NYT’s great moment in objective journalism

posted at 12:55 pm on March 15, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Via CentristNet, an image that has to be seen to be believed. What do you think the New York Times had in mind with this imagery?

But the plan’s fate could depend on how a couple dozen Democratic congressmen answer the questions Mr. McConnell and Mr. Obama raised: Would passing health care devastate Democratic chances in the fall? Would rejecting it devastate a Democratic presidency?

In other words, will the Obama presidency become a political martyr for the progressive agenda?  It’s not terribly difficult to discern the subtext, if it can even really be called that, from the Times’ article.  What’s rather amazing is that the Paper of Record puts this in its news section rather than Opinion.

Next time, use a photograph.  Leave the Nola Lopez “illustrations” for the cartoon section, unless the Times wants to leave the impression that its entire paper is a cartoon … a strategy that, in this case, would be considered a success.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

The International Committee of the Red Cross

This is the original Red Cross organization, a private Swiss institution that acts as a neutral intermediary in matters of human suffering related to international conflicts, civil wars, and internal social, political, and military disturbances throughout the world.

Red Cross

The Red Cross on white background was the original protection symbol declared at the 1864 Geneva Convention. It is, in terms of its color, a reversal of the Swiss national flag,[1] a meaning which was adopted to honor Swiss founder Henry Dunant and his home country.

INC on March 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Geez, I don’t like the New York Times as much as the next conservative but let’s every once in a while give them the benefit of the doubt.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Actually, no they don’t. Magen David Adom uses a red Star of David, but they aren’t the Israeli Red Cross. The international Red Cross forced the Israeli Red Cross to use a red diamond instead of a Star of David, or they wouldn’t be allowed to join.

Trivia, I guess. But it still pisses me off.

Tanya on March 15, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Well duh…. of course the Red Cross made them use a Red Diamond… more appropriate considering all those Secret Jew Caves and the Secret JOO Banker Zionist Cabal which rules the West…

/sarc tag for the below 90 IQ crowd…

Romeo13 on March 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM

That all is true, but I honestly don’t think that the cross is supposed to be invoking the christian cross. The story was about Obama and healthcare, so it only makes sense the cross is supposed to be like a red cross.

DethMetalCookieMonst on March 15, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Except for one minor detail…. the cross over Obama is not red, it’s bright white. And the backlighting creates the illusion if a halo surrounding his bulbous head.

Clearly this is intended to portray him as some sort of savior for the masses.

UltimateBob on March 15, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Actually, no they don’t. Magen David Adom uses a red Star of David, but they aren’t the Israeli Red Cross. The international Red Cross forced the Israeli Red Cross to use a red diamond instead of a Star of David, or they wouldn’t be allowed to join.

Trivia, I guess. But it still pisses me off.

Tanya on March 15, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Thanks, I didn’t know this. What an outrage.

conservative pilgrim on March 15, 2010 at 1:41 PM

The only thing the Times left out of the picture was the two Greek pillars crumbling on either side—symbolizing the fall of the Democratic Party and the liberal progressive’s march to Marxism.

Rovin on March 15, 2010 at 1:42 PM

It’s obvious symbolism.

INC on March 15, 2010 at 1:42 PM

Jeez, did they have to soak the mic sponge covers in vinegar again?

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 1:43 PM

DethMetalCookieMonst on March 15, 2010 at 1:35 PM

The entire ambiance is celestial, it is hysterical. Your point about Huckabee was well taken, I don’t remember, did the NYT not get involved with the window pane ruckus?

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2010 at 1:43 PM

Geez, I don’t like the New York Times as much as the next conservative but let’s every once in a while give them the benefit of the doubt.

Spoken like a “big tent squish”.

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Christian cross or Red Cross…it still creeps me out.

lonesome_pine on March 15, 2010 at 1:44 PM

And the backlighting creates the illusion if a halo surrounding his bulbous head.

Clearly this is intended to portray him as some sort of savior for the masses.

UltimateBob on March 15, 2010 at 1:41 PM

That is exactly what I am seeing. Not even worried about the cross, just take that out and see what is left. It is clear to me what the intent of the illustrator was.

Johnnyreb on March 15, 2010 at 1:44 PM

I wonder if the skeptics can furnish us with links to NYT images of Bush with misty halos and the like, you know, to show us that they’re not singling out Obama for glorification.

Sharke on March 15, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Except for one minor detail…. the cross over Obama is not red, it’s bright white. And the backlighting creates the illusion if a halo surrounding his bulbous head.

Clearly this is intended to portray him as some sort of savior for the masses.

UltimateBob on March 15, 2010 at 1:41 PM

The reason it has a halo affect is probably because they needed to blend the photo of Obama and the MEDICAL cross together so they NEEDED to add some glow so the two pictures can be blended together.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM

It is a red cross sign…Don’t make too much of it you look petty.

tomas on March 15, 2010 at 1:47 PM

I can see this may represent a medical symbol, but given the religiosity of Obama followers & stuff like saint candles with Obama on them etc, I think the NYT was in extremely bad taste here.

Badger40 on March 15, 2010 at 1:47 PM

The reason it has a halo affect is probably because they needed to blend the photo of Obama and the MEDICAL cross together so they NEEDED to add some glow so the two pictures can be blended together.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Which certainly explains the countless other Obama/halo pictures from the last few years. *rolls eyes*

Good grief.

Midas on March 15, 2010 at 1:47 PM

Don’t make too much of it you look petty.

tomas on March 15, 2010 at 1:47 PM

I would agree if we hadn’t already been assaulted by tons of Jesusisms regarding BO.
They really need to cut it out-even if it’s an innocent mistake.

Badger40 on March 15, 2010 at 1:49 PM

The reason it has a halo affect is probably because they needed to blend the photo of Obama and the MEDICAL cross together so they NEEDED to add some glow so the two pictures can be blended together.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Really? They NEEDED to use both a cross and a picture of O!? and they NEEDED to blend them together? And therefore they NEEDED to create a halo effect around O!’s head? That is your argument?

Monkeytoe on March 15, 2010 at 1:50 PM

The reason it has a halo affect is probably because they needed to blend the photo of Obama and the MEDICAL cross together so they NEEDED to add some glow so the two pictures can be blended together.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Criminently, Terry. Were any of your relatives standing in Paris in 1942 saying, “Gosh, they don’t look that bad amarching down the street.”?

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 1:50 PM

The reason it has a halo affect is probably because they needed to blend the photo of Obama and the MEDICAL cross together so they NEEDED to add some glow so the two pictures can be blended together.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Bwahahaha! Thread winner.

Sharke on March 15, 2010 at 1:50 PM

1. Thou Shalt Love The Lord Obama With All Thy Heart

2. Thou Shalt Not Kill The Bill

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 1:51 PM

tomas on March 15, 2010 at 1:47 PM

And racist.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2010 at 1:51 PM

Have you guys ever worked with PhotoShop? Sometimes you need some affects in order to meld two images together. The glow affect on PhotoShop is used often. No big deal.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM

For what it’s worth, the photo illustration was in their opinion/analysis section (yeah, I know – the whole paper is that), not on the front page.

And the article wasn’t exactly glowing.

YYZ on March 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM

I want him to fail.

khacha on March 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM

What more would you expect from the Old Grey Lady of the Evening?

JohnGalt23 on March 15, 2010 at 1:54 PM

Have you guys ever worked with PhotoShop? Sometimes you need some affects in order to meld two images together. The glow affect on PhotoShop is used often. No big deal.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM

Okay that’s how the picture came to be. Was it a good idea to publish it in that form?

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 1:55 PM

This imagery is straight from the Book of Reconciliations.

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 1:55 PM

And the article wasn’t exactly glowing.

YYZ on March 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM

…but the picture was

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 1:56 PM

The reason it has a halo affect is probably because they needed to blend the photo of Obama and the MEDICAL cross together so they NEEDED to add some glow so the two pictures can be blended together.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Seriously? You are being extremely naive.

Just for you terryann, because this isn’t the first halo photoshopped on Obama.

conservative pilgrim on March 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM

It’s obvious symbolism.

INC on March 15, 2010 at 1:42 PM

I guess it’s too obvious for some people.

conservative pilgrim on March 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM

Have you guys ever worked with PhotoShop? Sometimes you need some affects in order to meld two images together. The glow affect on PhotoShop is used often. No big deal.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:53 PM

If it’s such a common everyday graphical technique then I’m sure you’ll have no trouble finding similarly halofied photos of Bush from the New York Slimes.

Sharke on March 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM

This imagery is straight from the Book of Reconciliations.

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 1:55 PM

I thought that is was 2nd Reparations Ch.2 v.7

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 1:58 PM

The photographer, from that angle, had no other choice but to put Obama in front of the sun.

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 1:58 PM

This equal star is an effort to look spiritual but not Christian, because we know he ain’t one of them Bible-thumpin’ gun totin’ patriots.
When people like Farrakhan says that you’re The One, and you’re the #1 narcissist in America, you believe Satan every time. Oooooohhhbama!

Christine on March 15, 2010 at 1:59 PM

Cross not star…DUH!

Christine on March 15, 2010 at 1:59 PM

The photographer, from that angle, had no other choice but to put Obama in front of the sun.

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 1:58 PM

Because when you’re kneeling down in front of your *false* messiah, you always look up into the sun. Makes perfect sense!

conservative pilgrim on March 15, 2010 at 2:00 PM

Obamahu Barackbar!!!

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 2:00 PM

conservative pilgrim on March 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM

The contortions are amazing.

INC on March 15, 2010 at 2:00 PM

It’s a great illustration, and the ‘+’ in the pic is a plus, not a cross, as in the universal sign for health, but that sign itself is sometimes associated to the cross… so maybe it wasn’t a good idea. Also, the pic seems to glorify him. But everyone knows NYT are leftist. It’s not like people will be surprised by this slant.

AlexB on March 15, 2010 at 2:01 PM

I thought that is was 2nd Reparations Ch.2 v.7

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 1:58 PM

That’s where the Apostle Emmanuel hands out loads of fishes, right?

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Christian cross or Red Cross…it still creeps me out.

lonesome_pine on March 15, 2010 at 1:44 PM

I had some links above about the history.

The Red Cross symbol is from the Swiss flag to honor the Swiss man who founded it.

The cross on the Swiss flag is a Christian cross–

The region of Schwyz in central Switzerland, one of the three founding members of the Old Swiss Confederacy, and the one, whose name was later in history used to denote the confederacy as a whole, was granted immediacy in 1240 and carried a red flag from the middle of the 13th century on (yet still without the white cross). In 1289 they supported King Rudolf of Habsburg in a war against Burgundy and received as a recognition the right to represent the crucifixion of Christ and the tools used to torture him in the upper right field on their flag. Originally they painted this symbol on parchment and fastened it on the banner. Only later the cross symbol was painted directly on the banner.

INC on March 15, 2010 at 2:03 PM

I didn’t mean to strike over lonesome pine above.

INC on March 15, 2010 at 2:04 PM

The audacity of a compliant press, and an arrogant president. That’s what that is, and it’s an offense to the eyes. Especially when the man wants the crucifix covered at speaking events, where a crucifix is in view. He’s a putz, and so is the NYT’s.

Let’s throw some holy water on ol’ Scary, and see what happens.

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:04 PM

That’s where the Apostle Emmanuel hands out loads of fishes, right?

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 2:01 PM

Yes he hands them out to loafers of all ages and political action group.

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 2:05 PM

If it’s such a common everyday graphical technique then I’m sure you’ll have no trouble finding similarly halofied photos of Bush from the New York Slimes.

Sharke on March 15, 2010 at 1:57 PM

I found a halofied Bush photo.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Let it speak for itself…don’t get all worked up and let them make conservatives the issue. It is what it is and people cans see what other motives might be involved.

Let them hurt themselves.

tomas on March 15, 2010 at 2:07 PM

The halo isn’t photoshop, haha.

The picture was taken from an angle where the sun was behind The Messiah’s head, that’s why his face looks shaded. The picture was chosen for that reason and for the finger pointing in the sky.

The red cross, medical “crosses” are two lines of the same length that intersect in the center. The cross in the image is longer vertically, than it is horizontally.

reaganaut on March 15, 2010 at 2:08 PM

terryannonline and tomas are right; we’re getting pretty worked up over nothing but some pretty typical imagery ing).

http://www.culturejamforlife.com/nobama2008/images/hitler.jpg

Yep, I’m all calmed down, and got my head right. How ’bout the rest o’ you guys?

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Ob+ama is your savior. You need no other God. The NYT acknowledges that. Why don’t you?

Extrafishy on March 15, 2010 at 2:09 PM

The NY Times should be careful throwing crosses around like that…

… people have been known to get nailed to them.

Seven Percent Solution on March 15, 2010 at 2:10 PM

Making an excuse that this is like the symbol for the Red Cross is ridiculous. What if this had been Pres. Bush. It’s so very disturbing to me. The dark imagery is akin to that used by Bolsheviks in their video and poster propaganda for Communism. Regardless, even using the Red Cross symbol with the White House pictured at the base as if the WH is our savior and coming to our “physical” aid is very bizarre. No matter how you slice it, using this for “news” is spooky.

Sultry Beauty on March 15, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:08 PM

Dude take a break from watching Glenn Beck.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Really, it’s common imagery…

http://ganeshkulkarni.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/biografia-fidel-castro.jpg

Completely innocent…

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:14 PM

Book of Reformations chapter 1 verse 1.
“And behold, a magnificent figure stood before us. His image blotted out the sun and the light shone all around him. For when he spoke, the water in the new skins turned to koolaid, and all who drank continued to thirst for more.”

ted c on March 15, 2010 at 2:14 PM

What’s rather amazing is that the Paper of Record puts this in its news section rather than Opinion.

No it’s not.

Del Dolemonte on March 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Actually can’t stand Glenn Beck; he’s way too hysterical for me… Sort of like the Times adoration of the One.

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM

Ob+ama is your savior. You need no other God. The NYT acknowledges that. Why don’t you?

Extrafishy on March 15, 2010 at 2:09 PM

Because unlike the NYT’s…..I insist my savior be smarter than a toothpick, and Obama is NOT!!!

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:16 PM

Book of Reformations chapter 1 verse 1.
“And behold, a magnificent figure stood before us. His image blotted out the sun and the light shone all around him. For when he spoke, the water in the new skins turned to koolaid, and all who drank continued to thirst for more.”

ted c on March 15, 2010 at 2:14 PM

ROFLMAO!!!!

Say….isn’t that blasphemy? From the death panel: NO HEALTH CARE FOR YOU!!! LOL

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:17 PM

This is not a cross. It is a blown up image of the top of a Phillips headed screw. Just a symbol of how Obama and the White house will screw us all.

Electrongod on March 15, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Because when you’re kneeling down in front of your *false* messiah, you always look up into the sun. Makes perfect sense!

conservative pilgrim on March 15, 2010 at 2:00 PM

well it all depends

if that was his only angle
if he were blocked on other sides

thats all you CAN do

if the sun was just in the middle of the blue part of the photo, it would look like SH!T.

just giving an honest perspective from someone in the field

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Looks just like Ravanna from the Rahmayana. Yeah, that’s the ticket!

Christien on March 15, 2010 at 2:19 PM

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Yeah, kiddo. But the Editor at the Times chose the image for publication.

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 2:20 PM

If it’s “supposed” to be a red cross….then why not make it one??????

alwyr on March 15, 2010 at 2:21 PM

According to this, the Magen David Adom is accepted as a symbol by the Red Cross as is the Red Crescent.

erp on March 15, 2010 at 2:22 PM

Because unlike the NYT’s…..I insist my savior be smarter than a toothpick, and Obama is NOT!!!

capejasmine on March 15, 2010

Foul blaspheemer! Your name shall be stricken from the Book of Life-on-the-taxpayer’s-dime.

Extrafishy on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Yeah, kiddo. But the Editor at the Times chose the image for publication.

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Exactly. I for one moment don’t believe this is meant as a propoganda tool. They want all of us to see Obama as they do. UGH!!!

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 2:18 PM

Yeah, kiddo. But the Editor at the Times chose the image for publication.

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 2:20 PM

Who was the photographer, Leni Riefenstahl?

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

I wonder if the skeptics can furnish us with links to NYT images of Bush with misty halos and the like, you know, to show us that they’re not singling out Obama for glorification.

Sharke on March 15, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Agreed.

Curious to see some new names posting in this thread. More sleeper cells activated from the last Open Registration, no doubt.

Del Dolemonte on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Yeah, kiddo. But the Editor at the Times chose the image for publication.

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 2:20 PM

fair enough

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 2:24 PM

all depends
sometimes you cant get the right angle

maybe the guy had all the perfect angles possible, and chose it precisely because he wanted to get the messiah image across

or maybe he had no room at all and was where he was

who knows

blatantblue on March 15, 2010 at 2:24 PM

Foul blaspheemer! Your name shall be stricken from the Book of Life-on-the-taxpayer’s-dime.

Extrafishy on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Well, I’m sure governments made much bigger wastes of our tax dollars. ;)

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:25 PM

Simply the latest in a long line of “Obama as deity” photos. Each one is more preposterous than the last.

n0doz on March 15, 2010 at 2:25 PM

Who was the photographer, Leni Riefenstahl?

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

I thought maybe it was the woman who was going to have her car, house, and gas paid for, courtesy of Obama. Maybe she did the photography to expedite those wet dreams?

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:26 PM

Doorgunner on March 15, 2010 at 2:23 PM

Illustration by Nola Lopez, photograph by Damon Winter/The New York Times

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 2:29 PM

It was deliberate. Period.

kingsjester on March 15, 2010 at 2:32 PM

I found a halofied Bush photo.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM

Just not from the NYT, terryann.
The challenge was to find the NYT posting similar pictures of GWB.

massrighty on March 15, 2010 at 2:33 PM

What’s rather amazing is that the Paper of Record puts this in its news section rather than Opinion.

It’s not in the news section! Look at your own graphic. It’s in the Week in Review section, which is the Sunday opinion section.

YYZ on March 15, 2010 at 2:35 PM

I found a halofied Bush photo.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 2:06 PM

If you’re comparing those two pictures then you are dumber than I thought and I didn’t think that was possible.

thomasaur on March 15, 2010 at 2:37 PM

The photographer is not just some Joe Schmo. Check out his portfolio.

I stopped after the picture of Dustin Hoffman with a halo…

reaganaut on March 15, 2010 at 2:37 PM

Say….isn’t that blasphemy? From the death panel: NO HEALTH CARE FOR YOU!!! LOL

capejasmine on March 15, 2010 at 2:17 PM

Ha—-! how about some soup or cheese?

ted c on March 15, 2010 at 2:38 PM

Ed,

I think a much better question to ask:

Is it better to devastate a Presidency by rejecting ObamaCare or devastate the country by accepting it?

Hmmmmm????

belad on March 15, 2010 at 2:41 PM

The cross is symmetric, making it a medical symbol, but the whole sun-behind-the-head thing is as obnoxious as all the other times it’s been done.
Though, I am curious about the faint image of the white house at the bottom.

Count to 10 on March 15, 2010 at 2:51 PM

Truly a disturbing image. Placing the White House at the base of the cross, a representation of the crucifix, with Obama bathed in white with what looks like a halo?

Holy wrong karma, Batman. Liberals are staking their salvation on this healthcare debate and on the lying perfidy of Teh One mistake in the electoral process. At least the one mistake we made recently.

Very sad to see that kind of symbolism.

Tennman on March 15, 2010 at 2:53 PM

Geez, I don’t like the New York Times as much as the next conservative but let’s every once in a while give them the benefit of the doubt.

terryannonline on March 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM

No.

Whether it’s the NYT or another lefty rag, this type of salvific Obama imagry is not exactly new. (Does the last presidential campaign ring a bell?) While we’re sitting around scratching our heads wondering wtf the halo/cross concept is about, you can bet that PLENTY at the NYT did as well. They let it run knowing full well the dialogue which would occur. It’s a bit obvious, TAO. If the NYT isn’t naive, and everyone here isn’t, why must you be?

Diane on March 15, 2010 at 2:56 PM

INC on March 15, 2010 at 2:03 PM

Yeah, I getcha. But I do think there is some validity to not knowing that the Red Cross is directly related to the Christian cross – I mean, I’m a Christian and I don’t think I knew that. Not surprised by it, but unaware.

But let’s just go with it, shall we? Let’s just say that it’s a medical cross and that’s it – no “subtle” Christian imagery here. What’s the point? Even if it isn’t the tired old Messiah meme, it does look like he’s some grand poobah of healthcare. Which doesn’t make me any more comfortable.

lonesome_pine on March 15, 2010 at 2:58 PM

Just so you know what a nice person Nola Lopez is.

http://ejnord.com/blog/ronald-reagan-lost-poster/

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2010 at 2:58 PM

The cross with four equal arms is known as the Greek Cross or the Crux Immissa Quadrata. Its four equal arms represent harmony in the universe, or the physical and the spiritual worlds, as well as the balance found in nature.

Any way you cut it, there’s an awful lot of symbolism at work here.

pain train on March 15, 2010 at 2:59 PM

The NYT is full of it… This is blasphemous… This is absurd… They have jumped the shark!

CCRWM on March 15, 2010 at 3:00 PM

Just so you know what a nice person Nola Lopez is.

http://ejnord.com/blog/ronald-reagan-lost-poster/

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2010 at 2:58 PM

I feel like we need a screenshot for posterity because things like that tend to vanish…

Diane on March 15, 2010 at 3:02 PM

Diane on March 15, 2010 at 3:02 PM

It’s on her/his/it’s website. I doubt it will disappear the Left is never ashamed of anything the do.

Cindy Munford on March 15, 2010 at 3:06 PM

Junk bond status, sold their building…

daesleeper on March 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM

The cross is symmetric, making it a medical symbol, but the whole sun-behind-the-head thing is as obnoxious as all the other times it’s been done.
Though, I am curious about the faint image of the white house at the bottom.

Count to 10 on March 15, 2010 at 2:51 PM
____________________

Where do you think the medical cross came from?

Say what you will about this photo, but one thing anyone with a brain should be able to agree on, is it’s bad taste.

uknowmorethanme on March 15, 2010 at 3:10 PM

What, no red crescent?

Wyznowski on March 15, 2010 at 3:35 PM

Does anybody read that rag any more?

mr.blacksheep on March 15, 2010 at 3:39 PM

The old grey biddie just made watermelon man look like a backstabber to millions of muslims the world over.This won’t go over to well with the radical so called clerics. Many thanks idiots.

nukeemnow on March 15, 2010 at 3:39 PM

The NYT has been the cartoon of all in a long time.

Obama is a mortal, not even a special one.
His shiite stinks like all other.
The NYT hasn’t internalized this, yet.

Let them. If they are still in his pants, they won’t focus on being traitors to this country.

Schadenfreude on March 15, 2010 at 3:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3