Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Advice to Sarah: Water off a duck's back. There is going to be a lot of water.
Kathyrn Lopez and Hugh Hewitt aside, most of us are not that thrilled by "sexy" photos of Mitt Romney.
My first reaction to her complaint at the cover of Newsweek was, "why did you pose for the picture then?"I like a lot about the lady. She has a lot of spunk and she has the right attitude, but she certainly steps into a lot of problems. I mean, I like the turkey slaughter house, but surely she should have known that a lot of people would be repulsed.
What is wrong with that fact that she is sexy? I thought feminist doctrine teaches that it is good right and salutary for a woman to use her sexuality to her advantage.
Cheesecake, but, sadly, I'm getting used to it.
Skylar,The photo was for Runners World. The Newsweek headline says, "Going Rogue and Going Places." They are trying to make fun of her and her book. Does Newsweek have right to use that picture?
Is Newsweek going with a Doug Hoffman bath tub shot on next weeks cover to appear fair and balanced in face of sexism charges. At least they didn't show Sarah waiting tables at Hooters. That probably comes as a photoshop job next week. Newsweek could win the special Tina Fey Honorary Emmy for their work for the cause.
That photo was from a Runners World Magazine photoshoot. So its very disingenuous for Newsweek to use it as part of a political article.http://www.runnersworld.com/photo/sarahpalin/slide7.html
This photo is picked up from a whole article she did for something like "Runner's World". It made the rounds last year.She was probably involved somehow in Newsweek running it. Wasnt like she didn't know about it! [posed]
You need another category for the poll:( ) Yes, but in a good way.What gets me is the tag line: "She's bad news for the GOP -- And for Everybody Else, Too."That tag line will never never never appear next to Obama's picture.There's the bias.
There was that photo of Obama in the surf. Now that was porny.ps: Good advice from Fred4Pres in first comment.
I am waiting for the Newsweek cover photo of Obama sucking hard on a cancer stick, with the caption, "He's Bad News for the Dems, and everybody else too"
Maybe next week we'll get John Meacham's wife in hot pants and we can compare and contrast.
The greater insult is to the American flag
She is what she is. Some of us like her for it. Others cringe or even hate. That's part of her too.
The Sound of Music has a famous song sung by nuns at the Convent (where Sister Maria quit to reload) with a chorus," How do you solve a problem like Maria". They sent her to the top and her good talents, good character and beauty were not a problem at all anymore.
[Too many typos this morning.]They probably took thousands of pictures. (Digital age remember?) How is she to know what was going to be on the cover? (Did she bitch? On Oprah? I missed that.)Never occurred to her, I bet. Because she has better sense than to think that a national news magazine would think her in her workout stuff was front cover worthy. But tell me, how come Barack coming out of the surf shirtless is cool? How come Barack playing basketball with the guys is cool? How come Sarah standing in some workout clothes is not cool?Because the latter is meant to minimize her power and influence, prtrayin her as someone with no substance. (Contrary Thought: How many men or women her age are disciplined enough to work out like she does?) And yes, I think it is sexist and biased, given that the diverse tolerant Newsweek chose to use it.Ha.Disclaimer -- I like Sarah Palin and think she accomplished a lot in Alaska, most of which has been ignored and/or mischaracterized. The fact is she accomplished much more than BHO had accomplished. I do not know if she would be the best next president. I do however, firmly believe she would have been better than what we have now, even though she was not running for POTUS (which the media keeps forgetting).
It looks like the Runners world picture from a few months ago. It made sense there, but it's weird for it be on Newsweek.
Oops -- just saw it was from Runners World.I somehow don't think she knew that was going to be the NEwsweek cover.Too lazy [cheap] to take their own shots?wv prinkshThat was pretty prinksh of Newsweek.
There's nothing wrong with the pitcture per se; it's not slutty, and it wouldn't be out of line IF they were using it for a perspective on her life (such as her hobbies, etc., as Runner's World was using it). But, the picture was clearly chosen for a reason. It conveys a message: She's a girl, she has sexuality, and therefore should not be taken seriously. They is simply no other reason that they would have chosen that shot. I'm 29 years old, female, and of the ambitious and high achiever sort. Never, I mean NEVER before last fall, had it even occurred to me that my sex could be effectively used against me. That seemed like an absurd relic from the past; something that, if it ever dared to happen, I would snappily overcome by showing everyone exactly what I could do, movie-of-the-week style. Ms. Palin and I don't have much in common, I'm not athletic, I'm more education-oriented, I guess I'm somewhat pretty, but not Palin-style, I'm not a mom (though I want to be someday). But time after time we see her sexuality, rather than actual issues, being used against her, reminding me that this is brewing just below the surface; anyone who I upset can and will turn these sexual attacks on at will, and characters as mainstream as Newsweek will nod OK.
Blah, blah, blah [pic or post about Sarah - lots of attention and $$], blah, blah.Clever, Newsweek. ;-)
You know, I hadn't read the comments when I said it looked like the runners world picture and now that I know it really was? I would change my vote to the poll. That is total bullshit. She did a running outfit picture for a running magazine, not freaking newsweek.
JAL: "But tell me, how come Barack coming out of the surf shirtless is cool? How come Barack playing basketball with the guys is cool? How come Sarah standing in some workout clothes is not cool?Because the latter is meant to minimize her power and influence, prtrayin her as someone with no substance."Yeah, I think that's right. The pictures of Obama were showing his life- here's what he does for fun. If that picture were part of a story about Palin's personal life and hobbies, it would be completely different. WV: Noment- the moment I realized that the treatment of Sarah Palin meant that my sex was also a liability
If that picture were part of a story about Palin's personal life and hobbies, it would be completely different. Or maybe in a magazine about running : ) Nobody complained about it then. Context matters. And ITA with the stuff you said about the nasty, sexist comments from the campaign being kind of a revelation.
This is either awesomely bogus, or bogusly awesome!
The only thing Ms. Palin has going for her is the MILF thing...and boy is she!
This post deserves a "Palin is like Carrie Prejean" tag. If you pose for sexy pictures, don't be surprised if they appear in print.Palin -- or someone at Runners World -- chose the props: the shorts, the flag, the blue star banner. They communicate an image of herself that Palin wanted.Things could have been worse -- Newsweek could have used their own picture of her trademark wink. Or they could have used the Runners World shot where Palin exhibits visible camel toe. You decide.
I like the subtle danger symbolism: flag dangling precipitously close to floor, one electrical outlet with child safety plug, one without, and that zipper, if it were to inch just a wee bit lower...
During the 1990s, so may liberal "women" (girls really) turned Bill Clinton into some sort of sex symbol. I more than once heard "I'd give him a blowjob to preserve a women's right to choose" (presumably the right to choose to lobby with kneepads on). I mean, I guess Clinton is/was sexier than Carter or Dukakis, but talk about setting the bar pretty low. Now, unlike Clinton, who used his power to get women (zaftig yentas and Arkansas trailer trash), Palin is genuinely good looking (face) and has a remarkably good body for a woman her age, especially given the time demands of family and jobs, so of course this is used against her. At the same time, you have Chris Matthews literally drooling to give Obama the full Monica treatment, but that's ok, it is Palin who is the bimbo, clearly.I really thought that I was so jaded that I could no longer be shocked by lefty/media hypocrisy, but I guess I was wrong.
"This post deserves a "Palin is like Carrie Prejean" tag. If you pose for sexy pictures, don't be surprised if they appear in print."First it is not a sexy picture. It is just her in her workout clothes. It is not like she is topless. There is nothing inappropriate about the picture in a running magazine. It is grossly inappropriate for a newsmagazine article about her book.Look at it this way, if Newsweek ran a profile on Obama and used the picture of him from his college days wearing his pimp hat and puffing on what appears to be a joint, I doubt you would say "he posed for it". You only deny the obvious here because you are a dishonest hack and think sexism is ok as long as it is directed at the right person.
If it's fair to mock Dukakis for wearing a helmet that makes him look silly or Kerry for wearing a clean room suit then it's fair to mock Palin for making a silly pose.
She's a small-government conservative, and that makes her the target of everybody in the political class, no matter what party affiliation.What Palin can accomplish nationally is yet to be determined, but she will have all of the media working against her, aided by many in the GOP establishment.In regard to the media — well, coverage will continue to be snide or hostile, but there's no such thing as bad publicity so the more they yap, the better she comes out in the end. (The media haven't yet figured this out.)As for the opposition from the GOP establishment, her play here has to be over their heads to the general public. Given the attitude of the Tea Partyers around the country, this might work. Everything depends on Tea Party sentiments spreading wider, and their committment to small government becoming stronger.We'll see.
Palin -- or someone at Runners World -- chose the props: the shorts, the flag, the blue star banner. They communicate an image of herself that Palin wanted.For a running magazine! You don’t think that matters? You don’t run in a suit. RW does this feature in every magazine with some famous person in running clothes, usually in their office. I have never seen any of those pictures pop up on the cover of newsweek.
"If it's fair to mock Dukakis for wearing a helmet that makes him look silly or Kerry for wearing a clean room suit then it's fair to mock Palin for making a silly pose."Did Newsweek or any other newsmagazine ever put those pictures on the cover? No they didn't. This goes beyond people like you and I sitting around making fun of dumb pictures.
The problem is that a self-promoter will have pictures taken for one self-promotion that are not quite the right message for the next self-promotion. The pertinent question is: who has the rights to the Runners World picture? If it's Palin, then she okayed the Newsweek cover. If it's not Palin, why not?Good news for the photographer who took the Runner's World photo. Nice paycheck for the Newsweek cover, I'll guess.
Whaddyaknow, the bookstore has free wi-fi now. I can ost on Althouse as I scope out the Palin book. The problem of typing on the iPhone still remains. Firstly, the book is better-written than I suspected it wld be. Sadly, even her fans are influenced by the constant trashing of her talents.Secondly, LOL. Chapter One Starts out with a Lou Holtz quote. Wasn't he the Notre Dame coach? The exsportscaster reins her head.Thirdly, her very first memory -- of being at the Alaska State Fair 2008 -- has her checking out the various stalls, including one selling salmonberry wine. Americans have the most delectable berry names. Suddenly, she sees a poster of a baby with little wings, which turns out to be the Right to Life booth ...and the baby is Piper when she posed for it!Hooboy. My first thought is that this was a staggering conscious punch in the feminist estabishment's face.IOW, yay.More later guys.Cheers,Victoria
Newsweek's meme: A Traditional Values conservative woman is always a bad woman home wrecking the world created by progressive women that are loved by all for helping redistribute money to the needy children. The problem is that Sarah just doesn't look evil and she is known for loving her children for more than temporary props in a campaign drama. What a problem for the Newsweek crowd!
"The problem is that a self-promoter will have pictures taken for one self-promotion that are not quite the right message for the next self-promotion."You are just begging the quesiton. The issue is is it appropriate for Newsweek to take pictures totally out of context and use them to put her down? Take Palin out of it. What if Newsweek took a picture of Obama shooting a basketball with the caption "Obama gets serious about Iran"? There is nothing wrong with the picture, if published in ESPN the Magazine. But used in that way, it is clearly unfair to Obama. This is no different.
My first reaction to her complaint at the cover of Newsweek was, "why did you pose for the picture then?"Then your first reaction was ignorant.She posed for that picture for a magazine about running. In her running togs for a sporting magazine. As such the picture was appropriate for that magazine.Newsweak by using that photo on the cover was totally inappropriate and sexist. It was a not very subtle attempt, sexist, biased and just basically propogana for the Democrats. Of course we know that Newsweak and almost every other publication has thier lips vapor locked on the Democrat's asses and are actively propoganizing for Socialism.Some people are able to see throught this.Wake up people. Even if you don't like Sarah Palin or would never vote for her, WHY do you accept this type of media treatment?
the book is better-written than I suspected it wld be.http://www.lynnvincent.com/
They don't like to talk about it but there is a seperate Pulitzer award for that article that expresses the most contempt and malignancy for Sarah. It is the most hotly contested and highly envied of all the Pulitzer Prizes. Reporters and photographers would die to win it. In their entry last year, Newsweek submitted an article that was ostensibly about tabloid coverage of the Edwards' troubled marriage. That article featured a large picture of the Enquirer cover that proclaimed Palin was an adultress. It was an imaginative attempt to drown Palin in the Edwards' sleaze. Sadly for Newsweek that year's prize, almost by acclamation, went to Andrew Sullivan. But a new year is coming up.
Skyler said: "If it's fair to mock Dukakis for wearing a helmet that makes him look silly or Kerry for wearing a clean room suit then it's fair to mock Palin for making a silly pose."I don't think that anyone is saying that you can't mock silly poses (although I'm at somewhat of a loss to understand how a person who likes running, posing for a runner's magazine, in running clothes, is "silly"). What I (and I think others) am saying is that it is sexist and wrong to use the photo in an unrelated story, out of context, in a way that certainly appears to intend to belittle and say she's "just a girl."
The more I think about it, this is no different than Newsweek using a photo of Obama playing basketball with a serious headline. That would be a total racist dog wistle. It would totally convey the message that Obama is just a dumb jock, which is a traditional racist slam on black men. This is no different. Newsweek is saying Palin is nothing but a dumb sexpot.
PS: I agree with the conmenter who said this cover didn't make her look bad. IMHO, much contrary. Of course, the blurb is biased but people would be too busy thinking, Jesus, she's 45? Without Botox on her bod?Only to progressives would the cover suggest a slur (because they're trying too hard to bimbo-ise her on purpose, because pretty = dumb in their world).
"Only to progressives would the cover suggest a slur (because they're trying too hard to bimbo-ise her on purpose, because pretty = dumb in their world)."Maybe. But they would never use such a picture for any other politician. Of course no other politician is that good looking.
What I (and I think others) am saying is that it is sexist and wrong to use the photo in an unrelated story, out of context, in a way that certainly appears to intend to belittle and say she's "just a girl."Come on now. The only context in Runners World was "I have nice legs" None of those Runners World shots showed her actually running.
I could care less.When Obama was on the beach in Hawaii shirtless, do you think he figured he might be photographed? How about JFK in the surf before the 1960 election? With his perfect tan? That was some great beefcake.Reagan on the horse with the top button of his shirt open?Here's a list: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Ford, Reagan, Clinton, Obama. All were very good looking men who used their sex appeal to great advantage in their careers. Sex appeal helps? Who knew?
"Come on now. The only context in Runners World was "I have nice legs" None of those Runners World shots showed her actually running."What is the conext of Obama puffing a cig in his pimp hat from the 80s? Is it okay to use that picture?
The picture's fine, the idea that her constituency in the GOP base and the tea parties are some kind of malign influence is what's unfounded. We've already seen this sort of projection with Goldwater the year of her birth. The fact that she would not in a million years transfer Gitmo detainees to a civilian court, certainly not close Gitmo, give the troops in Afghanistan full support, and not saddle us with these flawed schemeslike stimulus funds to nonexistentcongressional districts. Probably contact interpol to detain Ahmadinejad for his part in the Quassemlou hit, twenty years ago, is more on point.
Come on now. The only context in Runners World was "I have nice legs" None of those Runners World shots showed her actually running.I take it you don’t read the magazine, but this is a monthly thing. I don’t remember any of the pictures showing somebody actually running. They are generally in their office, wearing running clothes. Gosh, most of the guys are even in shorts!!! Heavens to betsy!Newsflash. Lots of people run in shorts.
There is merit to the argument that it's not a good photo choice for an article about a politician. I still wonder, though, who owns the rights and thus okayed the cover. Image is all to a politician -- if you don't control your image, I'm going to ask why.(Will this picture sell more magazines vs. a head shot or Sarah in a business-y type suit?)
MM, I'm wondering who owns the rights too. It's possible newsweek and runners world are related in some way.As for politicians, here is the NY Governor's picture from the same series. And most of the women were wearing shorts, but alot of them were actors/tv personalities. http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-243-410--13069-0,00.html
Is it okay to use that picture?It's OK to use any picture the subject posed for within the past year.
There are differences between B. Hussein in the surf and this pose of Palin.Let's be clear, I like Palin and her ideology. A lot! Not everything, but the big points anyway.But the pose of B. Hussein in the surf was meant to convey virility and strength. Personally, I think he looks like a sissy boy with skinny arms that aren't even strong enough to control a bowling ball enough to get a grown up score.The pose of Palin is not meant to convey strength, it's meant to convey beauty. I'm sorry, but the facts are that we don't want politicians who are beautiful, we want ones that are strong. If you can be both, more power to you, but if you want to portray yourself as beautiful then you risk that being contrasted with your strength. It's really that simple.The wise way to use beauty or good looks is to allow the viewer to see it without overtly expressing it. If she were in shorts and doing something instead of posing and bending her legs so cutely, then that would be fine. A pose of her actually running would be great. A national politician has to be intensely aware of how he or she presents themself at all times. Cheesecake photos do not get a lot of votes. So the analogy with Dukakis and Kerry is apt. Wearing a helmet is very appropriate when riding in a tank. Wearing a clean room suit is appropriate when touring a chip manufacturing plant. Wearing shorts is appropriate when you're running. But she wasn't running. She was posing. And that makes it even more admissable to use it against her.
Is anyone surprised by Newsweek's decision? I mean, are they the soft gummed fellators of the current President?
Wearing shorts is appropriate when you're running. But she wasn't running. She was posing. And that makes it even more admissable to use it against her.Moron
Skylar--Those poses from Dukakis and Kerry were meant to be shown for political purposes. Both men were campaigning, and that's why those pictures were taken. Palin posed for a runners magazine, and nothing more. That's the difference.
P.S. I don't think the photo is bad at all. It's the words to the left of it on the cover that I find questionable.
Skyler said: "I'm sorry, but the facts are that we don't want politicians who are beautiful, we want ones that are strong. If you can be both, more power to you, but if you want to portray yourself as beautiful then you risk that being contrasted with your strength. It's really that simple."Women, remember to hide your bodies completely at all times or you will never be taken seriously! (BTW, your observations about the world are not incorrect, this situation, among many others, proves that. But the fact that it is out there, and that Newsweek perpetuates and encourages it, is a huge problem for any woman who wants to retain any aspect of her femininity while pursuing a career. As Shanna pointed out, men can pose in shorts or even shirtless without a problem.)
Newsweek is owned by the Washington Post Company. Runner's World belongs to Rodale Inc. The picture was taken by a photographer named Brian Adams. You can find it on his site (baphotos.com) with a copyright notice at the bottom of the page on which it is displayed.You're welcome.
I have no idea why you find the picture objectionable. She is a good looking woman. Did you also object to th shirtless pictures of Obama?
From Brian Adams' bio page:Brian Adams is a freelance photographer based in Anchorage, Alaska. In 2005 after two years of assisting one of Alaska's most prominent photographers he started freelancing. Adams specializes in environmental portraiture. He offers both large format film and digital capture. His clients include both local and international corporations and publications.
To add to my last comment, I'm particularly bothered by the fact that she is getting flack when she was dressed appropriately for the context. If she had been, say, showing up at professional events in a mini-skirt and halter top, that would be worth making fun of. But shorts should not be out of line for a feature about running.
This information was brought to you by an arguably undereducated, certainly underemployed woman living in flyover country who nonetheless has figured out how to Google (and confirmed the magazine ownerships and determined the photographer in less than 4 minutes.Yes, I'm feeling snotty this morning. Tough.
Thank you reader.I know a free-lancer, so when I see him next, I'll ask about ownership of a picture like this. Palin must have signed a release for the image to the photographer if she didn't okay its use by Newsweek (and do we know that?).
DBQ, watch your tone. You are impolite and inappropriate. Incivility reflects badly on you.Lyssa, the difference is that B. Hussein did not pose with his shirt off. No one dislikes him more than I do, but he wasn't overt about his posing. It may be true that the result was intended (in fact, I'm sure it was) but he wasn't standing in front of a prop and saying "cheese."Palin, on the other hand, is openly posing in a cheesecake photo. This puts a different character on the nature of the photo and the photo session. I'm not saying that it's fair or even good. Life isn't fair. It's just the way it is.B. Hussein was cynically trying to influence the voters with his body. Palin is not. But the way both photos were taken gives the opposite impression and it's fair game to use that against Palin.
Palin is a good looking woman. Much better looking than that reformed fatty Tina Fey.
They are generally in their office, wearing running clothes. Gosh, most of the guys are even in shorts!!! There are seven pictures, not one, in Palin's RW photospread. Taking a picture of her running would have been easy as she's outdoors in most of them.
"Palin, on the other hand, is openly posing in a cheesecake photo."How is that a cheesecake photo? It is jus ther in her shorts. There is nothing wrong with it. It is not pornographic. It is just grosly inappropriate for the cover of Newsweek. Putting that photo on the cover is the equivilent of her showing up in a running suit to a business meeting.
I will shortly be posting links to blogposts by Brian Adams about related to shooting pictures of Sarah Palin, but I need to check my son's math work for a couple of minutes and assign him some English.
"Taking a picture of her running would have been easy as she's outdoors in most of them."So, if she had been running it would be okay in your mind? That is rediculous. The aricle was about her work out not her running form. If anyone did this to a person you liked, you would be appalled.
Cheesecake photo? She has running clothes and shoes on, not some french maid outfit with high heels.
Cheesecake doesn't mean pornographic, in fact it means the opposite. At least it does as far as I intended it to mean. Words like that are not strictly defined so perhaps I shouldn't have used the word. The photo was intended to show off her legs in a way that doesn't suggest sex overtly but does promote her looks. That's what I meant by "cheesecake."
Here's one.Here's another about the Time Inc. cover).And here's the one from this past Sunday (though the earlier two are more interesting.
"The photo was intended to show off her legs in a way that doesn't suggest sex overtly but does promote her looks. That's what I meant by "cheesecake."I would imagine they were taken to show what great shape she is in. All work out magazines do those kinds of articles. Here is so and so who is this important of a person and this is their workout routine and look how fantastic they look. That is pretty standard fair for those kinds of magazines. The reaction to this picture shows that none of Palin's critics are serious when it comes to her. Any serious critic would say "I don't like or agree with Palin, but that is really a nasty thing of Newsweek to do." That is what I would say if the did the same to Hillary Clinton. And I did say the same when the media was ripping on Hillary about her clothes during the primaries. But, the unserious critics who look desparately for any excuse to put her down, the Andrew Sullivans of the world, just giggle and think this is great.
Reader_jam,From those blog posts, she seems like a very pleasent person, especially to someone like a photographer whom she doesn't have to be nice to. No wonder liberals hate her so much. She doesn't even know how to handle those kinds of people.
If anyone did this to a person you liked, you would be appalled.Recycle a cover photo from one magazine to a different magazine? The Palin protectors come out, not realizing this kerfuffle merely shows, once again, her lack of foresight, her inability to think through the consequences of her acts.Palin is the anti-Obama. Obama is Ready-Aim-Aim-Aim-Aim-Fire, while Palin is just Fire!
A photo later used by Andrew Sullivan is mentioned in the comments attached to one of those blogposts. The photographer comments.
I said sexist but it doesn't matter.Palin's hot. That's just kind of how it is, but I really doubt that a male candidate similarly endowed with good looks would get the same treatment.Does it matter? Doubtful. The people who liked her will continue to like her, and the people who don't, won't.What I think is more noteworthy is that Newsweek has set itself up to be in the position of either a sour old nun or the Nazis.Go figure.
I'm thinking the "Rapport" referred to by Adams is a stock photo agency or repository or something, but I haven't confirmed this for sure.
If you all want conservative male beefcake see hereThis is Conservative/Libertarian Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona's 6th district. His website here
"Recycle a cover photo from one magazine to a different magazine?"First, if you are going to have a discussion, stop lying. We are not talking about just recyling a photo and you know it. You are not Jeremey so stop acting like it.The issue is using a grossly inappropriate photo for the headline and the context. To state it once again, this is like using a photo of Obama playing basketball with the headline "Obama gets serious about Iran." That would be grossly unfair and borderline racist. And you would have a fit. So, either consider the contra examples and make an argument or shut the hell up. But, stop begging the question and lying. We already have Jeremy and Cook for that job. You are usually a little better than that.
DBQ, watch your tone. You are impolite and inappropriate. Incivility reflects badly on youScrew you. I'll use any tone I like.Stupidity reflects badly upon you.A photo of a person in running togs and wearing running shoes... and yes showing off her athletic form for a magazine about running and about being athletic is completely appropriate. The fact that you think this is cheesecake is revealing and not very attractive.The misuse of the photo by a magazine for another and completely unrelated (to running) story is a deliberate attempt to make Palin look poorly. I haven't read the article and would not pay a penny for the magazine, but I bet that they didn't reference that the photo was taken for Runners World and not a recent pose for their shit rag.I don't care if it was Hillary or any other woman, this is institutionalized sexism at its very worst. And you are condoning it.
"A photo later used by Andrew Sullivan is mentioned in the comments attached to one of those blogposts. The photographer comments."I would imagine Sullivan "uses" the picture quiet frequently in the privacy of is bathroom. When you think about that would explain Sullivan's derrangement over Palin. She has caused him to have a crisis of sexuality.
I've been told that my profile picture scares young children.
And the picture at Andrew Sullivan is the same as the Newsweek cover.I like the Time cover picture of Palin better.
John wrote: Here is so and so who is this important of a person and this is their workout routine and look how fantastic they look. That is pretty standard fair for those kinds of magazines.Yeah, and Playboy has a standard fare for their magazine, too. Politicians shouldn't be posing that way in their magazine just because it's the way the magazine does it and it's appropriate for that magazine.I have to insist again that I really like Palin and would not object if she were to be president. I think she would make good decisions. I don't know if she can get anything undone because she has yet to build a political machine to get others to adopt her ideas, but she's in the process of doing that now. I wish her luck.But she has been showing a tendency to allow others to manipulate her, including this photo session. It just wasn't a wise idea. It doesn't matter if criticism is accurate or not. In politics it only matters if it's effective. She has great legs. She didn't need to remind us of that and this makes it look to some that this is her only good quality. She should be more discrete in how she reminds us of how hot she is.You don't need to like this, but that's the way the world works.She can still use the photo to her advantage, and the newsweek cover, too. I hope she does. But so far she's gotten a minor smack from those that hate her.
If you all want conservative male beefcake see hereThat looks like a picture from Survivor or something. Was he stranded on a desert island?There was some really gorgeous pictures of Palin from the Runners World shoot with pretty mountains behind her.
DBQ, you're so cute when you're angry. You're such a sweetie pie. Don't let the real world bother you any, you're obviously too delicate, and we don't want you to have any fainting spells.Find an argument, babe, and don't let insults do your thinking. You're not being very rational. Too emotional. I think you should go get your nails done and maybe you'll feel better. Or go buy a new outfit. Run along now, dear. Serious people are having a discussion.
Skyler,I think she had a right to expect that the photos done for runners world would not be reused by Newsweek for a cover. And even if you ding her being naive for not realizing how depraved Newsweek and the MSM are, that doesn't make the Newsweek any less depraved or in anyway excuse them.
How about JFK in the surf before the 1960 election? With his perfect tan? That was some great beefcake.I remember the hair plastered on his chest (the guy was a sweater) from the water, and a bevy of suddenly appearing women all around him. Now that's political staging boy...'cause he sure didn't need it for picking up the babes.Cheers,Victoria
Run along now, dear. Serious people are having a discussion.Lovely. Is that some misguided attempt at parody? Look, you don't think she should be in Runner's World. Fine. But it is ridiculous to think that Newsweek didn't choose to run that particular picture for very specific reasons that don't show them in a very good light. Also, apologize for the grammar typo in my previous post.
I think she had a right to expect that the photos done for runners world would not be reused by Newsweek for a cover.Do you mean that the photographer violated an agreement they had? Palin should sue.
MadisonMan: I didn't click over to Sullivan (still don't go there, well over a year after I said I wouldn't), so I didn't know that. But it's interesting what the photographer said himself about that photo, in his own comment section, back then.
Shanna, of course it was a parody.And yes, I certainly think Newsweek did this on purpose. But that's why politicians should be very careful of their image. Dukakis wearing a helmet was very appropriate, but that didn't stop everyone from mocking him for looking goofy and using that image to remind everyone that he could not be trusted on defense issues. Kerry just looked plain goofy in the clean room suit. There was no point in parading that picture around except to point out what a goof ball he looks like.Palin looks great in that photo, but she looks like she's showing off her legs. She does have very nice legs. But if you're going to show off your legs, you deserve to put up with comments that this is your only positive trait. It's not sexist, it's just fodder for the opposition.
I think she had a right to expect that the photos done for runners world would not be reused by Newsweek for a cover.That would depend on the release she signed with the Photographer.Or are you intentionally trying to portray her as naive?
It's not like we all didn't know Newsweek was biased. It's just a cheap shot with an old-news photo. It's not a big deal though - but only because Sarah looks hot.
Good point about her legs, Skyler. Palin should have grabbed her eyeliner pencil and put a couple of long scars with some stitches on her legs. You betcha!
Skyler said: "Yeah, and Playboy has a standard fare for their magazine, too. Politicians shouldn't be posing that way in their magazine just because it's the way the magazine does it and it's appropriate for that magazine."There's a huge difference between Playboy and Runner's World. Huge. I don't think that we are disagreeing that a woman has to make a choice between being at all womanly and achievement. I'm bothered by the facts that 1) this is wrong and harmful to young women who want to achieve, 2) this is encouraged by mainstream publications, and 3) liberals, who claim to be *for* women, are the worst perpetrators, yet they get a pass. The left has a hold on women that it doesn't want to lose. If you're going to be conservative, you are expected to be quiet about it. If you don't, they will do everything they can to destroy you.
Here's an observation I'm almost afraid to make (observation, not an offering of fact, as earlier in this thread):That picture brought to my mind the movie "Miss Firecracker," the one Holly Hunter starred in what, 20 years ago? I don't generally "do" psychologizing, especially publicly, and by design, but I must say I have to wonder at least a bit about the (at least unconcious) underpinnings here.
OKAY!!First... I thought someone had implied that Sarah Palin did not like the use of this photo. If she's said anything about it at all I'd love to see the quote.I clicked through and it's just some guy from CBN news (!) fussing over it. Who cares?I've been reading complaints about the "How do you solve a problem like Sarah" being an utterly misused reference to Sound of Music, and "bad for the GOP and everyone else" and not a single word bad about the picture... which all of those complaining had certainly seen before (and appreciated).In any case... what is the message of the photo and the choice of captions?(I haven't seen any commentary at all on whatever Newsweek said *between* the cover art.)Is it sexist? Maybe just a little. Or rather, maybe it was meant to be.But in the end it can only be positive because in the end, while we might dock people for fertility, we reward our politicians, greatly reward them, for virility. Okay? So "virile" doesn't quite apply but healthy, fit, and athletic DO apply.We talked a bit about Obama's basketball habits... well Palin was a for-real basketball star and it's easy to see her, cute as she is, putting on some sweats and playing with the boys... and playing to win. And those of us who read the Running World article know that while she doesn't intend to play basketball with Obama, she did throw-down on him for distance running.I think that the affect of the Newsweek cover, whatever the intent, is to present a young, healthy, athletic person who isn't going away.
Lovely. Is that some misguided attempt at parody? No. It just confirms my suspicions that Skyler is a sexist pig and that it is not worth attempting to discuss this issue with him.
"Fred4Pres said... Kathyrn Lopez and Hugh Hewitt aside, most of us are not that thrilled by "sexy" photos of Mitt Romney."I wouldn't put Romney or Pawlenty up with Palins photogenic charisma...but clearly both guys far surpass her in brains and executive experience. And both are handsome.Charisma is nice, but if charisma was the only thing that mattered, Jesse Jackson would have been the nominee in 1984 against Reagan, Nixon never would have been President, and Teddy who had his own Palin-like Cult on the Left would have been a 2-termer in the Whitehouse.
That was me!Not Rachel. (But isn't the little picture cute?)
Leadership styles among men usually favor intelligent and sharply dressed leaders over the opposite style. The question is how sexy can a woman be and we still say that she is intelligent and sharply dressed. Carly Fiorino comes to mind as a easier woman to accept leadership from. But Palin is Palin and she cannot quit having great legs and an instant rapport with traditional americans. We will need to see her intelligence when she is given a forum to display it. In the meantime she is sharply dressed and personable.
Synova (re: "Rachel" comment): Palin has expressed her dislike of the use of this photo. She posted about it on her Facebook page last night.And yes, that picture is cute.
"Picture" referring to the Rachel avatar of which Synova spoke.
Lyssa, all your three listed points are correct. But nothing has been fair about politics for a long time.Rachel, Sarah has indeed complained about Newsweek's use of this photo on her facebook page.http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=175955933434Here's the text of her post: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 PalinSeems to me that she likes the attention and likes keeping up the running story of her being attacked by traditional media.DBQ, I haven't said a single sexist thing, except to mock you, and you richly deserve mocking today. I've only been talking about what a politician should expect and how they should be very careful to manage their image.If Sarah doesn't like the use of photos out of context, then she should be more careful in making photos that can be exploited out of context.WV: believe it or not is "hystrc" or as Lance Ito would rule, a very sexist word.
Some of you have such Palin Derangement Syndrome it's not funny. I occasionally read Runners World. Once they had a profile of Gov. Paterson of NY (yeah, he's blind and he runs!). Can you imagine if Newsweek did a political story about Paterson and put a photo of him in running shorts on the cover? Yeah, I'm sure you'd all say, "He asked for it by posing for Runners World!" What about Hillary Clinton? What about a cover of the Sec. of State, but using paparrazi photos of her on the beach with Bill? Yeah, I'm sure that'd be cool too.
As far as ownership of the photo:Unless Palin commissioned the photoshoot for herself and paid the photographer for the rights as well, then the rights belong to the photographer or the company that commissioned the photoshoot and paid for the rights to them.Given the context of the original photoshoot, it is likely that either Runner's World parent corporation, Rodale Press, or the photographer himself owns the rights to the photographs and sold them to the Washington Post for use on the cover of their Newsweek magazine.At the end of the day, this was the management of the Washington Post - you know, the folks who got busted selling access to the Obama administration to the highest bidder? - attempting some not so subtle dismissal of Palin while also trying desperately to keep their 3 remaining Newsweek subscribers from cancelling their subscriptions.
I like how Palin refers to herself in third person in that response. Is someone keeping track of the Obama-I versus the Palin-Palin references? Could be fun. There could be charts and colorful illustrations.
I like the panty hose under the shorts.Slick. Again, she is portraying herself as victimizedwhen it is clear she cooperated with this shot. I think she should stand up for herself and say-Yeah this is me. Instead she complains about it on FB.
Were I Palin, I think I'd much rather have a magazine use a pretty picture of me on their cover than the kind of malicious, ugly photo that is usually reserved for negative campaign ads....I understand the discontent on some level, but things can most certainly get worse than this. (Not to mention, I'm sure Newsweek expects to sell more copies of the Palin issue based solely on this cover.)
The only good-looking men who've been national political figures in the last 50 years are JFK and Quayle.Obama's a nice-enough looking man (so was W. for that matter), but JFK and Quayle were handsome men. Evan Bayh is probably the best looking guy who has a shot at being President in the next 20 years. Palin's definitely the best-looking woman who has a shot.
I'm a registered sexist, but I don't think this picture even raises to the level of cheesecake. As Palin writes, the picture projects her health and fitness. There is always a slightly flirtatious way about her, and that is included in the picture. But there is nothing come hither or seductive about her look. This is the photographic equivalent of a quote being taken out of context. Newsweek attempts to portray her as an airhead simply because of her good looks.....There were plenty of pictures of Bush(es), Clinton, and Carter out jogging. Clinton, in particular, used to look blubbery and sweaty during his work outs. No one took a photo of him looking lame and used it to illustrate an article about how lame some policy of his was.....I can sympathize with Palin. I'm an ex-marathoner. I am sometimes uncomfortable with the lascivious looks that women, particularly older ones, give my legs when I wear shorts while jogging. There is no wish on my part to excite their lust, but there you have it. It's just the way humans are made.
Only to progressives would the cover suggest a slur (because they're trying too hard to bimbo-ise her on purpose, because pretty = dumb in their world). (vbspurs 9:42)Exactly! This cover doesn't reflect badly on Palin from the perspective of normal, decent people. It is the transparency of Newsweek's malignant motives that is interesting, along with the silliness of leftist dimwits like fls who defend Newsweek with inanities such as: "Palin is like Carrie Prejean" (9:20)---------------... it's fair to mock Palin for making a silly pose. (Skyler 9:07)She was posing. And that makes it even more admissable to use it against her. (Skyler 10:04)Consider the possibility that a magazine calling itself "Newsweek", as opposed to, say, "Partisanweek, ought not to be "mocking" or "using ... against" a political figure.
Forget the Palin photo. Scroll down and check out Hillary's eyebrows in her Newsweek cover!!
She has running clothes and shoes on, not some french maid outfit with high heels.I'll be in my bunk.
All the sexy photos they had of Mitt Romney came out looking too much like Emma Watson.
elHombre,I think you and many people here are equating my expectation of a politician to expect dirty play to forgiving that dirty play.Of course Newsweek is reprehensible. I thought that most people knew this without mentioning it. They have been supporting socialism and now an overt communist for a long time now. They are a scummy magazine, without question. I didn't think that needed to be stated.What I'm saying is that a politician who aspires to national office should be aware of how otherwise innocent things are going to be purposefully taken out of context. If she's going to pose showing off her legs (she's not just standing, she's standing in a way that displays her legs prominently and does so knowingly) then she should expect to be criticized for it. It's not right, but it's a fact.
First Putin, then Obama, (did Sarkosy do one?) and now Palin--regretably, Palin is not topless. And hell has frozen over: Robert Cook and I agree one at least one thing.Can't wait till one of the news mags does a mud wrestling photo shoot between Pelosi and Boxer--now THAT would be something.
Skyler wrote (2:54): ...she's standing in a way that displays her legs prominently and does so knowingly) then she should expect to be criticized for it. It's not right, but it's a fact.Who's criticizing her? I think the point of Althouse's post is that over and above the bias always shown by Newsweek, they resorted to obvious sexism in the selection of the photo.I'm sure they intended for it to reflect negatively on Palin and it may -- with the lefties who already dislike her, including the few remaining pinheads who still read Newsweek.wv "emoodeda" = Obama is in deep emoodeda over his indecision on Afghanistan.
Ann - "But really, Palin (obviously) posed for that picture. It's funny and it gets your attention. It's a little silly and desperate of Newsweek to use it, but..."But it already ran on another magazine cover so this is just another case of Princess Sarah whining.
Shanna;That looks like a picture from Survivor or something. Was he stranded on a desert island?Ding, ding, ding, ding!!You win the prize. See story here.
I think Beth has finally figured it out.Sarah Palin is really Ricky Henderson.
Her legs are rather...thick.
Allen - "Does Newsweek have right to use that picture?"Oh, no...they probably just forgot all about copyright and trademark law and just ran it anyway.Duh.
I think she is taking that stance to narrow the appearance of her legs so she isn't criticized for having cankles.Hillary is criticized for having cankles.Hillary wears pantsuits to hide the cankles and neutralize the issue.Hillary is criticized for wearing pantsuits.The way both Hillary and Palin were treated during the campaign was a turnoff to me. Feministing was right, on this score.If The Big O ever grows a pair and does something spineful, Newsweak should run the fedora smoking photo with the caption, "Keeping His Pimp Hand Strong!"*sigh*
Oh, and note, now that Hillary has some actual accomplishments of her own, she is not being featured as a cover woman. (The cover below Palin's at the link.)Because she's old and ugly now.You can't win.
Fred4Pres said... Kathyrn Lopez and Hugh Hewitt aside, most of us are not that thrilled by "sexy" photos of Mitt Romney.Hewitt is a Romney uberfan. I don't want to see sexy photos of Romney because I fear it will involve his sacred under garments.
The pic of Palin is hot.
On the other hand, this Newsweek cover is a shrewd strategic maneuver to demean Palin without having to take responsibility for it. I think it's brilliant. They take an inelegantly, even laughably propped photo where Palin is an obvious participant as opposed to being a manipulated subject, and recontextualize it to show how far out she is willing to travel on the road of self promotion. They beat her at her own game and in the process shield themselves from what would have been the inevitable criticism if they had dolled her up themselves and posed her the same way.
мультфильмэлектронная почта без регистрации
Post a Comment