[The Final Dakar]

How can we expect Palin to properly manage a country when she can't properly manage photos of herself from a shoot for an athletic magazine?

(Let's let this descend into further futility)

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

How can we expect Palin to properly manage a country when she can't properly manage photos of herself from a shoot for an athletic magazine?

(Let's let this descend into further futility)

I guess if it caused some kind of major real scandal or damage to the country, you'd have a point. It just caused Sarah to point out the intellectual dishonesty of Newsweek, and for the most part now people have forgotten about it.

No biggie really, in the scheme of things. I'd hope she wasn't personally sweating these small details herself anyways. I'm guessing she has bigger fish to fry. If Obama wants to spend hours going over photo contracts and negotiate, then that would make him a much better President. He doesn't really have to worry though because none of the news magazines would have done that to him. He has it a lot easier.

[The Final Dakar]

I was being facetious you hack.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by spacefreak 

Agreed, but in both cases, she did get frucked without giving consent.

I think what one of the posts above was alluding to is the "she was asking for it" defense that we sometimes hear in rape cases because a woman dresses or acts a certain way. But you are right, this episode doesn't even compare to rape.

I agree.

Of course, I was never comparing using a photo without consent to being sexually assaulted. I think everyone here is smart enough to know that it was the "blame the victim" argument I was comparing, not the act itself.

Are people here really not smart enough to know the difference?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I was being facetious you hack.

No need to attack my hack with name calling, you facetious bat!

(good enough for Dr. Suess, I think!)

[Macrobat]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

How can we expect Palin to properly manage a country when she can't properly manage photos of herself from a shoot for an athletic magazine?

(Let's let this descend into further futility)

Well, they aren't hers to control, in the first place.

They belong to the photographer. Taken in context, this photo was shot for an article on fitness for a running magazine.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

How can we expect Palin to properly manage a country when she can't properly manage photos of herself from a shoot for an athletic magazine?

(Let's let this descend into further futility)

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I guess if it caused some kind of major real scandal or damage to the country, you'd have a point. It just caused Sarah to point out the intellectual dishonesty of Newsweek, and for the most part now people have forgotten about it.

No biggie really, in the scheme of things. I'd hope she wasn't personally sweating these small details herself anyways. I'm guessing she has bigger fish to fry. If Obama wants to spend hours going over photo contracts and negotiate, then that would make him a much better President. He doesn't really have to worry though because none of the news magazines would have done that to him. He has it a lot easier.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I was being facetious you hack.

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Well, they aren't hers to control, in the first place.

They belong to the photographer. Taken in context, this photo was shot for an article on fitness for a running magazine.

OH COME ON

(**** no caps)

[hyteckit]

Sarah Palin should've negotiated to keep the rights to her photo.

Instead, she negotiated to give up her rights to the photo.

Since the photographer owns the photo, s/he can do whatever s/he wants with it as long as it doesn't violate any existing contract.

[Macrobat]

Hyteckit, when anyone consents to be photographed for a publication, they sign a contract - the images are the property of the publication and the photographer - this is standard practice.

In fact, Newsweek is currently in a bit of trouble for its unauthorized use of someone else's property - the aforementioned photograph.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Of course, I was never comparing using a photo without consent to being sexually assaulted. I think everyone here is smart enough to know that it was the "blame the victim" argument I was comparing, not the act itself.

Are people here really not smart enough to know the difference?

Really? You think you were being subtle? Are people in here really not smart enough to know others will pick up on "implied" verbage and call them on it? I think certain people were enjoying themselves with a serious topic, hoping others would infer the worst.

A better analogy is, let's say Angelina Jolie poses for pictures for an interview, and then later doesn't like where they end up. She can sue for money lost or libel. She's not a victim, no one is blaming her for posing for the picture, but you know, I bet she's not gonna claim sexism is the cause.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Really? You think you were being subtle? Are people in here really not smart enough to know others will pick up on "implied" verbage and call them on it? I think certain people were enjoying themselves with a serious topic, hoping others would infer the worst.

I think some people spend too much time looking for things to be offended by, or that their lack of intellect causes them to make efforts to shift them blame when they don't have a credible rebuttal to an argument they are losing.

I never did was I was accused of. Sorry.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I think some people spend too much time looking for things to be offended by, or that their lack of intellect causes them to make efforts to shift them blame when they don't have a credible rebuttal to an argument they are losing.

I never did was I was accused of. Sorry.

You talking about Sarah Palin right?

I'm pretty sure you are talking about Sarah Palin since this thread is about Sarah Palin looking for things to be offended by.

[andi*pandi]

I think some people are disingenuous.

"Sorry."

[Wiskedjak]

It's quite amazing that conservatives have suddenly become as PC as they've always accused liberals of being.

[stupendousman]

When you can show that you aren't being treated in a manner that's fair and consistent, and simply point that out, I don't think that's a matter of looking for a reason to be offended.

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I think some people are disingenuous.

"Sorry."

I accept your apology, Mr. Kettle.

[andi*pandi]

If I call you Mr. Black, please don't call me racist.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

It's quite amazing that conservatives have suddenly become as PC as they've always accused liberals of being.

But conservatives aren't the ones posting all the threads about Sarah Palin. What's interesting I think to most conservatives on this board is how cavalier "liberals" have suddenly become about offending the sensitivities of women. Not to say I'm personally surprised by any of this mind you; these were the same folks who did not hesitate in calling Colin Powell a "house nigxxx" before he was of the Preferred Ideology™.

The good news for Sarah is, she can stop all this madness by simply denouncing conservatism and espousing all the liberal values like tolerance, freedom of speech, dissent, and begin championing the rights of those who've been disenfranchised throughout history like blacks and women.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

The good news for Sarah is, she can stop all this madness by simply denouncing conservatism and espousing all the liberal values like tolerance, freedom of speech, dissent, and begin championing the rights of those who've been disenfranchised throughout history like blacks and women.

No. Many liberals acknowledge that people like Michael Moore and Al Sharpton are morons. Palin is irredeemable.

[Wiskedjak]

hmmm ... looks like Palin is the target of sexism from both sides ...
YouTube - Beck Turns Down Ticket With Palin, Makes Sexist Remark

Originally Posted by Glenn Beck

I'm just saying, Beck-Palin, I'll consider. But Palin-Beck—can you imagine, can you imagine what an administration with the two of us would be like? What? Come on! She'd be yapping or something, and I'd say, "I'm sorry, why am I hearing your voice? I'm not in the kitchen." I mean, you'd have to live up to the evil conservative stereotypes, you'd have no choice, you'd have to. Look, I talked to the woman about it, I don't even know what she was saying.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

hmmm ... looks like Palin is the target of sexism from both sides ...
YouTube - Beck Turns Down Ticket With Palin, Makes Sexist Remark

Have your keepers check your sarcasm detection chip. It appears it's malfunctioning.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

No. Many liberals acknowledge that people like Michael Moore and Al Sharpton are morons. Palin is irredeemable.

I think the truth regarding all three is that they have their moments of merit. Irredeemable must then be the notion of the one least tolerant to opposing views. Otherwise, any reasoned opponent of Palin's may simply regard her as a highly controversial woman with lofty ideals and goals.