TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › tasteless and offensive.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

tasteless and offensive.

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
yea sure it is cause it is about obama.
and that is not PC anymore. No satire allowed.

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008...and-offensive/


i think it is about right,
i wonder how much for a framed pic to hang on my wall would be.
More he comes to the center, more the media will start to bash him.
post #2 of 29
I must agree that cartoon is pretty tasteless. They are bad news, but not in that way, I hope.
I have been suspicious of Obama from the very start. How does a junior Senator get enough political juice to run for President. I think he is sincere, but has someone or some group unknown using him for their own agenda and he will not be able to do what he wants as President, assuming he is elected. I certainly won't vote for a puppet. Not that I would ever vote for a democrat, anyway.
post #3 of 29
Thread Starter 
i could vote for a DEM, just not the ones they keep putting up. I voted for the gov of ohio who is a democrat(lol i also think are old gov who was a rep should be sitting in jail cell)
post #4 of 29
If they were aiming for satire, they missed the mark.
post #5 of 29
Is it really any more tasteless than some activists wanting a sewage treatment plant named after our current president?
post #6 of 29
I wonder how the New Yorker feels about being criticized for being racist, etc., when that was never their intention. Maybe they feel like the rest of us, never knowing if we're going to get in trouble for some innocent remark? My wife had a co-worker who was summarily fired from a job she was doing great at, just because a passing remark was complained about by two students who were failing.
post #7 of 29
Oh, I get it. It's funny. It's the Neo-Cons worst nightmare!

We, the people, are the subject of this satire not Obama. I just wonder when The New Yorker started getting art from Onion alums?
post #8 of 29
The picture seemed about accurate to mine and some co-workers thoughts on those two
post #9 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
i could vote for a DEM, just not the ones they keep putting up. I voted for the gov of ohio who is a democrat(lol i also think are old gov who was a rep should be sitting in jail cell)
And 99% of Ohio agrees with you. What was Taft's rating, like 2% or something?

As for this cartoon... the only reason it's stupid is that so many people actually believe the whisper campaign that this is true. If everyone knew that "Obama is a terrorist Muslim" bs was false, well, it would be funny.
post #10 of 29
The satire is not about Obama but all of those in the far right that are whispering about "Obama Hussein" and the Whitey speech. Trying to instill fear by throwing out scary words that have no truth behind them.
post #11 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by katachtig View Post
The satire is not about Obama but all of those in the far right that are whispering about "Obama Hussein" and the Whitey speech. Trying to instill fear by throwing out scary words that have no truth behind them.

Problem is, there is too much truth to that illustration. People on the far right who may be "whispering" about Obama's middle name and the so-called "whitey " speech aren't the only ones with grave and legitimate concerns about Obama. Plenty of moderates, conservatives, Dems and everyone in between is wondering who exactly this guy is... and from what he's been telling us about himself, in words, actions and associations with a number of dubious characters, he's no one who belongs in the White House.
post #12 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
Is it really any more tasteless than some activists wanting a sewage treatment plant named after our current president?

Great point.
post #13 of 29
Thread Starter 
but where are the people that screamed racist for all the rice cartoons that came out? you know the ones,

her sleeping with bush, the ones with big lips? the one pregent with monkey?
few examples.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/14/grow-a-pair-obama/
if anyone should be screaming racism, should be her.

oh wait, its allowed cause she works for bush.
post #14 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
but where are the people that screamed racist for all the rice cartoons that came out? you know the ones,

her sleeping with bush, the ones with big lips? the one pregent with monkey?
few examples.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/14/grow-a-pair-obama/
if anyone should be screaming racism, should be her.

oh wait, its allowed cause she works for bush.
Or because she's been called "The Concubine"? She doesn't enjoy a lot of credibility, because she's been lumped together with Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Ashcroft, and, sadly enough, Powell, who at least had the grace to resign.
post #15 of 29
Thread Starter 
that is the point. Its ok to abuse her based on her sex and race.
post #16 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
that is the point. Its ok to abuse her based on her sex and race.
I have to disagree. I think many people praised her for her ability to rise above race and gender, but others condemned her for her subservience to Bush. Don't you wonder why the GOP didn't push her as a candidate, seeing as so many consider McCain "too leftist"!? Maybe she cut her own throat by aligning herself too closely to Bush.
post #17 of 29
It's a joke that no one got. Total failure as satire. I heard (granted on Rush's show) two different people saying on yesterdays shows that if the artist had put Rush Limbaugh paining the cartoon, it wouldn't have missed its mark.

The point, which was actually pretty clear if you know anything about The New Yorker's political slant, was to slam the Right for making these allegations, innuendos and rumors about Obama. It was never meant to mean offense to Obama. They want him to win.

The problem is, if you have to explain the joke, it just ain't funny. And they've been all over national TV and other media explaining the joke. I guess in their ivory tower they didn't think anyone wouldn't get the joke, since all of them did.
post #18 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
I have to disagree. I think many people praised her for her ability to rise above race and gender, but others condemned her for her subservience to Bush. Don't you wonder why the GOP didn't push her as a candidate, seeing as so many consider McCain "too leftist"!? Maybe she cut her own throat by aligning herself too closely to Bush.

yea, some did. But the facts still remain.
there was no out cry about being racist, over her cartoons.
but along comes obama, and now its racist.
post #19 of 29
I see Michelle Malkin doesn't like whiners either.
post #20 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Essayons89 View Post
Is it really any more tasteless than some activists wanting a sewage treatment plant named after our current president?
Touche.

Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
It's a joke that no one got. Total failure as satire. I heard (granted on Rush's show) two different people saying on yesterdays shows that if the artist had put Rush Limbaugh paining the cartoon, it wouldn't have missed its mark.

The point, which was actually pretty clear if you know anything about The New Yorker's political slant, was to slam the Right for making these allegations, innuendos and rumors about Obama. It was never meant to mean offense to Obama. They want him to win.

The problem is, if you have to explain the joke, it just ain't funny. And they've been all over national TV and other media explaining the joke. I guess in their ivory tower they didn't think anyone wouldn't get the joke, since all of them did.
Exactly what I meant when I said it missed it's mark. It's not clear what point they're trying to make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
yea, some did. But the facts still remain.
there was no out cry about being racist, over her cartoons.
but along comes obama, and now its racist.
Liberals aren't going to complain about a Rice satire on a conservative website. It just doesn't compute.
post #21 of 29
Thread Starter 
err what? what that got to do with media let slide racist cartoons, because it was about rice?
post #22 of 29
Well actually McCain came out and said he thought it was pretty tasteless and offensive, too, so it's hardly a case of Obama-bashing not being allowed or PC. The interview I saw with the editor of the New Yorker didn't try to explain it as a joke against the right, either. He came out pretty clearly and said that it meant exactly what it looked like it meant. I'd have liked to have seen more interviews because he was pretty clear in the one that was shown here.

It's certainly satirical, but I agree with others here who feel it is in poor taste. There are some lines I don't think should be crossed, and given the fact that Islam and Muslims are so feared and hated in society these days, especially by Americans, and that your greatest thread to national security comes from militant Islamic fundamentalists, I felt it was very, very poor to portray one of your presidential candidates as belonging to your most hated enemies.

Some things push the envelope but are clever and funny, and some things set fire to the envelope and are insulting and poorly executed. I believe this is the latter.
post #23 of 29
Thread Starter 
they where poking fun at the what some people see as obama as. (even if its 60% true)

the story inside is still very pro- obama
post #24 of 29
Off-topic, but I just read your ticker Sarah and I knew you prayed.


I never saw the cartoons about Condi. I like Condi and think that is pretty low they did that to her because she is loyal to President Bush.
I don't see her loyalty as being "subservience". Is that label because she is a woman? Because she is a "black woman". Maybe the "subservience" is somehow looked on as being an "Uncle Tom"?
President Bush was the first President to have a black woman in a high postiton(s) in his cabinet. Doesn't he get any brownie points for that from the Dems? Did Clinton have anyone similar? I don't remember, but I don't think so.
post #25 of 29
Here is an explanation in one of the most liberal websites in the universe.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_112456.html

Quote:
The idea that we would publish a cover saying these things literally, I think, is just not in the vocabulary of what we do and who we are... We've run many many satirical political covers. Ask the Bush administration how many.
post #26 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Off-topic, but I just read your ticker Sarah and I knew you prayed.
Lol! Very good - but I hate to burst your bubble, I didn't write that ticker.

As for the covers regarding Bush - are you telling me that none of those crossed the line or were unacceptable? I'm sure some were. And it works both ways - certain lines should not be crossed, no matter who the subject is.
post #27 of 29
I thought of it as satire making fun of the right wing caricature of Obama and his wife. In it were all of the assertions made by Rush Limbaugh's crowd. I read the New Yorker for its fiction but it is a very left leaning magazine. They make fun of Bush all of the time. Both sides have to be able take being the target of razor sharp satire.
I don't think it was particularly good satire and the editors knew that. They knew it would be controversial so they could get their name in the press.
post #28 of 29
Unfortunately, though, there are going to be plenty out there who don't see it that way, who will take it as confirmation that Obama really is a Muslim (and just when all that middle name hysteria was finally dying down) and that he is really anti-American (i.e. the flag in the fireplace). Sometimes attempts at political satire backfire and I think in this case, for a lot of folks, it will.
post #29 of 29
It fits my definition of tasteless and offensive. And certainly political figures are always going to be the target of jokes and satire that are tasteless and offensive. Hillary Clinton got her share of it - remember those nutcrackers?

Also this ain't the 1970s, nowadays everyone is walking on eggshells trying to be PC.

What surprised me was it being on the cover of the New Yorker. I always thought of them as being more restrained then say The Rolling Stone. Frankly I think this was bad judgment on someone's part they blew it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › tasteless and offensive.