The Power of Images

The comment above by "stef"' shows the malignant effect the cartoon has by unintentionally confirming the worst falsehoods about the Obamas in the minds of those prey to doubt, suspicion and thinking the worst of others.

It is true that now Obama claims to be a Christian. But is is also true that one-half of his family, which is all of his natural father's family, is Moslem and lives in Africa today. Literally half of Obama's family is African and Moslem. These are not relatives from a 300 year old slave ancester. These are his brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. His step-father is a Moslem and lives in Indonesia. While a child, Obama lived in Indonesia and attended a Wahabe Moslem school. His religion was stated as Moslem. These are not connections that can be cast aside with an, "Oh, that was then, this is now" attitude. When you place this in combination with his wife's comments about being proud of America for the first time when her husband (Obama) was running for president, his very close 20 year relationship with a black Christian preacher who clearly hates the USA and his association with an unrepentant Weatherman who publically stated the day before 9/11 stated he was sorry he hadn't set off more bombs, you have a picture of a man we all should be shocked hold the public post of dog catcher, much less United States Senator. The idea he is being seriously considered for the office of President is positively revolting.

You can tell how irreverent, bacward-minded and , yes, still bigoted most ''progressive'' Americans really are. What true believer is ever thought to "worship" a pastor (whether contoversial or not, FAITH is controversial in and of itself), believers worship the Lord. As for Michelle Obama being ''proud'' of her country? How many of the readers can claim pride in President Bush, period? He's an embarrassment all by himself. Let alone living here in the U.S. knowing Bush ''picked'' a war with folks who had no WMD's and why no talk of Osama Bin Laden,...the TRUEST most heinous MUSLIM, to date! You guys bore me trying to tear-up Obama over the most TRITE things. Guess the adage is true,..."Small minds, small thinking"!

It just goes to show haw the Obama Campaign expects to be exempt from public scrutiny and controversey. Think of the sexist and derrogatory things being said about Clinton. They took a free ride on that. And the Bush Administration is continually subject to this stuff (now that I laugh at). if Obama wants to be in the White House he better stand up to scrutiny and discussion. Let's talk about this and all his other trash without his accusations about smears and lies. Do not be silenced. Who is obama?

Mr. Alter, you "forgot" to mention a couple of things:

It is true that Obama's religion was stated to be Muslim when he was a student in Indonesia. It's also true that he later became a Christian, following the racist, anti-American theology of the Trinity United Church of Christ. I don't know which is worse.

Michelle Obama's comments about being proud of her country for the first time in her life were not taken out of context. She said it in a political setting more than once, and the magic word "really" wasn't always used.

And you wonder why no one respects or believes the MSM....

This controversy will be a good test of Obama's ability to persuade, lead and inspire the elctorate as a whole. so far, nothing.

This controversy will be a good test of Obama's ability to persuade, lead and inspire the electorate as a whole. So far, nothing.

Freddie Mac &Fannie Mae hold Debt US 5 trillion,The US government moved to shore up the beleaguered the companies by injecting 2.25 bilion ONLY through investment and loan. What a Joke.!!!!!!!...MC Bush & MCSame tells America Economic is SOUND.and SAFE.keeping all BORROWING from other country are kept secrets under Carpet UNTIL THE WORLD LOST RESPECT TO PARIAH USA anymore,DONT Worry Our Bank verge of Bankrupt so dont bother TAKE your money OUT....We guarantee..US100,000 but cost you 0.50Ct every dollar...Americans now face ONLY Mental Recession just like (John MCSame having Vietnam Mental treatments) and the AMERICANS are just whinners Bunch......GREAT REPUBLICAN POLITIC ANALYSIST.

The reason there is such a swarm of rumors is that there is no substance to back this guy up.
He has no experience and no track record. True on day one, no less the fatal deciding factor now.

If you have no accomplishment and nothing to show but a lifetime accretion of entitlement, what do you expect from those who are pragmatic enough to be skeptics.

No experience equals no tangible accomplishments equals no reason to vote for Obama.

He comes along with a lot of politically correct vague ideology and then when confronted with actualities he keeps breaking his campaign promises before he is even nominated. When he isn't going around talking up campaign millions to a country where suddenly no one has enough money for both groceries and gas.


Everything else, his messy background, his dour priggishness, his visible discomfort around the working class, his humorless demeanor, his charmless wife, is just peculiar.

His judgement is bad and his behavior is too Bubble Boy reminiscent of George Bush
. How you expect a nation that would rather have had a second helping of Bush rather than Dean or Kerry because they were deemed unacceptable to relate to someone who marvels at the price of arugula is really beyond comprehension.

What we are going to see is how the rest of America rejects a candidate that is iconic of entitlement , division and the cluelessness of new money. It's all Kerry redux.
In this economy we have no reason to favor Obama over a traditional candidate like McCain.. They 'll consider that McCain has paid his dues and that will be that.
Obama is why hubris and Icarus are so compellingly timeless.

And Michelle Obama is too easily seen as a Lady Macbama. Or the Nancy Reagan of the Reagan Years.
It was pointed out to me by several men that Michelle speaks to male fears of watching a wuss being run by his wife. That might have been tolerated -just barely in an older man- but not at Obama's age level.

There are just too many reasons not to feel good about Obama. he doesn't inspire confidence in the presidency or the comfort of familiar traditionalism in a time that is crying out to the need of both.

And he brought this on himslef. Had he become Clintons vice president , the nation could have come to know what the could do and give him the time to start proving himself

There is no reason to have to believe in a man who reflects little reason for bothering to do so.

I am writing in Hilary Clinton and preparing to ignore another ineffectual GOP president for the next four years.

It is a sorry reflection on the Democratic Party that in a land of 300 million this hologram was what they came up with.

You can foist Obama onto the ticket but you can't make America vote for him.

I think this discomfort is why there is such unease about joking about him.
He's just too universally weird to place.

And we have had our fill of weird, ineffectual and entitled.
No one is going to go for third helpings of it.

-gala1

Comment: It's comically disingenious for the New Yorker to feign surprise and claim they were only being satiirical. Of course they were being satirical! Anyone should knows that --- and everyone should know that's entirely beside the point, even though an even more convincing satire would've placed the satirical images in the mind or eye of a protagonist, preferably of an equally satirical rendering. Either way, the real damage here is in the license this move grants and the precedent it sets; now, nothing's going to be off limits -- and I thought i'd have to wait until, oh, October or so until the so-called responsible and accountable political media stooped to this level. I still can't believe how stupid and reckless the editors of the New yorker were in green-lighting the illustration. Their actions are despicable.

Hi frontsightfocus -- you seem liike a very devout Christian. I've been all over the place asking this question and no one seems to be able to answer it. Maybe you can.

On what Christian path was McCain taking when he abandoned his disabled wife for a much younger, richer beer heiress only to abandon her after her stroke - leaving her to learn to walk on her own?

No one anywhere has been able to answer that question - but you probably can.

Lame defense Alter. Why no citations? You make it out like what you spew is common knowledge, but it just isn't so. Who says his father was an atheist? B.O.? If his family has such deep Christian roots, then why did his mother marry two Muslims? If he is such a devout Christian, than how could he have exposed his two daughters to vile ranting of the "Reverend" Wright for twenty years. Who says this is "old news"? Barack's flacks, that's who. The same gang of lying idiots who vouched for Slick Willy the last time we had this conversation.

Lame defense Alter. Why no citations? You make it out like what you spew is common knowledge, but it just isn't so. Who says his father was an atheist? B.O.? If his family has such deep Christian roots, then why did his mother marry two Muslims? If he is such a devout Christian, than how could he have exposed his two daughters to vile ranting of the "Reverend" Wright for twenty years. Who says this is "old news"? Barack's flacks, that's who. The same gang of lying idiots who vouched for Slick Willy the last time we had this conversation.

It's comically disingenious for the NewYorker to feign surprise and claim they were only being satiirical. Of course they were being cynical! Everyone knows that --- and anyone should know that is entirely beside the point, even though an even more convincing claim of satire would've registered had the drawing put the satirical images in the mind of a protagonist's eye or mind. Either way, the real damage here is in the license this move grants and the precedent it sets; now, nothing's going to be off limits -- and I thought i'd have to wait until, oh, October or so until the so-called responsible and accountable political media stooped to this level. along these lines, i still can't believe how ridiculously stupid and reckless the editors of the New yorker were in green-lighting the illustration. Their decision is truly despicable.

It's comically disingenious for the NewYorker to feign surprise and claim they were only being satiirical. Of course they were being cynical! Everyone knows that --- and anyone should know that is entirely beside the point, even though an even more convincing claim of satire would've registered had the drawing put the satirical images in the mind of a protagonist's eye or mind. Either way, the real damage here is in the license this move grants and the precedent it sets; now, nothing's going to be off limits -- and I thought i'd have to wait until, oh, October or so until the so-called responsible and accountable political media stooped to this level. along these lines, i still can't believe how ridiculously stupid and reckless the editors of the New yorker were in green-lighting the illustration. Their decision is truly despicable.

IIt's comically disingenious for the NewYorker to feign surprise and claim they were only being satiirical. Of course they were being cynical! Everyone knows that --- and anyone should know that is entirely beside the point, even though an even more convincing claim of satire would've registered had the drawing put the satirical images in the mind of a protagonist's eye or mind. Either way, the real damage here is in the license this move grants and the precedent it sets; now, nothing's going to be off limits -- and I thought i'd have to wait until, oh, October or so until the so-called responsible and accountable political media stooped to this level. along these lines, i still can't believe how ridiculously stupid and reckless the editors of the New yorker were in green-lighting the illustration. Their decision is truly despicable.

This New Yorker cover shows just how deep racism runs in America. Somehow because you are liberal you are allowed to publish racist images on the cover of one of the most prominent magazines in the country and call it satire. It hearkens back to the days of apartheid South Africa when Liberal became a label of slander in many circles.

And why do so many dismiss the mainstream media? Just read your own drivel: "Apparently, the New Yorker is losing some subscriptions over this flap. That's silly. It's hardly a crime to let a clever idea for a magazine cover (rare) trump political sensitivities (common). Getting too huffy about cartoons is something we should leave to extremists. But let's not pretend the cover doesn't play into a lot of garbage that otherwise smart and reasonable people actually believe, and in places far beyond Dubuque."
So you think an insulting racist image is clever because it is a cartoon. Yet you bombastically write that smart people believe the negative images to depict the truth. Why would you expect to have any credibility at all with that kind of insidious analysis?

The right wing is not going to be the biggest obstacle for Obama. It will be the liberal racists who feel no need to reflect on their choices to fan the flames of racial controversy to make a buck and a name for themselves (and express some deep seeded feelings) while bringing a man down, then finding others to blame it on.

This New Yorker cover shows just how deep racism runs in America. Somehow because you are liberal you are allowed to publish racist images on the cover of one of the most prominent magazines in the country and call it satire. It hearkens back to the days of apartheid South Africa when Liberal became a label of slander in many circles.

And why do so many dismiss the mainstream media? Just read your own drivel: "Apparently, the New Yorker is losing some subscriptions over this flap. That's silly. It's hardly a crime to let a clever idea for a magazine cover (rare) trump political sensitivities (common). Getting too huffy about cartoons is something we should leave to extremists. But let's not pretend the cover doesn't play into a lot of garbage that otherwise smart and reasonable people actually believe, and in places far beyond Dubuque."
So you think an insulting racist image is clever because it is a cartoon. Yet you bombastically write that smart people believe the negative images to depict the truth. Why would you expect to have any credibility at all with that kind of insidious analysis?

The right wing is not going to be the biggest obstacle for Obama. It will be the liberal racists who feel no need to reflect on their choices to fan the flames of racial controversy to make a buck and a name for themselves (and express some deep seeded feelings) while bringing a man down, then finding others to blame it on.