Oprah Magazine Cover - Michelle Obama, page 5

privacy

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times

reply posted on 26-3-2009 @ 10:29 PM by finemanm

There is a song by the rock band Disturbed called Deify. Its about diefying Bush. I think the song has more relevence now with this president as so many people want to beleive that he is the Messiah.

YouTube Link

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 12:39 AM by AnjeluvDeath

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
And nearly an entire audience forget the entire film they just watched!

Wake up ALL of you , you ARE hypnotised.

Just a Picture?

Makes your face look nice does it?

Did you have longish hair as most as a child and you were "cute" older women liked it?

Kind regards,

Elf

That last thing is not even a sentence. Try again and maybe I can actually address it. Yes I did as a child and it was always because it was how I wanted it and not because of all the magazines I was reading when I was 7. I could tell between haircuts that as it grew out, it was more appealing to my eye. Sorry if some of us think for themselves? None of anything you offered actually addressed the point I made. Who is this meant to influence? Who is this meant to control? Who is this aimed at? Why go after such a specific and small group of people? This is what I have asked many times now and you want to prove advertising works to me? I believe I already acknowledged that to be true. What I asked was what is the grand conspiracy behind trying to get a tiny subset of a small group of the people to worship Obama? Seriously, just explain why even bother if the only people you want to influence are housewives.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 12:42 AM by AnjeluvDeath

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist

I will not bother finding the think, but if I can recall, I remember reading that Oprah and the president (don't know if anyone else attended) had a dinner together?

Just seems a bit weird...I wonder if she funded his campaign at all?

Bush and the Bin Ladens vacation together but that means nothing. Oprah may have had dinner with the president and it is a huge conspiracy. I see how this works now. You have to leave rational thought outside. Someone should put up a sign.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 06:45 AM by kinda kurious

Originally posted by FlyersFan

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

As patently absurd as this thread is to begin with, in like fashion I submit an equally
ludicrous response: ( Sanitized for T&C. )

Hey, dogs are people too. ( At least mine think they are.) Awwww cute cuddly puppies.

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

It says some people need a life. It is "nothing" as you offer as an acceptable choice of reply.

DENY IGNORANTS.............KK

[edit on 27-3-2009 by kinda kurious]

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 09:02 AM by Fremd

i love how obama can go from this ignorant man who doesnt know his elbow from a hole in the ground and can't do anything without his teleprompter

to this master of illusion that can control people's minds and influence billions with a magazine cover.

This is as ludicrous as allllll the other lies produced by the conservative hate machine.

A modern day lynching.

Instead of a rope, they use lies. Think im lying? Being too dramatic?

Have you ever heard on national television, a news pundit wish an assassination on the president? I have

They will stop at nothing (especially here) to invent lies that make them feel better about being who they are.

"I hate Obama....why do i Hate Obama....its not his skin color, its not his skin color, its not his skin color!.......it's....he's....uh.....a MUSLIM!"

doh! So close.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 09:44 AM by Grimnal

both heavily involved in prince hall masonry as mutch as females can ms obammas hands are in a type of pose used in the last position in a initiation ceromonie oprahs hands are in in a type of compas or pyrramid possition surjesting a cristian type of position to sell it this is quite cleaver and heavily thought threw intwersting ow and if you looked at obbamas campagne all the stars in those adds were in some way related to masonry

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 10:22 AM by Fremd

Originally posted by Grimnal
both heavily involved in prince hall masonry as mutch as females can ms obammas hands are in a type of pose used in the last position in a initiation ceromonie oprahs hands are in in a type of compas or pyrramid possition surjesting a cristian type of position to sell it this is quite cleaver and heavily thought threw intwersting ow and if you looked at obbamas campagne all the stars in those adds were in some way related to masonry

...yes, and his DNA reads 666 under a microscope and the lines on his forehead are a road map to hell.

Seriously. It's a picture.
With the internet, people have come to be far too neurotic and obsessed. The movie "23" is just a movie, there is no scientific proof, or even remotely sound theories, to back up these bizarre and irrational hypothesis.

It's a conspiracy in its self that so many have been brainwashed into believing this ridiculous non-sense as posted above. Someone got bored and decided to start googling.

[edit on 27-3-2009 by Fremd]

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 10:28 AM by nixie_nox

I think Oprah has Michelle on because Michelle is in the age group of a lot of Oprah's followers. The mother group. I think it has been a long time since young parents have been in the white house, it is just interesting to people.

And people watching Michelle is nothing different then people watching any of the first ladies,what they wear, what they like to eat,what they think about child rearing.

There is an exhibit in the Smithsonian of first ladies dresses, and they go back in time quite a bit.
The Obamas are controversial figures, like many politicians, and because they are unique it has upped the ante. But I really don't think it is anything extradorinary. They are different and they get people's curiosity. But curiosity isn't worship, as much as some would like to think.

When a family takes the white house that is not the norm, people want to know how it is working out.

I like Michelle. I think she is down to earth and has made it clear her family comes first. I like her spunk. I think she is refreshing.

But I have liked all the first ladies. I like Mrs. Bush II. I think she is sweet and quite and nice. I liked Mrs. Bush I. I thought when she went sled riding with her grandkids, that was the coolest grandma thing ever.

In fact, a lot of people like the first ladies more then the president.
If people were not interested in what they thought, there wouldn't be a china room, how they decorated, etc. People like experiments, and the white house is the ultimate experiment, how does on handle such living arrangements? How do you handle a young family under such extreme conditions?
Me, I think if it were me, the whole place would have to placed in storage in bubble wrap, since my child is a hurricane. And all the antique furniure would have to be removed and placed with plastic.
People wouldn't flock to the whitehouse to see how it is decorated.

And people wonder to themselves how they would handle such living arrangements?
I went to see the national christmas tree like I usually do, and even with the bush admin. being on the unpopular side, there was still a line wrapping around the property to see the white house xmas decorations. People just like to know and there is nothing wrong with that.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 11:40 AM by TailoredVagabond

Good find...but shame on you for reading 'Oprah' magazine

....seriously, Oprah is a shrewd and media savvy businesswoman. She vets ALL pictures especially the cover of her rag with the first (now confirmed as the) black first lady on the cover.

Blatant, brazen and shameless "subliminal" influence by a wealthy and educated women to influence millions of loyal followers (and potential followers of Obama).

I am an Obama supporter (not a blind one) but this is quite wrong and very conceited, too.

Shame on her.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 11:44 AM by TailoredVagabond

Originally posted by nixie_nox
I think Oprah has Michelle on because Michelle is in the age group of a lot of Oprah's followers. The mother group. I think it has been a long time since young parents have been in the white house, it is just interesting to people.

And people watching Michelle is nothing different then people watching any of the first ladies,what they wear, what they like to eat,what they think about child rearing.

There is an exhibit in the Smithsonian of first ladies dresses, and they go back in time quite a bit.
The Obamas are controversial figures, like many politicians, and because they are unique it has upped the ante. But I really don't think it is anything extradorinary. They are different and they get people's curiosity. But curiosity isn't worship, as much as some would like to think.

When a family takes the white house that is not the norm, people want to know how it is working out.

I like Michelle. I think she is down to earth and has made it clear her family comes first. I like her spunk. I think she is refreshing.

But I have liked all the first ladies. I like Mrs. Bush II. I think she is sweet and quite and nice. I liked Mrs. Bush I. I thought when she went sled riding with her grandkids, that was the coolest grandma thing ever.

In fact, a lot of people like the first ladies more then the president.
If people were not interested in what they thought, there wouldn't be a china room, how they decorated, etc. People like experiments, and the white house is the ultimate experiment, how does on handle such living arrangements? How do you handle a young family under such extreme conditions?
Me, I think if it were me, the whole place would have to placed in storage in bubble wrap, since my child is a hurricane. And all the antique furniure would have to be removed and placed with plastic.
People wouldn't flock to the whitehouse to see how it is decorated.

And people wonder to themselves how they would handle such living arrangements?
I went to see the national christmas tree like I usually do, and even with the bush admin. being on the unpopular side, there was still a line wrapping around the property to see the white house xmas decorations. People just like to know and there is nothing wrong with that.

I agree. It's not Obama's fault (his or hers) - this is Oprah's doing.

There are too many people who claim soem kind of ownership over Obama in the media - OW, as you know is one of the main ones.

It's quite disgusting, but it shouldn't detract from an intelligent, stylish, funny and sincere first lady, however.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 12:04 PM by nixie_nox

reply to post by TailoredVagabond

I really think that is where a lot of the curiosity is coming in. Usually presidents are already from well to do and well known families. So watching them come into the white house would be like watching someone move from the Hampdons to Malibu. No big change there.

But the Obamas are more run of the mill. From Chicago, down to earth. Like people like to point out, nothing extraordinary. So it is like a rags to riches story. Who doesn't like a good rags to riches story?Though they were not poor, they generally don't come from the same elite factory. So it has just upped the curiosity ante.

so what they are friends. they have the same story. They both have Os. They both came from Chicago, they have made a name for themselves, especially in a world that is not kind to black people.

it would be weird if they were not friends.

[edit on 27-3-2009 by nixie_nox]

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 04:25 PM by MischeviousElf

To everyone who keep saying

NO PROOF

Please refer this this post 12 Accepted Psychological Experiments that prove it does matter

And as they are all accepted and linked from scholarly articles except for the Derren brown videos, which though is proof, please could you explain how saying "there is no proof" disproves the entire experimental evidence shown there.

Please could you show similar experiments and proven responses by people to this that contradicts the information I posted?

Please then all take up Harvard Professorships of psychology .

TRolls

Elf.

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 05:24 PM by AnjeluvDeath

Originally posted by MischeviousElf
To everyone who keep saying

NO PROOF

Please refer this this post 12 Accepted Psychological Experiments that prove it does matter

And as they are all accepted and linked from scholarly articles except for the Derren brown videos, which though is proof, please could you explain how saying "there is no proof" disproves the entire experimental evidence shown there.

Please could you show similar experiments and proven responses by people to this that contradicts the information I posted?

Please then all take up Harvard Professorships of psychology .

TRolls

Elf.

There is no proof.

What is the conspiracy?

Who are the targets?

What is the mind control purpose?

What does this cover do to simple minded people who see it?

So Derren Brown can trick you into wishing you had a bike, and...?

reply posted on 27-3-2009 @ 09:23 PM by kinda kurious

reply to post by MischeviousElf

Hi Elf, sorry ain't buying. I too am asking for pertinent, substantive proof.

While your list of "scholarly" references is impressive, none of them satisfy the request for "proof" that this particular image is nothing more than a tastefully "art-directed" image on a supermarket magazine cover.

Its purpose perhaps not as sinister or innocuous as you so claim.

No doubt you are an academic type by linking to a whole dozen sources which seem to support your argument based on empirical research in a clinical setting. But I know my fair share of PhD totin' upper level college professors and laureates that couldn't change a flat tire. I also suspect some of your touted research is plagued by the Hawthorne effect and non-peer reviewed. ( And the TV show guy, that's just lame.) Some pleebs might be intimidated by your heady credentialed sources. But not this pleeb.

First and foremost we all realize the rampant and blatant influence that the "dark forces" utilize to influence peddle at the subconscious level by image manipulation / tampering, subliminal treatment and neuro-linguistic programming techniques.

This is especially disturbing and highly dubious when employed by governments, political parties or news organizations to sway public opinion unknowingly.

But my cognitive dissonance meter goes berserk when you suggest that it is not acceptable within a private commercial enterprise. In the commercial world, photos are regularly air brushed, routinely 'shopped, re-touched and enhanced to make them more "visually appealing." And in this simple case, to sell more magazines. To make it "Jump off the news stand or grocery check-out rack." This is an industry accepted practice. IMO, in this case it was not done to make us all a bunch of Obama-Zombies.

The Cardinal Rule: Truly subliminal images cannot be perceived consciously - thus, by definition, this photo of Michelle and Oprah IS NOT subliminal.

It is obvious you have intimate knowledge of psychology and I respect the voracity of your supposition. But not to seem boastful, I too am well schooled. I have a PhD in reality.

The purpose of this magazine cover is singular. To entice the throngs of cellulite-ridden soccer moms to purchase the periodical and somehow become instantly "empowered."

( BTW, I hear yellow and lavender are the hot new seasonal colors.)

Respectfully......KK

[edit on 28-3-2009 by kinda kurious]

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^