Excuse me, sir, your Lyotard seems to have a hole in the seat…

Now that the Iraqi documents have proven the existence of WMD and established Saddam’s links to Al Qaeda, the WingNet has resumed its clever plan to starve us of material by obsessing obsessively on jots, tittles, and dandruff flakes (i.e. things they can occasionally be right about), with a special concentration on close, intertextual engagement with sites of non-dominant knowing as discursively (re)engendered through the meta-semiotics of photos in newspapers.

Michelle Malkin blows the roof off the Times Hooded-Guy Photo Scandal, while Powerline blows the extra-super-roof off the Times Magenta Blazer Photo Scandal.

Malkin is of course confused again. Or, rather, not confused again, because that implies transit between lucidity and bonkiness — but a difficulty in referring to Malkin’s persistent cognitive state is that “Ho ho, Malkin’s acting crazy” eventually takes on the informative value of “There is air.”

By Michelle Malkin · March 19, 2006 12:09 AM

The phony who posed for the NYTimes:



While we’re on the subject of the Times and photo alterations, beware of posing for Times photographers. It seems even Dems aren’t immune to the paper’s distorted lens.

That’s a lot of air!

Dear Ombudsman, MichelleMalkin.com:

In your item of March 19th., etc., the writer seems unaware of the difference between the following two propositions:

1) The NY Times faked a photograph to make it look like there was an Iraqi in a hood being tortured, when there really wasn’t an Iraqi in a hood at all, but only some guy dishonestly posing as one to fool people.

2) According to the NY Times, an Iraqi guy said that he was the one in the hood being tortured, in the photo, but he was actually a different guy than the one being tortured, wearing a hood, in the photo.

The right answer is Number Two. Please print a correction.
Thank you,
Godyer Sodum

Vastly Shorter Powerline: By evidently changing the color of Governor Mark Warner’s blazer and tie to magenta, the cover story of the liberal NY Times Magazine destabilizes the counter-hegemonic narratives at stake in the positive coverage of Governor Mark Warner in the cover story of the liberal NY Times Magazine.


Comments: 10


Warner’s a Democrat. The devilish liberal media is just making him look bad because they think Hillary’s liberaler!


Oop, correction time. It’s only been up for about 3 minutes, so I’ll reboot it.


PS: “I believe the fact that I made a sloppy and idiotic error only strengthens my position.”


…with a special concentration on close, intertextual engagement with sites of non-dominant knowing as discursively (re)engendered through the meta-semiotics of photos in newspapers.

….and with that careful reading of the divine texts, along with a few chicken feet, a chalice of ram’s blood and a little dance in front of the altar…presto…Abu Ghraib never happened!

Hysterical Woman

I don’t get the blazer thing. What is the scandal? Even if it was intentional, it’s still petty. What’s wrong with magenta?


Well they made his shirt look Freddie MErcury pink, if you know what I mean.

I’ll need the e-mail of the Michelle Malkin ombudsperson dept. I’ve got a little laundry list.


Only the PowerTools would get up in arms over a freaking picture of a sweater.


Holy crap! Have you read all the updates and reader interplay over at Powderline [sic] about the frickin’ photo colors? I realize these are people with nothing better to do, but I have to ask: Do they really have nothing better to do? I mean, if they can’t find anything of greater significance to write and think about… maybe they should explore a different hobby? I hear bowling is relaxing.


They’re just hoping to get picked up by the MSM they hate so much as their claim to fame.

“Remember, we’re the website that broke magenta sweater-gate, and that keeps us perpetually relevant!”


(comments are closed)