'bots go ballistic

[Libsmasher]

Obamabots are having brain hemorrhages over the latest New Yorker cover:

The cover was >>OBVIOUSLY<< a satire of what the New Yorker believes to be anti-Obama defamations, but satire is apparently above the intellectual level of the 'bots. (You're saying "tell me something I don't know", right? )

 

[Dr.Who]

Not just O supporters but O's spokesman.

Man these people have thin skins! Or is there some kind of truth behind at least one of the rumors that scares them? I would bet on the true one being that Michelle is a black radical.

if he becomes president is this what we can expect - constant whining about every perceived insult. Well welcome to public life.

Can't he take a joke, even one that supported him? A good leader would have laughed at the ridiculousness of it publicly. If he can't handle satire how will be handle the real attacks?

Or is it just that people don't appreciate jokes when they involve their messiahs?

Maybe it is that we all know that this was satire and anyone smart enough to read a newspaper can see that. But what about the legions of dumb americans who are not smart enough to see this for what it is? Well how many of them are in the league of people voting for O? Maybe that is what is feared - that only dummies are voting for O.

 

[PLC1]

Asked about the drawing at a news conference here Sunday, Mr. Obama held his tongue, saying: “I have no response to that.”

OMG! How could he have gone more ballistic than that? Oh, the rage, the rage!

 

[Dr.Who]

OMG! How could he have gone more ballistic than that? Oh, the rage, the rage!

So far the only two people who have weighed in here have not said that O went balistic. They said that people who work for him and represent him in a formal way, like his spokesman, over-react. There is a trend in the O campaign to react strongly to any criticism. They even set up a website specifically to address criticism. I am not saying that this is not a smart move, just that it is a move that points to an underlying sensitivity about criticism.

Hey on the bright side when someone starts saying that he is being sensitive about being criticised for being black we can point to his campaings pattern of responses and say that he is sensitive about any criticism not just black criticism.

 

[PLC1]

So far the only two people who have weighed in here have not said that O went balistic. They said that people who work for him and represent him in a formal way, like his spokesman, over-react. There is a trend in the O campaign to react strongly to any criticism. They even set up a website specifically to address criticism. I am not saying that this is not a smart move, just that it is a move that points to an underlying sensitivity about criticism.

Hey on the bright side when someone starts saying that he is being sensitive about being criticised for being black we can point to his campaings pattern of responses and say that he is sensitive about any criticism not just black criticism.

Well, you might be able to say that some of his supporters are sensitive to criticism. It would be hard to make a case that Obama himself is.

 

[Dr.Who]

Well, you might be able to say that some of his supporters are sensitive to criticism. It would be hard to make a case that Obama himself is.

Is he not their fearless leader? Does he not instruct his spokesman? Does the fish not stink from the head?

 

[Libsmasher]

OMG! How could he have gone more ballistic than that? Oh, the rage, the rage!

I said Obamabots, not Obama. Respond to what is said, Megathink.

 

[PLC1]

I said Obamabots, not Obama. Respond to what is said, Megathink.

OK, then, show us how "Obamabots" are having "brain hemorrages" about a silly cartoon.

 

[Dr.Who]

OK, then, show us how "Obamabots" are having "brain hemorrages" about a silly cartoon.

You have called it a silly cartoon so apparently you can see the humor in it. Just as I can see the humor in the many cartoons about P. Bush.

But as we can see from this quote below even after it has been explained to them the O spokesman cannot see the humor in a magazine that is known for being 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.”

But here is where the "hemorrages" begin:

Also offended by all the tastelessness was Los Angeles City Councilman Bernard C. Parks, a fervent Obamaphile, who went on CNN on Monday to call for a boycott of this week's issue of the magazine. What Parks, Burton and myriad critics across the blogosphere agree on is that, yes, people who subscribe to the New Yorker are probably smart enough to understand the concept of satire, but the issue will be seen by clueless people at newsstands nationwide -- and they will come to the dangerous conclusion that, well, some artist hired by the New Yorker thinks Obama is a Muslim, his wife is a terrorist, he uses the American flag for kindling and he'd put a portrait of Osama bin Laden in the Oval Office. It's terrifying to imagine the impact this might have on the campaign.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/deborahhenry/gGxkbQ

 

[Libsmasher]

OK, then, show us how "Obamabots" are having "brain hemorrages" about a silly cartoon.

Google doesn't work for you?

http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/07/obama-new-yorker-cover-insults.html

http://gawker.com/tag/cartoon-viole...s-obama-cover-idea-that-readers-arent-retards

http://www.ta-nehisi.com/2008/07/is-this-cover-offensive.html

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/07/obama-new-yorke.html

 

[Federal Farmer]

I think it's absolutely hysterical that everybody is all up in arms about the COVER of a periodical that hasn't even been released yet.

Are any of you betting people? I'd be willing to wager that the cover art is the lead in of an article that's going to be an attempted hit piece on the "vast right wing" conspiracies portrayal of Obama.

Any takers?

 

[PLC1]

You have called it a silly cartoon so apparently you can see the humor in it. Just as I can see the humor in the many cartoons about P. Bush.

But as we can see from this quote below even after it has been explained to them the O spokesman cannot see the humor in a magazine that is known for being 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.”

But here is where the "hemorrages" begin:

Also offended by all the tastelessness was Los Angeles City Councilman Bernard C. Parks, a fervent Obamaphile, who went on CNN on Monday to call for a boycott of this week's issue of the magazine. What Parks, Burton and myriad critics across the blogosphere agree on is that, yes, people who subscribe to the New Yorker are probably smart enough to understand the concept of satire, but the issue will be seen by clueless people at newsstands nationwide -- and they will come to the dangerous conclusion that, well, some artist hired by the New Yorker thinks Obama is a Muslim, his wife is a terrorist, he uses the American flag for kindling and he'd put a portrait of Osama bin Laden in the Oval Office. It's terrifying to imagine the impact this might have on the campaign.
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/deborahhenry/gGxkbQ

That is one "Obamaphile" who overreacted.

I'm surprised that anyone who has internet hasn't received the emails that cartoon was lampooning.

 

[Libsmasher]

Know what the subtext is here? Any equivalent cartoon of Bush wouldn't raise an eyebrow - think of the thousands of satires, and even defamations from the huffington post types for several years about Bush. The whole deal is you can't satirize Obama because he's black. Think of the PC regime in place if he gets elected.