Jill Greenberg: Liberal Photographer Makes Democrats Look Vile

Jill Greenberg was hired by the Atlantic to do a photo shoot of John McCain to accompany an article for the liberal journal The Atlantic.  What she did is very revealing of the vile toxicity of liberalism today.

The John McCain and a few of his staff probably came to this shoot with their antennae up.  After all, they knew the philosophical perspective of The Atlantic.  But professional photographer Jill Greenberg still managed to deceive them.  She created outtakes which cast the horror movie shadows across John McCain’s face in order to attack him in the most malicious way she could.

And she was willing to misrepresent, deceive, and betray in order to do it.

She said, Some of my artwork has been pretty anti-Bush, so maybe it was somewhat irresponsible for them [The Atlantic] to hire me.”  You’re damn right, it was irresponsible.  The Atlantic deservedly bears the blame for this incredible act of betrayal and blatant bias.

Here is just one of the images that this photographer, representing The Atlantic, posted of John McCain:

I view this the way I would view a hateful group of vicious bullies ridiculing a victim by beating him up, putting mocking attire on him, and then laughing over how they dehumanized him.  The only one who is revealed as inhuman is the one who did the mocking.

Greenberg said:

“He had no idea he was being lit from below,” Greenberg says. And his handlers didn’t seem to notice it either. “I guess they’re not very sophisticated,” she adds.

That’s right, Jill.  Abuse your position for the malicious purpose to attack a person, and then gleefully blame it on your victim.

It isn’t John McCain who is revealed as the demon here; it is Jill Greenberg, and it is The Atlantic, for hiring her and allowing to do engage in this treacherous and hateful act, who are demonic.

The American Digest had this to say:

So what we see here is a candidate for President showing up at a photo-session for a cover shot for a magazine he knows is not going to give him an Obama-pass, but still making time for it. Waiting for him is the contracted representative of that magazine, Jill Greenberg, who has literally set a trap for him and then lures him into it. She mocks the McCain staff for not being “very sophisticated” about lighting when, in truth, the lighting used for a professional photo session is very complicated. There are umbrella lights, fill spots, and a raft of others being used at any given time.

I imagine that Ms. Greenberg was in full charm mode with Senator McCain at the same time she was executing her little partisan plot. Indeed, I am certain she was nothing other than sweetness and light to him. What she was doing was quite another thing, a vile thing. Simply put, it was betrayal for a cheap political frisson for her.

Then Greenberg extended the betrayal to her Client, The Atlantic. She either did not deliver all the images of the shoot to the client or she began to manipulate them for her own uses as seen above. In this digital age, she probably ftp’d the images to The Atlantic, kept the originals on her own system, and then made the cheap and disgusting photoshops seen above.

I’m not sure how the art director of The Atlantic, Jason Treat, feels about this, even though I have written him requesting a reply. Still, during the years that I hired and worked with illustrative photographers, product photographers, news photographers, and fashion photographers in London and New York City, my art directors and myself always got all the film to review. Depending on the contract, the film would or would not go back to the photographer. When digital came it, it was always understood that the out-takes or images we commissioned and paid for would be kept confidential by the photographer — as specified in the rights agreement. At the very least, we would have exclusive use of them for a considerable period of time.

One thing I do know is that if I, or any other editor or art director, ever caught a photographer using images held back for secondary profit outside of the contract, or using images in a way that would undercut our publication, we would pull that photographer’s card out of the assignment rolodex. Not only that we would make it out business to tell other editors and art directors at other publications that such a photographer was never to be trusted again.

Ms. Greenberg may well have her opinions and is welcome to them. But to use the offices, reputation, and money of The Atlantic Monthly to fool and ridicule a United States Senator and candidate for President goes well beyond unprofessional conduct and into the area of fraud.

This joins The Daily Kos’ vicious and hateful attack against Sarah Palin as representative episodes of the loathsomeness and vileness of the liberal left.  Democrats charge Republicans as being hateful on a daily basis, but no conservative photographer working for a conservative publication ever did anything like this to Barack Obama, just as no conservative ever attacked Michelle Obama as a bad mother just because she worked.  And they certainly didn’t demonize the Obama family in any way.

That’s what the left does; not the right.

Barack Obama is out claiming:

“They will spend any amount of money and use any tactic out there in order to avoid talking about how we’re going to move America forward to the future.”

But he’s the one raising record money, and it’s his side that is engaging in the most vicious and loathsome personal attacks in history.

Peggy Noonan recently argued that liberals in the media and Democratic officials who painted Sarah Palin as a being bad mother and religious weirdo undermine themselves.

Ms Noonan wrote: “The snobbery of it, the meanness of it, reminded the entire country, for the first time in a decade, what it is they don’t like about the Left.”

A Democratic strategist in the same artcicle said of the Obama campaign:

A Democratic National Committee official told The Sunday Telegraph: “I really find it offensive when Democrats ask the Republicans not to be nasty to us, which is effectively what Obama keeps doing. They know thats how the game is played.”

It is a longstanding tactic of the most loathsome and despotic regimes to engage in one crime against humanity after another all the while pointing fingers of blame at the very nations opposing them for their conduct.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words: what we have is a picture of how utterly vile the left is.  These pictures of John McCain are a snapshot into just how low liberals and their media outlets are willing to go to engage in the very worst kind of politics of personal destruction.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

11 Responses to “Jill Greenberg: Liberal Photographer Makes Democrats Look Vile”

  1. TAMI ALLEN Says:

    JILL JILL JILL YOU ARE A FOOLISH WOMAN AND YOUR RESENT CHILD LIKE TOUCH UP PHOTOS OF McCAIN HAVE PROVEN ONLY HOW RECKLESS PEOPLE OOPS INEXPERIENCED PEOPLE CAN GET WORK!

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    If it were only Jill Greenberg, it would be one thing. Sadly, there is so much of this coming from the left that it is unreal. I still vividly recall the hate that came from the passing of Tony Snow. You just don’t see conservatives expressing their glee that liberals slowing and painfully die from one of the worst forms of cancer.

    And we see the same hate coming after Sarah Palin, and now John McCain. It is irrational, and it is evil.

  3. Scott Fillmer Says:

    She did a total dis-service to all photographers. The best quote I heard all day yesterday was “saying she shot political pornography is an insult to pornographers”, that about sums it up.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    Yeah! And I just got my new Panasonic FZ28 camera in the mail yesterday!!!

  5. Disgusted GA Says:

    The “photo” if you can call it that is so vile abhorrent it makes you wonder about the mind of the person who concocted the idea and the moral fiber of the Newspaper Editors who publish such dirt. I sure hope no person connected to the Republican Party ever resort to such sewage on Obama. I don’t like the man; he is bad news for America; he doesn’t belong in the race; I can go on and on, but I sure hope the GOP does not sink to this level.

    I hope you keep us informed when and in what manner other media or news sources express their views on this behavior in their profession. It will be interesting to see how it develops. Jill Greenberg … oh well I won’t say anymore. Whoever Jill is, just go away! Has anyone asked the Obama Camp to comment? That may be revealing!

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    There’s always “dirt” in politics. It’s a dirty business – which is why I could never survive in it.

    But what we are seeing from liberals is one dirtbag low after another. The hacking into Sarah Palin’s emails – and publishing them on hundreds of liberals sites – along with pictures of her children, and her daughters’ cell phone numbers – is just another loathsome low (I write about that, too).

    The media have been ideologically and transparently liberal for decades. But they have become less and less “circumspect” about it in the last three presidential elections. They show their bias in dozens of ways: what stories they cover – and won’t cover; who they interview – and won’t interview; that sort of thing. They will cover a story that hurts liberals, but they will always give the “other” side, and then drop it as fast as they can and never come back to it. When the story hurts conservatives, there IS no “other side” from the liberal narrative, and they hound and pound on it.

    I agree with you on Greenberg; I hope she just plain drops off the face of the earth.

  7. P Says:

    I just looked at myself in the mirror. I don’t look vile. Huh, weird.

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    That’s only because you’re comparing yourself to liberals like Jill Greenberg. When you keep company with this kind ugliness, you quickly lose sight of your own.

    But the fact that you don’t seem to have any problem with what Greenberg did does in fact make you very ugly, indeed.

    Betrayal, treachery, the worst kind of propaganda, a mean-spirited hate. You should find it ugly. Too bad you don’t.

  9. Grandpaw GA Says:

    It is nice to hear P saying she can look herself in the mirror and feel clean. But calling Greenberg just weird is an understatement. Keep your life and feelings pure my friend and live a life even you enemies will have to respect. If they don’t they are not worth having as friends in the first place.

  10. You haven’t seen all the Trash yet? Says:

    In an article Columnist’s Labeling Palin Backers ‘White Trash’ Spurs Review at Canadian TV by FOXNews.com dated Thursday, September 18, 2008, by Heather Mallick from Canadian Broadcasting Corporation [CBC] reference is made to Sarah Palin as a “porn actress” and Mallick calls Palin’s daughter’s boyfriend a “redneck” and “ratboy.” [End quote]

    As expected CBC is hedging to accept responsibility on the grounds that Mallick is not a fulltime employee, just a columnist. It is my view that the Palin family is handling their personal lives as one can expect from decent everyday Americans and better. They are mortals. They are dealing with their personal lives with grace and responsibility serving as example how things should be done.

    I abhor and despise bad manners and deliberately intended hurtful language but this is a time where descriptions like “porn actress” and “white trash” rather befit the accuser, who sits there smirking in the photo accompanying the article. Absolute disgrace!

  11. Michael Eden Says:

    I am someone who tends to measure my tone to match my opponents’. In other words, if they want to talk about ideas, I will talk about ideas. If they want to use rhetoric, I’ll use it too.

    Liberals are engaged in one loathsome act after another. The attacks on Palin and her family, the publishing of family pics and the childrens’ phone numbers, this crap with Greenberg, it’s just vicious. I’m not willing to stoop to the level of these people, but I AM willing to call it what it is.

    I am still debating what I will do if Obama wins. Do I become as nasty and negative as liberal Bush opponents were? Do I try to tarnish him as evil, and try to influence my Republicans to block everything he tries to do, to use any means necessary no matter how deceitful to block everything he does or says?

    How low should we go? Should we fight fire with fire? I just don’t know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 493 other followers

%d bloggers like this: