Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Fri, Oct 1, 2004, 11:07pm (EDT-3)
(Florida=A0Patriot) spouts:
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.snip

So? Probably taken at different angles. And, even if not, they're
only politiciants, not people, so who cares? Why bother us with
political crap? Anyway, doesn't look like their lips are moving, so
they probably aren't lying.



JOAT
We will never have great leaders as long as we mistake education for
intelligence, ambition for ability, and lack of transgression for
integrity.
- Unknown

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m


That's an example of FOX being "Fair and Balanced".

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

The fox photo shows Bush after he whittled Kerry down during the debate.

Bea Essor wrote:

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m


That's an example of FOX being "Fair and Balanced".

From Bush's expression in the Fox photo I surmise that Kerry's standing on
his toe, which is probably why he's standing a little straighter there.

Geez, would you people get a friggin' LIFE.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

It's Fox "news" what do you expect??

Tony

www.votepair.org



"J T" wrote in message
...
Fri, Oct 1, 2004, 11:07pm (EDT-3)
(Florida Patriot) spouts:
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.snip

So? Probably taken at different angles. And, even if not, they're
only politiciants, not people, so who cares? Why bother us with
political crap? Anyway, doesn't look like their lips are moving, so
they probably aren't lying.



JOAT
We will never have great leaders as long as we mistake education for
intelligence, ambition for ability, and lack of transgression for
integrity.
- Unknown

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Easily explainable by camera angle and focal length. I won't bother
explaining since you would not listen.

These are not the same photograph. Bush is of average height while Kerry is
tall, maybe 6'3." There's no issue here.

Bob

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

"Bea Essor" wrote in message


That's an example of FOX being "Fair and Balanced".



No, it is an example of what parallax is in photography. They are not the
same photo or the same camera or the same angle.
OTOH, who give a damn anyway?

One can be paranoid, AND have people really out to get them...

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

(Florida Patriot) wrote in message om...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Fox also posted an article to its website that was completely
fabricated (later they called it a "joke").

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/lo...politics-print

That's fair and balanced for you.

On 1 Oct 2004 23:07:42 -0700, (Florida
Patriot) wrote:

Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Not that you will answer this, since you are just a spamming troll, but
why is it that the first photo is the "real" one and the second "fudged"?
Couldn't it be the other way around?

Or, gasp considering that there is not conspiracy here, just a couple
of different camera angles?

"Nate Perkins" wrote in message

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/lo...politics-print

That's fair and balanced for you.

well yes, it offsets Dan Rather. Both should have their asses kicked out.

On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 09:06:17 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

From Bush's expression in the Fox photo I surmise that Kerry's standing on
his toe, which is probably why he's standing a little straighter there.

I like the Yahoo one
"Kerry pummels Bush into the floor with his Vulcan Death Handshake"

And this has WHAT to do with rec.woodworking? Oh.....yeah....Kerry's
wooden performance.

On 1 Oct 2004 23:07:42 -0700, (Florida
Patriot) wrote:

Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Florida Patriot did say:

Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Two different photos from two perspectives. You're a trolling idiot.

Nobody takes Fox News seriously, they falsify everything.

http://www.geocities.com/julieearmstrong/fox.htm

appears more likely that they were taken at different angles.

"Florida Patriot" wrote in message
m...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

On 2 Oct 2004 15:52:35 -0700, (Joey) wrote:

Nobody takes Fox News seriously, they falsify everything.

http://www.geocities.com/julieearmstrong/fox.htm


/begin clue #1
If this is the best you can come up with, you may as well pack up and go
home now. Frankly, it seems more believable that you are comparing two
different perspectives and camera angles -- did they also clone different
facial expressions on the two men?
/end clue #1

/begin clue #2
While I grant you that AP (Associated Press) is biased to the left and
can't write an objective story to save their lives, I wouldn't accuse them
of falsifying everything. Why is this important? Take a look at
foxnews.com, the bulk of their stories are taken from AP, thus, if Fox is
falisfying everything, by extension, AP must also be falsifying everything.
/end clue #2

(Joey) wrote in message . com...
Nobody takes Fox News seriously, they falsify everything.

http://www.geocities.com/julieearmstrong/fox.htm

Millions of people watch Fox as their only news source, and many of
those are convinced that only Fox is "fair and balanced."

p.s. I know your original comment was made tongue-in-cheek.

Kerry is looking into his Bush's eyes in one photo and admiring the
windsor knot in his tie in the Fox photo.


On Sat, 2 Oct 2004 03:28:08 -0400, (J T)
wrote:

Fri, Oct 1, 2004, 11:07pm (EDT-3)
(Florida*Patriot) spouts:
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.snip

So? Probably taken at different angles. And, even if not, they're
only politiciants, not people, so who cares? Why bother us with
political crap? Anyway, doesn't look like their lips are moving, so
they probably aren't lying.



JOAT
We will never have great leaders as long as we mistake education for
intelligence, ambition for ability, and lack of transgression for
integrity.
- Unknown

Two different photos from two perspectives. You're a trolling idiot.

Speaking of idiots, perhaps YOU should have another close look.

Indeed those are two different photos, but the vertical perspective between
the two images is virtually identical. The photographers were shooting from
the same vertical height but with some horizontal separation. The most
obvious clue is where the dark background meets the blue, at the level of
Kerry's eye. Note that it's the same in both photographs. Also look at the
bottom of Kerry's chin more or less even with the top of his shoulder, also
in both photographs. There's a lighter green section (visible with a levels
adjustment in photo editing software) that is at the level of Kerry's lips,
again, the same in both photographs. There are a few other visual clues as
well. All of them taken together proves without a doubt that the two images
were photographed from the same vertical height and the final crop shows a
virtually identical effective focal length between the two images.

A closer inspection of the Fox photo shows an irregularity on GW's torso
roughly from his jacket button extending down a couple of inches. This is
probably where GW's body was lengthened a few inches. If you look closely
you'll also see that his right forearm looks to be a couple of inches longer
than his left.

The angle of Kerry's arm is roughly the same in both images. Look at where
the hands meet, just below the "V" in Kerry's jacket. More or less the same
in both photos, but the angle of GW's arm is distinctly different in both
images. In the Fox image Kerry seems to be looking right at Bush. You would
expect eye contact, but Kerry's eyes are looking at Bush's upper lip. This
is exactly at the height of where Bush's eyes are in the undoctored photo.

Fair and Balanced? My ass. Fox is the most biased and misleading news
organization on the air and those who follow it are mindless sheep.

"mp" wrote in message
...


Fair and Balanced? My ass. Fox is the most biased and misleading news
organization on the air and those who follow it are mindless sheep.


Forgetting whether the photo is doctored or not, you think this is worse
than what Rather did recently, which, by the way, he has done in the past as
well?

dwhite

(Florida Patriot) wrote in message om...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Two DIFFERENT photos, taken at two different instances. Put them side
by side and see the difference. In one photo Kerry is talking, Bush
has his mouth closed, and in the the other Kerry has his mouth half
way closed, and Bush is talking. They are also standing farther apart
in the Fox photo. Looks like the AP photo was taken a second later,
as Bush walked down a STEP, as you can see his right arm is bent more
in the photo. He is also leaning down a bit to his right.

So obviously you have no sense of what being objective is.

"mp" wrote in message
...
Two different photos from two perspectives. You're a trolling idiot.

Speaking of idiots, perhaps YOU should have another close look.


A closer inspection of the Fox photo shows an irregularity on GW's torso
roughly from his jacket button extending down a couple of inches. This is
probably where GW's body was lengthened a few inches. If you look closely
you'll also see that his right forearm looks to be a couple of inches
longer
than his left.

The angle of Kerry's arm is roughly the same in both images. Look at where
the hands meet, just below the "V" in Kerry's jacket. More or less the
same
in both photos, but the angle of GW's arm is distinctly different in both
images. In the Fox image Kerry seems to be looking right at Bush. You
would
expect eye contact, but Kerry's eyes are looking at Bush's upper lip. This
is exactly at the height of where Bush's eyes are in the undoctored photo.

Fair and Balanced? My ass. Fox is the most biased and misleading news
organization on the air and those who follow it are mindless sheep.


It doesn't take much to get you guys going, does it? This is the biggest
load of horse**** I've seen, and the resulting debate is ridiculous!

There wasn't any doctoring done on the photo. Go to the second link (the
one for Fox) and go through the 6 or 7 photos of the debate. The 4th photo
shows both candidates on the stage at their podiums. It is very easy to
determine a height difference exists. Wouldn't Fox need to doctor all of
the photographs? Are not most people aware Kerry is taller than average?
You are grasping here. Why don't you debate the positions of the
candidates, instead of this foolishness?

On 1 Oct 2004 23:07:42 -0700, Florida Patriot wrote:
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

Yes, two photos. One has Bush's mouth tightly closed, the other has
him with it partly open. Different color balance too; from this one
could conclude that they were taken with different cameras, presumably
from different places, and definately at different times.

http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

That's nice. Why not explain why Kerry didn't attend 3/4ths of the
Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he was supposed to be at.

On Sat, 2 Oct 2004 09:08:24 -0400, tony1158 wrote:
It's Fox "news" what do you expect??

Yeah, there ya go Tony, don't bother looking at the evidence or
anything to see that it's clearly two different photos rather than
one that Fox modified; it's so much easier to disregard Fox as
someone you don't agree with and accept the troll's premise without
thinking.

Dave Hinz wrote in message ...
....
That's nice. Why not explain why Kerry didn't attend 3/4ths of the
Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he was supposed to be at.

It's true that Kerry missed a lot of meetings, and he should have done
better. It's also true that he left the Senate intel committee well
before 9/11 (though you wouldn't know that from the Bush ads).

It's also true that Bush has spent 42% of his presidency on vacation
at either his Texas ranch, Camp David, or Kennebunkport.

"Nate Perkins" wrote in message
m...
Dave Hinz wrote in message
...
...
That's nice. Why not explain why Kerry didn't attend 3/4ths of the
Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he was supposed to be at.

It's true that Kerry missed a lot of meetings, and he should have done
better. It's also true that he left the Senate intel committee well
before 9/11 (though you wouldn't know that from the Bush ads).

It's also true that Bush has spent 42% of his presidency on vacation
at either his Texas ranch, Camp David, or Kennebunkport.

Such an insipid, discredited argument. I guess that's the best you got.

dwhite

"Nate Perkins" wrote in message
m...
Dave Hinz wrote in message
...
...
That's nice. Why not explain why Kerry didn't attend 3/4ths of the
Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he was supposed to be at.

It's true that Kerry missed a lot of meetings, and he should have done
better. It's also true that he left the Senate intel committee well
before 9/11 (though you wouldn't know that from the Bush ads).

It's also true that Bush has spent 42% of his presidency on vacation
at either his Texas ranch, Camp David, or Kennebunkport.

Just one big difference...while the President is at his ranch, he still can
and does work. Do you actually believe the guy gets an actual vacation?
OTOH, while Kerry is off doing who-knows-what, he cannot cast votes or
attend meetings that he is supposed to attend. In fact, the libs were
pretty perturbed that both Kerry and Edwards missed an important Social
Security vote that failed by (you guessed it) 2 votes. And the point is not
exactly when Kerry was playing hooky from the intelligence committee
meetings, the point is that it was so low on his list of priorities that he
could only be bothered to attend 1 out of 4. For God's sake, he was on the
committee until just 8 months before 9/11. It's not as though there was
nothing going on in the intelligence world.

todd

"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...
(Florida Patriot) wrote in message
om...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Two DIFFERENT photos, taken at two different instances. Put them side
by side and see the difference. In one photo Kerry is talking, Bush
has his mouth closed, and in the the other Kerry has his mouth half
way closed, and Bush is talking. They are also standing farther apart
in the Fox photo. Looks like the AP photo was taken a second later,
as Bush walked down a STEP, as you can see his right arm is bent more
in the photo. He is also leaning down a bit to his right.

So obviously you have no sense of what being objective is.

At best, FOX chose the photo most flattering to Bush, despite the fact that
it gave an unrealistic impression.

At worse, they used a doctored photo. (Yes, the two photos are different,
but how do you explain the fact that Bush is so tall in the FOX photo?)

On 4 Oct 2004 20:37:53 -0700, Nate Perkins wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in message ...
...
That's nice. Why not explain why Kerry didn't attend 3/4ths of the
Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he was supposed to be at.

It's true that Kerry missed a lot of meetings, and he should have done
better. It's also true that he left the Senate intel committee well
before 9/11 (though you wouldn't know that from the Bush ads).

The Bush ads have nothing to do with him missing meetings.
During the time he was supposed to be there, he wasn't there 3/4ths
of the time. Hell, he even felt it was so unimportant that he
didn't stay on the committee, apparently. So, the commercials should
say "not only didn't he go to 3/4ths of the meetings he was supposed
to, he felt it was so unimportant a subject that he quit the
committee entirely in (year). And now he wants to run the country?".

It's also true that Bush has spent 42% of his presidency on vacation
at either his Texas ranch, Camp David, or Kennebunkport.

Yes, and? Are you proposing that he isn't working when he's
at these three locations? Can you back up that assertion?

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 01:02:48 -0400, Jeff Harper wrote:

"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...

Two DIFFERENT photos, taken at two different instances. Put them side
by side and see the difference. In one photo Kerry is talking, Bush
has his mouth closed, and in the the other Kerry has his mouth half
way closed, and Bush is talking.

At best, FOX chose the photo most flattering to Bush, despite the fact that
it gave an unrealistic impression.

What's unrealistic about a camera angle? Why do you care who looks
taller? You know what? Until this came up, I had no clue how tall
either of them were, let alone in relation to the other. That's
because _it doesn't matter_ unless you're all about style over
content. I can see why Kerry supporters would worry about
something like this that doesn't matter (it's all you've got to
work with), but don't project your personal failings to care about
things that matter onto the rest of us. It's not a faked photo,

At worse, they used a doctored photo.

It's not. Yet your type will say "Even though the documents are
forgeries, let's talk about what they said anyway".

(Yes, the two photos are different,
but how do you explain the fact that Bush is so tall in the FOX photo?)

Please to be googling for the word "parallax". Get back to us once
you understand it. You must have encountered it at some point in your
life.

Dave Hinz wrote in message ...
On 4 Oct 2004 20:37:53 -0700, Nate Perkins wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in message ...
...
That's nice. Why not explain why Kerry didn't attend 3/4ths of the
Senate Intelligence Committee meetings he was supposed to be at.

It's true that Kerry missed a lot of meetings, and he should have done
better. It's also true that he left the Senate intel committee well
before 9/11 (though you wouldn't know that from the Bush ads).

The Bush ads have nothing to do with him missing meetings.
During the time he was supposed to be there, he wasn't there 3/4ths
of the time. Hell, he even felt it was so unimportant that he
didn't stay on the committee, apparently. So, the commercials should
say "not only didn't he go to 3/4ths of the meetings he was supposed
to, he felt it was so unimportant a subject that he quit the
committee entirely in (year). And now he wants to run the country?".

I think I already agreed with you that he should have attended more.
Now I'll say that he really really really should have attended more.

It's also true that Bush has spent 42% of his presidency on vacation
at either his Texas ranch, Camp David, or Kennebunkport.

Yes, and? Are you proposing that he isn't working when he's
at these three locations? Can you back up that assertion?

No, I'm sure he's working really hard there. Telecommuting and all.
I mean he was out there when he got that Aug 6 PDB, and he sure jumped
all over that one.

There wasn't any doctoring done on the photo.

You're stating your uninformed opinion as if it were a fact. There's plenty
of evidence that suggests it was doctored.

Go to the second link (the
one for Fox) and go through the 6 or 7 photos of the debate. The 4th
photo
shows both candidates on the stage at their podiums. It is very easy to
determine a height difference exists.

It's easy in a simplistic way. You're making some assumptions, such as the
horizon being level (its not). You're also assuming that the camera is
centered between the two podiums (it's not) and that the camera to podium
distance is exactly the same between each speaker (it's not). If anything,
the photo is skewed slightly towards exaggerating the height difference
between Kerry and Bush.

Wouldn't Fox need to doctor all of
the photographs?

So what. That's an hour's work for a rank beginner. I'm sure the
image-doctoring artists at Fox, with all their experience, are much faster
than that.

Easily explainable by camera angle and focal length. I won't bother
explaining since you would not listen.

You won't bother because you can't. In both images the vertical camera angle
is the same and any sublte difference in focal length doesn't matter.

"mp" wrote in message
...
There wasn't any doctoring done on the photo.

You're stating your uninformed opinion as if it were a fact. There's
plenty
of evidence that suggests it was doctored.


It's easy in a simplistic way. You're making some assumptions, such as the
horizon being level (its not). You're also assuming that the camera is
centered between the two podiums (it's not) and that the camera to podium
distance is exactly the same between each speaker (it's not). If anything,
the photo is skewed slightly towards exaggerating the height difference
between Kerry and Bush.

Wouldn't Fox need to doctor all of
the photographs?

So what. That's an hour's work for a rank beginner. I'm sure the
image-doctoring artists at Fox, with all their experience, are much faster
than that.

mp,

As you say, "you're making assumptions". Why are you spending so much time
on a conspiracy theory about a photo? A photo! One of many photos shown on
the fox site, and it _is_ clear in the other photo Kerry has a height
advantage. You wouldn't have even known about the photo had you not read
the OP's (spelt - troll) post and jumped on the conspiracy theory. All you
are doing is giving the troll bandwidth, as the troll just posts - then
disappears. You are his/her puppet! It's a joke!! This is ridiculous!!!

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 19:07:46 -0700, "mp" wrote:

Easily explainable by camera angle and focal length. I won't bother
explaining since you would not listen.

You won't bother because you can't. In both images the vertical camera angle
is the same and any sublte difference in focal length doesn't matter.


It also depends upon where the subject(s) of the photo are as well. All
of which begs the question, why is this even an issue? There were other
photos presented as well. One may just as well excoriate UFPI for putting
up a photo that placed Bush in such an unfavorable light.

If this is the best you can come up with, then you strengthen my
confidence that Bush's re-election is assured.

Still no answer on all the voter fraud being perpetrated by the other
side, the registering of people dead for 25 years, the registration of
felons, the paying homeless to vote with cigarettes and/or McDonalds
lunches, the multiple voting attempts. Seems a whole lot more of a concern
than an allegedly modified picture that shows both candidates.

As you say, "you're making assumptions". Why are you spending so much
time
on a conspiracy theory about a photo?

The thing is, I haven't spent much time on it and I don't care much about
conspiracy theories.

I do care greatly when the media organizations attempt to manipulate the
truth to serve their own ideological agenda. And so should you.

"Jeff Harper" wrote in message ...
"Larry Bud" wrote in message
om...
(Florida Patriot) wrote in message
om...
Two photos. The FOX news photo makes Bush 3 inches taller.

AFP Photo on Yahoo:
http://tinyurl.com/6mkeu

Fudged Fox Photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6tu5m

Two DIFFERENT photos, taken at two different instances. Put them side
by side and see the difference. In one photo Kerry is talking, Bush
has his mouth closed, and in the the other Kerry has his mouth half
way closed, and Bush is talking. They are also standing farther apart
in the Fox photo. Looks like the AP photo was taken a second later,
as Bush walked down a STEP, as you can see his right arm is bent more
in the photo. He is also leaning down a bit to his right.

So obviously you have no sense of what being objective is.

At best, FOX chose the photo most flattering to Bush, despite the fact that
it gave an unrealistic impression.

At worse, they used a doctored photo. (Yes, the two photos are different,
but how do you explain the fact that Bush is so tall in the FOX photo?)

Camera angle, STEPS (did you not hear that the first time?), leaning
down in the first photo. Geez. Go drink your kool aide.