Posted on 09/15/2008 1:55:09 PM PDT by Zakeet
The difference between The Atlantic and Jann Wenner’s US Weekly is that the Atlantic article was (presumably, I didn’t read it) NOT supposed to be a pre-meditated hit piece.
Being blown off forevermore by all conservative and republican figures from Here to Eternity is no way to shore up your bottom line. Especially if McCain/Palin win.
NOt that it matters now that the photos are out there.
Anyone have the web site of this cow. I sure would like to sent her a letter.
I'll volunteer to be interviewed by Megyn. Wrong, right, who cares. :-)
The Atlantic magazine didn’t just pick this girl out of the yellow pages. They knew what they were paying for.
The Atlantic accepted the absurd photo and PUBLISHED it on their cover.
The buck stops at the Atlantic, not the idiot who doctored the photos.
Andrew Sullivan gives sodomy a bad name.
Megyn, I’ve been a bad boy, punish me....please.
“Personal feelings aside, The Atlantic cannot afford NOT to chastise this artiste. She was on THEIR dime taking pictures for THEIR story. You can imagine the possible consequences on getting future interviews if their interviewees are trashed like that.”
EXACTLY! — She was working for THEM, taking pictures for THEIR magazine. They paid for her services, and it’s THEIR reputation that’s taken a hit by her disgusting and irresponsible behavior, because who’s going to trust them in the future to sit for a cover photo without remembering THIS?
I’m no lawyer, but I doubt, legally, that she had the right to do what she did, since I assume the rights to any photos she took belong to the magazine. If I were the magazine, I would also sue her until she’s worth about as much as Obama’s hut-brother.
Liberals never take responsibility for anything. If she'd done this to Obama, he would be the one suing her.
Another wannabe “artiste.” Crawl back to you ghetto Ms. Greenberg and start over.
If she did this to Hillary or Bill, she wouldn’t be breathing the next day.
I haven’t been following this very closely, did McCain fall for something as well...in other words should he have caught it? Or is it just that she used photos that are routinely taken but would never be used normally?
do we have phone number,address email address for this wonderful women id reall y like to tell her what she can do with her so called art.
What will hysterical Andrew say about his bosses when he hears this?
I think Jill just sunk The Atlantic...and they know it.
I would have kicked her butt if I saw pictures of my kids crying like that. Those pictures broke my heart and I couldn’t imagine seeing my own toddlers with those tear filled eyes.
I seriously would have been in jail for assault because she would have been in the hospital.
The cover picture they used still wasn't all that flattering...it made Senator McCain look like a plastic-skinned bulldog.
McCain thought it was just a regular photo shoot for a magazine article that actually was kind of flattering to him. But this Greenberg broad blamed McCain’s people for not knowing enough about photography to recognize she was taking unflattering lighting.
No, of course not..
They just commissioned, approved, and published the outrageous cover.
No sleaze there....
I would have called Social Services on Jill for abusing my child before the day was out.
She'd be taking pictures of furniture for Better Homes & Gardens after that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.