Powered by TypePad

« Gitmo Rights | Main | Not The Look They're Looking For »

June 17, 2008



Oh, my goodness,,I forgot to thank bad and Ann for their magnificant and amusing live blog.


I was in a hurry after blogging THE VIEW and didn't get to post anything about Jane's Tiger ( I let her say "my" cause I love her, but I think we might have to add him to the mud wrestling list :))
He will comeback!!

Elliott, My snark blogging doesn't even compare to yours, but thanks anyways.


Yes, his father said that between the morning and afternoon rounds of the 1994 U.S. Amateur final match, at which point he was 4-down to Trip Kuehne. (The article is undated but looks to have been written after the 2000 Canadian Open.)


Thanks Elliot, The View was an education, not something I watch. But I had heard they were very political so was unprepared for the total cheerleading session.

Jane, Your Tiger is amazing and will bw greatly missed for the rest of the season. What a talent!


Thanks, but wouldn't it be great if the JOM women had their own TV show. We could show them what real women are like. We could also invite real men to be on the show. (All kinda possibilities come to mind)


Thanks Clarice, I hope you found plenty to laugh about. What I'm thinking isn't always what comes out.

JM Hanes


Thanks for the link -- I hadn't noticed anybody talking about it elsewhere, but it's definitely curious. I was interested to see that the author included the border anomoly which also bothered me.


Sue is referring to a Hot Air discussion thread. I posted some enlargements of my own over at photobucket, two of which you can see here and here, along with an examaple of what more normal
jpeg pixel blocks look like from the background, where a bit of text from the reverse shows through.

As I said at the time:

It’s more a puzzle than a issue, as far as I’m concerned, but it really bothers me when something like this simply makes no sense. I couldn’t begin to guess who would have fiddled with the document — or the when & why either — but I also can’t think of a single logical reason (including filters, sharpening, or conversions) that a scan of an original document could result in the kind of selective pixelization/artifacting in evidence here. Pasting from one image into another, however, would produce precisely that effect
I originally thought perhaps an Obamanaut somewhere was just trying to be helpful, but then Fight the Smears, having told Karen Tumulty they were going to post a PDF of Obama's birth certificate, actually posted a much reduced version of the same certification posted by Kos (in which, perhaps conveniently, the anomolies are less pronounced as a result of the reduction). They didn't even post that till after Tumulty went back and corrected her column when a reader pointed out that the promised PDF hadn't ahown up yet. I think it's strange that neither Kos nor FtS cite an actual source for the document; if this were an official campaign release, I also think it's odd that apparently Kos was the only one on the distribution list -- esp. when they were talking to Tulmulty at the time.

I have no idea why this document was faked. It could be a tempest in a teapot over something mildly embarassing, it could be something more, but I work with Photoshop all the time, and there's no doubt in my own mind that it was pie