80 thoughts on “The latest cover of Newsweek

  1. The feature that is freaky may be that you can see sclera above her iris.

    I read somewhere years ago (no, I don’t have a reference and I’m not going to look for one) that, for most people most of the time, the sclera above the iris is not visible. The eyelid tends to cover it. You can make a conscious effort to lift your eyelid and even maintain it for a while. But the look is weird.

    Another good example of this is Michael Jackson’s booking photo.

    1. I’m glad that someone has finally explained what is so bizarre about her eyes. The strange thing is that she seems to do this on purpose, perhaps on the misguided belief that it makes her seems more bright and cheery.

      1. It is pretty chilling, yes. If a politician had that look in his or her eyes and I was 100% behind their policy, character, and judgment – I’d still try to avoid pictures of them to remain settled.

        There’s something to be inferred from the fact that she maintains this despite being someone who will be pictured often and whose profession calls for projecting personality with one’s face, and one who is certain to have image professionals about to tell her that she may be better off easing her eyelids down a tad. The inferences that seem natural to me (confirmation bias obviously possible) are that (1) she’s not at all interested in projecting an image of calm or control, or (2) she does not pay attention to experts in the field.

    1. I think you are right.
      Jim Ringer wrote it and recorded it on his LP, “Endangered Species (Flying Fish).”
      “His mama back home wishes he’d phone but his dad hopes he don’t call today
      The last time he called was some time last fall for money and to beg them to pray.
      Well the church has his money and his clothes are still funny
      and those new shoes aint even his size.
      He used to take acid, but now he loves God but he still got that look in his eye. Yeah,
      He used to take acid, but now he loves God but he still got that look in his eye. “

  2. It is not an old rock song but Ben Folds has a song (“Not the Same” on the album Rocking the Suburbs)about someone who spent a night in a tree on acid and came down a born again christian.

      1. Take a look through Google images. See if you can find even one photo of her with human-like wrinkles on her forehead.

      1. Yeah, honestly I think you’d be better off with Sarah Palin, she’s not insane just an opportunist. Insanity is frightening.

  3. Have some mercy on your Minnesotan readers, please. We see more of MB than we want to. Put her “below the fold” with a link.

    As much as I abhor her politics and rhetoric, I’m actually OK with her being in the national spotlight. It helps raise awareness of the crazy festering in MN about which progressives sometimes conveniently forget.

    1. Come to think of it, she looks as if she caught her knickers in something.

      Have you noticed how above her head it says Ne…eek! which was my reaction too.

  4. Scary or crazy, but desperate for any form of press recognition if she need to pose like that.

    I like that.

    [It would be even better if it didn’t sell. Alas.]

    1. With a morotized camera, they get dozens of pictures with all kinds of expressions, and they can just choose the one that makes her look craziest. So I’m skeptical that she really usually looks like that.

      Not to say she isn’t crazy, though.

  5. Wow!

    The United States of America is truly amazing country.

    Such a vine specimen with such a telling gaze!

  6. I hope that she gets the GOP nomination. This country needs to decide: do we want to be governed by the likes of her or by the likes of someone who believes in seriously thinking things through.

    1. Who’s the one that thinks things through? Haven’t seen indication of anyone like that running.

      (Hint: Always capitulating isn’t thinking things through)

      1. As it used to do before passage of all these government regulations that bind, hamper and discourage business. Sorry but I still remember people dying at Love Canal and the day the Cuyahoga river caught fire. Bachmann & her ilk will have us back to those days if they can………shades of James Watt!

    1. I read the New Yorker article too- how she doesn’t allow herself to be photographed without her nice clothes on. It’s all about the image. And here they have this picture perfect image of her, except that crazy look in her eye, and the right wing is screaming about it as they did with Sarah Palin where she wasn’t polished enough.

      The woman is who she is. You can’t hide what’s in the eyes.

    1. See! after that prayer meeting doG told him to run so he can bring the USA back to the kennel and save it from science and atheistic nihilism……..we’re doomed! Doomed I tell you…

  7. Interesting, however, that the picture (which may be truly reflective of MB’s nature) is raising a shit-storm even from the likes of NOW as misogynistic in it’s depiction along with the “Queen” reference below it.

    Again, I abhor what she says and claims to stand for, but does anyone here agree that the image in question might be intentionally unflattering or is it really just an accurate representation of MB?

    1. Yeah, I’m glad I’m not the only person thinking it’s a little uncouth.

      Kind of nice that the “Bachmann is CRAZY” angle is expected to sell magazines, but that point should be made by describing her positions, not putting unflattering photos on the cover.

      Newsweek was the mag that darkened OJ on its cover, IIRC.

      1. The New Yorker article gave the impression Bachmann has some control over what pictures appear. Might she have approved this?

        1. I thought about that and think it’s entirely plausible. If there is any thing to give her credit for, it’s that she knows how to play to her audience and is politically savvy (albeit in a really low-class manner, IMO). If you are on her side, the picture does kind of makes her look visionary. If you’re not, it makes her look “visionary”. She can garner support from her supporters and slyly win some sympathy from a whole array of media critics – progressive and conservative.

    2. Wasn’t it Newsweek that ran the unflattering close-up of Palin during the last election?

      Don’t get me wrong here — I consider Bachmann and Palin the poster children for everything that’s wrong with America. But I do think the cover is deliberating unflattering and designed with a political agenda in mind.

    3. Newsweek may have picked that picture on purpose to be unflattering, but the eye thing is not unusual, at least not in the pictures I’ve seen in the past. In fact, I’ve seen that look in nearly all the pictures of her I’ve seen for the past couple of years.

      I’ve been calling it ‘crazy eyes’ myself. “Self”, I say, “That woman has crazy eyes.”

      1. Yeah. The challenge is to find pics of her NOT doing it…really…Palin and Coulter have lighter versions of the look. I can’t prove it, I suspect it’s a symptom of a similar pathologies. Suze Orman (sp) has it too. It seems to effect only conservative women

    1. Sure they did. What’s your point? Is Newsweek under an obligation not to use the photos where she has crazy eyes?

      1. And those saner looking pictures are a bit older. As she gets closer and closer to being a possible contender, she’s become more unhinged.

    2. Actually, I’m fairly certain the story that people are missing here is this; Newsweek is in such a sorry state that they evidently cant afford a decent photo editor. Heck, do they even have a cover editor? How did that ugly monstrosity make it into print?

    3. Who are you trying to kid, aside from yourself?

      ALL the pictures of Bachmann that appeared when I clicked that link had the demented look in her eyes.

  8. I don’t like Bachman or her politics, but this is the kind of shit that turns me off politics. Where’s the post about OBama whining once again about how he inherited the economic woes? No one held a gun to his head and made him run for President.

  9. And, there’s a song pre-fabbed:

    Hey Michele Bachmann
    Did they teach you at Anoka [or Winona]
    That four thousand years ago
    We roamed the planet with Godzilla…

  10. Here’s a song for you – I’ve posted it elsewhere as well.

    Charlie Manson Eyes

    Her speech is Glenn Beck gold
    Her grimace sweet surprise
    Her heart is always cold
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes
    She’ll turn her rhetoric on you
    You won’t have to think twice
    Cold as Minnesota snow
    She got Charlie Manson eyes

    And she’ll tease you
    She’ll unease you
    All the better just to sleaze you
    She’s precocious and she knows just
    What it takes to make a Rove blush
    She got John Boehner teary cries
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes

    She’ll take you to the cleaners
    It whets her appetite
    She’ll lay you on her slab
    She’ll take a dump on you
    Roll you like you were dice
    Until you come out blue
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes

    She’ll expose you, when she snows you
    Off your feet with the crumbs she throws you
    She’s ferocious and she knows just
    What it takes to make a Rove blush
    Republicans think she’s a guy
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes

    And she’ll tease you
    She’ll unease you
    All the better just to sleaze you
    She’s precocious, and she knows just
    What it takes to make a Rove blush
    She got John Boehner teary cries
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes

    She’ll tease you
    She’ll unease you
    Just to sleaze ya
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes
    She’ll expose you, when she snows you
    She knows ya
    She’s got Charlie Manson eyes

  11. Bachmann didn’t finish the title, it should be “The Evils of Mixing Religion (Church) With Government (State)” The Shah of Iran tried to be a secular leader, recognizing the rights of man, especially women. The Shi’a forced him out; now look at Iran and all the other “religious states”. There is a billbord in northwestern Florida on route 19 that says “This Country was Founded on Christian Principles.” These uneducated, including Bachman and Perry, should read-up on their Jefferson, Franklin, Adams’es and Paine. Then, they should study James Burgh (1714-1775),another Englishman, whose book “Political Disquisitions”, Jefferson recommended to Madison and Monroe, the last two of our “Founding Fathers”.

    1. I keep wondering what Christian principles those are…

      Democratic elections? Nope, not in the Bible anywhere.
      Three co-equal branches of government? Nope, all the bible talks about is the pending kingdom of Jesus.
      No cruel and unusual punishment? Nope, not in there.
      Right of a trial by jury?
      Right to free speech?
      Right to worship any god you want (or none at all)? HAH. The First Amendment directly contradicts and contravenes the First Commandment!

      Is there ANY Christian value in our system of government? Don’t steal — how the heck is that Christian?

      1. I have been singing the Star Spangled Banner recently in the choir I frequent and I noticed with amazement that there is absolutely NO mention of gods! No Jesus, no spirit, nuffin, just the flag. I’m surprised the likes of Bachmann aren’t trying to get it changed, how can America hope to rule the world without god in the national anthem?

        1. If that’s the case, you must not be singing the entire anthem. The Star-Spangled Bannerhas four stanzas which I shall place below. Few people even know there is more than one stanza and fewer still know the words of two through four. (Isaac Asimov wrote a mystery short story set in WWII in which a NAZI spy was discovered because he knew the third stanza – something no true American would.) God is mentioned in passing in the fourth stanza.

          Here they are:

          O! say can you see by the dawn’s early light,
          What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
          Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
          O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
          And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
          Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
          O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave,
          O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

          On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
          Where the foe’s haughty host in dread silence reposes,
          What is that which the breeze, o’er the towering steep,
          As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
          Now it catches the gleam of the morning’s first beam,
          In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
          ’Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave
          O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

          And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
          That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion,
          A home and a country, should leave us no more?
          Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps’ pollution.
          No refuge could save the hireling and slave
          From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
          And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
          O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

          O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
          Between their loved home and the war’s desolation.
          Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the Heav’n rescued land
          Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!
          Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
          And this be our motto: “In God is our trust;”
          And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
          O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

          During the Civil War, a fifth was added:

          When our land is illumined with liberty’s smile,
          If a foe from within strikes a blow at her glory,
          Down, down with the traitor that tries to defile
          The flag of the stars, and the page of her story!
          By the millions unchained,
          Who their birthright have gained
          We will keep her bright blazon forever unstained;
          And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave,
          While the land of the free is the home of the brave.

  12. People, this is a very dangerous person and you’re busy commenting on her eyes? It’s like someone admiring the lights of a forest fire while their house is burning down.

    Run! Run!

    America is doomed.

  13. Evolution of American Presidential Idiocy:

    Ronald Reagan -> George W Bush -> ?? Michele Bachmann/Sarah Palin/Rick Santorum (u pick)

      1. No, Perry belongs to another category – not stupid, instead cynical and mendacious ala Dick Cheney or Richard Nixon.

  14. Matt Taibbi said it best:
    “She’s trying to look like June Cleaver, but she actually looks like the T2 skeleton posing for a passport photo.”

    Unfortunately, the line after is probably correct:
    “You will want to laugh, but don’t, because the secret of Bachmann’s success is that every time you laugh at her, she gets stronger.”

  15. I think that it is important to plan ahead if any of the evolution-denying fundy xians become president – where to move? My list contains Nicaragua, Canada and Argentina. Other thoughts?

    1. Canada will work. Within a hour or few, same language, eh? Better beer, familiar junk food, plus we did this a generation ago when Viet Nam and the draft was at its peak, so we are pretty used to the process (the pro in process rhymes with “grow”).

      Plus you have a ringside seat for the festivities.

    2. From The Vancouver Sun: “A 2006 Ipsos Reid poll showed the percentage of Canadians willing to vote for a prime minister who is evangelical had fallen 17 percentage points in a decade.

      Only 63 per cent of Canadians said they’d vote for a prime minister if he were an evangelical, below the 68 per cent who wouldn’t hesitate to vote for an atheist or a Muslim.”

      That, at least, is encouraging – the atheist part – with numbers that would not be matched here in the US (even though you only vote for the Prime Minister directly if you happen to be in their riding, the point is made). BTW, Harper is a Christian nut job but keeps it private … ?

  16. The rightwingnuts aren’t upset because Newsweek “photoshopped” her to look like that.

    The rightwingnuts are upset because Newsweek *didn’t* “photoshop” her to make her look better.

    The picture shows how she really looks close up. She’s completely batshit crazy, and people need to know that.

Leave a Reply