Disgusting prank by Leftist magazine
The Duchess of Cambridge has done nothing to deserve this. She is unfailingly polite and pleasant to all. It's just Leftist hatred of success in others again, I suppose
For someone so beautiful, this isn't pretty. The face of the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton, has been slapped on the front of a U.S. magazine with a set of yellow, decaying teeth.
The Royal was PhotoShopped like the American stereotype of a Brit with bad gnashers for a special issue of the politics and arts publication The New Republic about the future of Britain.
Last year the pearly white Duchess spent thousands of pounds having her teeth polished and turned to give her the perfect smile. French dentist Didier Fillion used a hidden brace to make Kate’s teeth appear a little out of line, un-American and therefore beautifully natural.
Source
Sadly, this will just reinforce the British view of Americans as crude and crass. It will neither surprise nor upset most Brits.
And helping to make their own country look bad will not disturb the American Left one bit. Their patriotism is not even skin deep. It is at most a hollow pretense.
17 comments:
Slow news day, Jon?
The REPUBLIC is no diffrent then any of the other liberal news rags like TIME,NEWSWEEK,PEOPLE and the other leftist propeganda rags
Magazines are getting more desperate as the internet spells out their slow agonizing death. As their readership and subcriptions dwindle away, we will likely be treated to the various stages of death.. denile, anger, bargaining, depression.. although I doubt acceptance will hit until the courts shut their doors via forced Chapter 7.
If you don't like left leaning news magazines, DON'T READ THEM. Just STFU.
Hmmm. Do we detect some leftists around here? 12:58 AND 4:10 maybe?
When a magazine smears a British royal, or anyone else for that matter, that's news and they need to be called on it. Why should The New Republic be given a pass on unethical practices?
* yawn *
The New Republic wanted a cover that would cause controversy. And here you are.
They wanted a cover that would show the concepts of "Britain" and "decay" in the same picture. They did that.
Personally, I think it's just rude to do that to a picture of the most beautiful royal in years. (And arguably one of the most beautiful women in the world, IMHO.) On the other hand, I don't have my panties in a bunch over it, trying to manufacture controversy where none exists.
Typical rightwing nonsense. Move on. Literally nothing to see here.
Let them print what they want, she doesn't have to read it. No big deal, move on.
Anon 8:02........I trust if a picture of you was published with say a wart on the tip of your nose or a harelip photoshopped in, you'd laugh it off as just wacky hijinks with no harm intended, right?
It strikes me as simply a gratuitous insult.
Why did they bother? All it manages to accomplish is to make the New Republic seem petty and vindictive.
8:54, I wouldn't care.
It seems that the left's favorite line these days revolves around saying the discussion is over, there is nothing to see here, move on. It seems to be a variation of their "big lie" strategy. There is something to discuss here, and it could go very deep into their motives and mental states, but they don't want to discuss it.
Meanwhile I saw some leftist talking about how the right uses the myth of the American dream to get their ideas across to gullible people, while the left deals only in facts - effing delusional!
PS - sure, the left may start with a fact here and there, like the fact that there is a wide gap between the wealth of the poor and the super rich, but where they go from there can't be supported by facts - it's all feelings and emotions.
Sounds like "sour grapes" or "inverted snobbery", but the British royals are now there to do a real job promoting their country's economy on all fronts, and Kate is a very good new PR asset (replacing Diana? - and she's not even from the usual aristocratic ranks either).
The photo, and in fact, that entire publication prove, once again, that limitless, uncontrolled freedom, is like limitless, uncontrolled water. Eventually, both will destroy all in their path.
No different then NEWSREEK and SLIME
Is this website about the First Amendment or does it want to police taste/style/crass behaviour?
Seems to me the cover is protected by the First, even if crass and distasteful.
who cares? royalty is an old fashioned concept riddled with a horrible past of oppression, kick the queen and her family out of the UK and grow up.
Anything to make them look bad.. Just like the Bachman cover of Newsweek.. Im still waiting for Newsweek to put the picture below on the cover of one issue to show how "unbiased" they really are.. I wont be holding my breath waiting though.
http://www.funnyobamas.com/pictures/Michelle_Obama_Crazy_Face.jpg
Post a Comment