if I understood the cartoon or had any idea what the alleged controversy was then *MAYBE* I'd be working myself into a frantic self-righteous rage right now.
and actually kind of childish, but it's not offensive.
The thing is, it's all very good saying it satirizes all the misconceptions about him, but all something like this does is fuel it - the kind of person who believes these things is extremely unlikely to have a sub to The New Yorker, so it's not like they're going to read the article and be enlightened (by all accounts the article is not exactly flattering anyway)...
''The magazine hit the newsstands yesterday. But its editor, David Remnick, evidently anticipating a liberal backlash against the cover - described yesterday as incendiary and irresponsible - gave an interview to the Washington Post ahead of publication. He said the image was meant to be seen as humour, poking fun at the smear campaign against the Obamas.''
Since it's a riposte to the slander solicited by Obama's opposition, it's quite a clever indictment of the smear campaign.
Not contraversial.
at all.
yeah
that's right ContrAversial.
What people?
Obama himself.
And John McCain, who publically backed Obama saying it was in bad taste.
I see
It is in bad taste I suppose, but I can't see that its all that controversial.
So, err, do we burn things now?
wait for the siren
That's the cover of the New Yorker?
Did it have a headline, this pic?
Yes
it was 'Shamalamadingdong'.
In that case, I shall ready my flag for burning.
Which country's flag am I supposed to be burning, by the way?
The American one
According to the Daily Mail, Iran's flag is now the stars and stripes, but set on fire.
it's a weird one.
cos they say they're satirising the fear and scaremongering etc etc BUT by publishing this picture it kind of fuels it.
if it was me, i'd be pissed off.
Anyone good with photoshop?
i wouldnt even know what this was supposed to be
obama is a man, isnt he?
this piture is clearly a woman.
and its shit
oh hes the guy on the right>
whos the bint on the left?
his wife michelle (i think it's michelle)
His wife.
BLAXPLOITATION REPRAZENT.
It's like the last year hasn't even happened.
or the year before!
?
there are two people.
the woman, is Obamas wife michelle.
the other is Obama dressed up like osama bin laden.
What is the New Yorker justification for it's publication?
Why are they satirising his possible presidency by characterising him as a terroist?
I don't get it.
as above
they say they're satirising the fear and scaremongering surrounding the election etc.
Bollocks.
They're trying to paint a portrait of him as a Student of Wahhabism, and Islamic seminary graduate. Adding fuel to the fire, I say.
oh...It's the Islamic connotations
In that case...it is quite controversial.
I bet behind the scenes Mcain's lot had something to do with this!
HIS MIDDLE NAME IS HUSSEIN
HE'S A MUSLIM
get him!
...
New Yorker is famous for its impenetrable cartoons.
This is no different.
DiS has a bastion of sesnibility
and it is you.
So what do you wish us to DiScuss
the nature and content of the cartoon?
Or people's reaction to it?
he wants us sissy liberals
to work ourselves into a massive froth over it while he cooly watches on with a disdainful but amused expression on his face.
well he's picked a pretty dud subject then
yeah
if I understood the cartoon or had any idea what the alleged controversy was then *MAYBE* I'd be working myself into a frantic self-righteous rage right now.
What's the mystery about this
It's just taking the piss out of people's misconceptions and unfounded fears about him.
Simple, isn't it?
does anyone have a number for the New Yorker art desk?
I could paint that badly, with a bit of effort. That is one ugggly magazine cover.
it's no Readers' Wives
for sure.
oh the humanity
http://www.jobbydealer.com/images/m/whs/ew05.jpg
'GUARANTEED 1000% RUDE!!'
The National are selling t-shirts
saying "Mr November" with a photo of Obama on them. Not sure if this is a good or bad idea...
it's quite neat
until you remember the "i'm the new blue blood / i'm the great white hope" lyrics :D
what does it mean?
I don't get it.
They should do a Garfield one. I get Garfield.
I bet Obama is always really loud at the cinema.
I think it's clumsy
and actually kind of childish, but it's not offensive.
The thing is, it's all very good saying it satirizes all the misconceptions about him, but all something like this does is fuel it - the kind of person who believes these things is extremely unlikely to have a sub to The New Yorker, so it's not like they're going to read the article and be enlightened (by all accounts the article is not exactly flattering anyway)...
is new yorker like the US version of VIz
but perhaps less subtle.
Obama should
start referring to it as the Jew Yorker.
That'll get some decent headlines.
fair enough
''The magazine hit the newsstands yesterday. But its editor, David Remnick, evidently anticipating a liberal backlash against the cover - described yesterday as incendiary and irresponsible - gave an interview to the Washington Post ahead of publication. He said the image was meant to be seen as humour, poking fun at the smear campaign against the Obamas.''
Since it's a riposte to the slander solicited by Obama's opposition, it's quite a clever indictment of the smear campaign.
I dont understand all this association though
I didnt realise he was a muslim, I thought he was an actual christian
No...he's well Muslim.
no he isn't
his father was
He's a christian
and there was some furore over his pastor (he's a bit of a radical fellow) Louis Farrakhan (or something). But no, he ain't a muslim.
^LOL
he actually belongs to an obscure sect
that live by the creed of a scripture shuffled together from baptist, methodist, jewish, Buddhist, Islamic and Jansenist teachings
I believe they call themselves 'The Electables'
^I'm stealing this joke!!!
that's 5 star dinner party material right there.
Now I just need to be invited to a dinner party.
consider it a gift
though mentioning Jansenism might find you in a tight spot if one of the other guests begins to quiz you on the writings of Racine or Pascal
and heaven forbid if there are any Jesuits around the table
I dont understand for another reason as well
I mean did they show a cartoon of Bush (snr) watching the twin tower drama unfurl, in the same room as Osamas half brother
it's all a bit meh really