It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oprah Magazine Cover - Michelle Obama

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   


Oprah has never shared the cover of her magazine with anyone.

The latest cover has Oprah sharing the spotlight with Michelle Obama.

Did you notice Oprah's body language?

She looks like she's in prayer.
Hands folded and looking toward Michelle Obama.

The media is very carefully scripted. Oprah, and the rest of them, are VERY careful about their image and what messages are sent.

So what does this say? Is it nothing? Or is it something?

I find it odd.

If you can't see the image well - click on this link and hit 'view larger image' - www.oprah.com...

[edit on 3/25/2009 by FlyersFan]




posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 10:51 AM
link   
From what Ive seen they like to put religious imagery with the Obama's. Have you seen all the pictures with Big O having a Halo? There's a ton.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


It says nothing....to people with a brain.

To average Americans who eat this crap up....it is more celebrity worship.

Oprah can do whatever she wants to do with her magazine and her cover; I could care less. But, this does feed into the "celebrity worship" that I am afraid is plaguing the Obama presidency.

The man is not a rock star; neither is his wife. The man is not a celebrity; neither is his wife. The man is President of the US and his wife is First Lady. For better or worse, they are the "face" of the US to the rest of the world.

I am having problems with the image they are presenting to our country and to the rest of the world so far.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tentickles
Have you seen all the pictures with Big O having a Halo?

Funny .. I didn't think of that. This could be the media version of the Obama-halo .. yet on Michelle. I swear it really looks like Oprahs in prayer and slightly bowed toward Michelle.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Michelle Obama reminds me of Sigourney Weaver in that picture...anybody say "Alien"...


Seriously, Opra is out to make points...and the religious Icon status that has been assigned by the media is nauseating. But I'm sure the Obama worshipers find it refreshing...to each his own.

~Holly



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Now I like my conspiracy theories but the whole magazine cover thing I just can't follow.

I have many friends who work in the high-end world of commercial photography. Back in the day, for a short amount of time, I used to do commercial modeling.

I really don't think annie liebowitz or whoever is purposely showing conspiracies in their covers. A lot of these "poses" that are supposed to be showing secret signs or worship or whatever really, really look quite common to me.
It just looks like a candid shot in my mind.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Hey guys I'm getting kinda worried..

Anyone seen BH lately?!



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
I think she is saying:

"Oh goooodie, I have a new BFF!!"



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by LostNemesis
 

That's got nothing to do with this subject.



Originally posted by skeptic1
Oprah can do whatever she wants to do with her magazine and her cover;

Sure. I just think it's interesting, that's all. And I think it's odd.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Oh, I agree with you. It is odd.

It is odd that this "First Family" seems to think that it is so very important to "appeal to the masses" and "soak up the celebrity" during times of crisis.

There is work to be done and no one is doing it. Who has the time between magazine cover shoots, Tonight Show appearances, being on 60 Minutes, and holding media junkets to publicize your NCAA brackets??

The job of the First Family is not to be celebrities.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
So Oprah has the First Lady on her magazine and now it's sinful and embarrassing?

Rush Limbaugh has President Bush on his radio show, and it's a glorious thing?

...okay...

for clarification, i dont really care about either, i just like pointing it out to those of you who can't seem to see the tree's for the big fat politician in your way.










But yeah - let's go ahead and criticize the first lady for being on the cover of Oprah.

Wow.

[edit on 25-3-2009 by Fremd]



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Fremd
 


There is a world of difference between Time magazine and People and "O" magazine.

:shk:



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Tentickles
Have you seen all the pictures with Big O having a Halo?

Funny .. I didn't think of that. This could be the media version of the Obama-halo .. yet on Michelle. I swear it really looks like Oprahs in prayer and slightly bowed toward Michelle.



It looks more like she's praying and then looking over her right shoulder, which symbolizes the fear of being betrayed. Over her left shoulder is an obelisk, and what could be a thought balloon, or maybe even a uraeus.

It also looks like Oprah's hands are in a pyramid position.

Michelle's hands are in both the shapes of pyramids, as well as the "M" sign. Behind Michelle is the green Earth. The Goddess? Michelle's shoulder obscures the letters to look like "The Obama"

Michelle and Oprah were once photographed on stage with Barack. While Michelle has her hand in the typical model "M" position, Oprah looked at her in what seemed like disgust. It makes me second-guess Oprah sometimes.

Is it me, or does this look like a composite ?



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


well, the only difference is you're okay with two of them, and not with the other

they're all media

they're all center pieces for celebrity stature (especially PEOPLE)

you just can't see past your own prejudices to see that you're wrong.

but you're right...how dare me.

Why in the hell should the private section CELEBRATE a leader?
That's just wrong...



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Fremd
 


Don't put words in my mouth, thank you very much.

The President appearing on the cover of Time is to be expected. Yes, it is media but it is not "celebrity whore" media.

The First Family appearing on the cover of Us Weekly, People, and O Magazine is tacky. Those are "celebrity whore" media.

There is still a modicum of respect associated with the office of President of the United States. The First Family, no matter who they are, should resemble that respect....not flaunt the office for attention and celebrity status.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


so then by your biased standards, the office of the president should not partake in the "partay" of the private sector?

They should set high and above us, keeping secrets from us and keeping us all in the dark from their ivory white castle made from the bones of enemy insurgents?

i know someone who agree's with you, unfortunately




....atleast you're not alone back there in the 50's



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Fremd
 


Did I say any of that?

Did I intimate any of that?

NO.

All I said is that the First Family should not be attention-seeking "celebrity" media whores.

Last time I checked, that did not mean that I wanted them holed up in a cave somewhere, conducting business under the cover of night, keeping secrets from any and all.




posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


no, you did not say or type any of that. Those are insinuations based on your actions.

Im not doing anything to you that you have not done to the first lady.

So she appears on the cover of "O"
Big Deal

You're insinuating it's because she's pursuing the status of being a celebrity.

Has she ever said it?



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I don't know if Oprah has joined forces with the dark side knowingly or innocently. Whatever the case, when the Obamas go down in flames (they're already smoldering), Oprah's credibility will be completely shot.

Good call Oprah! That was a rather goofy (read "career killing") decision by someone who's supposedly intelligent.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Fremd
 


Has any other First Lady been on all of the "celebrity" magazine covers that she has? Has any other President?

That is what bothers me. They are not celebrities. The President is an elected official, the "head" of the US. He has a job to do, and so far, he isn't doing all that well (IMO).

He needs to be focused on the job he was elected to do.....not playing the celebrity. The First Lady isn't a celebrity, either. True, she wasn't elected to do a job, but she is sort of an "ambassador" for the US. She shouldn't be playing the celebrity, either.

This country is in a crisis. While the "average" citizen may wallow in this "feel good" BS they are putting out, a lot of people don't and it is bothersome.

That is not bias. That is not insinuation. That is the feeling I'd have about any First Family acting like this during times like this.....no matter what letter follows their name.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join