IAP Political Forum

Picked up on Americablog this morning related to the firestorm on the MSM yesterday related to the New Yorker "satire" depiction of the Obamas as Muslim terrorists.  When the shoe is placed on the other foot as in this post and cartoon from the  Seattle Post-Intelligencer, though hardly with the uproar related to the New Yorker, wonder how the
McCain supporters would feel if this form of satire was reversed?

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?ID=1792

Do you mean like this REAL one from rolling stone??

(http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/johnmccainpow_rollingstone.jpg)

How about this REAL one calling Condi a house nigga??

(http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/tedrallevil.gif)

It's a "firestorm" because the MSM made it one. It should have been ignored.

I'm all for free speech, even ignorant and misguided ones.

The "New Yorker" has a right to damage its image. I know I'll never pick up another copy of it without thinking about this.


I can't either pics, Reaganite, but I'd be intrested in seeing if this is true.

I didn't know.

Is there a word for libel in picture form?

I don't understand why this makes people mad. Since when do non-Muslims take cartoons seriously?

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/14/grow-a-pair-obama/

Reaganite, are there pics there with ? marks? I couldn't pull them up. Maybe a conflict between PCs and Mac?  

Abraxas it was Harry Belefonte who referred to both Mushroom Cloud Condi and Collin Powell as "house slaves."  Maybe only those from the South understood what he was getting at?  Perhaps some publications picked up on his statements and published cartoons related to the statements. Like your suggestion this was a firestorm of media creation, at the time the statement created a similar one though I would suggest not totally to serve the interests of the 24/7 cables as it might today. Insulting to some, but others might have agreed with as might be the case with the cover of the New Yorker.

Actually, both were at the time, and though it is arguable where Powell is concerned Condi remains totally loyal to Bush. However, in the case of the two side by side pics in the
Seattle cartoon, in this case, it was according some an attempt at satire related to the presumptive candidates for this years election rather than a continued Bush cabinet
appointee who in the end took the first appointee's place as Secretary of State, considered by some to be the most powerful cabinet appointee.

IMHO, not really the same as caricatures of members of the Bush cabinet.

Reaganite, political cartoons have a long history in the U.S. going back to the Revolution.  Michelle Malkin, LOL, hardly attracks the attention of the same followers as the New Yorker. Your point?  

Right the Rolling Stone cartoon (was that a cover?) and some other cartoon are just like the cover of the New Yorker.

Golly you really are pathetic.

Personally, I found it funny, not at all offensive and am sorry that Obama doesn't have a sense of humor.

One of my personal favorite Presidential moments, was Gerald Ford being on Saturday Night Live during the height of Chevy CHase mocking him.

Showed class and a sense of humor.

lol.. shutup house nigga

Thanks toaster for providing the pics I couldn't access.  Hardly, the same as the New Yorker cover or the cartoon from the Seattle paper.  Looks like Reaganite is up to the usual.  One can only wonder as the overly long campaign continues if the cartoons and animations provided by the various elements of the popular culture will continue to rival some of the past.  I don't think anyone has ever topped the LBJ  the Daisy Girl commercial during the campaign against Goldwater, but it could happen.

calling condi a house nigga is ok then... BTW the NEW YORKER is making fun of REPUBLICANS with the COVER!!!

Obama needs to grow some balls.. what happens when peopel start asking for him to assinated in the streets as they do with Bush?

 Question;
Answer:
    Some racist asshole like you will take a shot at him.

How is it different?

Do you really need the difference between the cover of a national magazine and a cartoon inside a local paper explained to you?

I'm not talking about circulation, I'm talking about content.

HAHHAHAHHAHA

Ok so thats what he will do.. when people say he whould be shot as they do with Bush, Obama and his nut huggers like you will say RACISM!!!!

lol...

Seriously man... heh...

Is everything going to be racism when you dont like Obama for anything...

I am againts Obama tax increases.. I AM NOW RACIST!! lolol

Are you saying people don't do this to EVERY president?


I think circulation and the reputation it recieves are pretty much synonomous.

I mean, if the Delaware News Journal prints something racist (and they have in the past), does it really deserve as much attention as if the New York Times did it?

That's certainly a fair point...but...but, with the internet, things that may once have been obscure are now seen by the masses. I would argue that even if run locally, if picked up by, say, FOX or CNN, a cartoon could be made to be seen by a large number of people...and still damaging and hurtful, and every bit as distasteful.

Totally agree... but just cause it GETS attention doesn't mean it DESERVES it. Personally I don't think this deserves the "firestorm" it's getting.

The ironic thing is that the whole reason they did it was for shock value. They wanted the attention, but it's coming back to hurt them:


LINK (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07162008/business/inside_the_cover_story_120153.htm)

Let the market settle this.

Yes they do this to EVERY president, but when they do it to Obama is will be called RACIST as the Obama Nut huggers have already shown..

Oh, so, if we take out the ways they are diffferent, are they the same?

One might be done in water color, another pen and ink. One on canvas, the other on paper. Different? Of course. I don't see how that changes the content.

Who said the picture was "racist"?

Most of what I've heard call it "libel" or "defemation" and appropriately "anti-semetic" - but not "racist". Not even Obama calls it racist.


"Barack Obama to the New Yorker: It's your right - but you weren't right.

In his first substantive talk about the magazine's inflammatory cartoon depicting him and his wife as fist-bumping terrorists, Obama told CNN's Larry King the image fueled misconceptions and insulted Muslim Americans.

'I know it was The New Yorker's attempt at satire. I don't think they were entirely successful with it,' Obama said. 'But you know what? It's a cartoon ... and that's why we've got the First Amendment.'

The presumptive Democratic nominee said he wasn't personally stung by the cartoon."
- Daily News (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/07/16/2008-07-16_untitled__cover16m-1.html)


No one's calling it "racist" except the people that keep trying to make this campaign about race... like you, Reaganite, despite your ridiculous comments to the contrary.

I love black people!! I mean house nigga's like condi rock!!! heh :angel:

The liberals are the racists!!

So you don't actually have an answer?

... typical ::)

Answer too?? I was called a racist... whats there to answer?

I asked you to tell me who's calling this cover racist, http://www.itsallpolitics.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,26/topic,2502.msg59957/#msg59957HERE (http://), cause I really haven't heard that from anyone.

If anything, it's the Muslim population that has the most to complain about. The fact the he was even "attacked" for being a supposed Muslim, as if this somehow proves he would be a bad president, as you can imagine, rubs regular Muslims the wrong way.

But regardless, you implied that criticism of Obama supposedly labels you a racist by others, yet this "criticism" (read: "libel" or "defemation") by the New Yorker hasn't been reflected that way. It's been shown to be ignorant and false - not racist.

I keep waiting for you to prove your point... but you have come up noticibly empty every time...

The New Yorker gets huge publicity.

Obama gets a wide refutation of the worst rumors by having it brought up and then refuted.

Everybody wins.

No Bonzo ..you were not "called" a racist ...it was merely pointed out that you are a racist...and not a very clever one at that.

I am not a racist you are a racist!!

(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:RWeTPe-uErAqRM:http://bp2.blogger.com/_FAVP54Gs144/RrO6de6M2gI/AAAAAAAAAEQ/7fV1bId74-w/s400/Chimps%2Blaughing%2B%2Bgoogle%2Bchimps.jpg) (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:CYj3glK7XBTxpM:http://www.morphizm.com/images/observations/levine/reagan/reagan_bonzo.jpg)(http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:0fut5hSWbhYHnM:http://www.maddogmedia.com/chimp.gif)

     Its like the pot calling the kettle...errrrr....ahhhh ....
 
 
 ...a pot.

aww I am sorry Ihurt your feelings brownie hater!!

 Actually I lOOOOVE brownies...YUM!! .
 (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:E9C9Zkz2cr2R_M:http://www.dianasdesserts.com/assets/managed/categories/Peanut_Swirl_Brownies.jpg)
 ...I feel just fine and you are still a racist Bonzo.
 (http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:CYj3glK7XBTxpM:http://www.morphizm.com/images/observations/levine/reagan/reagan_bonzo.jpg)
 Have a nice day. ;D