T Nation

The Obamas on Cover of New Yorker

The cartoon is a satirical depiction of the way Barack and Michelle have been attacked by the right. Pretty funny (and ridiculous).

Obama apparently didn’t think so. Or, at least, his campaign is in an uproar.

He himself just kinda shrugged when he was shown it. I don’t really think he cares all that much personally. However, his campaign has obviously told him being deeply offended is the right move here… which I find semi-retarded.

McCain’s condemned the picture as well.

It seems neither of our candidates understand the concept of satire.

Once again… douchebag or turd sandwich…

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Obama apparently didn’t think so. Or, at least, his campaign is in an uproar.

He himself just kinda shrugged when he was shown it. I don’t really think he cares all that much personally. However, his campaign has obviously told him being deeply offended is the right move here… which I find semi-retarded.

McCain’s condemned the picture as well.

It seems neither of our candidates understand the concept of satire.

Once again… douchebag or turd sandwich…[/quote]

It’s not that neither one gets satire, it’s that, as so often with Obama’s his supporters are accidentally shooting him in the back. This sums it up, “Definitely Not Helping”:

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

I think the cover is clumsy and dumb, but a curious side effect is starting to take place, a Seinfeldian reaction:

“Obama is certainly not a Muslim, not that there is anything wrong with that.”

There seems to be a weird disconnect between Obama taking such great pains to distance himself from being a Muslim and yet saying there is nothing wrong with being one. I understand he is protecting himself in the game of politics, but it has a perverse consequence.

I get that it is satire, but I think it only “works” if the satirical images reflect the absurdity of the claims they are mocking. In this case, while Obama is not a Muslim, his ties to radicalism hit a little too close to home for the satire to work.

I really dislike Obama but I thought this was in bad taste. I can see this a political cartoon in back, but on the cover.

First off I really don’t see him being portrayed this way by the right and doing so would be rediculous. Secondly, what if people don’t read the article or don’t get that it’s a satire? If these guys are tying to help Obama they should stop.

horrible taste.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
I really dislike Obama but I thought this was in bad taste. I can see this a political cartoon in back, but on the cover.

First off I really don’t see him being portrayed this way by the right and doing so would be rediculous. Secondly, what if people don’t read the article or don’t get that it’s a satire? If these guys are tying to help Obama they should stop.[/quote]

Agreed. It’s pretty nonsensical satire at that. It’s on par with the Nazi comparisons with the current administration: unfounded and unnecessarily defaming. Good satire this is not.

Is it just me, or are politicians are bunch of pussies these days?

“Oh my gosh! You are making fun of me! You are not agreeing with everything I say, and you dislike my policies! That is terrible! You offended me! I DEMAND an apology!”

What the fuck? Get the fuck over it. When a person runs for a position as large as the presidency, then there will ALWAYS be people who disagree, poke fun at, and blatantly talk shit about the candidate. The real issue is that the politicians (it’s mainly there parties and advisers) get all bitchy about every single negative comment. That’s what happens too much.

[quote]ukrainian wrote:
Is it just me, or are politicians are bunch of pussies these days?

“Oh my gosh! You are making fun of me! You are not agreeing with everything I say, and you dislike my policies! That is terrible! You offended me! I DEMAND an apology!”

What the fuck? Get the fuck over it. When a person runs for a position as large as the presidency, then there will ALWAYS be people who disagree, poke fun at, and blatantly talk shit about the candidate. The real issue is that the politicians (it’s mainly there parties and advisers) get all bitchy about every single negative comment. That’s what happens too much. [/quote]

I would agree with you on all the appologies and demands for such. This was in bad taste and it will hurt the magazine more than Obama or McCain or Repulbicans or whoever. Uust makes no sense to me.

[quote]abcd1234 wrote:
Agreed. It’s pretty nonsensical satire at that. It’s on par with the Nazi comparisons with the current administration: unfounded and unnecessarily defaming. Good satire this is not. [/quote]

You’ve missed the point entirely. It isn’t mocking him, as a Bush-Nazi comparison so often does (badly btw). It is mocking those making the comparison. So if you drew Bush in a Hitler uniform with the small moustache in order to mock how ridiculous the claims of Nazi comparison are, you’d be more on target.

And, TB, it isn’t that radicalism has “hit close to home”. It’s that the nation has a lot of stupid people in it. These people won’t vote for a Muslim. A lot of these stupid people think, despite him saying otherwise many times, that Obama is a Muslim. Because these stupid people aren’t likely to A) open the magazine, or B) get the joke, the cover could make the whole thing worse.

Though I agree with you about the “but there’s nothing wrong with that” bit. It does kind of put a damper on things, but such is politics. If I claimed McCain was half-Mexican, and it got steam, I can assure you he’d make a similar claim :stuck_out_tongue:

I have seen much worse. Complaints make him seem thin skinned.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

And, TB, it isn’t that radicalism has “hit close to home”. It’s that the nation has a lot of stupid people in it. These people won’t vote for a Muslim. A lot of these stupid people think, despite him saying otherwise many times, that Obama is a Muslim. Because these stupid people aren’t likely to A) open the magazine, or B) get the joke, the cover could make the whole thing worse.[/quote]

My point is that the satire doesn’t work because Obama’s links to radicalism aren’t absurd.

As for the “stupid people” - always a favorite topic of mine here on the T-Nation PWI - the magazine is the New Yorker. I am not entirely convinced all the “stupid people”, however defined, are spending much time browsing this magazine or the section it sits in in the local bookstore, even enough to care about the cover.

If there is that danger of infecting “stupid people” just by transmission of the cover art, then we all have to wonder why the urban, reliably liberal New Yorker, which is presumably run by “smart people” (of course it is) would bring such harm to a candidate it no doubt prefers to McCain.

Libs like Obama, but only as an abstraction. They pronounce all kinds of things to upset the establishment but when the time comes to actually implement what they advocated, they back away.

That pic is what libs secretly want voters to take into the voting booth. They don’t really want Obama.

Besides, if Obama wins and we have an overwhelming Democratic Congress, who would the libs hate? Libs live for hate.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

And, TB, it isn’t that radicalism has “hit close to home”. It’s that the nation has a lot of stupid people in it. These people won’t vote for a Muslim. A lot of these stupid people think, despite him saying otherwise many times, that Obama is a Muslim. Because these stupid people aren’t likely to A) open the magazine, or B) get the joke, the cover could make the whole thing worse.

My point is that the satire doesn’t work because Obama’s links to radicalism aren’t absurd.

As for the “stupid people” - always a favorite topic of mine here on the T-Nation PWI - the magazine is the New Yorker. I am not entirely convinced all the “stupid people”, however defined, are spending much time browsing this magazine or the section it sits in in the local bookstore, even enough to care about the cover.

If there is that danger of infecting “stupid people” just by transmission of the cover art, then we all have to wonder why the urban, reliably liberal New Yorker, which is presumably run by “smart people” (of course it is) would bring such harm to a candidate it no doubt prefers to McCain.[/quote]

Because they’re too clever by half. Which is what happens when your only frame of reference is Manhattan.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

And, TB, it isn’t that radicalism has “hit close to home”. It’s that the nation has a lot of stupid people in it. These people won’t vote for a Muslim. A lot of these stupid people think, despite him saying otherwise many times, that Obama is a Muslim. Because these stupid people aren’t likely to A) open the magazine, or B) get the joke, the cover could make the whole thing worse.

My point is that the satire doesn’t work because Obama’s links to radicalism aren’t absurd.

As for the “stupid people” - always a favorite topic of mine here on the T-Nation PWI - the magazine is the New Yorker. I am not entirely convinced all the “stupid people”, however defined, are spending much time browsing this magazine or the section it sits in in the local bookstore, even enough to care about the cover.

If there is that danger of infecting “stupid people” just by transmission of the cover art, then we all have to wonder why the urban, reliably liberal New Yorker, which is presumably run by “smart people” (of course it is) would bring such harm to a candidate it no doubt prefers to McCain.[/quote]

Because they’re elitist dicks trying to be funny. And for elitist
dicks, showing off is more important than who is running the country.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
My point is that the satire doesn’t work because Obama’s links to radicalism aren’t absurd.
[/quote]

They aren’t? Because he happens to be friendly with Weatherman?

Anyhow, his wife is portrayed as the radical, while he’s the Muslim, which is something that is patently false, but 1/8 voters (according to a poll I saw) believes.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:

They aren’t? Because he happens to be friendly with Weatherman?[/quote]

Certainly not, given his attachments to former 60s radicals and his time with the Reverend Wright, Father Pleger, and his public policy proposals that involve “fair pay” and “oppression studies” as education.

It is falsehood that Obama is a Muslim, but truthfully, it won’t hurt him electorally much - I can’t imagine that the folks that believe Obama is a Muslim had potential to vote for him anyway.

[quote]dhickey wrote:
ukrainian wrote:
Is it just me, or are politicians are bunch of pussies these days?

“Oh my gosh! You are making fun of me! You are not agreeing with everything I say, and you dislike my policies! That is terrible! You offended me! I DEMAND an apology!”

What the fuck? Get the fuck over it. When a person runs for a position as large as the presidency, then there will ALWAYS be people who disagree, poke fun at, and blatantly talk shit about the candidate. The real issue is that the politicians (it’s mainly there parties and advisers) get all bitchy about every single negative comment. That’s what happens too much.

I would agree with you on all the appologies and demands for such. This was in bad taste and it will hurt the magazine more than Obama or McCain or Repulbicans or whoever. Uust makes no sense to me. [/quote]

Ok, my post was not clear at all. This is in bad taste, but so what? People need to learn that stuff like this happens. If you honestly can get over it without complaining, then that shows that you believe in yourself. His party though is really what screws his campaign up. They always find a person to put blame on for anything bad stated about Obama, and they create a useless campaign to receive apologies.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Beowolf wrote:

And, TB, it isn’t that radicalism has “hit close to home”. It’s that the nation has a lot of stupid people in it. These people won’t vote for a Muslim. A lot of these stupid people think, despite him saying otherwise many times, that Obama is a Muslim. Because these stupid people aren’t likely to A) open the magazine, or B) get the joke, the cover could make the whole thing worse.

My point is that the satire doesn’t work because Obama’s links to radicalism aren’t absurd.

As for the “stupid people” - always a favorite topic of mine here on the T-Nation PWI - the magazine is the New Yorker. I am not entirely convinced all the “stupid people”, however defined, are spending much time browsing this magazine or the section it sits in in the local bookstore, even enough to care about the cover.

If there is that danger of infecting “stupid people” just by transmission of the cover art, then we all have to wonder why the urban, reliably liberal New Yorker, which is presumably run by “smart people” (of course it is) would bring such harm to a candidate it no doubt prefers to McCain.

Because they’re elitist dicks trying to be funny. And for elitist
dicks, showing off is more important than who is running the country.[/quote]

I don’t understand how a New-York kid that hangs out on T-Nation and plans to go to Princeton can use “elitist” derogatorily.