Only one tabloid correctly summed up the news of the day, the free daily Metro
All the others (except for the Post which chose to ignore it) went with the same
nauseating, patronizing photo
over and over, reminding me of the look of the press in a dictatorship (there were two newspapers, both looking identical)
7 comments
May 27, 2009 at 11:16 am
angiencpets
I posted the same thing on TW — wtf? Would Obama be doing that creepy patronizing hug with a male appointee? See, even when he appoints a woman (who, btw, is as “safe” a choice re: legal theory as he could have made) he still has to be a condescending prick.
May 27, 2009 at 1:20 pm
edgeoforever
You’re right! I originally thought it was a photoshop – but corrected my text after realizing it was “live”. Frankly, having missed the televised version, I couldn’t believe he’d do that!
May 27, 2009 at 12:26 pm
cj
They nailed it on Hillaryis44:
“For Obama the Sotomayor appointment was close to a “must do” for the Latino and Women communities. This was not a high-minded, requires deep thought decision. It was a check the boxes decision. It is entirely consistent with Obama’s lack of everything except concern for his personal advancement.”
It was a good choice, but Obama risked nothing by chosing her.
On the other hand, supporting gay rights would have required a backbone & may have cost him some votes.
(btw, the admins @ Hillaryis44 have harsh words for the GLBT leadership who decided to back Obama even though he started throwing gays under the bus early the primaries.)
It’s also not surprising that the political opportunist would hold the Sotomayer news conference this week in an attempt to bury any stories about Prop 8.
Everything is calculated in this WH.
May 27, 2009 at 4:37 pm
sister of ye
I have pretty harsh words for the GLBT leadership, too. Along with the feminist leadership, the AA leadership, and every other group who blithely fell in with this con artist. Whether they thought Obama would actually help their membership, or were after their own power positions, they willfully deluded themselves that Obama would benefit anyone but himself and his closest cronies.
Not only that but, as Bush and his creeps did with the religious right, Obama and friends are doubtless laughing their asses off behind their backs.
May 27, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Mrs. Bucket (Boo-Kay!)
Sorry OT, but interesting.
“RED ALERT: Did Anti-Obama Campaign Contributions Dictate Which Dealers Were Shuttered?
Some excellent sleuthing by…you guessed it, bloggers….reveals a grossly disproportionate correlation between dealerships closed by Chrysler and political contributions. Guess which party got the bulk of donations from the shuttered dealers? DirectorBlue broke the story and is filing ongoing updates:
I have thus far found only a single Obama donor (and a minor one at that: $200 from Jeffrey Hunter of Waco, Texas) on the closing list.
Chrysler claimed that its formula for determining whether a dealership should close or not included “sales volume, customer service scores, local market share and average household income in the immediate area.”
In fact, there may have been other criteria involved: politics may have played a part. If this data can be validated, it would appear to be further proof that the Obama administration is willing to step over any line to advance its agenda.”
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/tues-round-up-palin-tweets-big-question-alarming-link-found-between-shuttered-car-dealers-political-contributions-obama-nominates-ethnic-activist-to-scotus-calif-supremes-say-yes-to-8/#more-8421
May 27, 2009 at 5:55 pm
angrynana
“so-er” looks more Chinese than Hispanic. Were both her parents Hispanic?
June 1, 2009 at 5:06 am
Tabloids using identical headlines « Not Your Sweetie
[...] time it was the same photo. This time, it’s the same cutesy [...]