First Family Photo By Annie Leibovitz
Tweet
Nice.
46 Responses to “First Family Photo By Annie Leibovitz”
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
What Time Is Super Bowl 2012 (Super Bowl XLVI)?
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
A very nice portrait of the first family.
So that’s what the face of modern American terrorism looks like, he said sarcastically.
Very nice shot. Annie Leibovitz does excellent work.
That is a very good photo. Beautiful girls, proud parents and it shows.
AHHH they look so cute. I am proud.
LOL, I wonder what Dave Letterman thinks, something wholesome and pure no doubt.
I’m sorry, I can’t control myself.
Isn’t that just the GREATEST photographe ever of the most handsome First Family ever?
There has been more gushing over the Obamas, than there was over the Kennedys.
@ Frank – you’re like a fruit fly Frank, you turn everything that’s sweet into vinegar.
You’re right isms; it’s not the Obamas’ fault that grown mean and women treat them like teenage girls waiting at the airport for the Beatles to arrive.
Incoherent. Please clarify.
I mean that the gushing over the Obamas is as cloying as it was when it was aimed at the Kennedys, who, I must admit, I gushed over – he, Catholic, Democrat and handsome, she, beautiful, worldly and sphisticated.
I didn’t become disillusioned with librals, leftists, and Democrats in general until late into the sixties
mean that the gushing over the Obamas is as cloying as it was when it was aimed at the Kennedys,
Indeed.
“Isn’t that just the GREATEST photographe ever of the most handsome First Family ever?”
Did anybody say that? No? Hmm. Are you freaking out again over our black president?
Yes, yes you are.
Indeed, that was one reference. There have been hundreds of silmilar things said about the Obamas since Election Day, and over a dozen – at least – in here.
And, jaim, why did you mention Pres Obama was black? Does that bother you? I’ll bet it does. You probaby feel like a special guy being white amongst all those “ornamentals”, eh, jaim?
It’s an awesome photo of a happy family. Frank, wouldn’t you agree if this was the Smith family from Atlanta or Kansas City instead of the Obamas?
“Indeed, that was one reference. There have been hundreds of silmilar things said about the Obamas since Election Day, and over a dozen – at least – in here.”
Wow, people saying nice things about the President of the United States.
We should cover ourselves in ashes and declare a national day of mourning.
Isn’t that just the GREATEST photographe ever of the most handsome First Family ever?
Proving yet again there is no post so innocuous that it won’t stick a broom under the bridge and swish it around a little bit and draw various annoyed grumblings.
“I didn’t become disillusioned with librals, leftists, and Democrats in general until late into the sixties.”
The apex of fun and political praxis.
Yeah, Jaim, remember when people said nice things about the President?
They took 8 years off from 2001 – 2009.
Excuse me if all this ass kissing rankles.
Quaker, of course I would , no matter who it was, if it were apolitical.
Yes, isms, That’s when the Democrats were swallowed whole by the Left
Poor baby. Americans turned on an incompetent president, but a majority happens to like this one.
How is it ass-kissing to show a press photo anyways? I didn’t lose my shit when White House Christmas pictures came out of George and Laura (as they do every year). I just didn’t care.
Being told criticism of Bush was treason, as often happened during the dark ages of 2001-2006 or so, before America woke up and realized what a disaster Bush was? That was kind of annoying. And un-American.
No, Jaim, the left turned on a good President, and with the cooperation of their dog teams in the MSM, made him out to be a bad one (Remember The Worst President in American History? Real historians rated him ahead of Pres Clinton… Bet you didn’t know that, did you?)
And no one ever said criticizing the President was treason — at least, not until the left wanted to lynch Rush Limbaugh for wishing Pres Obama would fail.
(Remember The Worst President in American History? Real historians rated him ahead of Pres Clinton… Bet you didn’t know that, did you?)
Link please.
A president who started two wars and couldn’t even finish either, let alone win one of them? A president who presided over the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression?
It’s amazing what abilities of self-delusion cons have. People don’t hate Bush because he’s a Republican, they hate him because he was a big fucking failure at everything he touched.
“real historians rated him ahead of Pres Clinton”
Name one. And I want an actual historian who teaches and publishes, not Jonah Goldberg.
Again, Jaims, watch this PBS Frontline show, The Warning, and you’ll understand a little better how idiotic it is to say a president ‘who presided over the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression’ is. The foundation for what happened last year was built ten years ago under another president.
Watch it and learn.
What happened could’ve just as easily have been delayed another year and Obama would be taking the blame for what Clinton, Rubin, Greenspan, Summers and Leavitt did in the late 90′s, at least according to your definition since you blame him for nothing, not even him miserable failure on the jobs situation.
Here’s the left’s favorite “encyclopedia” :: Historical Ranking of U.S. Presidents
What do you think I am, a liberal? I don’t make this stuff up.
And there are more articles to back that up … And I am not terribly busy between now and 8 AM EST… I’ll find dozens more if you want to keep this crap up…
And , by the way, jaim, who are you to demand anything? You don’t even quote anyone, let alone provide a link or a cite.
LOL Jaim,
Would you consider Howard Zinn an accredited historian?
Frank, your link doesn’t show what you assert. A lower score is better.
There were about a dozen ratings. And I can find more. I know what I know.
I also recall asking the people here who the second worst President was , Funny thing was, there were then about 10 different answers, from Fillmore to Nixon.
Again, your link doesn’t show what you assert, Farris,…er, I mean, Frank.
Please find more links that don’t show proof of your assertions. That’ll show “us lefties” that you know what you know!
OK, you’ve covered your ass. You can go now.
Too bad Clinton didn’t take him out when he had the chance, isn’t it, Indeed?
You know, after we had already been attacked inside the United States.
Cut and paste idiot.
From your link, Dennis:
“In reality, getting bin Laden would have been extraordinarily difficult. He was a moving target inside Afghanistan. Most military operations would have been high risk. What’s more, Clinton was weakened by scandal, AND THERE WAS NO POLITICAL CONSENSUS FOR BOLD ACTION, especially with an election just weeks away.”
There’s your answer. To be fair, it also takes the wind out of the argument, somewhat, that Bush should have had his hair on fire about the August 6 memo. Because if there was no consensus for bold action in 2000, there was even less in August 2001.
I’ve never held with those who fault Bush OR Clinton for “not preventing” 9/11. I was a cheerleader for fucking up the Taliban after it happened, but I doubt I would have supported a ground war in Afghanistan before. I still think 9/11 was a monster sucker-punch that nobody saw coming. It’s how Bush used 9/11 to further neocon wetdreams in Iraq that pissed me off.
You let us know when you find the non-NRO historians who put Bush ahead of Clinton, Frank.
I know what I know.
Is this an internet tradition? If not, shouldn’t it be?
By non-NRO I of course mean published at a university press. No Regnery.
I agree with you on that, Bruce. Just not with Indeed. And I don’t blame Clinton for the market collapse, either. Or the four people I mentioned working with him in deregulating the derivatives market.
I have a bettert idea… Why don’t you scholars show me a peer-reviewed study that indicates Pre Bush WAS the “Worst President in US History.”
I didn’t say he was. Well, at least not on this thread, or lately.
You were the one who said you could show us a link that proved historians rated Bush higher than Clinton.
It didn’t.
Because he almost certainly wasn’t. That would very likely be Warren Harding, by most metrics. But as Bruce said, we ‘scholars’ aren’t the ones with an unproven assertion here.
At least I now know Frank DiSalle is even more of an ass than Dennis and Jay judging by this thread.
Frank, the best your link shows is that the WSJ liked Bush. In 2005, before Iraq and Afghanistan both went completely tits up.
You’re the one who made a claim about historians. And you’re the chickenshit baby who can’t back it up.
How does a picture of the First Family turn into “Who wrecked the country up the most Clinton or Bush”?
This post is about neither of those Presidents, so please stay on topic.
Also to Frank this is a Liberal blogger blog you are visiting, so if you are going to look for harsh criticism over a Obama photo(unless Oliver brings it up himself) please go to one of those crazy right-wing blogs for you daily dose, okay?
I thought I posted a comment here, must have messed up somehow…
Anyway, Jaim, “chickenshit baby” might be construed as a personal attack. I will only say that it’s the kind of attack that would never be made in person, and we know why don’t we ?
Because you keep making claims that you can’t back up?
not this again.
No, isms, this time Jaim stays in the sandbox alone , because he can’t play well with others.