A fake image of Parkland shooting survivor Emma González ripping up the US Constitution spread rapidly across far-right media, despite being widely debunked
(CNN)
Emma has become a target again
Ever since the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, on Valentine’s Day, Emma and other fellow classmates have become targets of those opposing their actions, thoughts and reasonable demands.
They have tried to vilify them calling them ‘crisis actors’, too young, inexperienced and so much more.
This is but another example of adults being unable to deal with the truth these kids are bringing to the forefront.
I firmly believe Emma and her fellow students, as well as the millions who are now ‘woke’ and loudly speaking, are not going away.
~ No, Emma González didn’t rip up the Constitution~
A fake image of Parkland mass shooting survivor Emma González ripping up the US Constitution spread rapidly across far-right media, despite being widely debunked
The media tour for the carefully curated group of Parkland shooting survivors continues apace, and now Teen Vogue is getting in on the action – although if you’ve seen video of student Emma González tearing up a copy of the Constitution, it’s fake; here’s the real cover, with the target being, well … a target.
The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.
Our do-nothing President Drumpf has decided that he’s earned yet more leisure time despite not having actually accomplished anything besides taking credit for President Obama’s hard work.
This weekend, Trump is visiting the Drumpf National Golf Club in Virgina – his ninth trip to a golf course in the fifty-one days he’s been the president.
The Washington Post determined that out of 744 hours in his first month, Trump spent just 27 of them in briefings, while spending 25 hours golfing and 106 hours relaxing at his Mar-a-Lago mansion.
For the first time in his presidency, Drumpf acted the part.
“I am here tonight to deliver a message of unity and strength,” he announced from the Speaker’s rostrum moments into his hour-long joint address to Congress on Tuesday night, February 28.
For once, that message bucked his bombastic instincts and channeled the aspirational aims of conventional predecessors. It was perhaps the clearest sign yet that after 40 days in the West Wing, the President is beginning to come to grips with the public responsibilities of the office.
He campaigned on the huge crowd sizes, but the turnout for the inauguration of President Donald Trump appears to be smaller than that of his predecessor as measured by side-by-side photos of the two events.
It’s hard to gauge crowd sizes and the National Park Service, which oversees the National Mall, doesn’t offer estimates of any sort.
But the side-by-side images of Friday’s ceremony alongside the 2009 inauguration of President Barack Obama show a significantly smaller crowd on the National Mall for Trump than for Obama.
There is empty ground exposed in the Trump photos.
I must confess that, at minimum, this distressed me. I’d seen the others candidates who were under consideration. Like the election results, I, again, never thought this would be the pick.
The short words, included below, about “The Choice” is the short version.
The mailmanbrings this magazine to my house.
I won’t renew the subscription.
However, I found an article which explains a major meaning behind the details of the picture itself.
These observations helped me breathe better.
It’s not what I thought.
It’s even better.
I know, there’s a lot of reading but, if the choice boggled your mind, it’s worth the read.
I strongly believe that the selected choice has no idea that he could have been played except for Trump being upset Time named him ‘Person of the Year‘ instead of ‘Man of the Year‘.
This is the 90th time we have named the person who had the greatest influence, for better or worse, on the events of the year.
So which is it this year: Better or worse?
The challenge for Donald Trump is how profoundly the country disagrees about the answer.
It’s hard to measure the scale of his disruption. This real estate baron and casino owner turned reality-TV star and provocateur – never a day spent in public office, never a debt owed to any interest besides his own – now surveys the smoking ruin of a vast political edifice that once housed parties, pundits, donors, pollsters, all those who did not see him coming or take him seriously.
Out of this reckoning, Trump is poised to preside, for better or worse.
For reminding America that demagoguery feeds on despair and that truth is only as powerful as the trust in those who speak it, for empowering a hidden electorate by mainstreaming its furies and live-streaming its fears, and for framing tomorrow’s political culture by demolishing yesterday’s, Donald Trump is TIME’s 2016 Person of the Year.
The 2016 Person of the Year is Donald Trump, the President-elect of the divided states of America.
Person of the Year is one of the best-known and most-followed franchises in journalism. TIME selects the person who for good or ill has done the most to influence the events of the year.
~Why Time’s Trump Cover Is a Subversive Work of Political Art~
By: Jake Romm
December 8, 2016Time Magazine’s annual “Person of the Year” announcement is, year after year, grossly misunderstood.
Time Magazine is clear on its sole criterion – “the person who had the greatest influence, for better or worse, on the events of the year” – yet, do a simple search on Twitter and you will find countless people who seem to think that the “Person of the Year” selection is tantamount to an endorsement.
Previous winners have included Joseph Stalin (1939, 1942), Ayatollah Khomeini (1979), Adolf Hitler (1938), and other figures who I think it is safe to assume the Time staff does not endorse.
Photo was shot by Jewish photographer Nadav Kander.
For clues as to how Time feels about that question — is it “for better or worse?” — we can look to the image chosen for the cover of the issue. The decisions that Time made regarding how to photograph Trump reveal a layered, nuanced field of references that place the image among, in this viewer’s opinion, the magazine’s greatest covers.
In order to deconstruct the image, let’s focus on three key elements (leaving aside the placement of the ‘M’ in ‘Time’ that makes it look like Trump has red horns): the color, the pose, and the chair.
~THE COLOR~
Notice how the colors appear slightly washed out, slightly muted, soft. The palette creates what we might call a vintage effect. The image’s sharpness and detail reveal the contemporaneity of the picture, but the color suggests an older type of film, namely, Kodachrome. Kodachrome, the recently discontinued film produced by Kodak, was designed to create accurate color reproduction in the early 1900’s.
This visual-temporal shift in a sense mirrors a lot of the drives that fueled Trump’s rise.
Trump ran a campaign based on regressive policies and attitudes – anti-environmental protection, anti-abortion, pro-coal, etc. This election was not just about regressive policy choices, but also about traditional values (defined primarily by the Christian right), about nostalgia for American greatness and security, about nostalgia for a pre-globalized world.
~THE POSE~
Trump’s pose can be read as a subversive play on a traditional power-portrait pose.
Trump’s turn towards the camera renders the tone conspiratorial rather than judgmental. There are two images at play here – the imagined power-image taken from the front, and the actual image, in which Trump seems to offer the viewer a conniving wink, as if to say, look at how we hoodwinked those suckers in the front (both Trump and the viewer are looking down on those in front).
By subverting the typical power dynamic, Time, in a sense, implicates the viewer in Trump’s election, in his being on the cover in the first place.
By choosing not to shoot Trump head on, the Time cover almost offers us a “behind the scenes” glimpse of the man who has spent so much of his time in front of the camera – heightening the conspiratorial tone and complicity of the viewer. The highly posed and processed nature of the photograph offers yet another level of irony.
Finally, we must note the ominous shadow lurking on the backdrop.
It’s a small, but important and clever detail.
Just as this image provides us with two theoretical points of view, it also provides us with two Trumps – Trump the president-elect, and the specter of Trump the president, haunting in the wings, waiting to take form.
~THE CHAIR~
The masterstroke, the single detail that completes the entire image, is the chair.
Trump is seated in what looks to be a vintage “Louis XV” chair (so named because it was designed in France under the reign of King Louis XV in the mid 18th century).
It’s a gaudy symbol of wealth and status, but if you look at the top right corner, you can see a rip in the upholstery, signifying Trump’s own cracked image. Behind the bluster, behind the glowing displays of wealth, behind the glittering promises, we have the debt, the tastelessness, the demagoguery, the racism, the lack of government experience or knowledge (all of which we unfortunately know too well already).
Once we notice the rip, the splotches on the wood come into focus, the cracks in Trump’s makeup, the thinness of his hair, the stain on the bottom left corner of the seat – the entire illusion of grandeur begins to collapse.
The cover is less an image of a man in power than the freeze frame of a leader, and his country, in a state of decay. The ghostly shadow works overtime here – suggesting a splendor that has already passed, if it ever existed at all.
Taken together, these elements add up to a profound portrayal of anxiety for the coming years. We have the implicit placement of Trump in the mid 1900’s. We have a suggestion of the scheming, sordid underside of power.
We have the crumbling facade of wealth, which, like “The Picture of Dorian Gray” suggests more than just a physical deterioration.
As a photograph, it’s a rare achievement.
As a cover, it’s a statement.
These are only excerpts.
There’s more to it.
Again, I encourage you to read TIME’s complete article.
He ‘lied his a– off’: Carrier union leader on Trump’s big deal
Chuck Jones, president of the United Steelworkers 1999, which represents Carrier employees, felt optimistic when Trump announced last week that he’d reached a deal with the factory’s parent company, United Technologies, to preserve 1,100 of the Indianapolis jobs – until the union leader heard from Carrier that only 730 of the production jobs would stay and 550 of his members would lose their livelihoods, after all.
At the Dec. 1 meeting, where Trump was supposed to lay out the details, Jones hoped he would explain himself.
“But he got up there,” Jones said Tuesday, “and, for whatever reason, lied his a– off.”
Of the nearly 1,700 workers at the Indianapolis plant, however, 350 in research and development were never scheduled to leave, Jones said. Another 80 jobs, which Trump seemed to include in his figure, were nonunion clerical and supervisory positions. (A Carrier spokesman confirmed that 800 factory jobs once earmarked for Mexico are staying.)
And now the president-elect was applauding the company and giving it millions of dollars in tax breaks, even as hundreds of Indianapolis workers prepared to be laid off.
A carbonated drink is a beverage that has dissolved carbon dioxide, most often to improve the taste and/or texture.
Sugar is the generalized name for sweet, short-chain, soluble carbohydrates, many of which are used in food. They are carbohydrates, composed of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen. There are various types of sugar derived from different sources. Refined sugars have been processed even more from their natural form.
Fake (artificial) foods are made from various types of plastics, resins, and similar materials to replicate the appearance of real foods. There are various names for fake food including pretend food, wax food, artificial food, faux food, replica food, imitation food, food replicas, false foods, food fakes, and simulated food.
Food processing is the transformation of raw ingredients, by physical or chemical means into food, or of food into other forms. Food processing combines raw food ingredients to produce marketable food products that can be easily prepared and served by the consumer. Food processing typically involves activities such as mincing and macerating, liquefaction, emulsification, cooking (such as boiling, broiling, frying, or grilling), pickling and preservation, canning or jarring (primary-processing such as dicing or slicing, freezing or drying when leading to secondary products are also included).
It Is What It Is 