thing is, it backfired, Limbaugh laughed at them and his ratings went higher than ever.
Limbaugh is such a master of playing the media and his political opponents it is almost scary. And he does it without being a crazy nut like Madonna, late Michael Jackson, or assorted PFFBF (people famous for being famous.) You would think at some point they might pay somebody to actually listen to the show and understand when he is playing a prank. It would not be hard as half the time he *tells* you it is a prank to catch the media. Yet they nearly always act to script.
Quote: EvenBobIt was far worse in 1900 than now. They said truly awful and mostly untrue
things about opponents and got away with it.
Bob, you are so right. As bad as it is now, it is still civil compared to what went on in the past. Duels and fights were common. In 1856 Congressman Preston Brooks walked into the Senate chamber and severely beat Senator Charles Sumner with a cane, and calmly walked out; he was not prosecuted. Sumner could not resume his duties for three years while he recovered. Election day riots were common; almost 100 people were killed in the 1857-58-59 Baltimore election day riots.
Our problems are troubling, and solutions for many of us don't work for many others. But we're not murdering our brothers and sisters, yet.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerI don't think the use of anything imaginary was what Stewart meant, but it is what Limbaugh means. Limbaugh also says that liberalism is only successful in imagination-land. As much as you probably disfavor him, you're proving him right. And this doesn't do anything to further the cause or address the problem Stewart identifies. Again, I'm not sure true believers think that way.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
Limbaugh is not a good example. He's someone who often has implied or left hanging lots of negative innuendo in the midst of all his "truth telling." Very similar to posting the worst looking photo of someone, I'd say. It's actually much better than lying, because you can be called much easier on lies than implication.
~
Supprime tuum stultiloquium.
Quote: AZDuffmanLimbaugh is such a master of playing the media and his political opponents it is almost scary.
Rush is a phenom. His brother says Rush has an IQ thats substantially
over the genius rating, but Rush never mentions it. He's a rarity in that
you seldom see somebody that smart who's also an entertainer and a
business genius. Talk about a self made man...
Quote: MoscaBob, you are so right. As bad as it is now, it is still civil compared to what went on in the past.
All the election day rules we have now came from the
abuse at the polls in the past. They would bribe voters
with whiskey and cigars, pay them, threaten violence,
stuff the ballot box with fake votes, anything and
everything to get their guy elected.
Good ol' democracy in action.Quote: EvenBobAll the election day rules we have now came from the
abuse at the polls in the past. They would bribe voters
with whiskey and cigars, pay them, threaten violence,
stuff the ballot box with fake votes, anything and
everything to get their guy elected.
Quote: EvenBobRush is a phenom. His brother says Rush has an IQ thats substantially
over the genius rating, but Rush never mentions it. He's a rarity in that
you seldom see somebody that smart who's also an entertainer and a
business genius. Talk about a self made man...
He is more than smart he is street smart. He admits he hated school yet knows so much of what a person needs to know in most subjects. He is an excellent judge of human nature. How many people come along and they know so much in "book learning" yet you would be afraid to let them walk the Vegas Strip alone for fear they might fall for the first scam that they saw. Or they go into a business job and can't get the first answer because, "its not in the manual."
He is always on my list of "people you would like to have dinner with" when I am asked for an icebreaker.
Quote: AZDuffmanHe is more than smart he is street smart.
People are always saying 'Rush lies'. Really? Name something he
lied about. They never have an answer because they don't listen
to the show. If he did lie, it would be big news, every word he says is
monitored by his enemies.
Quote: EvenBobPeople are always saying 'Rush lies'. Really? Name something he
lied about. They never have an answer because they don't listen
to the show. If he did lie, it would be big news, every word he says is
monitored by his enemies.
Correct. In the early days his fact-checking was not as good as it is today and he used bad sources from time to time. Today I would put his fact-checks up against news orginaztions 100xs his size. You can bet Limbaugh would not use fake doccuments about Obama's record in his past.
Quote: AZDuffmanCorrect. In the early days his fact-checking was not as good as it is today and he used bad sources from time to time. Today I would put his fact-checks up against news orginaztions 100xs his size. You can bet Limbaugh would not use fake doccuments about Obama's record in his past.
When you think about it, he's set himself up as just about
the most reliable person in media. There is an army of people
fact checking every word out of his mouth for errors. They
never find any, so they pounce on nuance and inuendo..
Quote: EvenBobRush is a phenom. His brother says Rush has an IQ thats substantially
over the genius rating, but Rush never mentions it.
As proven, only idiots mention their IQ ratings, for good reason :)
He's a rarity in that you seldom see somebody that smart who's also an entertainer and a
business genius. Talk about a self made man...
What I learnt that is important about Limbaugh... he's an entertainer before he's an analyst.
Quote: thecesspit
What I learnt that is important about Limbaugh... he's an entertainer before he's an analyst.
Yes. He could read the phone book and make it sound
interesting. He's an actor who has one character he plays.
Watch him on the camera he has in his studio and he
puts an amazing amount of energy into talking on the radio.
Kudos to s2dbaker for the KISS photo. By the way, which member of KISS is Rep. Bachmann supposed to be?
Quote: EvenBobYes. He could read the phone book and make it sound
interesting. He's an actor who has one character he plays.
Watch him on the camera he has in his studio and he
puts an amazing amount of energy into talking on the radio.
As soon as I realized Limbaugh's act, he stopped annoying me and made it something I can ignore happily, like I can ignore Maher's smugness (I caught his show for the first time the other week... as a comedian, he's no Lewis Black.
Though to be honest, I can safely ignore all American political shows... I don't live there, I don't vote there, so its just an interest on what happens to my neighbour rather than stating what SHOULD happen to my neighbour.
Thank you, but I can't take credit for an excellent job done by Princess Sparkle Pony.Quote: imperialpalaceKudos to s2dbaker for the KISS photo. By the way, which member of KISS is Rep. Bachmann supposed to be?
Did you ever wonder how truly off the wall Marylin Manson would look with Michele Bachmann eyes?
OMG, does he pray with that mouth?Quote: matilda
Quote: s2dbaker
Ok, this is approaching porn status. Got anymore?
All these corn dog photos are taken at the Iowa State Fair where they also serve fried butter on a stick. Take that Michelle Obama with trying to set an example to kids. We'll have none of that "nanny state".
Anderson Cooper weighs in on the photo
(1) Henry Clay (1824) in our only four way finish (election decided by House of Representatives) First election in which one of "founding fathers" did not run.
(2) James A. Garfield (1880) was elected President- the only time a sitting member of the House elected president
(3) John Anderson (1980)
Supposedly, Anderson stayed in the race as a third party candidate because he would receive federal election subsidies only if he received 5% of the vote, and millions of unpaid debts had been accumulated.In the end, he received 7% of the vote in the election with a total of 5.7 million votes.
These representatives (or former representatives) must believe that centuries of tradition can be bucked.
Michele Bachmann, U.S. Representative from Minnesota
Thaddeus McCotter, U.S. Representative from Michigan
Ron Paul, U.S. Representative from Texas
Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives from Georgia
Quote: pacomartinOnly three times in history has a sitting member of the House of Representative run for President:
(1) Henry Clay (1824) in our only four way finish (election decided by House of Representatives) First election in which one of "founding fathers" did not run.
(2) James A. Garfield (1880) was elected President- the only time a sitting member of the House elected president
(3) John Anderson (1980)
Supposedly, Anderson stayed in the race as a third party candidate because he would receive federal election subsidies only if he received 5% of the vote, and millions of unpaid debts had been accumulated.In the end, he received 7% of the vote in the election with a total of 5.7 million votes.
These representatives (or former representatives) must believe that centuries of tradition can be bucked.
Michele Bachmann, U.S. Representative from Minnesota
Thaddeus McCotter, U.S. Representative from Michigan
Ron Paul, U.S. Representative from Texas
Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives from Georgia
Corrections:
1. Paul also ran in 2008, so there are 4 historical cases.
2. Gingrich is currently an author and professional speaker. He is not a sitting member of Congress.
Quote: pacomartinOnly three times in history has a sitting member of the House of Representative run for President:
(1) Henry Clay (1824) in our only four way finish (election decided by House of Representatives) First election in which one of "founding fathers" did not run.
(2) James A. Garfield (1880) was elected President- the only time a sitting member of the House elected president
(3) John Anderson (1980)
Supposedly, Anderson stayed in the race as a third party candidate because he would receive federal election subsidies only if he received 5% of the vote, and millions of unpaid debts had been accumulated.In the end, he received 7% of the vote in the election with a total of 5.7 million votes.
These representatives (or former representatives) must believe that centuries of tradition can be bucked.
Michele Bachmann, U.S. Representative from Minnesota
Thaddeus McCotter, U.S. Representative from Michigan
Ron Paul, U.S. Representative from Texas
Newt Gingrich, former U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives from Georgia
Paco-
Your list is just the ones that made it to the general, not the ones that "ran for President". I know, for example, that Dick Gephardt ran as a sitting Congressman at least twice. You also grouped "former" Rep (Gingrich) as a tradition bucker, but one of history's most revered Presidents was a former 1 term Congressman. Gingrich is not Lincoln, but you've got a mish-mash of stats here that don't add up.
Elvis Presley
Born: January 8, 1935
Died: August 16, 1977
She's a moron!
Michele Bachmann may have crazy eyes, but she certainly does not show her age (born in 1956).
Check out this article "written" by Michele Bachmann entitled, Somebody's Got to Save This Country From Certain Doom, And Let's Face It, That Person Is Me. The Onion
Quote: cclub79Paco-
Your list is just the ones that made it to the general, not the ones that "ran for President". I know, for example, that Dick Gephardt ran as a sitting Congressman at least twice. You also grouped "former" Rep (Gingrich) as a tradition bucker, but one of history's most revered Presidents was a former 1 term Congressman. Gingrich is not Lincoln, but you've got a mish-mash of stats here that don't add up.
The current candidates are campaigning for their party's nomination. They are not running for president.
It is not a mishmash of stats. I carefully checked them with the Office of the Clerk of the House of Representative to make sure that they were correct.
I did not forget about Abraham Lincoln. Which is why I specified very clearly that these three cases were "sitting" members of the House of Representatives. That was a special time in our history. Seven states withdrew from the Union upon his election. They did not wait for him to begin his term. The other four states waited until military conflict began shortly after his inauguration day.
I may have erred somewhat in putting Gingrich in the same group with the other three as he is no longer "sitting", but historically all other presidential candidates have left the House and done something that brought them national attention before running for president. Most often it was at least one senate term, but sometimes it was a term as governor or as vice president. Gingrich has not done anything of national acclaim since he left as Speaker of the House.
All three cases in themselves had some mitigating circumstances that made them unusual.
(1) Clay’s candidacy predated the rise of the modern two-party system.
(2) Anderson (the only candidate in the 20th century) ran as an independent challenger. He was not even close to winning any electoral college votes. He used his run as a pulpit for ideas, and a way to retire from congress.
(3) In Garfield’s case, the only successful instance of a sitting Representative becoming President, he also ran for Senator of Ohio, and had been elected to that position at the same time he was elected president.
