10/09/2008
GOP Media Consultant Apoplectic 'Regular Hockey Mom' Not Retouched
This is what FAUX News has come to.
How dare they not rid Sarah Palin "of the real flaws that human beings have!"
Andrea Tantaros, Republican Media Consultant: "This cover is a clear slap in the face at Sarah Palin. Why? Because it's unretouched. It highlights every imperfection that every human being has. But we're talking unwanted facial hair, pores, wrinkles. This is a gross slap in the face to Sarah Palin after Newsweek has done so many favorable covers of Barack Obama that make him look presidential. They are clearly retouched. He looks flawless."
Watch the hilarity, AFTER THE JUMP...
Posted 12:42 PM EST by Andy Towle in Magazines, News, Republican Party, Sarah Palin | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
That's because they used up all the concealer covering up McCain's carcinoma's and scars.
This is news?
Posted by: Rad | Oct 9, 2008 12:50:37 PM
When I saw the photo--before I read anything--I was surprised at how well she looked. Yeah, there are some slight wrinkles, but for her age, she looks really good.
And how could this hurt her? It's not that big of deal to begin with.
Posted by: Tom S. | Oct 9, 2008 12:53:39 PM
Wow. As someone who sees Palin as a serious THREAT to my family, I am loving how freakishly creepy and yes - SCARY - she looks "framed" in the photo.
AND SHE IS SCARY!
My marriage would not cause her family ANY grief beyond challenging their spiritual arrogance. Her political party's desire to deny my (our) family marriage has, is, and will cause trauma and harm to myself and countless LGBT Americans.
Posted by: John Bisceglia | Oct 9, 2008 12:58:23 PM
the lady in the red - she crazy. Obama 08!!
Posted by: DCMNY | Oct 9, 2008 1:01:19 PM
OK, doesn't Tantaros' comments speak volumes about the GOP and how it operates in the shadows and with guile and trickery? Seriously, isn't the demand that a news publication participate in a lie by Photoshopping Palin typical of the GOP?
Posted by: noah | Oct 9, 2008 1:10:30 PM
What's the problem?
I think she looks good. Though I DO NOT AGREE with her politics, she is a pretty lady.
Madonna looks much scarier.
Posted by: Andy | Oct 9, 2008 1:11:44 PM
At least they wiped that moose blood off her mouth.
Posted by: David D. | Oct 9, 2008 1:14:58 PM
Fox News is ridiculous and so is this segment. I mean come on! GOP has nothing else to complain about, so they reach for magazine retouch-ups. I don't think there is anything wrong with the picture and the chick all fired up about it..seemed like she could be a real "C U Next Tuesday".
Posted by: scb | Oct 9, 2008 1:15:29 PM
seriously- none of you can see how the media frames the political conversation in this country?
Crop Lauren Conrad like that and she would look scary.
Newsweek new exactly what they were doing. And you are all buying right into it.
Posted by: dc8stretch | Oct 9, 2008 1:16:19 PM
Only women, faux newswomen, could freak out over this....the republican consultant in this video comes off as rabid - and honestly, what a sad life she must lead...Palin looks just fine on the cover.
Posted by: dean | Oct 9, 2008 1:22:08 PM
DC8, I agree that the extreme closeup is a little jarring. That would not be a flattering photo for most people. But I think Palin looks great for her age. And frankly, with all those references about her being a "pretty litle lady" or some such diminutive crap, some small crowsfeet can only add a little bit of faux "gravitas".
Don't get me wrong. I think Palin would be a total abomination as vice president (or president). But to say that this picture is somehow derogatory just misses the mark completely.
Posted by: The Milkman | Oct 9, 2008 1:22:36 PM
I find it laughable that they're going batshit over this when her whole schtick is "I'm one of you." Shouldn't someone who is supposed to be like Joe/Jane Sixpack look unretouched?
Posted by: Glenn | Oct 9, 2008 1:23:19 PM
"My marriage would not cause her family ANY grief beyond challenging their spiritual arrogance."
Are you talking about Palin or Obama? Coz that could go either way. Why is everyone so hypocritical?
Fox News doesn't have any credibility when it comes to questioning retouching photos. They just prefer to do it to make people look worse.
Posted by: gag reflex | Oct 9, 2008 1:24:28 PM
I'd rather look at her up close than at that disgusting mole on Obama's face.
Posted by: christopher | Oct 9, 2008 1:26:39 PM
*sound of babies crying loudly*
Posted by: peterparker | Oct 9, 2008 1:27:54 PM
Fox News' desperation is hysterical and it's only getting funnier in the final weeks of this campaign. They are falling over themselves to find anything to whine about because with each passing day, McCain/Palin drop deeper in polling.
Fox News is like the alcoholic who doesn't know when to quit. Party is (almost) over, losers.
Obama/Biden 2008. I donated to their campaign today, btw. I suggest everyone do the same. Let's wrap this shit up and take this country in the right direction.
Posted by: Marco | Oct 9, 2008 1:28:28 PM
Really? Is this what it's come to? OMG I can't vote for Obama because they retouched his face. OMG these people are so stupid.
I think she looks pretty good and I bet they did retouch the photo..her teeth can't be that white with all the raw moose meat she eats.
Posted by: Kyle | Oct 9, 2008 1:29:01 PM
Sorry but the Republicans can't have it both ways. The Republican Party is selling Palin as a next-door-Jane, and trying to tell us she is just like the average American. If she is just like the rest of us the Republicans give up the right to be upset that she still has fine lines, wrinkles and a few very fine hairs on her face. Does anyone seriously believe she would lose votes because of a photo that has not been retouched?
Posted by: rayrayj | Oct 9, 2008 1:31:46 PM
This is why FauxNews will NEVER be taken seriously by anyone with half a brain! Watching this segment is like watching an SNL sketch, it is so surreal! BTW, the cover of Obama that the Foxxies are griping about is a photo taken at an outdoor campaign rally with the noonday sun shining off-center of Obama's head. And, NO, it wasn't retouched. What the Foxxies don't get as they try to drum up another "controversy" is that when they complain about something as senseless as this, they confirm the worst stereotypes about women who aspire to succeed in the corporate or political world--that women are empty-headed and more concerned about their fingernail polish than they are about the weighty issues of the day. FauxNews' attempt to make an issue of this is sexism in its purist form.
Posted by: mike | Oct 9, 2008 1:34:11 PM
This is why FauxNews will NEVER be taken seriously by anyone with half a brain! Watching this segment is like watching an SNL sketch, it is so surreal! BTW, the cover of Obama that the Foxxies are griping about is a photo taken at an outdoor campaign rally with the noonday sun shining off-center of Obama's head. And, NO, it wasn't retouched. What the Foxxies don't get as they try to drum up another "controversy" is that when they complain about something as senseless as this, they confirm the worst stereotypes about women who aspire to succeed in the corporate or political world--that women are empty-headed and more concerned about their fingernail polish than they are about the weighty issues of the day. FauxNews' attempt to make an issue of this is sexism in its purist form.
Posted by: mike | Oct 9, 2008 1:34:55 PM
Um ... I kind of WANT my president to have wrinkles.
Oh, and foreign policy experience. And a well-used passport. And an understanding of the economy. And the ability to answer a question coherently.
So Sarah Palin's eyes at least give her SOME credibility. Too bad she has nothing else going for her.
Posted by: Jake | Oct 9, 2008 1:37:00 PM
Retouched ? Oh you mean like the plastic faces at the GOP convention ?
Posted by: Ty | Oct 9, 2008 1:37:34 PM
As far as I know, political figures do not get retouched for political news stories. It might be a different story if this were a lifestyle puff piece in People magazine. This is not supposed to be a celebrity. She is a politician, and politicians should be represented "truthfully", not airbrushed as if they were Hollywood stars.
Of course, there is a slant to every news story, and I'm not blind to the fact that, yes, they most likely are trying to play up an generally unflattering profile. But then, complain about the content of the article. Don't complain because your candidate is human and has real human skin.
Posted by: gay as life | Oct 9, 2008 1:46:05 PM
The "anchor's" first comment made me laugh. I was watching Yes Minister over lunch and she just channelled one of their best bits. I can see Jim Hacker and Sir Humphrey now.
Sir Humphrey: Just announce that "Some say say the cover is ridiculously unfair to her."
Jim Hacker: "But what if no one has said that?"
Sir Humphrey: "Then you say it and then it has been said!"
Fox news "creating" news where there isn't any.
Posted by: Ed | Oct 9, 2008 1:46:34 PM
Am I missing something? Palin looks good on the cover. Now compare this cover with all the haggard and unretouched photos that the MSM ran of Hillary Clinton and yet again you'll realize that Fox News is crying wolf.
Posted by: sugarrhill | Oct 9, 2008 1:48:17 PM