Is the New Yorker Magazine Cover Unfair to Obama??
- Thread starter LanceOregon
- Start date
Dust Monkey
New member
The truth hurts sometimes. As said above, I find it funny that liberals who attack and paint others with a bad brush, cry and throw a tantrum when it happens to them. Screw em.
Regardless of whether it was intended as satire or not, many people will simply see the picture and get the impression Obama as an anti-American Muslim. The picture will only harm his campaign. Maybe not by much, but some may be influence by such images.
Personally I’m glad. I can’t stand Obama and would NEVER vote democrat.
Personally I’m glad. I can’t stand Obama and would NEVER vote democrat.
MisterWilson
New member
SecDef, I don't know what kool-aid you're drinking but let me put things to you this way:
The Heller case, the figurative Normandy beachhead in returning our rights, was won by the slimmest of margins, as you probably know.
Now, I don't agree with or even like a lot of the things about John McCain, but between the two, who is more likely to put up Supreme Court Justices that would continue to affirm our rights? Obama!?
I was never a fan of Bush II either, but so help me God I couldn't have been more glad that he'd won the election after realizing that HIS SCOTUS appointment may have very well saved the union, if only for the time being.
Again, I don't know what tree you're trying to bark up but keep that in mind when you go to pull the handle.
ETA: I haven't gotten to read the New Yorker magazine in question (yet), however saying that it was just to provoke discussion sounds like a good excuse. Meanwhile every person seeing it will have those views reinforced. I can't say that a lot of us would see that as a bad idea. The ends justify the means when it comes to keeping that marxist out of office...
The Heller case, the figurative Normandy beachhead in returning our rights, was won by the slimmest of margins, as you probably know.
Now, I don't agree with or even like a lot of the things about John McCain, but between the two, who is more likely to put up Supreme Court Justices that would continue to affirm our rights? Obama!?
I was never a fan of Bush II either, but so help me God I couldn't have been more glad that he'd won the election after realizing that HIS SCOTUS appointment may have very well saved the union, if only for the time being.
Again, I don't know what tree you're trying to bark up but keep that in mind when you go to pull the handle.
ETA: I haven't gotten to read the New Yorker magazine in question (yet), however saying that it was just to provoke discussion sounds like a good excuse. Meanwhile every person seeing it will have those views reinforced. I can't say that a lot of us would see that as a bad idea. The ends justify the means when it comes to keeping that marxist out of office...
SecDef, I was being flippant. It never occured to me that anybody thought it was anything other than satire. Call it what you will it is annoying and often damaging to the object, especially when it reinforces preconceived notions of those who don't understand or appreciate satire to begin with. It's been done to political candidates in this country for generations. Obama is shocked because he has been coddled so much by the press that it was unexpected.
Martyn4802
New member
The cover has nothing to do with fairness. Only Liberals scream about fairness, rational people do not. Liberals' lives are consumed with everything having to be fair, and equal. Life ain't fair, or equal.
The cover is satire, and very good too. There's a whole lot of truth in it.
Martyn
The cover is satire, and very good too. There's a whole lot of truth in it.
Martyn
Double Naught Spy
New member
Martyn, I see you are, in fact, a closet Liberal playing both sides of the fence, speaking of fairness when it is something you don't like...
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=265553&highlight=fair
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=265553&highlight=fair
azsixshooter
New member
That cover looks about right to me!
Regardless, the Democrats are the ones circulating the pictures of Bush and a monkey, attempting to point out the similarities.
They coined the name "Chimpy McHalliburton" and "Shrub"
There is a cartoon lampooning the President called "That's My Bush"
The Democrats do it too.
Of course, it isn't as though the Republicans are without hypocrisies. "Slick Willy" and all of the other jokes that went around about him. Running for and becoming President kind of makes you a target for humor, in good taste and bad. It goes with the territory.
They coined the name "Chimpy McHalliburton" and "Shrub"
There is a cartoon lampooning the President called "That's My Bush"
The Democrats do it too.
Of course, it isn't as though the Republicans are without hypocrisies. "Slick Willy" and all of the other jokes that went around about him. Running for and becoming President kind of makes you a target for humor, in good taste and bad. It goes with the territory.
This is so stupid it is funny. The New Yorker is and always has been on Obama's side. The cover and purpose of the story was to insinuate that "the right" is unfairly characterizing Obama as an anti-American, terrorist consorting, black militant Islamist. It was SATIRE, meant for a pro-Obama audience with the intention of saying "look how these Neanderthals are trying to paint our Saviour."
Now The New Yorker is finding itself under assault by the same people they were trying to help. As far as I am concerned I don't care what the New Yorker publishes or who takes issue with it. If the left chooses to eat their own young I eagerly support them.
Personally I think there have been some real nonsensical attacks against Obama by sound bite driven talking heads on the right. At the same time there are huge issues with this empty (or even worse poorly filled) suit that have been ignored in favor of simple chanting "CHANGE."
I see the New Yorker issue as an attempt at Obama support poorly conceived, horribly executed and detonated in their faces but not an intentional attack.
Now The New Yorker is finding itself under assault by the same people they were trying to help. As far as I am concerned I don't care what the New Yorker publishes or who takes issue with it. If the left chooses to eat their own young I eagerly support them.
Personally I think there have been some real nonsensical attacks against Obama by sound bite driven talking heads on the right. At the same time there are huge issues with this empty (or even worse poorly filled) suit that have been ignored in favor of simple chanting "CHANGE."
I see the New Yorker issue as an attempt at Obama support poorly conceived, horribly executed and detonated in their faces but not an intentional attack.
I agree with Musketeer. This cover was an attempt to show that people on the right are stupid for having the view that Obama is a Muslim and his wife is a terrorist.
While I don't think she is a terrorist, she certainly has some friends who are.
The Obama campaign is so busy looking to take on any "swift boating" of Obama, that they've fired a torpedo at their own sub. Unfortunately for our side, McCain also fell for this and came out denouncing the cover. He should have denounced the cover for it's tasteless stereotyping of conservatives, rather than for making fun of Obama. It was not supposed to poke fun at Obama, Senator McCain. It was supposed to make conservatives look stupid. Of course, since McCain isn't much of a conservative, IMHO, he wouldn't understand the joke any better than the hyper sensitive Obama and his campaign do.
What a sad state of affairs our national political scene has descended to. Sheesh. When Jesse (The Body) Ventura can make waves about whether he's running for the Senate from my home state, we've got troubles. He hadn't even announced whether he'd run or not and a poll already had him leading Al Franken. Stormin' Norman Coleman is a wishy washy moderate RHINO as far as I'm concerned. I think Jesse may have won. I don't think I would have voted for him, but I think there are enough people who are frustrated with the choice between Coleman or Franken that Jesse would have had a shot at winning. Some folks, like me, may not have voted for any of the three choices, where others may have voted for Jesse just to shake up the two party shindig going on in Washington. That's exactly how he beat Coleman and "Skip" Humphrey (Hubert H. Humphrey's son) for Governor of Minnesota, back in 98.
Coleman then ran against former VP Walter Mondale (Carter Admin.) for Senator, after Mondale replaced Paul Wellstone after Wellstone was killed in a small plane crash. The democrats turned Wellstones funeral into a campaign rally, which probably turned off a lot of people. So, Coleman, who is a former democrat and was the Mayor of St. Paul, got to be the Senator. He's not real popular. Democrats hate him for switching parties and taking Wellstone's Senate seat. Conservatives aren't convinced he's one of them. Independents don't seem to place any value in him. He supported the Iraq war and has been a big time Bush supporter. With the President's approval so low, the democrats will be trying to tie Coleman to Bush in a big way. Jesse would have done the same, while lambasting Franken for many of his negatives. Thus, Jesse would have had a shot, again.
While I don't think she is a terrorist, she certainly has some friends who are.
The Obama campaign is so busy looking to take on any "swift boating" of Obama, that they've fired a torpedo at their own sub. Unfortunately for our side, McCain also fell for this and came out denouncing the cover. He should have denounced the cover for it's tasteless stereotyping of conservatives, rather than for making fun of Obama. It was not supposed to poke fun at Obama, Senator McCain. It was supposed to make conservatives look stupid. Of course, since McCain isn't much of a conservative, IMHO, he wouldn't understand the joke any better than the hyper sensitive Obama and his campaign do.
What a sad state of affairs our national political scene has descended to. Sheesh. When Jesse (The Body) Ventura can make waves about whether he's running for the Senate from my home state, we've got troubles. He hadn't even announced whether he'd run or not and a poll already had him leading Al Franken. Stormin' Norman Coleman is a wishy washy moderate RHINO as far as I'm concerned. I think Jesse may have won. I don't think I would have voted for him, but I think there are enough people who are frustrated with the choice between Coleman or Franken that Jesse would have had a shot at winning. Some folks, like me, may not have voted for any of the three choices, where others may have voted for Jesse just to shake up the two party shindig going on in Washington. That's exactly how he beat Coleman and "Skip" Humphrey (Hubert H. Humphrey's son) for Governor of Minnesota, back in 98.
Coleman then ran against former VP Walter Mondale (Carter Admin.) for Senator, after Mondale replaced Paul Wellstone after Wellstone was killed in a small plane crash. The democrats turned Wellstones funeral into a campaign rally, which probably turned off a lot of people. So, Coleman, who is a former democrat and was the Mayor of St. Paul, got to be the Senator. He's not real popular. Democrats hate him for switching parties and taking Wellstone's Senate seat. Conservatives aren't convinced he's one of them. Independents don't seem to place any value in him. He supported the Iraq war and has been a big time Bush supporter. With the President's approval so low, the democrats will be trying to tie Coleman to Bush in a big way. Jesse would have done the same, while lambasting Franken for many of his negatives. Thus, Jesse would have had a shot, again.
applesanity
New member
Jesse The Body Ventura thinks 9/11 was a conspiracy. On-air, on the record, live interviews. Something about the fire being not hot enough to melt steel columns, or tower 7 falling on its own.
On topic, this new yorker cover is such a great thing for Obama. He's gonna "rise above" as usual and get all the media coverage. Same as Jesse Jackson's ... nutty... comments. It was such an momental changing of the guard.
Meanwhile, McCain is somewhere, nowhere, waving his arms about, begging for maybe 3 seconds of media attention.
On topic, this new yorker cover is such a great thing for Obama. He's gonna "rise above" as usual and get all the media coverage. Same as Jesse Jackson's ... nutty... comments. It was such an momental changing of the guard.
Meanwhile, McCain is somewhere, nowhere, waving his arms about, begging for maybe 3 seconds of media attention.
Of course this cover isn't unfair to Obama. It isn't making fun of him. The ONLY reason Obama supporters care about the cover is because the target of the satire absolutely don't get it. Again, this thread as a case study.
Nice to see 1 right restored to some extent. Too bad you are ignoring our other ones that this administration had eroded away. Presidents do more than recommend Supreme Court justices.
Nice to see 1 right restored to some extent. Too bad you are ignoring our other ones that this administration had eroded away. Presidents do more than recommend Supreme Court justices.
I am astounded that the press would put something like that out on him, even though the intent is something that is not evident in the cartoon at face value. I have noticed that they are so loathe to dis him in any fashion, usually, that I would have thought they would have feared misinterpretation despite the intent and not put that on the cover. Now if they did that sort of thing to Bush or McCain, they would be fully applauded by the press with no concerns about whether it is a valid parody of something or just pointless slander. I don't care about someone slamming any politico with cartoons as long as it is based on something instead of just nonsense pulled out of their *** to make them look bad with no factual basis.
MisterWilson
New member
Yes, but relative to those other rights, the one affirmed is arguably the most important.
Totally right, but if you ask me in twenty years about one thing Bush II has done, appointed the necessary justices to likely prevent the next civil war will be the first thing I can think of.