Obama and the Press

[PJack]

i never said it wasn't acceptable for the clintons to fight dirty,

no, you just frequently criticize them for doing so, while excusing obama and his camp every time they do it. a bit hypocritical to say the least.

but i still believe bill knew what he was doing when he made his "jesse jackson" comment. whether that was racist or not is debateable, but it definitely back fired on the clinton campaign !!

if you think it's debatable, then reprint exactly what clinton said and support your point why referring to jesse jackson's presidential campaign in south carolina makes someone a "racist.''

i'm surprised you're not calling jesse jackson a racist, considering what he said.

when did i criticize them and when did i excuse obama .... i repeat i'm convinced bill clinton knew what he was unleashing when he made that comment. i didn't say it was racist, but he must have known some ppl would perceive it as such ... this is one of the shrewdest politicians of modern times we're talking about here not some boy scout !!

and i do believe that cartoon had racist overtones and that the obama camp were dead right to criticize it !!

well, as obama himself hasn't publicly supported your view that it has racist overtones, then i guess you're in the radical minority.

i don't know about being in the radical minority as it seems a lot of ppl feel the cartoon was racist !!

most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included.

[eagle]

I'm not so worried about the New Yorker cover as it is over the top ,but the rebublicans are brutal when they campaign and I'm sure if they can convince americans Osama is a muslim they will. After seeing how they attacked Clinton for a BJ and how they slandered Kerry's war record while he ran against Bush ,an AWOL Prodigal son, and all but got away with it I expect a twisted evil asortment of BS campaigns against Obama :twisted:

[biachung]

The people that say they are voting McCain only because Hillary never got the nomination are the people I believe need convincing.

[CiaranM]

i never said it wasn't acceptable for the clintons to fight dirty,

no, you just frequently criticize them for doing so, while excusing obama and his camp every time they do it. a bit hypocritical to say the least.

but i still believe bill knew what he was doing when he made his "jesse jackson" comment. whether that was racist or not is debateable, but it definitely back fired on the clinton campaign !!

if you think it's debatable, then reprint exactly what clinton said and support your point why referring to jesse jackson's presidential campaign in south carolina makes someone a "racist.''

i'm surprised you're not calling jesse jackson a racist, considering what he said.

when did i criticize them and when did i excuse obama .... i repeat i'm convinced bill clinton knew what he was unleashing when he made that comment. i didn't say it was racist, but he must have known some ppl would perceive it as such ... this is one of the shrewdest politicians of modern times we're talking about here not some boy scout !!

and i do believe that cartoon had racist overtones and that the obama camp were dead right to criticize it !!

well, as obama himself hasn't publicly supported your view that it has racist overtones, then i guess you're in the radical minority.

i don't know about being in the radical minority as it seems a lot of ppl feel the cartoon was racist !!

most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included.

r u white by any chance ?? do u have any figures to back up ur claim that MOST people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satire ?? or have u just pulled that "fact" out of ur ass ??

[Loburt]

"are you white, by any chance?"

ah, so white people don't have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism?

that's actually a racist viewpoint, ciaran.

[CiaranM]

"are you white, by any chance?"

ah, so white people don't have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism?

that's actually a racist viewpoint, ciaran.

off course white people have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism, but a white person's perception of what is racist may differ significantly from what a black person might see as racist. i thought u might have been smart enough to see that !!

and for him to claim that

most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included.

would seem to suggest he doesn't have that much of a grasp on reality !!

i mean that's a pretty serious claim from a 39 year old white guy living in bangkok !!!

[Loburt]

"are you white, by any chance?"

ah, so white people don't have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism?

that's actually a racist viewpoint, ciaran.

off course white people have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism, but a white person's perception of what is racist may differ significantly from what a black person might see as racist. i thought u might have been smart enough to see that !!

so, once again, all white people don't have the same sensitivity to what is racist to blacks or other groups. only blacks or other groups can decide that.

sorry, ciaran, that's a racist viewpoint.

i thought you would be smart enough to understand that.

and for him to claim that

most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included.

would seem to suggest he doesn't have that much of a grasp on reality !!

i mean that's a pretty serious claim from a 39 year old white guy living in bangkok !!!

and what evidence do you have that most new yorkers do see it as "racist"?

none.

so you're just as guilty of pulling garbage out of your ass.

certainly, i think that most people who regularly buy and read The New Yorker know the cartoon is not racist, but is satirizing racism and ignorance.

and as you don't seem to have a clear idea who reads The New Yorker, you're in even less position to judge if they would "get it" or not.

[CiaranM]

"are you white, by any chance?"

ah, so white people don't have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism?

that's actually a racist viewpoint, ciaran.

off course white people have the ability to recognize or be sensitive to racism, but a white person's perception of what is racist may differ significantly from what a black person might see as racist. i thought u might have been smart enough to see that !!

so, once again, all white people don't have the same sensitivity to what is racist to blacks or other groups. only blacks or other groups can decide that.

sorry, ciaran, that's a racist viewpoint.

i thought you would be smart enough to understand that.

sorry loburt that's just absolute bollocks .... different ppl have different ideas/perceptions about what is racist to different ppls/nationalities/races !!

u think a white BNP voter will have the same sensitivity to what is racist to a black person or asian person as a white person with a more liberal outlook .... no f**king chance !!

all white ppl do NOT have the same sensitivity to racism .... in fact i would also suggest that not ALL blacks would have the same views on what is racist and what is not .... sometimes it just comes down to a matter of opinion !!

and for him to claim that

most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included.

would seem to suggest he doesn't have that much of a grasp on reality !!

i mean that's a pretty serious claim from a 39 year old white guy living in bangkok !!!

and what evidence do you have that most new yorkers do see it as "racist"?

none.

so you're just as guilty of pulling garbage out of your ass.

certainly, i think that most people who regularly buy and read The New Yorker know the cartoon is not racist, but is satirizing racism and ignorance.

and as you don't seem to have a clear idea who reads The New Yorker, you're in even less position to judge if they would "get it" or not.

and off course u will now provide the quotes where i said "most new yorkers see it as racist" .... might take u a while though as i believe what i said was that "i thought/felt it had racist overtones" ... and guess what ... i still do !!

i know that the New Yorker is perceived as being a liberal publication for a liberal readership, but that doesn't mean they don't make errors of judgement ... and in my opinion this was one !!

[PJack]

i never said it wasn't acceptable for the clintons to fight dirty,

no, you just frequently criticize them for doing so, while excusing obama and his camp every time they do it. a bit hypocritical to say the least.

but i still believe bill knew what he was doing when he made his "jesse jackson" comment. whether that was racist or not is debateable, but it definitely back fired on the clinton campaign !!

if you think it's debatable, then reprint exactly what clinton said and support your point why referring to jesse jackson's presidential campaign in south carolina makes someone a "racist.''

i'm surprised you're not calling jesse jackson a racist, considering what he said.

when did i criticize them and when did i excuse obama .... i repeat i'm convinced bill clinton knew what he was unleashing when he made that comment. i didn't say it was racist, but he must have known some ppl would perceive it as such ... this is one of the shrewdest politicians of modern times we're talking about here not some boy scout !!

and i do believe that cartoon had racist overtones and that the obama camp were dead right to criticize it !!

well, as obama himself hasn't publicly supported your view that it has racist overtones, then i guess you're in the radical minority.

i don't know about being in the radical minority as it seems a lot of ppl feel the cartoon was racist !!

most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included.

r u white by any chance ?? do u have any figures to back up ur claim that MOST people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satire ?? or have u just pulled that "fact" out of ur ass ??

White? how about affluent, educated, sophisticated. Now you might be making an intelligent distiniction.

I have as many facts to support my claim as you do about yours. And I have lived there for a few decades more than you have.

If you listen to the editor of the New Yorker you might learn that he doesnt agree that only sophisticated white urbanites who live in NY are the only ones capable of understing sarcasm. I agree. You dont.

The article was written to counter "the politics of fear" and the disgusting numbers of ignorant Americans who still believe such falsehoods about Obama. The cartoon was a lampoon.

That said, I am pleased to hear you are at least sophisticated enough to know to vote for Obama.

[CiaranM]

White? how about affluent, educated, sophisticated. Now you might be making an intelligent distiniction.

I have as many facts to support my claim as you do about yours. And I have lived there for a few decades more than you have.

If you listen to the editor of the New Yorker you might learn that he doesnt agree that only sophisticated white urbanites who live in NY are the only ones capable of understing sarcasm. I agree. You dont.

The article was written to counter "the politics of fear" and the disgusting numbers of ignorant Americans who still believe such falsehoods about Obama. The cartoon was a lampoon.

That said, I am pleased to hear you are at least sophisticated enough to know to vote for Obama.

affluent, educated and sophisticated .... wow am i supposed to be impressed ??

guess what ... i f**king ain't !!!

now exactly what claim have i made ?? that in my opinion it's racist ?? what facts do i need to support what is my opinion ?? now what's the population of NY ? what's the readership of the New Yorker ? what facts do u have to support ur claim that most of these ppl could see it as satire ?

satire/irony can be a difficult to pull off and sometimes it goes wrong ... IMO this was one of those times !!

[PJack]

White? how about affluent, educated, sophisticated. Now you might be making an intelligent distiniction.

I have as many facts to support my claim as you do about yours. And I have lived there for a few decades more than you have.

If you listen to the editor of the New Yorker you might learn that he doesnt agree that only sophisticated white urbanites who live in NY are the only ones capable of understing sarcasm. I agree. You dont.

The article was written to counter "the politics of fear" and the disgusting numbers of ignorant Americans who still believe such falsehoods about Obama. The cartoon was a lampoon.

That said, I am pleased to hear you are at least sophisticated enough to know to vote for Obama.

affluent, educated and sophisticated .... wow am i supposed to be impressed ??

guess what ... i f**king ain't !!!

now exactly what claim have i made ?? that in my opinion it's racist ?? what facts do i need to support what is my opinion ?? now what's the population of NY ? what's the readership of the New Yorker ? what facts do u have to support ur claim that most of these ppl could see it as satire ?

satire/irony can be a difficult to pull off and sometimes it goes wrong ... IMO this was one of those times !!

the distinction that you failed to get (yet again) is that the issue was not how white I or New Yorkers are, it is how sophisticated they are to get the sarcasm.

no. as you said... 'you aint sophisticated' but your working class hero mantra is charming.

So if sarcasm is so difficult for you then you might want to refrain from attempting to understand or analyze it.

[Loburt]

sorry loburt that's just absolute bollocks .... different ppl have different ideas/perceptions about what is racist to different ppls/nationalities/races !!

u think a white BNP voter will have the same sensitivity to what is racist to a black person or asian person as a white person with a more liberal outlook .... no f**king chance !!

all white ppl do NOT have the same sensitivity to racism .... in fact i would also suggest that not ALL blacks would have the same views on what is racist and what is not .... sometimes it just comes down to a matter of opinion !!

that's right, all white people do not have the same sensitivity to racism. some have more sensitivity than others.

so what's the point of you asking someone expressing the opnion that this wasn't racist "are you white?"

the question blatantly implies that BECAUSE THE PERSON IS WHITE, which you already know he is, he is not as sensitive to racism as someone who isn't white.

you're question is inapropriate and out of bounds, because you're profiling someone simply on the basis of their race and nothing else. Not as an individual person.

you're simply wrong to do that, so get over it.

the bollocks here is from you.

and for him to claim that most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included would seem to suggest he doesn't have that much of a grasp on reality !!

and off course u will now provide the quotes where i said "most new yorkers see it as racist" ....

in saying he doesn't have much of a grasp on reality, you are saying he's wrong.

but you also have no evidence to prove he is wrong and that the opposite is true.

so you're pulling bollocks out your ass too. okay?

might take u a while though as i believe what i said was that "i thought/felt it had racist overtones" ... and guess what ... i still do !!

Are you taking a steady diet of "thick in the head" pills or something?

If the cartoon has "racist overtones" it's because it is satirizing racist attitudes and beliefs.

It's ridiculing them, not supporting them.

That's not very hard to understand.

[CiaranM]

sorry loburt that's just absolute bollocks .... different ppl have different ideas/perceptions about what is racist to different ppls/nationalities/races !!

u think a white BNP voter will have the same sensitivity to what is racist to a black person or asian person as a white person with a more liberal outlook .... no f**king chance !!

all white ppl do NOT have the same sensitivity to racism .... in fact i would also suggest that not ALL blacks would have the same views on what is racist and what is not .... sometimes it just comes down to a matter of opinion !!

that's right, all white people do not have the same sensitivity to racism. some have more sensitivity than others.

so what's the point of you asking someone expressing the opnion that this wasn't racist "are you white?"

the question blatantly implies that BECAUSE THE PERSON IS WHITE, which you already know he is, he is not as sensitive to racism as someone who isn't white.

you're question is inapropriate and out of bounds, because you're profiling someone simply on the basis of their race and nothing else. Not as an individual person.

you're simply wrong to do that, so get over it.

the bollocks here is from you.

FFS ... i would have thought it would be blindingly obvious (except to someone with a closed mind) that most white people would NOT be as sensitive to racism as someone who isn't white ... because guess what a white person is unlikely to be on the receiving end of racist behaviour or attitudes as a non white person ..... which part of that is so difficult to understand !!

and for him to claim that most people in NY and most people who read the New Yorker could see that it was satirical, myself included would seem to suggest he doesn't have that much of a grasp on reality !!

and off course u will now provide the quotes where i said "most new yorkers see it as racist" ....

in saying he doesn't have much of a grasp on reality, you are saying he's wrong.

but you also have no evidence to prove he is wrong and that the opposite is true.

so you're pulling bollocks out your ass too. okay?

nope .... i'm expressing an opinion, he's claiming to speak for most new yorkers and for most of the new yorker readership .... u can see the difference in that .... can't U ??

might take u a while though as i believe what i said was that "i thought/felt it had racist overtones" ... and guess what ... i still do !!

Are you taking a steady diet of "thick in the head" pills or something?

If the cartoon has "racist overtones" it's because it is satirizing racist attitudes and beliefs.

It's ridiculing them, not supporting them.

That's not very hard to understand.

it's not very hard to understand what it was trying to do, but did they succeed in that or did they just reinforce the negative images ppl have been trying to pin on Obama. IMO it didn't work ... it wasn't smart, it wasn't clever and most of all it wasn't f**king funny !!!

[CiaranM]

interesting article from the New York Times .... and guess what .... it would appear a LOT of ppl didn't find it funny at all !!

check out the readers commets below the article !!

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/political-satire-but-obama-is-not-laughing/?scp=3&sq=obama%20cartoon%20poll&st=cse

July 13, 2008, 8:47 pm

Political Satire, but Obama Isn?t Laughing

By Jeff Zeleny

Updated SAN DIEGO ?- As he flies around the country, Senator Barack Obama has a fondness for magazines. The New Yorker is often among the titles at the front of his campaign plane.

The July 21 cover of The New Yorker.The issue this week, though, is not likely to make its way on board.

The cover of the magazine depicts Mr. Obama wearing a turban, while he offers a fist bump to his gun-toting wife. An American flag singes behind them in the fireplace.

Asked about the drawing at a news conference here Sunday, Mr. Obama held his tongue, saying: ?I have no response to that.? A campaign spokesman, though, was not so measured at a sketch that the magazine calls satirical.

?The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Senator Obama?s right-wing critics have tried to create,? the spokesman, Bill Burton, said in a statement. ?But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive ?- and we agree.?

The cover of the July 21 issue is entitled, ?The Politics of Fear.? A news release to promote the magazine said artist Barry Blitt ?satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the presidential election to derail Barack Obama?s campaign.?

Asked about the cover, Tucker Bounds, spokesman for Senator John McCain?s campaign, said: ?We completely agree with the Obama campaign.?

David Remnick, the editor of the magazine, defended his choice of covers in an interview with the Huffington Post. He said, ?Obviously I wouldn?t have run a cover just to get attention ? I ran the cover because I thought it had something to say. What I think it does is hold up a mirror to the prejudice and dark imaginings about Barack Obama?s ? both Obamas? ? past, and their politics.

?I can?t speak for anyone else?s interpretations, all I can say is that it combines a number of images that have been propagated, not by everyone on the right but by some, about Obama?s supposed ?lack of patriotism? or his being ?soft on terrorism? or the idiotic notion that somehow Michelle Obama is the second coming of the Weathermen or most violent Black Panthers. That somehow all this is going to come to the Oval Office.?

[PJack]

interesting article from the New York Times .... and guess what .... it would appear a LOT of ppl didn't find it funny at all !!

check out the readers commets below the article !!

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/political-satire-but-obama-is-not-laughing/?scp=3&sq=obama%20cartoon%20poll&st=cse

I read the article and the comments you are pointing to with such fervor.

10 think it was a bad decision to run the cartoon and 8 say that it was not a bad decision, or it was just sad that so many small minded people cant get the joke. 2 were on the fence or balanced. 10 support your point but another 10 do not support your point.

and when you say "A LOT" of readers, where is your data to support your point? Or, was that your opinion...

[Loburt]

FFS ... i would have thought it would be blindingly obvious (except to someone with a closed mind) that most white people would NOT be as sensitive to racism as someone who isn't white ... because guess what a white person is unlikely to be on the receiving end of racist behaviour or attitudes as a non white person ..... which part of that is so difficult to understand !!

Wrong, ciaran. You yourself write "most white people." So, instead of dealing with the poster as an individual person, you automatically assume things about simply on the basis of his race.

People who make negative assumptions about others simply on the basis of their race (as you did) are what?

You're wrong to ask that question. You're wrong to make the assumption. And frankly, you're guilty of exactly what you are implying about him.

I've got news for you, buddy. Racism can run both ways. Even people who are members of a discriminated-against minority can have racist views and behave in racist ways.

When you asked that question, you were over the line.

It's a shame you don't have enough of an open mind to admit you made a mistake.

[Loburt]

it's not very hard to understand what it was trying to do, but did they succeed in that or did they just reinforce the negative images ppl have been trying to pin on Obama. IMO it didn't work ... it wasn't smart, it wasn't clever and most of all it wasn't f**king funny !!!

If you didn't think it worked, or you didn't think it was funny, fine. Many people agree. Others don't.

Saying it was racist is a whole other thing.

And on that, you're so obviously wrong.

[Loburt]

Op-Ed Columnist

May We Mock, Barack?

By MAUREEN DOWD

Published: July 16, 2008

WASHINGTON

When I interviewed Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert for Rolling Stone a couple years ago, I wondered what Barack Obama would mean for them.

?It seems like a President Obama would be harder to make fun of than these guys,? I said.

?Are you kidding me?? Stewart scoffed.

Then he and Colbert both said at the same time: ?His dad was a goat-herder!?

When I noted that Obama, in his memoir, had revealed that he had done some pot, booze and ?maybe a little blow,? the two comedians began riffing about the dapper senator?s familiarity with drug slang.

Colbert: Wow, that?s a very street way of putting it. ?A little blow.?

Stewart: A little bit of the white rabbit.

Colbert: ?Yeah, I packed a cocktail straw of cocaine and had a prostitute blow it in my ear, but that is all I did. High-fivin.? ?

Flash forward to the kerfuffle ? and Obama?s icy reaction ? over this week?s New Yorker cover parodying fears about the Obamas.

?We?ve already scratched thrift, candor and brevity off the list of virtues in this presidential cycle, so why not eliminate humor, too?? wrote James Rainey in The Los Angeles Times, suggesting ?an irony deficiency? in Obama and his fans.

Many of the late-night comics and their writers ? nearly all white ? now admit to The New York Times?s Bill Carter that because of race and because there is nothing ?buffoonish? about Obama ? and because many in their audiences are intoxicated by him and resistant to seeing him skewered ? he has not been flayed by the sort of ridicule that diminished Dukakis, Gore and Kerry.

?There?s a weird reverse racism going on,? Jimmy Kimmel said.

Carter also observed that there?s no easy comedic ?take? on Obama, ?like allegations of Bill Clinton?s womanizing, or President Bush?s goofy bumbling or Al Gore?s robotic personality.?

At first blush, it would seem to be a positive for Obama that he is hard to mock. But on second thought, is it another sign that he?s trying so hard to be perfect that it?s stultifying? Or that eight years of W. and Cheney have robbed Democratic voters of their sense of humor?

Certainly, as the potential first black president, and as a contender with tender experience, Obama must feel under strain to be serious.

But he does not want the ?take? on him to become that he?s so tightly wrapped, overcalculated and circumspect that he can?t even allow anyone to make jokes about him, and that his supporters are so evangelical and eager for a champion to rescue America that their response to any razzing is a sanctimonious: Don?t mess with our messiah!

If Obama keeps being stingy with his quips and smiles, and if the dominant perception of him is that you can?t make jokes about him, it might infect his campaign with an airless quality. His humorlessness could spark humor.

On Tuesday, Andy Borowitz satirized on that subject. He said that Obama, sympathetic to comics? attempts to find jokes to make about him, had put out a list of official ones, including this:

?A traveling salesman knocks on the door of a farmhouse, and much to his surprise, Barack Obama answers the door. The salesman says, ?I was expecting the farmer?s daughter.? Barack Obama replies, ?She?s not here. The farm was foreclosed on because of subprime loans that are making a mockery of the American dream.? ?

John McCain?s Don Rickles routines ? ?Thanks for the question, you little jerk? ? can fall flat. But he seems like a guy who can be teased harmlessly. If Obama offers only eat-your-arugula chiding and chilly earnestness, he becomes an otherworldly type, not the regular guy he needs to be.

He?s already in danger of seeming too prissy about food ? a perception heightened when The Wall Street Journal reported that the planners for Obama?s convention have hired the first-ever Director of Greening, the environmental activist Andrea Robinson. She in turn hired an Official Carbon Adviser to ?measure the greenhouse-gas emissions of every placard, every plane trip, every appetizer prepared and every coffee cup tossed.?

The ?lean ?n? green? catering guidelines, The Journal said, bar fried food and instruct that, ?on the theory that nutritious food is more vibrant, each meal should include ?at least three of the following colors: red, green, yellow, blue/purple, and white.? (Garnishes don?t count.) At least 70% of the ingredients should be organic or grown locally, to minimize emissions from fuel during transportation.?

Bring it on, Ozone Democrats! Because if Obama gets elected and there is nothing funny about him, it won?t be the economy that?s depressed. It will be the rest of us.

[CiaranM]

interesting article from the New York Times .... and guess what .... it would appear a LOT of ppl didn't find it funny at all !!

check out the readers commets below the article !!

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/political-satire-but-obama-is-not-laughing/?scp=3&sq=obama%20cartoon%20poll&st=cse

I read the article and the comments you are pointing to with such fervor.

10 think it was a bad decision to run the cartoon and 8 say that it was not a bad decision, or it was just sad that so many small minded people cant get the joke. 2 were on the fence or balanced. 10 support your point but another 10 do not support your point.

and when you say "A LOT" of readers, where is your data to support your point? Or, was that your opinion...

when i checked out the article, before posting it here .... there were over 700 comments ..... maybe u should check the link again !!!

[CiaranM]

it's not very hard to understand what it was trying to do, but did they succeed in that or did they just reinforce the negative images ppl have been trying to pin on Obama. IMO it didn't work ... it wasn't smart, it wasn't clever and most of all it wasn't f**king funny !!!

If you didn't think it worked, or you didn't think it was funny, fine. Many people agree. Others don't.

Saying it was racist is a whole other thing.

And on that, you're so obviously wrong.

says f**king who loburt ?? now i know u have a pretty high opinion of urself, but since when did u decide what is or isn't racist !! get a f**king grip and come down from that pedestal of urs !!!

[PJack]

interesting article from the New York Times .... and guess what .... it would appear a LOT of ppl didn't find it funny at all !!

check out the readers commets below the article !!

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/political-satire-but-obama-is-not-laughing/?scp=3&sq=obama%20cartoon%20poll&st=cse

I read the article and the comments you are pointing to with such fervor.

10 think it was a bad decision to run the cartoon and 8 say that it was not a bad decision, or it was just sad that so many small minded people cant get the joke. 2 were on the fence or balanced. 10 support your point but another 10 do not support your point.

and when you say "A LOT" of readers, where is your data to support your point? Or, was that your opinion...

when i checked out the article, before posting it here .... there were over 700 comments ..... maybe u should check the link again !!!

I would if considering your ignorance were remotely interesting to me at this point. It isnt. My work is done here.

[beej]

I must say I DO find it NOT very funny, insulting, and down right rude, I'm very liberal, very open minded, and a proper rude ***** but this cover went a little too far in my mind.

[CiaranM]

interesting article from the New York Times .... and guess what .... it would appear a LOT of ppl didn't find it funny at all !!

check out the readers commets below the article !!

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/political-satire-but-obama-is-not-laughing/?scp=3&sq=obama%20cartoon%20poll&st=cse

I read the article and the comments you are pointing to with such fervor.

10 think it was a bad decision to run the cartoon and 8 say that it was not a bad decision, or it was just sad that so many small minded people cant get the joke. 2 were on the fence or balanced. 10 support your point but another 10 do not support your point.

and when you say "A LOT" of readers, where is your data to support your point? Or, was that your opinion...

when i checked out the article, before posting it here .... there were over 700 comments ..... maybe u should check the link again !!!

I would if considering your ignorance were remotely interesting to me at this point. It isnt. My work is done here.

ur work is showing urself up ?? nice work if u can get it !!

[i_love_som_tam]

Evidently Obama did not care too much for the cover... as quoted in "The Independent" :

"It was Obama himself who perhaps offered the most compelling argument against running such a cartoon ? that it was offensive to Muslim Americans. 'There are wonderful Muslim Americans all across the country who are doing wonderful things. And for this to be used as sort of an insult or to raise suspicions about me I think is unfortunate. And it's not what America is all about.' "

And then today it was announced that New Yorker writer, Ryan Lizza, who has written a glowing article about Obama, was refused a seat on the flights to follow Obama on his trips to Iraq, Afghanistan and Europe. The reason given? Seating constraints. :roll:

[eagle]

Evidently Obama did not care too much for the cover... as quoted in "The Independent" :

"It was Obama himself who perhaps offered the most compelling argument against running such a cartoon ? that it was offensive to Muslim Americans. 'There are wonderful Muslim Americans all across the country who are doing wonderful things. And for this to be used as sort of an insult or to raise suspicions about me I think is unfortunate. And it's not what America is all about.' "

And then today it was announced that New Yorker writer, Ryan Lizza, who has written a glowing article about Obama, was refused a seat on the flights to follow Obama on his trips to Iraq, Afghanistan and Europe. The reason given? Seating constraints. :roll:

Yet if he said nothing and his staff said nothing they would rip into them because they should have . Spin is just another word for BullSh*t. Its a political game to keep us busy while they rip us off :roll: