NYTimes Exterminates George Bush!

[iamwhatiseem]

The photo looks better without Bush in it

Too bad he marched on the other side of the divider

Really?
Even you know that the administration handlers dictate who walks beside the President. They chose Al Sharpton.
As stated by the articles you didn't read, other news outlets show dozens of photos of the two together. NYT is the only one that didn't.

As already noted, Sharpton is behind O'bama, trying desperately to get into the picture (which says more about him than he might want). Walking next to the POTUS are John Lewis and (in the wheelchair, 103 years old) Amelia Boynton Robinson, both of whom were directly and dramatically involved 50 years ago. And then the First Family.

Methinks Fox Noise doth whine a bit too much scraping the bottom of the barrel to find fault on a slow news day on what should be a positive event.

Fox Noise does not like positive. Doesn't $ell.

It's not Fox News. I specifically noted two other links for whiners like you.
As also stated, even MSNBC...I say again...even MSNBC included Bush in their photos and videos.
Even MSNBC.

 

[Pogo]

Another photo from different news outlet...

And another.....

another...

NYT - chose Al Sharpton...and so did Obama's handlers.

I like the last one. It's the most powerful.

When you want to convey the impact of a large gathering though, you need a massive crowd. Your first pic has it, but aesthetically it's also a high-angle perspective and has the distraction of those traffic lights. You have to realize what graphics editors are looking for, and making sure every notable figure gets in there really isn't high on the priority list.

 

[rightwinger]

I was very glad to see both Presidents Bush and Obama at the ceremony

I was also glad that none of the 2016 Presidential candidates were there. It would have politicized a solemn event

 

[TheOldSchool]

The NYT cover is a waaaaay better photo than the others in this thread. Discard whatever agenda your paranoid about and look at the composition of the photos. It's not even a contest.

 

[Skylar]

The pertinent evidence is this thread, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a lying sack of sewage, and a boot-licker for the Left.

There is no evidence in the thread that the original photo had Bush in frame. As the picture you offer as 'evidence' isn't the original photo. Its a completely different photo from a completely different angle.

You can't change the angle a photo was taken from by cropping it.....you get that, right?

You've been exposed as a liar and a Democrat boot-liker.

Dismissed.

Translation: you can't possibly explain h ow someone could be cropped from a photo they aren't in.

So you're going to ignore anyone who asks.

Shrugs....you can't fix stupid.

 

[Pogo]

The photo looks better without Bush in it

Too bad he marched on the other side of the divider

Really?
Even you know that the administration handlers dictate who walks beside the President. They chose Al Sharpton.
As stated by the articles you didn't read, other news outlets show dozens of photos of the two together. NYT is the only one that didn't.

As already noted, Sharpton is behind O'bama, trying desperately to get into the picture (which says more about him than he might want). Walking next to the POTUS are John Lewis and (in the wheelchair, 103 years old) Amelia Boynton Robinson, both of whom were directly and dramatically involved 50 years ago. And then the First Family.

Methinks Fox Noise doth whine a bit too much scraping the bottom of the barrel to find fault on a slow news day on what should be a positive event.

Fox Noise does not like positive. Doesn't $ell.

It's not Fox News. I specifically noted two other links for whiners like you.
As also stated, even MSNBC...I say again...even MSNBC included Bush in their photos and videos.
Even MSNBC.

And I already essplained to you about graphics. The shot they ran on the front page has a LOT more people in it than the alternate with Bush on the side. That's worth a lot more than a "who's who" list for visual impact. I mean it's not even close.

Which brings one to wonder -- is this event supposed to be about commemorating a significant event in civil rights history -- or is this even supposed to be about George Bush? Which is more important?

Sorry, this really is scraping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel whining. Would it kill them to just acknowledge Selma and its significance? Does everything they do have to be some kind of political football score?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

When you want to convey the impact of a large gathering though, you need a massive crowd. Your first pic has it, but aesthetically it's also a high-angle perspective and has the distraction of those traffic lights. You have to realize what graphics editors are looking for, and making sure every notable figure gets in there really isn't high on the priority list.

Yeah your right...choosing a photo with less traffic lights, and a creepy Sharpton pop-up over a photo placing together TWO U.S. Presidents together is much more powerful message.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I don't know why anyone would pay for that slimy leftwing rag. they didn't nickname it the NewYakSlimes for no reason

Circulation and advertising revenue locked in a downward death spiral with no bottom in sight.

 

[rightwinger]

Another photo from different news outlet...

And another.....

another...

NYT - chose Al Sharpton...and so did Obama's handlers.

I like the last one. It's the most powerful.

When you want to convey the impact of a large gathering though, you need a massive crowd. Your first pic has it, but aesthetically it's also a high-angle perspective and has the distraction of those traffic lights. You have to realize what graphics editors are looking for, and making sure every notable figure gets in there really isn't high on the priority list.

I also liked the last one. But it shows a moment of silence from the speakers platform

The New York Times cover photo shows them marching over the bridge which was the idea. The wide shot with the barrier between the marchers is not as good a photo as the one they printed

 

[PoliticalChic]

The pertinent evidence is this thread, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are a lying sack of sewage, and a boot-licker for the Left.

There is no evidence in the thread that the original photo had Bush in frame. As the picture you offer as 'evidence' isn't the original photo. Its a completely different photo from a completely different angle.

You can't change the angle a photo was taken from by cropping it.....you get that, right?

You've been exposed as a liar and a Democrat boot-liker.

Dismissed.

Translation: you can't possibly explain h ow someone could be cropped from a photo they aren't in.

So you're going to ignore anyone who asks.

Shrugs....you can't fix stupid.

You can try to dig yourself out of the hole you've buried yourself in, but it isn't possible.


What have we learned about you?
If you were given an enema, you could be buried in a matchbox.


You've served your purpose.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The photo looks better without Bush in it

Too bad he marched on the other side of the divider

Really?
Even you know that the administration handlers dictate who walks beside the President. They chose Al Sharpton.
As stated by the articles you didn't read, other news outlets show dozens of photos of the two together. NYT is the only one that didn't.

As already noted, Sharpton is behind O'bama, trying desperately to get into the picture (which says more about him than he might want). Walking next to the POTUS are John Lewis and (in the wheelchair, 103 years old) Amelia Boynton Robinson, both of whom were directly and dramatically involved 50 years ago. And then the First Family.

Methinks Fox Noise doth whine a bit too much scraping the bottom of the barrel to find fault on a slow news day on what should be a positive event.

Fox Noise does not like positive. Doesn't $ell.

It's not Fox News. I specifically noted two other links for whiners like you.
As also stated, even MSNBC...I say again...even MSNBC included Bush in their photos and videos.
Even MSNBC.

And I already essplained to you about graphics. The shot they ran on the front page has a LOT more people in it than the alternate with Bush on the side. That's worth a lot more than a "who's who" list for visual impact. I mean it's not even close.

Which brings one to wonder -- is this event supposed to be about commemorating a significant event in civil rights history -- or is this even supposed to be about George Bush? Which is more important?

Sorry, this really is scraping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel whining. Would it kill them to just acknowledge Selma and its significance? Does everything they do have to be some kind of political football score?

Are you really that dumb?
You don't see the significance and message brought by having two Presidents, different party, VERY different political beliefs, one blacj and one white - HOLDING HANDS TOGETHER in SELMA has MORE significance that a photo with a queer Al Sharpton pop-up.
Really...you wanna say that again.

Also AGAIN - every news outlet other than NYT showed both Presidents - even MSNBC!!!!!!!!!

 

[Pogo]

When you want to convey the impact of a large gathering though, you need a massive crowd. Your first pic has it, but aesthetically it's also a high-angle perspective and has the distraction of those traffic lights. You have to realize what graphics editors are looking for, and making sure every notable figure gets in there really isn't high on the priority list.

Yeah your right...choosing a photo with less traffic lights, and a creepy Sharpton pop-up over a photo placing together TWO U.S. Presidents together is much more powerful message.

Traffic lights strong across the horizontal plane distract the eye. That's just biology.
I suppose the traffic lights could have been photoshopped out. Al Sharpton could have been photoshopped out too. But then he'd start whining. And for reasons I can't fathom he's got a TV show to do it.

I think Sharpton should have been told the march was in Seattle and left waiting. His presence cheapens the event.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Another photo from different news outlet...

And another.....

another...

NYT - chose Al Sharpton...and so did Obama's handlers.

I like the last one. It's the most powerful.

When you want to convey the impact of a large gathering though, you need a massive crowd. Your first pic has it, but aesthetically it's also a high-angle perspective and has the distraction of those traffic lights. You have to realize what graphics editors are looking for, and making sure every notable figure gets in there really isn't high on the priority list.

I also liked the last one. But it shows a moment of silence from the speakers platform

The New York Times cover photo shows them marching over the bridge which was the idea. The wide shot with the barrier between the marchers is not as good a photo as the one they printed

It's not just the front page RW'ger...as noted by all articles..photos on other pages was also without Bush. I have not seen it of course, but according to them not till the end of the piece did they include Bush.
That is stupid. And unfortunate.
Showing two Presidents with very, very, very different politics, one white and one black, one Democrat and the other Republican - holding hands on the anniversary of Selma is significant! It shows that everyone, no matter race or politics can agree and honor what happened there and civil rights in general.
But that is not what is on NYT's agenda. They instead spent most of the covereage talking about Ferguson.
Pathetic.

 

[rightwinger]

The photo looks better without Bush in it

Too bad he marched on the other side of the divider

Really?
Even you know that the administration handlers dictate who walks beside the President. They chose Al Sharpton.
As stated by the articles you didn't read, other news outlets show dozens of photos of the two together. NYT is the only one that didn't.

As already noted, Sharpton is behind O'bama, trying desperately to get into the picture (which says more about him than he might want). Walking next to the POTUS are John Lewis and (in the wheelchair, 103 years old) Amelia Boynton Robinson, both of whom were directly and dramatically involved 50 years ago. And then the First Family.

Methinks Fox Noise doth whine a bit too much scraping the bottom of the barrel to find fault on a slow news day on what should be a positive event.

Fox Noise does not like positive. Doesn't $ell.

It's not Fox News. I specifically noted two other links for whiners like you.
As also stated, even MSNBC...I say again...even MSNBC included Bush in their photos and videos.
Even MSNBC.

And I already essplained to you about graphics. The shot they ran on the front page has a LOT more people in it than the alternate with Bush on the side. That's worth a lot more than a "who's who" list for visual impact. I mean it's not even close.

Which brings one to wonder -- is this event supposed to be about commemorating a significant event in civil rights history -- or is this even supposed to be about George Bush? Which is more important?

Sorry, this really is scraping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel whining. Would it kill them to just acknowledge Selma and its significance? Does everything they do have to be some kind of political football score?

Are you really that dumb?
You don't see the significance and message brought by having two Presidents, different party, VERY different political beliefs, one blacj and one white - HOLDING HANDS TOGETHER in SELMA has MORE significance that a photo with a queer Al Sharpton pop-up.
Really...you wanna say that again.

Also AGAIN - every news outlet other than NYT showed both Presidents - even MSNBC!!!!!!!!!

The day was not about Bush

It was about those who struggled on that day
Both John Lewis and 103 yr old Amelia Robinson deserved their spots

 

[Pogo]

The photo looks better without Bush in it

Too bad he marched on the other side of the divider

Really?
Even you know that the administration handlers dictate who walks beside the President. They chose Al Sharpton.
As stated by the articles you didn't read, other news outlets show dozens of photos of the two together. NYT is the only one that didn't.

As already noted, Sharpton is behind O'bama, trying desperately to get into the picture (which says more about him than he might want). Walking next to the POTUS are John Lewis and (in the wheelchair, 103 years old) Amelia Boynton Robinson, both of whom were directly and dramatically involved 50 years ago. And then the First Family.

Methinks Fox Noise doth whine a bit too much scraping the bottom of the barrel to find fault on a slow news day on what should be a positive event.

Fox Noise does not like positive. Doesn't $ell.

It's not Fox News. I specifically noted two other links for whiners like you.
As also stated, even MSNBC...I say again...even MSNBC included Bush in their photos and videos.
Even MSNBC.

And I already essplained to you about graphics. The shot they ran on the front page has a LOT more people in it than the alternate with Bush on the side. That's worth a lot more than a "who's who" list for visual impact. I mean it's not even close.

Which brings one to wonder -- is this event supposed to be about commemorating a significant event in civil rights history -- or is this even supposed to be about George Bush? Which is more important?

Sorry, this really is scraping-the-bottom-of-the-barrel whining. Would it kill them to just acknowledge Selma and its significance? Does everything they do have to be some kind of political football score?

Are you really that dumb?
You don't see the significance and message brought by having two Presidents, different party, VERY different political beliefs, one blacj and one white - HOLDING HANDS TOGETHER in SELMA has MORE significance that a photo with a queer Al Sharpton pop-up.
Really...you wanna say that again.

Also AGAIN - every news outlet other than NYT showed both Presidents - even MSNBC!!!!!!!!!

You think Bush and O'bama are "very different"?

Again, counting celebrities isn't the point -- masses of people, and what they stood up for in 1965 -- is the point. THEY are the heroes; that's the story here. Let's quit idolizing Presidents and turn our attention on the power of the People.

 

[Pogo]

The photo looks better without Bush in it

Too bad he marched on the other side of the divider

Really?
Even you know that the administration handlers dictate who walks beside the President. They chose Al Sharpton.
As stated by the articles you didn't read, other news outlets show dozens of photos of the two together. NYT is the only one that didn't.

As already noted, Sharpton is behind O'bama, trying desperately to get into the picture (which says more about him than he might want). Walking next to the POTUS are John Lewis and (in the wheelchair, 103 years old) Amelia Boynton Robinson, both of whom were directly and dramatically involved 50 years ago. And then the First Family.

Methinks Fox Noise doth whine a bit too much scraping the bottom of the barrel to find fault on a slow news day on what should be a positive event.

Fox Noise does not like positive. Doesn't $ell.

It's not Fox News. I specifically noted two other links for whiners like you.
As also stated, even MSNBC...I say again...even MSNBC included Bush in their photos and videos.
Even MSNBC.

Then that should hammer home the point that these choices are about graphic impact, not about headhunting to keep a political football score.

Actually what you're saying here is that MSNBC is less biased than Fox.

 

[rightwinger]

Another photo from different news outlet...

And another.....

another...

NYT - chose Al Sharpton...and so did Obama's handlers.

I like the last one. It's the most powerful.

When you want to convey the impact of a large gathering though, you need a massive crowd. Your first pic has it, but aesthetically it's also a high-angle perspective and has the distraction of those traffic lights. You have to realize what graphics editors are looking for, and making sure every notable figure gets in there really isn't high on the priority list.

I also liked the last one. But it shows a moment of silence from the speakers platform

The New York Times cover photo shows them marching over the bridge which was the idea. The wide shot with the barrier between the marchers is not as good a photo as the one they printed

It's not just the front page RW'ger...as noted by all articles..photos on other pages was also without Bush. I have not seen it of course, but according to them not till the end of the piece did they include Bush.
That is stupid. And unfortunate.
Showing two Presidents with very, very, very different politics, one white and one black, one Democrat and the other Republican - holding hands on the anniversary of Selma is significant! It shows that everyone, no matter race or politics can agree and honor what happened there and civil rights in general.
But that is not what is on NYT's agenda. They instead spent most of the covereage talking about Ferguson.
Pathetic.

The day was not about Bush

I was thrilled to see him attend but do not think he deserved any more "face-time" than those who risked their lives that day

 

[peach174]

I don't think that it was done intentionally.
The Photographer explained that it was a wide angle shot and that there was a technical problem with an upload of that wide angel shot to the newspaper.
I do think that the mention of the Bushes father down the page was meant to ease up the lefts mention earlier of no Republicans attending. There was 23 Republicans who did show up.

 

[Theowl32]

Saying a left winger is the scum of the earth is an insult to scum of the earth.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't think that it was done intentionally.
The Photographer explained that it was a wide angle shot and that there was a technical problem with an upload of that wide angel shot to the newspaper.
I do think that the mention of the Bushes father down the page was meant to ease up the lefts mention earlier of no Republicans attending. There was 23 Republicans who did show up.

Did Mia Love attend? I saw Tim Scott there