Is this photo/cover that´s doing the rounds on the internets for real?

I would say no.  It doesn’t look real.  But I don’t really want to look at it long enough or close enough to make sure.

Plus, looking at their website it looks like the current issue has Jessica Simpson on the cover.

And here’s the obligatory: “It is rather bizarre.“

Well, it is a subject that appears to have been in the news of late.  I would guess that somebody simply took advantage of the current media buzz and threw that cover together as a joke.

The cleavage is not only uneven but would accommodate a MUCH larger cup size than Hilary’s when tucked into a bra; the leopard print dress hiked up to show the top of the stocking on her crossed leg is clearly not her style either, nor the giant ring on her finger. 

This is photo-shopped

Obviously photoshopped, and not a very good job either, if it’s that noticeable at a small size and crap resolution

I"m moving this to….hoaxes I think

No way is that real.

With all the spin doctors and publicists she’ll have, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that a picture like that would make it out.

hulitoons - 01 August 2007 02:40 AM

The cleavage is not only uneven

Hmmm, it is rather. . .unbalanced, isn’t it?  I wonder what that’s all about.

The crap resolution is because I had to ehm… crap it. (size wise)

Here is the uncrapped version of Hill’s (click on “sigaar”)

Accipiter - 01 August 2007 07:38 AM

hulitoons - 01 August 2007 02:40 AM

The cleavage is not only uneven

Hmmm, it is rather. . .unbalanced, isn’t it?  I wonder what that’s all about.

Unbalancedness can be natural. Tits are like your face. Left and right. Both are different.

Beasjt’s number is 669 - 01 August 2007 08:09 AM

Tits are like your face.

Soft, round and with a little nose in the middle?

Or stubbly?

Beasjt’s number is 669 - 01 August 2007 08:06 AM

The crap resolution is because I had to ehm… crap it. (size wise)

Here is the uncrapped version of Hill’s (click on “sigaar”)

I wasn’t criticizing

I just meant that usually if something has been tampered with, a good way to disguise the work done is by making the image small. It looked like an obvious fake even as a thumbnail.

MadCarlotta - 01 August 2007 08:18 AM

Beasjt’s number is 669 - 01 August 2007 08:06 AM

The crap resolution is because I had to ehm… crap it. (size wise)

Here is the uncrapped version of Hill’s (click on “sigaar”)

I wasn’t criticizing

I just meant that usually if something has been tampered with, a good way to disguise the work done is by making the image small. It looked like an obvious fake even as a thumbnail.

Fault on my side for not providing “the real thing”

But there you have it.