ForumGarden

What do you think about the cover? Cheap, but maybe TRUE??

southern yankee;917726 wrote: What do you think about the cover? Cheap, but maybe TRUE??


It was strictly satire or supposed to be. I found it revolting.

It was in bad taste, what would have been said if they put Mcain in KKK outfit?

It's everything a cartoon should be, I've rarely been more surprised or impressed by one.

YZGI;917745 wrote: It was in bad taste, what would have been said if they put Mcain in KKK outfit?


What would that have been lampooning?

Over the top, I can see why he is getting angry, he is being portrayed (even satirically) as someone that he is not. If he was white I am sure they wouldn't put him in a turban with a US flag burning in the fire. Its not particularly a particularly clever satire, and given the misconceptions about him already this just adds grist to the mill.

spot;917763 wrote: It's everything a cartoon should be, I've rarely been more surprised or impressed by one.







What would that have been lampooning?
I don't know, maybe his whiteness.

Galbally;917767 wrote: Over the top, I can see why he is getting angry, he is being portrayed (even satirically) as someone that he is not. If he was white I am sure they wouldn't put him in a turban with a US flag burning in the fire. Its not particularly a particularly clever satire, and given the misconceptions about him already this just adds grist to the mill.


Those "misconceptions", as you call them, all started as deliberate witting lies knowingly invented to muddy his real existence. Hence the genius of the cartoon - everything in there is part of the lie. That's the Ann Coulter "Obama and wife" to a T.

JAB;917890 wrote: Gee, I wonder how many more issues the New Yorker sold as a result of all this 'bad' publicity. :rolleyes:


Have to agree their Jab, it's everywhere. Waiting for the New Yorker to do a satire on McCain.

And to also see the reaction of Miss Conservative herself, Elizabeth Hasselback from the View. Grrrrrrrrrr!:wah:

spot;917868 wrote: Those "misconceptions", as you call them, all started as deliberate witting lies knowingly invented to muddy his real existence. Hence the genius of the cartoon - everything in there is part of the lie. That's the Ann Coulter "Obama and wife" to a T.


Yes spot I realize that, but that cover is now being flashed around the states, and the net, and the world, and not always in its "ironic" context. Most people will only see it momentarily, on a news stand or a TV screen, also images are powerful, much much more so than words. They may have been trying to make a certain point, but like the Danish cartoons, the image will end up meaning whatever people want it to mean. Thats why his campaign people have had to say something, just to make sure that the image has to be explained as a joke.

rjwould;918040 wrote: Not so! The fist tap is accurate and that lends legitimacy to the cartoon.


The lie was the Fox analysis of the "terrorist fist jab" - http://gawker.com/tag/oh-no/?i=5014604& ... t-fist-jab

qsducks;917738 wrote: It was strictly satire or supposed to be. I found it revolting.


i will cause war hooping what i am about to say. to tell you the truth. i am not sure if it not true or not. He came out of no where. personally i do not trust him. well, there just is something not right about him. I do not care for McCain either, but would not, could not vote for Obama. sad pickins for prez. this time around.

southern yankee;918163 wrote: i will cause war hooping what i am about to say. to tell you the truth. i am not sure if it not true or not. He came out of no where. personally i do not trust him. well, there just is something not right about him. I do not care for McCain either, but would not, could not vote for Obama. sad pickins for prez. this time around.


And he's obviously a closet Muslim regardless of how many times he goes to church to make it look different, eh?

rjwould;918172 wrote: You probably say that most every four years.

He didn't come out of nowhere. Hes been around his whole life......Could it be????......No, I won't say it..


no, this is the first election i have felt this much dismay. i have voted since the late 70's. it seems to get worse and worse each time. at least every other election. i have voted in. i have had a clear choice. not this time. there is no choice.

You got that right there is not such thing as bad "PR"

[QUOTE]Quote:

Originally Posted by JAB

Gee, I wonder how many more issues the New Yorker sold as a result of all this 'bad' publicity. [/QUOTE]

How come there's no picture of the cover here? I went to their website and saw nothing so I can't comment.

RedGlitter;918294 wrote: How come there's no picture of the cover here? I went to their website and saw nothing so I can't comment.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7505953.stm

Thanks for posting that, Spot.

I'm familiar with The New Yorker and I like satire but I don't really think this was too cool. I mean satire can offend anyone of course but really, to depict someone as a terrorist like that? Obama in Muslim dress doesn't offend me because he could be, who really knows what his religious business is, and also not all Muslims are bad people. But to put his wife in as a terrorist is just bad all around. Since when is a terrorist ever a good thing?

I've seen better covers from them.

RedGlitter;918369 wrote: But to put his wife in as a terrorist is just bad all around. Since when is a terrorist ever a good thing? The fact that it was Fox News who accused her of it doesn't come into the discussion at all, then? It's a picture of accusations, not a photograph!

Political cartooning's often lurid - these are the Joint Leaders of the House of Commons treating Britannia for her own good, the way politicians always have. Leaving the viewer to read things from the cartoon is the art.

I understood the pictorial accusations, Spot; I'm saying dressing up an innocent woman (or man if that had been the case) in terrorist getup after part of our country had been blown to bits was an uncool move on the NYer's part. Let me rephrase that...specifically and especially since we'd been bombed, it was an uncool move on the NYer's part. I see that to be as bad as if they'd dressed Obama himself as Bin Laden. I appreciate the need to butcher sacred cows, but then again, there are some things that just shouldn't be done. If Obama had been involved in the bombing *then* they could dress him up as Bin Laden and if his wife had been in on it, then dress her up as a terrorist. That's fair. This wasn't fair. And even if it was a satirical spitting toward Fox News for their crappy reporting, it's a fact that many will see that cover and not know about it or take it in some other way, possibly smearing the Obamas. Giving them a dirty smudge when one wasn't necessary. By that token, the damage is already being done.

RedGlitter;918397 wrote: I understood the pictorial accusations, Spot; I'm saying dressing up an innocent woman (or man if that had been the case) in terrorist getup after part of our country had been blown to bits was an uncool move on the NYer's part. Let me rephrase that...specifically and especially since we'd been bombed, it was an uncool move on the NYer's part. I see that to be as bad as if they'd dressed Obama himself as Bin Laden. I appreciate the need to butcher sacred cows, but then again, there are some things that just shouldn't be done. If Obama had been involved in the bombing *then* they could dress him up as Bin Laden and if his wife had been in on it, then dress her up as a terrorist. That's fair. This wasn't fair. And even if it was a satirical spitting toward Fox News for their crappy reporting, it's a fact that many will see that cover and not know about it or take it in some other way, possibly smearing the Obamas. Giving them a dirty smudge when one wasn't necessary. By that token, the damage is already being done.


I can't believe you keep not getting the point. Yes Senator Obama's a sacred cow - Fox News most definitely can't be, the ritually lying Republican Op-Ed writers can't possibly be but Barack Obama is as sacred a cow as you can get in the USA. He's young, he's idealistic, he's confident, how sacred does it get? He hasn't been butchered by the New Yorker! He's been defended by the New Yorker. The New Yorker has gone out on a limb to tear the Republican Op-Ed writers to shreds and a good thing too. They, the Republican Op-Ed writers, had portrayed Michelle Obama as a terrorist - did you not see the Fox News clip where it happened? - and they keep pretending Senator Obama's a Muslim at a time when Muslims are The Enemy and the only good Islamicist is a dead Islamicist. Guns'R'Us has finally got back where it's most comfortable, having enemies to protect the peepul from and perpetual government contracts to fatten on.

Nobody who sees that cover and can't work out the joke has any business voting in the election, they should be in sheltered accommodation for the bewildered.

Jon Stewart was right last night on The Daily Show. Obama should not have made any reaction at all about the cartoon depicting him as a radical Muslim, because the only people that get upset about cartoons about radical Muslims ... are radical Muslims!

Spot spouted:



Nobody who sees that cover and can't work out the joke has any business voting in the election, they should be in sheltered accommodation for the bewildered.


Oh horsepoop, Spot! I get so tired of you taking stabs like that at people. If you think I'm a dumbass then have the backbone to call me one and stop taking these futile little smarmy shots!

Now, personal stuff aside, NO I did not see the newsclip which SHOULD have proven my point to you! I said people who didn't see the clip or know of the big hoo-ha over it, would see the cover just as I did! Did you miss that part? And since I've not benefit of reading the article and have only the cover to go on, NO I do not see the NYer defending Obama. What I see is exactly as I described earlier- done in poor taste and I stated the reasons why.

My mistake is in assuming you'd read the thread, I posted the link to the Fox News clip before you joined in.

My other mistake is in assuming nobody could ever imagine the New Yorker adopting a Republican political slant.

I was speaking about the article in The NYer. I would have liked to have read what they had written in there. I remember the days past when different opinions were welcomed here and not shat upon.

RedGlitter;919627 wrote: I remember the days past when different opinions were welcomed here and not shat upon.


It's all an opinion like "Obama in Muslim dress doesn't offend me because he could be, who really knows what his religious business is" deserves. That's the most appalling thing I've seen you write, and you've written some pretty appalling things in your time. It completely lacks the slightest hint of fair play. I don't think you'd dream of challenging any other politician's claim to faith as dishonest. You're deliberately perpetuating the lie these cynical Republican Op-Ed manipulators created.

None of that can be taken to imply that your opinions aren't welcomed here, the welcome and the analysis are entirely unrelated.

RedGlitter;918294 wrote: I went to their website and saw nothing so I can't comment.Here, you wanted the articles to read. One's under "The Political Scene", the other's the Comment article "Flip-Flop Flap".

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/toc/2 ... c_20080714

As far as I'm aware the articles have nothing to do with the cartoon and the cartoon has nothing to do with the articles. I've read neither.

spot;919638 wrote: It's all an opinion like "Obama in Muslim dress doesn't offend me because he could be, who really knows what his religious business is" deserves. That's the most appalling thing I've seen you write, and you've written some pretty appalling things in your time. It completely lacks the slightest hint of fair play. I don't think you'd dream of challenging any other politician's claim to faith as dishonest. You're deliberately perpetuating the lie these cynical Republican Op-Ed manipulators created.

None of that can be taken to imply that your opinions aren't welcomed here, the welcome and the analysis are entirely unrelated.


I think your remarks are ridiculous and here is why:

First of all, don't presume to know what I think about anything, Spot. You're not quite that good. :-6

I most certainly would comment on any other politician's religion. Why wouldn't I? This time it's you who goofed. I was defending Obama in my remarks not slagging him, but you have one brush and it's always loaded with Muslim Paint and you insist that I am loathe of Muslims. In truth, that's the only angle I can see you coming from because your other one doesn't even make sense. None of my comments were remotely unfair. I think what it is is that you once again just wanted to jump me on the Muslim issue but it isn't sticking. You don't care for my opinion, that's fine. But kindly stop with the presumptions and your eagerness to tear me up when I write something that "appalls" you.

I appreciate the articles being posted, thank you.

RedGlitter;919695 wrote: I was defending Obama in my remarks not slagging him"Obama in Muslim dress doesn't offend me because he could be, who really knows what his religious business is"?

Tosh, madam. You're calling the man a liar.

spot;919701 wrote: "Obama in Muslim dress doesn't offend me because he could be, who really knows what his religious business is"?

Tosh, madam. You're calling the man a liar.


Spot, don't take what you want to hear and tell me what I said. I know what I said. You evidently don't. And now you're calling me a liar and you are out of line again.

If I had called Obama a liar, what would be your issue with that anyway? Am I supposed to believe whatever he says because he's a politician? I don't know his business, do you? What if I had said the same about McCain? Or anyone else? I bet you would never have noticed.

RedGlitter;919727 wrote: And now you're calling me a liar and you are out of line again.The lie was in "I was defending Obama in my remarks not slagging him" and you're still doing it.

spot;919738 wrote: The lie was in "I was defending Obama in my remarks not slagging him" and you're still doing it.


No.

But you're showing yourself as a pony that only knows one trick.Over and over again. You are so determined to defend Muslims that you see insults where none ever were. Sorry Spot, you're not ruffling my feathers this morning.

spot;919843 wrote: