I want my time back that I took to read this post.
I Wonder
- Thread starter Cancel7
- Start date
DigitalDave
Sexy Beast!
I'm sure if the outrage over this cover continues as well, they'll laugh about the whole thing and see it as liberals fighting one another. They know damn well what the point of that cover was.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
What title has ever appeared on the cover of The New Yorker?
Last edited:
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Darla, I assure you that the satire of the right I've made in this regard has been tenfold as "violent".
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Why do I never finish your posts?
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Why is your first knee-jerk liberal reaction to blame it on the Right? The New Yorker is a LIBERAL magazine, always has been, always will be. It is run by Liberals, put together by Liberals, purchased by Liberals, and read by Liberals.
Yes, this particular image was dreamed up and illustrated by a Liberal, it just happens to be attacking another Liberal, unlike the tasteless image of Condi Rice a few years ago. I don't recall you having your panties in a wad about that one, Darla... (you do wear panties, right?) I seem to recall you were pretty nonchalant about that, and thought we all ought to be able to take a joke. Funny how your feelings change when the shoe is on the other foot... only, the difference is, this wasn't the work of the opposition like that was.
While we are on this subject, can we possibly even count the number of cartoon caricatures of George W. Bush as a monkey or chimp? Yeah, it's not as bad as being portrayed as a terrorist, but if you were anywhere close to being true to your principles, such images would be just as disturbing and wrong to you, and they clearly are not. You can yuck it up with all your Liberal buddies and sneer at Conservatives who dare to express outrage when it's Bush, Cheney, or Rice, but when it's your Messiah, you can't even have the rationality to blame the guilty party, you want to pass it off on the Right Wing, when they had absolutely nothing to do with it.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Dear Dixie,
The cover is not an "attack" on Obama. If it were it wouldn't be so clearly over the top.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Dear Waterhead,
Tell Darla, she is the one who posted a thread of outrage, saw it as a smear, and tried to blame it on the "right-wing media."
Darla: "I Wonder if this election will finally put a rest to the ludicrous claims by the scum on the right of a liberal media."
Now, if say... The Weekly Standard ran a tasteless cover of Bush, and I posted a thread pondering whether the cover would prompt the scum on the left to admit there is an outrageous left-wing media bias... how fast would it take for Liberals to laugh me off this board?
0.33 seconds!
Interesting:
In a July 13 online poll, the conservative website WorldNetDaily.com asked readers to "ound off on the New Yorker's cover with turban-wearing [Sen. Barack] Obama, gun toting wife [Michelle Obama]" by choosing one of 12 options, including the factually baseless options: "Funny, because there's some truth in it" and "The image isn't too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family." While the New Yorker said in a press release that its cover "satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama's campaign," for a majority of respondents to WND's poll, the cover apparently provided support for their false perceptions of Obama's religion and patriotism: As of 10:07 a.m. ET on July 14, the most popular option in the poll -- selected by 60 percent of WND respondents -- was "The image isn't too far from the dangerous truth about the Obama family." The second-most popular option was "Funny, because there's some truth in it," which was selected by 11 percent of respondents.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200807140002?f=h_top
In a July 13 online poll, the conservative website WorldNetDaily.com asked readers to "
http://mediamatters.org/items/200807140002?f=h_top
Thorn
Member
I was afraid that Dave (and, by extension, the New Yorker) was too optimistic about the intelligence of the general public. This confirms it.
Yes, this particular image was dreamed up and illustrated by a Liberal, it just happens to be attacking another Liberal, unlike the tasteless image of Condi Rice a few years ago. I don't recall you having your panties in a wad about that one, Darla... (you do wear panties, right?) I seem to recall you were pretty nonchalant about that, and thought we all ought to be able to take a joke. Funny how your feelings change when the shoe is on the other foot... only, the difference is, this wasn't the work of the opposition like that was.
The point of this is that there is no liberal media. I would have thought that the Iraq war proved that, but for some really dumb people, like you Dixie, it didn’t.
This election might be the tipping point.
As far as this bolded paragraph, you made it up out of whole cloth. I don’t know what Condi incident you are referring to, and if you brought something offensive to my attention and I blew it off, why don’t you go fetch us some proof that this ever occurred?
The point of this is that there is no liberal media. I would have thought that the Iraq war proved that, but for some really dumb people, like you Dixie, it didn’t.
This election might be the tipping point.
As far as this bolded paragraph, you made it up out of whole cloth. I don’t know what Condi incident you are referring to, and if you brought something offensive to my attention and I blew it off, why don’t you go fetch us some proof that this ever occurred?
I was afraid that Dave (and, by extension, the New Yorker) was too optimistic about the intelligence of the general public. This confirms it.
Sadly, yep.
LOL
They sure did capture the true Obama in all his glory, just another fucking anti-American, flag burning muslim terrorist giving his whore wife the bump.
It’s interesting, because this really shows a high-level of racism. If anyone has taken a look at Cindy McCain, she frankly looks like a blowsy whore. She’s got her tits hanging out half the time, and is very over-made up. Very un-first ladylike. There’s also the little fact of her having fucked a married man who then divorced his crippled wife to marry her.
Then you have Michelle Obama, tastefully and beautifully dressed, married her college sweetheart, had two kids following that marriage – but she is caricatured by Americans, and obviously most especially by the right wing as being everything that Cindy McCain actually is ( a blowsy over made up whore who fucked another woman’s husband, to reiterate), while McCain somehow comes off as ladylike. It’s absolutely stunning, and a real study I believe, in the additional prejudice that black women face in this country. More than black men, and more than white women.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
This is the cartoon you and other liberals chuckled off as nothing but "satire" and said we righties should learn to take a joke. It is just as offensive to me as the Obama cover is to you, but the point is, BOTH were the work of the Liberal Media!
This is the cartoon you and other liberals chuckled off as nothing but "satire" and said we righties should learn to take a joke. It is just as offensive to me as the Obama cover is to you, but the point is, BOTH were the work of the Liberal Media!
Of course a little pansy assed liar like you would compare those two images, because right wingers, especially the men, always have to have something to sob about. The two are nothing alike.
And, am I to take this as an admittance that you made up the conversation you had with me “ a couple of years ago”? Thanks.