O'Reilly says "I don't blame Ann Coulter for being teed off."

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154153,00.html

The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day

Time now for "Most Ridiculous Item of the Day"...

As you may now, Ann Coulter (search) is "Time" magazine's cover subject this week, but Ann is not happy. She says the picture is unflattering, and she's right. Taken with a distorted lens, it naturally distorts how Ms. Coulter really looks.

My question is, why does "Time" and other publications do stuff like this? You may remember Newsweek (search) put a phony body below Martha Stewart's face recently.

The article on Ms. Coulter is fair and interesting. Why does "Time" have to muck it up with a foolish and unfair photo? It's ridiculous, and I don't blame Ann Coulter for being teed off.

[wtmusic]

1. Bill is still fuming over his blotchy-faced photo on Franken's "Lies" n/t

[elperromagico]

2. Exactly what I thought.

Ol' Bill still hasn't made good on his promise to shoot Franken "between the head."

Look out, Al! He's got a dildo!

[jeff30997]

3. It's not the lens, she IS distorted.

And so is Bill Peabody O'Leilly.

[lpbk2713]

4. They did the best they could with what they had to work with.

Really now, is it possible to take a "flattering" photo of this waste of flesh?

[Dr Fate]

5. So Dild-O-Reilly sticks up for other pervs.

Suprised?