Why would the Republican Party of Kentucky darken the skin tone of a possible challenger to Mitch and post on their website? I can only think of one possibility! I am not saying all republicans feel this way, but someone high up in the state party decided to go with this idea of darkening someone's skin tone, and place the photo next to Pres Obama's and darken her skin to be darker than his.

 

First I would like to ask that this stay on topic, I know, good luck with that here. I am looking ONLY for ideas on why someone high up in a state party would darken the skin tone of a possible opponent and place it on their website.

 

Second, Alison is my cousin, the first sign of political attacks then I am out of here, as I am only looking for reasons for this tactic. For those that know me, I am white, light skinned, and Alison is just a couple of shades darker than me, but no where near this dark.

Can't tell from the picture. Do you have links to the original picture and the KY Republican website where the picture is posted? Also, how do you know it was changed by the Republican party? How do you know it was changed by someone "high up" in the party? Lot's of accusations here with no backup. Give us more facts and we can discuss. Assuming you are correct, and that's a BIG assumption based on what you've posted, then the obvious one is that they are playing the race card.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39912[/ATTACH]

 

This is one is from Kentucky.com it looks darker than a regular photo of her, I think the ad has more to do with lighting of that particular photo and recent tanning sessions than someone trying to darken her skin for the ad and comparison to the President.

http://mycn2.com/politics/?pg=70&c=from-frankfort

 

This appears to be the original photo that was used for the ad, except that it has been flipped. Does not appear to be darkened at all from this one to the ad you posted.

 

Take a deep breath and calm down now, there does not appear to be a conspiracy of "color" in these ads.

This is one is from Kentucky.com it looks darker than a regular photo of her, I think the ad has more to do with lighting of that particular photo and recent tanning sessions than someone trying to darken her skin for the ad and comparison to the President.

The photo you posted was from the night of the general election this past November. Yes, under lights she looks a little "tan"a little bit of a redish tone, but not black.

 

As to how do I know it was "someone high up", I am guessing on that, as I would assume that something like that would need to be approved. Again, I am not saying all repubicans are like this, nor am I saying all in the republican state party are either, but someone made this choice.

 

Photo on the same night that photo Jumper posted, she is with me but I cut myself out of the pic, actually it was taken about 30 minutes before the pic Jumper posted.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39914[/ATTACH]

cn|2 Pure Politics*- From Frankfort

 

This appears to be the original photo that was used for the ad, except that it has been flipped. Does not appear to be darkened at all from this one to the ad you posted.

 

Take a deep breath and calm down now, there does not appear to be a conspiracy of "color" in these ads.

 

It's closer, but side by side, on a very good computer and screen set up, this pic is still a different shade. Maybe whoever decided to go with the photos just wanted to keep both photos the same shade for flow of the entire ad? But, wouldn't someone think "this may be looked at as________ " (fill in the blank how ever you want)?

 

And it was a PAC, who's website seems to be down now.

The photo posted in post 4 appears to be the exact same one as in the ad without any retouching or color change. I don't see how you can think that they darkened her skin tone from that photo to the ad.

 

I understand that she is your cousin and that you will be more sensitive to this than others, but looking at it as an outsider I don't see anything malicious in the photo. It is the same photo that had been posted else where without alteration other than being flipped in the ad.

cn|2 Pure Politics - From Frankfort

 

Link still works and appears to be a CN/2 political news page not a PAC

The photo posted in post 4 appears to be the exact same one as in the ad without any retouching or color change. I don't see how you can think that they darkened her skin tone from that photo to the ad.

 

I understand that she is your cousin and that you will be more sensitive to this than others, but looking at it as an outsider I don't see anything malicious in the photo. It is the same photo that had been posted else where without alteration other than being flipped in the ad.

 

I respect your opinion. But I am at work now, with about the best screens you can buy, and others here agree, some are rebublicans. They agree that besides possibly the flipping of the photo, that it was doctored. For what reason? Who knows, as I said possibly someone just wanted to keep the tone about the same on the entire ad, possibly they are not too keen on what they were doing.

 

I was told about it early yesterday to look at the Hillbillyreport, as there was a photo there that may be of interest.

After seeing all the photos it doesn't look like something where the skin tone was darkened. She can certainly contact the Republican party for an explaination if she thinks it's neccessary. It might even be a good publicity generator for her.

My wife has met her on a couple of occasions and really liked her. In looking at this ad she didn't see or think there was anything altered.

 

I just don't think you have anything to worry about, nor do I think anyone would see those photos and think that she is African-American which is what you seem to be alluding to.

As a politician running for office in Kentucky, I would be much more concerned about an ad that implied that I supported Barack Obama's policies than whether somebody might think that I had a Charlie Crist suntan or that I might not be white. To imply that somebody intentionally darkened her photo with no evidence that was done is just wrong.

You're reaching big time here SportsGuy. The pics posted in this thread don't look any different at all.

Talk about making something out of nothing.

 

Let me guess WHEN she loses to McConnell it's going to be because of racism which has become the Dems rallying cry.

It's closer, but side by side, on a very good computer and screen set up, this pic is still a different shade. Maybe whoever decided to go with the photos just wanted to keep both photos the same shade for flow of the entire ad? But, wouldn't someone think "this may be looked at as________ " (fill in the blank how ever you want)?

 

And it was a PAC, who's website seems to be down now.

Your concerns are legitimate. At this stage, though, it's probably just a trial run by Mitch's lackeys.