Tuesday, March 29, 2011
The Associated Press photography staff is at it again! The Telegraph's caption for this photo is as parve as it gets: "President Barack Obama speaks about Libya." I am quite sure that you, or even your angry drunk of an uncle, can do better.
Feel free to square the halo with this fact-check, also from the Associated Press.
Before anyone answers, Senator Schumer wants to inform you that you are all extreme, and racist, and you don't care about America and God hates you (or at least the President does).
Back to the captioning now.
"Who threw that shoe?"
I'm at a loss toward why people think there are conspiracies, but let's see what the public comes up with for captions. Hopefully some will be amusing and not venal.
Maybe instead of engaging in silly contests, we should try to engage in discourse and analysis, and come to a consensus for both sides. I do not support this President's policies for the most part, but I don't have to resort to attacks on camera angles. That is something a trog and a showman like Sean Hannity would do, not thoughtful conservatives. I try to find solutions rather than cheer as if in a bloodletting Yankee-Red Sox playoff. We can do better
If I didn't know background I would have said the photo was an obvious send up.. some not so discrete mockery.
And frankly, this still looks like mockery to me.. its just that its the subconscious of the photographer doing it.
"we can do better", gerard? you mean like chuck schumer and (apparently) the entire democrat party, who're on the record as having a *policy* of calling _every_ GOP idea/notion/plan as "extreme"?
you mean better like that? because after all, that sort of behavior is the sort of crapola that a trog and a shrill carny barker like chris matthews would do, doncha think?
our Dear Leader seems to want it both ways: he wouldn't touch libya with a 10-foot pole until france and the UN said it was ok, refuses any sort of US leadership role, but.....still wants to take any and all credit for anything good that might come out of this. revolts and massacres in iran, ivory coast, darfur et al are pointedly ignored. so why *shouldn't* we bash the mendacious egomaniac stupid fool manchild and his sycophantic media stooges?
"Hopefully some will be amusing and not venal."
Venal? Did you mean something else, like maybe "vulger"? Venal means one is so greedy and dishonorable that he/she is easily corruptible. It refers to love of money over duty or honor.
I hate being lectured to by a moralizing ninny, so, because you may decide to hang around here and keep posting I'll just assume you made a hasty error instead.
C'mon Gerrard, have some fun! Be just a little out of your apparently normal character: Show us you can come up with the best demeaning caption yet.
"I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will tell our children that this was the moment when my administration acknowledged the disconnect between consequence free campaign promises and the hard choices that come with leading the world's largest superpower. This was the moment when my poll numbers came out of free fall and my presidential approval ratings began to HEAL! This was the moment when democracy promotion became the last best hope for my re-election in 2012. Yeeeeeaaaarrrggghh!!!!!"