http://fawny.org/spy/spy-illos/SPY1993-02.cover.jpg

Looks like the Rethuglicans are running scared... First Kim flip-flops the before and after photos on her post, which Jay links to without explanation, and then Jay shocks - I say SHOCKS the world with the revelation that Hillary had make-up put on before last week's debate.

The horrors!!

As someone explained, in Kim's thread I believe, the difference was lighting. The debate was professionally lit, the less-flattering photo of Hillary was not.

but don't let reality get in your way there wingnuts - party on!

Lee, while I have your attention, could you kindly explain your positions on softening the discourse? Especially when dealing with those with whom you have a professional relationship?

Kim accurately reported what the Boston Herald said, did not notice when they corrected themselves, and then did not drop everything else in her life the instant someone noticed it. For that, you labelled her a "liar" and various and sundry other things.

Remind me to send you a case of Preparation H some time. I hear it works wonders for inflamed assholes.

J.

could you kindly explain your positions on softening the discourse?

What a shame such a remarkable talent should lend itself to evil...

softening the discourse? - I thought this post was about softening Hillary's wrinkles? I'm not sure where you're headed with this Jay, but it appears to be hard left turn off-topic so you could use your prep H joke. You forgot the all caps "BWHAHAHHA" that usually accompanies humor of that caliber...

back on-topic, Hollywood types use preparation H around their eyes to sharing the puffyness and look "tighter" - something I hope Fred Thompson takes to heart, but Fraidy-cat Fred needs to use it on his entire face. I've never seen a guy look more like a bassethound than Frightened Freddy.

Is it just me, or is anyone else having trouble waiting for the page here to load until the ad up top finally decides it's not going to load?

"Rethuglicans", "wingnuts", blah, blah, blah. It's really tiresome. Will someone please let me know when Lee says something of any significance that's not peppered with an underdeveloped sixth-grader's vocabulary?

"Looks like the Rethuglicans are running scared... First Kim flip-flops the before and after photos on her post, which Jay links to without explanation, and then Jay shocks - I say SHOCKS the world with the revelation that Hillary had make-up put on before last week's debate."

"back on-topic, Hollywood types use preparation H around their eyes to sharing the puffyness and look "tighter" - something I hope Fred Thompson takes to heart, but Fraidy-cat Fred needs to use it on his entire face. I've never seen a guy look more like a bassethound than Frightened Freddy."

Anyone else laughing their asses off trying to reconcile these two statements by Lee?

Someone tried to reconcile statements that Lee makes?

Anyhow, seems to me that "Sicko" may well be a deliberate attempt to prop Hillary since socialized medicine is her thing.

Yeah, one is based on facts (Fred Thompson's floppy jowels and the fact the stars use Preparation H to reduce puffiness) and the other is not (Kim's post which incorrectly still shows the incorrect, flip-flopped photos right there at the top of the post).

Not supriseing that you can't tell fact from fiction here on Wizbang, brainy - but I'm glad I can help you out...

"Kim accurately reported what the Boston Herald said..."

Writers on this site will say, do or believe anything to push their agenda - this being another example in a very long, long line. You are no stranger to this Jay. And what a zinger on the Prep. H!

Interesting that she has worked with both Bush presidents, Buchanan and Romney.

In one post Lee says:

You forgot the all caps "BWHAHAHHA" that usually accompanies humor of that caliber...

Then in the same post says:

but Fraidy-cat Fred needs to use it on his entire face. I've never seen a guy look more like a bassethound than Frightened Freddy.

You can't make this stuff up.

JT, why do you even try to reason with the two idiots? They don't read and comprehend. They just want to lay out their juvenile talking points they receive from the DNC. On topic, it will take a lot of make-up to keep up with Hillary's campaign. Oh, and at least our republican candidates and probable candidates, don't run in terror of Fox News or any other organization. "They will be mean to us", pouted Edwards. ww

Jay tea - why did you give that hateful lee a platform anyway?

"Yeah, one is based on facts (Fred Thompson's floppy jowels and the fact the stars use Preparation H to reduce puffiness) and the other is not (Kim's post which incorrectly still shows the incorrect, flip-flopped photos right there at the top of the post).

Not supriseing that you can't tell fact from fiction here on Wizbang, brainy - but I'm glad I can help you out..."

Actually I was commenting on the childish hypocricy of chiding someone for bashing an opponent based on looks, then immediately flip-flopping 180° and bashing an opponent based on looks.

And I'm painfully aware, from your past comments, of your intimate relationship with fiction.

I could think of nothing more completely and totally irrelevant than Hillary's make-up or cosmetic surgery (or lack thereof). Who cares???

"Actually I was commenting on the childish hypocricy of chiding someone for bashing an opponent based on looks, then immediately flip-flopping 180° and bashing an opponent based on looks."

Fine, except the problem I have with Kim's post isn't the chiding, it's the incorrect use of photos to support a lie. Right there at the top of Kim's post are two side-by-side photos, and the text that appears beneath it suggests that Clinton had "work" done" - with the left photo shown a "before" shot of Hillary looking wrinkled, and the right side showing a smooth-skinned Hillary.

Well, it turns out the photos as they appear there at the top of this post are flip-flopped, the supposed "before" shot is actually a photo taken the day after the smooth photo.

I have no problem with right wingers chiding Hillary about her looks, but be honest about it, as I'm being honest about Floppy-Joweled Fraidy-Cat Freddy.

Miserable Loser Lee is flinging poo again.

It is fun to watch. BWAhahahahhah.

No amount of supposed plastic surgery or lighting is going to bestow Mrs. Clinton with charisma, so this is a moot point anyway. Let's move on to the next bloody name-calling fracas shall we?

Man, do I really need to explain simple concepts to you? If you had basic reading comprehension, you'd know that in my comment YOU were the one doing the chiding... of Kim... while she was doing the first bashing, of Clinton. Now, if we can leave grade school-level reading problems behind, I'll move on to the main error in your argument.

You want to crucify Kim for switching the pictures around... except she already explained that the AP and the Herald had it wrong and has since updated her post with the new photo and text. Did you expect her to somehow identify the 2 photos used and independantly verify their dates to make sure that the Herald and the AP both had it right? If so, you have a long way to go with the quality of your assertions before you can cast those stones, brother. It's not like Kim was the only person skeptical of the transformation: "She transformed the would-be president in about 15 minutes before last Sunday's CNN debate, so wowing the TV audience that everybody from New Hampshire voters to Yours Truly to the ladies of "The View" to Jay Leno started speculating: Did Hillary get a face-lift, Botox, what?"

Kim accurately reported what the Boston Herald said, did not notice when they corrected themselves, and then did not drop everything else in her life the instant someone noticed it. For that, you labelled her a "liar" and various and sundry other things.

Well Jay, what's your excuse? 'Cause you had a whole week to see that that post was inaccurate, yet you chose to link to it anyway.

Brian,
Wasn't the correction of that post noted and updated before Jay linked to it?
And didn't he say in his post that Kim's speculation was wrong?

Given that the answers are yes, what exactly has taken up residence in your butt?

Things up butts explains a lot.

I went back to look... a whole 5 hours to correct once the mistake was pointed out and *then* that wasn't good enough because it was just a correction and not... what... a declaration of Hillary love?

It's just blatant and baseless perpetuation of slimy innuendo. "Some people recently thought X, and here's a post that shows where people though X. And yes it also shows that X wasn't true, but I'm going to post a link to something related to X, and so here's another link to the now disproven post about X... but this post isn't really about X, so don't accuse me of claiming X!"

What? Me, wrinkle?
=============

Now you know Oyster.

What is slimy about getting a face lift?

I mean, sure, Pelosi looks perpetually surprised but if Hillary's looks had been due to a face lift, the doc did an excellent job.

As it is, the make up lady did some amazing stuff with her knowledge about how to make Hillary look good under the lights.

Yeah, Kerry getting botoxed is slimy. With Pelosi, it's not slimy, it's vanity.
================================

I'm amused that top on the hit Fred list for Dems is personal appearance. Notice, too, how they project his tardy entry as cowardly? So amusing, those buffoons.
==============================

"Rethuglicans", "wingnuts", blah, blah, blah. It's really tiresome. Will someone please let me know when Lee says something of any significance that's not peppered with an underdeveloped sixth-grader's vocabulary?

Does longevity run in your family genes?

Wow.

All I thought I was saying was "hey, we got someone here in New Hampshire who is amazingly talented and did an incredibly cool thing. In fact, she did what a lot of people thought must have been the work of a highly trained surgeon (including a couple of us), and she did it all in about 10 minutes!"

I had no idea I was being so subtle and sneaky. I just wanted to follow up on a story (one where we inadvertently repeated others' mistakes, and corrected ourselves) and play up the local angle (well, local for me).

It also occurs to me that John Edwards' famous haircut was also done by a New Hampshirite, and makes me realize I have little business looking like a schlub.

But thanks again, Brian. I didn't realize my subconscious was so devious. I'll have to watch out for that -- or find out more ways to exploit it.

J.

"back on-topic, Hollywood types use preparation H around their eyes to sharing the puffyness and look "tighter" "

Would you consider using some Prep H around your pie hole?

Egads, egresses exacerbate egalitarily, easy on the easing liniment.

It is steroid abuse, and will blotch your face.
=========================

JT, it is Brian's consciousness that is devious. That kind of explanation is slam dunk projection, in any scorer's book.
============================

Sorry, John in Pain, but Wizbang is such a target-rich environment...

I'm amused that top on the hit Fred list for Dems is personal appearance. Notice, too, how they project his tardy entry as cowardly? So amusing, those buffoons.

Posted by: kim at June 13, 2007 12:55 AM

That from the head buffoon -- and now this

Read his whole post at the link above. Fred Thompson is doing pretty well for guy who isn't in the race. He was on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno this evening, so I tuned in. Fred appeared relaxed and confident, and did well but not spectacularly so. Someone needs to remind him to unbutton his jacket when he sits down, though - it gave him something of a disheveled look.

Posted by Jim Addison
Published: Jun 13, 07 02:21 AM

priceless...

C'mon guys and gals, the dude is an accomplished actor with apparently a lot of money behind him. You don't think that look isn't calculated? I can see it now: 'Those silly Dems have nothing on me but my looks; vote for me for what's behind my pretty face, and not what's behind hers.'
=====================================

Drat, the dreaded doubled negatory.
========================