0
   

Satire : Muslim Barack with Gun-Slinging Michele Obama

 
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2008 08:40 am
H2O_MAN wrote:
gungasnake wrote:


In a perfect world I might get a chance to cast a vote for president based entirely upon human factors, brains, talent, speaking ability... Barack Obama would be an easy choice


Have you seen BO speak lately? He has lost his mo-jo ...


Either way this election as I see it is about parties more than about people, and I'm still voting against demokkkrats.

McCain might be 70% of the way towards being an idiot but at least he's not absolutely locked into ideological positions with the potential to reduce human populations to medieval levels. When the evidence gets to be overwhelming, he's capable of changing his mind.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Jul, 2008 08:46 am
cjhsa wrote:
littlek wrote:
what?


That Obama/Osama/muslim/whatever got confused.


Not the only one confused..... Confused
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 04:49 am
http://www.vfdaily.com/politics/assets/Cover-McCain2.jpg
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:13 am
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/07/14/article-0-01F23B3C00000578-533_468x685.jpg
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:18 am
Yeah, we saw that one, dumbass. The Vanity Fair cover, however, is new.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:21 am
joefromchicago wrote:
The Vanity Fair cover, however, is new.


Yeah, so what and who cares dumbass!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:27 am
I forget now where I saw this comment, but I thought it made a good point -- the McCain cover is all stuff that is true while the Obama cover is illustration of rumors. OK, not so much the constitution in the fireplace (arguable) but McCain IS in fact old, Cindy DID in fact have a drug/pill problem, McCain DOES have a combover (OK, I'm not quite sure what's on his head, are those bandages? If so, he DID have surgery on his face and sported bandages for it), and McCain and Bush HAVE agreed on a bunch of things.

So while I never was upset about the New Yorker cover, the Vanity Fair one still doesn't seem like a true answer.

That'd have to be something about a black baby, that his Vietnamese captors made him into a Manchurian candidate, um can't think of anything else. But scurrilous rumors, not plain ol' reality.

That part (McCain rumors) is me, but the other point this person made was that the Vanity Fair cover makes the Obama cover worse because of the implied equivalency -- John McCain is, in fact, old, so is Obama in fact Muslim? I still tend to think people aren't THAT dumb, but I've certainly been surprised by people's capability thereof often enough.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:34 am
sozobe wrote:
I forget now where I saw this comment, but I thought it made a good point -- the McCain cover is all stuff that is true while the Obama cover is illustration of rumors. OK, not so much the constitution in the fireplace (arguable) but McCain IS in fact old, Cindy DID in fact have a drug/pill problem, McCain DOES have a combover (OK, I'm not quite sure what's on his head, are those bandages? If so, he DID have surgery on his face and sported bandages for it), and McCain and Bush HAVE agreed on a bunch of things.

So while I never was upset about the New Yorker cover, the Vanity Fair one still doesn't seem like a true answer.

That'd have to be something about a black baby, that his Vietnamese captors made him into a Manchurian candidate, um can't think of anything else. But scurrilous rumors, not plain ol' reality.

That part (McCain rumors) is me, but the other point this person made was that the Vanity Fair cover makes the Obama cover worse because of the implied equivalency -- John McCain is, in fact, old, so is Obama in fact Muslim? I still tend to think people aren't THAT dumb, but I've certainly been surprised by people's capability thereof often enough.




Lots of people ARE that dumb.


The other problem is the extreme faultiness of memory, particularly when we want to believe something, and the tendency of information meant to refute the kind of scurrilous memes being assiduously created and distributed, by the right in this case, to become faultily recalled as information CONFIRMING the trash.


I bet that, within a few weeks, many people will remember not that there was a satiric Vanity Fair cover, but that there was SOMETHING which proves Obama is a terrorist with Angela Davis as a mistress, or some such.

Whether any who might actually have ever conceivably voted for Obama will be thus affected is moot.


I am also not arguing against satire, simply because we are beset by fools who will be incapable of comprehending it.....but I do think that it is wrong simply to accuse Obama of not being able to roll with a joke because he has reacted to something that will sadly end up confirming vicious rumours in the minds of many.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:35 am
I'm waiting for American Rifleman to run a version with Ted & Shemane Nugent, holding bows, guitars and EBR's, a donkey head mounted on the wall, with both the New Yorker and the even worse Vanity Fair (what a POS that mag is) both on the fire.

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/C/00/82/89/image_5389820.jpg
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:37 am
Lol! And I was just hoist on my own faulty memory petard by recalling the Obama cover as having been on Vanity Fair, when it was on the New Yorker!
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:49 am
sozobe wrote:
the McCain cover is all stuff that is true while the Obama cover is illustration of rumors.


I think you have it backwards.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:50 am
Yeah, I know. The memory aspect of it does suck, but I have a hard time censuring the New Yorker for that (not that you are, either).

Someone on another site was talking about how everyone's seen it, the image was flashed everywhere, etc., and my response was that the New Yorker had no particular reason to think that would happen. They've had several other political covers, some of which I disliked more (the Hillary-and-Obama-in-bed one for example), that didn't get any attention beyond the readership. They thought they were addressing an audience far smaller than the audience they ended up addressing.

(Aside on memory, brains, etc. -- I'm reading Daniel Gilbert's "Stumbling on Happiness" and it is AWESOME!!!)
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:50 am
H2O_MAN wrote:
sozobe wrote:
the McCain cover is all stuff that is true while the Obama cover is illustration of rumors.


I think you have it backwards.


Of course you do.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:52 am
sozobe wrote:
Yeah, I know. The memory aspect of it does suck, but I have a hard time censuring the New Yorker for that (not that you are, either).

Someone on another site was talking about how everyone's seen it, the image was flashed everywhere, etc., and my response was that the New Yorker had no particular reason to think that would happen. They've had several other political covers, some of which I disliked more (the Hillary-and-Obama-in-bed one for example), that didn't get any attention beyond the readership. They thought they were addressing an audience far smaller than the audience they ended up addressing.

(Aside on memory, brains, etc. -- I'm reading Daniel Gilbert's "Stumbling on Happiness" and it is AWESOME!!!)



Oh? Now you have sent me to Amazon.

If it's awesome, why not open a thread on it?
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 06:53 am
sozobe wrote:
H2O_MAN wrote:
sozobe wrote:
the McCain cover is all stuff that is true while the Obama cover is illustration of rumors.


I think you have it backwards.


Of course you do.


Your memory problems are real
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 07:01 am
Yeah.

Anyway, went ahead and revived my old thread on the subject -- Gilbert was quoted/ referred to often in the NYT article in 2003 that I loved and started a thread on.

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11811
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 07:08 am
sozobe wrote:
Yeah.

Anyway, went ahead and revived my old thread


Cool, now we can get back on topic here.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/07/14/article-0-01F23B3C00000578-533_468x685.jpg
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 08:52 am
Rumor? But, McCain doesn't use a walker, does he?
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2008 09:44 am
All these years I was taught that as one grew old one grew in knowledge and experience. Now that I am old I am told that old, senile, and stupid mean the same thing. However I think that later in the Obama presidency, if he is elected, you will find that he is just another politician whose only interest is in being elected and reelected as I have come to realize over the years. Some have more ability to pull the wool over the sheeps eyes. Think Bush, Clinton, and Reagan.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 10/21/2019 at 04:17:14