Did the NYT subtly alter Bush checking out Condi pic?

[Helga Scow Stern]

It seemed so obvious in the photos posted by Stephanie yesterday that Bush had lust in his heart for his SoS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x557597:





But in today's NYT the photo looked tamed down:



Here is the NYT webphoto for comparision. It does not appear to have been altered:



Is this just my imagination or were the whites and pupils adjusted to show a slightly different expression?

[converted_democrat]

1. Nope, you're not imagining anything.. IMHO..n/t

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. his wittle pwincess. his wovvie dovvie security blanket advisor

the first shot suggests his eyes were directed to her butt. The others seem to peer, Visine-fixed, at her shoulders.

[ryan_cats]

3. Are they sleeping together?

Are they sleeping together?

That seems like the kind of look lovers exchange.

[sandrakae]

6. I always thought he was boinking her.

[Bucky]

16. Presidents do not boink. They swive. They relax from a stressful job.

In this case, of course the stressful job would be "boinking Condi".

















That said, we should note that this is not the first President-Secretary of State love tryst in US history...

[sandrakae]

4. Has anyone else wondered why she doesn't get braces?

It is not like she can't afford them.

[Mind_your_head]

27. LOL

I've thought that myself....MANY times!

AND.... I've wondered why pickles can't get measured for a proper bra. I know a lady who does 'just that'....measures/fits women with the correct bra. About a year ago I told her to write a letter to the white house and offer her services as a 'public service to the nation'....so that she could, (cue the music): "Lift pickles boobs up to where they belong"

:rofl: :rofl:

[leftofthedial]

31. junior's pecker fits perfectly in the gap

[SPKrazy]

5. I'm pretty sure it's just that one is print pic, and the other is on the

web, the web photo is of better quality than the print photo obviously.

look at any other photos that are on the web and good quality that appear in print on newsprint paper, you'll see the same thing.

[TahitiNut]

28. There's also the question of who had the clearest copy of the photo ...

... to begin with. Compressing and adjusting a digital/digitized photo for the web is one thing; preparing it for print is another. It's impossible to validly claim which, if either, was more 'altered' (from what?) than the other without a lot more information on the various copies and generations made from some original.

[SPKrazy]

29. Okay, I do think that you will not usually see a pic in print that is as

as clear as a digital pic on the net.

Of course you could have low res pics on the net that wouldn't be as clear as a high res, but I would imagine that almost any pic in print, on newsprint paper, is going to be less clear than a digital pic on the net, or even than a pic in print on a glossy (like magazine quality) page.

But you are right there is no information about the original.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. They Look Identical To Me Other Than One Print And One Web.

No reason for concern. They're identical.

[rocktivity]

8. At least this solves the mystery of who puked on Laura's dress.

:evilgrin:
rocknation

[dorkulon]

9. I don't see it.

Seems to me just that the print photo is a little blurrier.

[Helga Scow Stern]

11. You may be right.

It's just that the photos from the web yesterday were so striking in their depiction of Bush's lust, and then when I walked downtown today and saw the NYT on the newstand, and the lust was gone. And I was with someone who hadn't seen the webphotos, and they said that they didn't see the lust in his eyes. More like concern or worry.

[aden_nak]

10. As amusing as that would be, I think it's just a consequence of printing.

Contrast like that, especially eyes that are not up close, often gets lost in that sort of color printing on just general use paper.

[Helga Scow Stern]

12. I hope you are right.

It really bugged me that the LA Times had a picture of anti-Bush protestors back on page 5 or so and it was captioned: ANTI-AMERICANISM.

[dorkulon]

15. Damn, seriously? n/t

[Helga Scow Stern]

19. Yes, for the anti-Bush protestors in India....

to call them anti-American because they were protesting Bush?

[Imalittleteapot]

13. Soooooooooooooooo

He's looking at her. What's the big deal? Malloy made the photo sound much more scathing than what I'm seeing.

No, I don't think the photo has been altered. Just looks like a difference in the media - print v. web. Compare the difference of Condi's appearance in the photos.

[CottonBear]

18. The long shot original photo shows everyone else looking the other way.

Only Bush is looking at Condi's booty. The NYT cropped the photo so that wouldn't be apparent.

[Helga Scow Stern]

20. And changed the eyes? I swear the irises and whites have been rearranged..

[The Backlash Cometh]

14. What was on the menu?

monkey brains, steamed beetles, live baby snakes and mangos?

[otohara]

17. Stop Wearing Drapes

as wraps!

[Justpat]

21. You got to love the way they cut Pickles out of the picture.

She was standing next to him dressed in what looked like a bathrobe and a necklace.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

22. If anything, to me

he looks more leering in the NY Times version. I think they might have whitened up the whites, but I don't think they changed positions of the eyes.

It's fun to speculate, but really he was probably just smiling in her direction.


BUT DO YOU REALLY THINK HE BOINKING HER?


Okay..sorry...couldn't help it.

[Helga Scow Stern]

24. YES MAYBE HE IS BOINKING HER, SOME PEOPLE SAY....

Sorry, couldn't help it.

And of course, who cares, except for the hypocrisy of it all.

[Divine Discontent]

34. I see nothing... n/t

[MoonRiver]

23. Hahaha! Still looks like he LONGS for her.

In the second one, it's more like 'I passionately love that woman'. In the first it's 'I want some of that'. Pick your poison *.

[Bluebear]

25. She's his "unsticker".

Remember?

[WinkyDink]

26. Well, he IS her husb...I mean, President!

Unquote.

[NastyRiffraff]

30. Wow, when I first saw Laura in that photo...

I thought someone had done a nasty Photoshop on her! Where in HELL did she get that thing she was wearing? Did she actually look for the ugliest thing she could find?

BTW, looks like the same photo. Newsprint always blurs, even a high res photo, because of the dot screen. Unless you compress a jpg down too far, the screen photo will always be much clearer. Bush is blurry in both...he prolly swiveled his head as the pic was being taken.

[grasswire]

32. where did she get it?

I'm betting that she raided Aunt Bea's wardrobe.

[kentuck]

33. I think you are absolutely right...

A little photo job on the whites of the eyes to change the entire glance from one of lust to one of simple love...

[Oilwellian]

35. If the NYT wanted to hide the fact....

that monkey boy has lust in his heart for Condi, then they wouldn't have chosen this particular photo for the front page. They wouldn't attempt to alter it. They'd just use one of the many other photos from that evening. The fact that they DID choose this photo to run on the front page speaks volumes. :D

[Helga Scow Stern]

37. Except...

one of their tactics is to head off damaging truths by showing whatever it is they are afraid of in an altered form. Almost like the National Guard records...have them come out but in a way that they become harmless. They knew these pics would get around, for instance, but if they put on one the front of the NYT everyone sees it and thinks it's nothing, in the one they ran. It just does not embody the stark lust of the others. I was shocked when I saw it in print because it does not convey the same feeling at all as the pics published the day before.

[Lars39]

36. It looks like his head was brought more upright.

Like they changed the angle of his head slightly.
And I think Condi is learning to sew.