Sexist Democratic Strategy: Portray Sarah Palin As Tabloid Slut–Updated

Today, we’re going to look at magazine covers and contemplate whether there is really media bias. First, let’s look at the Obama covers. How do you feel looking at them?

Now, for the McCain covers. Notice any differences?

Notice the difference, not only in sheer volume, but in the feel of the covers. A photographer is capturing his or her interpretation of a person in a portrait. There is a certain aspect of his character or personality he wants to catch.

The Obama covers are invariably adoring. The photograher wants him to look approachable, human, funny, interesting, youthful, yet “ready”. The McCain covers, contrastingly, either blare negative headlines, portray him as serious, distant, maybe arrogant or in the Time cover, a little crazy. There is a method to this visual madness. The editorial staff knows exactly what they’re doing.

Nice! I have more for you, though. When I was grocery shopping the other day. I counted four magazine covers doing glossy family photos of Barack Obama. How many magazines had the fashionable and stylish Cindy McCain or the McCain family? Exactly zero. Don’t tell me there isn’t media bias.

Now, let’s talk about Sarah Palin. She hasn’t made any magazine covers yet, but they’re coming. Michelle Malkin reports the latest disgusting media display of sexism and really, just plain hate:

A source forwards the following e-mail from former Clinton operative and Us weekly flack, Mark Neschis, that went out to all media in St. Paul:

Thought I would send over our Us Weekly/Sarah Palin cover story, on stands Friday, if helpful in your coverage. Might be useful as an illustration of how the news is playing out.(Us Weekly has 12 million, mostly female readers)
Mark Neschis
Corporate Communications Director
Wenner Media
Us Weekly | Rolling Stone | Men’s Journal

Steve Hayes notes that Us publisher Jann Wenner is a prominent Obama donor.
Wenner also publishes Rolling Stone, which deified Obama in March.

Go look at the pictures at Michelle’s.

For so long, the answer to the skewed coverage was that McCain has been around forever and Obama is a fresh face. But what of Sarah Palin’s disgusting coverage? She’s new. She’s beautiful. She’s a fresh face. She’s a smart woman. It’s not just sexism. It’s that she is a threat to the Obamessiah.

And they know what they’re doing here, too:

Let’s analyze this for a minute. Notice the lighting. It is harsh and bright. Contrast that with the Obama US cover where the Obamas are in soft focus. Sarah Palin’s face looks over-exposed making her nose appear bigger than it is. Her eyes also look a little wide making her seem too excited and inauthentic.

This is all purposeful. Every last bit of the vicious biased coverage has a point: and that is to get favored son Barack Obama elected. Ace calls this the “Tabloidization of Sarah“. No kidding.

Over at Sundries Shack:

I wonder if the real reason the left is attacking Bristol Palin is because she’s the only one they could find to attack with less real-world experience than Barack Obama. I mean, give her a few years and even she’ll have a resume with more heft than the Obamessiah. Unless, of course, she decided to make her living begging for tax money and sucking up to rich criminals and bigots. Given her Mom, though, I see that as pretty unlikely.

Susan Estrich called the actions of “my friends” …”the sexist, vicious, hateful attacks on Sarah Palin.”

Newsbusters has more about the US cover:

The Us magazine cover story is filed under the URL slug “sarah-palin-very-difficult-to-work-with”. This particular smear job on Sarah Palin was literally spoon fed to the magazine and bloggers on the left by the Huffington Post that featured a hacked up YouTube version of the interview that was edited to take Governor Palin out of context and make the incident sound worse than it really was. (Full interview here)

Oh yes, let’s trot that one out. Any strong woman with an opinion, Martha Stewart, Michelle Malkin, needs to learn to sit down and shut up otherwise she’s branded as “difficult.”

This is how it’s going to go. The politics of personal destruction, indeed.

Just for balance: Sarah Palin has not been given a hummer by an intern in the Governor’s Office. Sarah Palin is not accused of rape. Sarah Palin did not lose $60 million dollars of service organization’s money with a former terrorist Bill Ayers. Sarah Palin did not buy her house with the help of a sleazy criminal with terrorist ties. Sarah Palin did not fuck a guy she picked up at a bar, hire him to her campaign, get pregnant by him and pay him off for the last year. More importantly Bristol Palin did none of these things.

And The Anchoress wonders something I’ve been wondering. Where’s Hillary Clinton? Well, she won’t cry to many tears if Sarah Palin goes down. If there’s one thing that unites Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton right now, it’s that Sarah Palin must be stopped. She is a threat to all they hold dear. Still, The Anchoress hopes for these people (I’m not a former Democrat so I don’t feel especially desolate over their craven actions because I never believed them to begin with, but man, what a come down if you believed that they actually stood for the rights of all women):

You’d think Hillary – a “lifelong advocate for women and children” – would be stepping up, mildly, even, to ask her Angry Left friends to at least pretend – give a little lip service – to the long-standing idea that women and their choices, and their children were sort of, you know…to be respected, a little? Where is Hillary? We don’t know.

Nope, this is the way it’s going to be until the election. And no, Fox pundits, this is not going to die down. This is war. Until election day, expect to see Sarah Palin used and abused like the cheap Republican slut the press views her as being. She’ll get the treatment afforded all whores because that’s how they view her.

Posted in America • Corrupted Culture • Entertain Me • Isms • Political Animals
Tags: Feminism • Media • Men • MSM • Psychology • Sex • Sexism • Women