Townhall.com cartoon shows bin Laden wearing "Obama 2008" button
April 17, 2007 12:10 pm ET
A sidebar on the conservative website Townhall.com features a cartoon of a bearded man with a rifle -- presumably Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden -- wearing a button that reads "Obama 2008." In the image, the man is smiling and giving a thumbs-up. As of April 17, the sidebar appears aside every column on the website and invites visitors to "Click Here" for "More Funnies." The image is linked to Townhall.com's "The Funnies," a collection of political cartoons by "Townhall.com Cartoonists."
Media Matters for America has documented numerous examples of media figures' making reference to Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) name and its similarity to "Osama."
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Anyone who has never had the pleasure of slogging through the TownHall "funnies", I highly recommend it. A little window into propaganda boiled down to it's most simplistic, not to mention hilarious in its complete abscence of humor..
Been there done that.
Sad really. There's no real satire or subtlety going on there. No intelligent commentary on the state of politics in this country. Just a bunch of knee-slappin', mean-spirited jock jokes. They really have nothing to say, they just want to insult somebody. Hmmm, kinda like Limbaugh, Coulter, etc...
On another note, has anyone noticed a rash of new trolls on the boards lately? It seems like a huge tornado blew up some bridges and turned over some rocks and out came the knuckle-draggin' wingnuts. On the one hand, I'm glad MMFA is getting the publicity and the hits (not that it matters since they have no advertising revenue). I maintain the foolish hope that maybe one in ten will actually read some of the articles and learn a little bit about conservative misinformation in the media. On the other hand, they bring absolutely nothing to the discussion and really just want an open forum to shout their nutty agenda. I guess they can't get it at the MRC, so they come here.
And I've noticed they almost never say anything in the discussion threads for substantive articles, such as those about Gonzales or other issues. They only show up in the filler threads about TV personalities like Limbaugh or Imus. Further proof that modern conservatism is less about the issues and more about the talking heads' opinions?
You tell me...
I think it was the Rush piece MM put up yesterday that has driven the trolls in. In fact in that thread are a lot of new Republican (can we find them a new name since they are neither Republican nor conservitive) posters/trolls posting in that thread.
My vote is clear: there may be, in the wild, "Republicans" - a few - endangered, struggling to survive; what grips this nation, for six long years, at least - is "Repugnants".
In fact, the genesis of the "Repungant" movement, and creed, probably traces back to about the same "Repugnant" adminstration that politicized the FCC (and incidentally, but far less harmfully overturned the Fairness Doctrine) to allow concentration of the media into the hands of basically four steadfast Corporate allies.
I call them 30-percenters.
As in, the remaining 30% of the country that still thinks George Bush is doing a good job.
Look for the people with handles like GHJF67432 that post one-liners saying "I think we should silence O'Reilly next." Someobdy out there is playing a game...
No, No Hannity should be next.
How can they do that to the next president of The United States. I bet Hannity will say Hillary did this.
That just reeks of desperation. This is the Bo Dietel-level of political discourse.
Sadly, I thought we would have seen the last of Bo Dietel now that the hater and racist Imus is gone.
Maybe Obama should not only quit smoking, but legally change his name to Floyd R. Turbo. That way, rightwing "commedians" would have no material left, and Fox Nothing Channel would actually have to talk about his ideas and proposals.
And in a variation of Poe's law, TownHalls "funnies" are almost indistinguishable from The Onion's parody right wing editorial cartoons.
I mispelled a word in a post yestirday and was called on it, so i had to fact chick, spell cheke and gramire check my one sentence post, losing to your reference to "The Onion" by less than a minit..
HAHAHAHAHA
FOX talks about issues and policies. Now, that's a funny.
So now cartoons on partisan websites are misinformation? Isn't this a little ridiculous?
I agree Tommy,
It's a friggin cartoon.
If it offends someone, they should look away.
Plenty just as offensive out there [on partisan Liberal sites] depicting Republican/Conservatives.
Now I've got to go check the comics from the Sunday paper to see if I'm offended by any so I can whine here too. ;-)
Remember what this site is for again.
Conservative misinformation. You guys seem to keep forgetting that. It has nothing to do with liberal political cartoons. Don't right wingers also have their "debunking" wesbsites as well?
Also, you guys fail to see the connection that MMFA also put up there, tying this back to how MSM sources have constantly tried to say how Obama, sounds like "Osama", and now we have it all tied together in a "nice" little cartoon.
Mag,
It's a cartoon on a highly partisan political website.......if you start going there and finding "misinformation", you'd be very busy. They don't hide their ideology in any way. Anyone who clicks there and reads knows exactly what they're getting.
yes, and it is a purely racist cartoon, so yes, that IS your/their agenda. One of them anyway, add in hate of women and the Constitution as well.
Where do you get the racist part?
Silly. Racism is in every conservative's thinking on every issue, no matter what.
Sorry. I keep forgetting.
Tell me, is that trope a "talking point" of the right or the left?
ah widdle tummy needs his hand held again. Let's see, a cartoon about a black man who has had lies told about going to a 'madrassa' in his early years being tied to an 'arab' person who is a terrorist and sponser of 'madrassas'...and you are to stupid to see the racism in all that?
Mutt,
Was there a hidden picture in there? I didn't see any maddrasas or Osama in the cartoon. I congratulate you on your ability to see racism in everything. Sharpton would be proud.
As I applaud YOUR ability to NEVER see racism in ANYTHING. Rush would be proud
I see a terrorist rooting for Obama in '08. What do YOU see that makes it a "racist" cartoon? Politics are plain to see in it, but I just don't see the racism. I guess Sharpton would be proud of you, too, solon.
"Was there a hidden picture in there? I didn't see any maddrasas or Osama in the cartoon."
-----
The cartoon was of Osama, so if you didn't see him I must assume you have the reality blinders completely closed today.
No, I don't think so. OBL does not have a pimple on his nose and doesn't have white hair like in the cartoon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden
Anyone who clicks there and reads knows exactly what they're getting.
As do you when you click on this site... but you keep complaining.
You call it complaining. I call it illuminating.
Yeah, because what we really need is YOU up on a pedestal illuminating us with your brilliant one note symphony.
If you are doing so much illuminating, why are you still in the dark all the time?
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
magnolia,
I understand that. But if I've got a cigarette hanging out of my mouth I'm not gonna lecture anybody else on the evils of smoking.
And if I try...I'd expect someone to mention my cigarette ;-)
Guys,
I do see your point on this as well. And, for the record, no big deal, it is just a silly political cartoon. Most, if not all political cartoons are meant to be sort of, what's the word I'm looking for here?? Flamethrowing.
just curious...when was the last time Obama wore an OBL in 2001 button? Gosh, and to think you turned it into a lecture on cigarettes...
Gosh, and to think you turned it into a lecture on cigarettes...
Mutt,
It's called an analogy.
Go read Magnolia's post to me again. Then read mine to Magnolia.
Let it sink in.
Magnolia understood.
But if you're still not getting it...go ask a grownup.
so when will you be answering my first question? It is after all the ONLY way your 'analogy' would fit. yes it seems Obama is a smoker (oh HEAVENS!!!!) but I do not recall him holding forums and lectures on it. Can you fill us all in, and perhaps even get your 'analogy' to fit?
Mutt,
It has nothing to do with Obama being a smoker. Geez.
Magnolia was explaining that THIS is a Liberal website highlighting Conservative information, so Tommy & I pointing out that cartoons on partisan sites depicting Republicans/Conservatives in a similar fashion wasn't going to be taken into consideration by MMFA.
MY ANALOGY was pointing out to Magnolia [who UNDERSTOOD] that if MMFA was going to highlight cartoons that offended Liberals then Tommy, myself and others were going to point out that there are cartoons out there that offend Conservatives.
Now here comes the analogy...
Another words, IF you smoke don't lecture others on it's evils. Cause they will point out you're smoking. Kinda makes you look silly.
Get it?
If you're gonna point to cartoons that offend Liberals, then expect to be told there are cartoons that offend Conservatives.
Get it yet?
Let me simplify it further for ya Mutt.
People who live in glass house shouldn't throw rocks, cause me & Tommy & the other Conservatives will throw them back.
Got it yet?
*eye roll*
J,
Your analogy was clear, apt, spot on and to the point. Those that didn't get it, don't get it.
Thanks Tommy, I guess Mutt missed his Liberal Nuance training classes ;-)
Seems he/she takes things so literally that he can't quite figure out an analogy.
I mention smoking, and he thinks it's because Obama smokes. Lordy it gets frustrating at times to have to explain things over & over to some people.
"Don't right wingers also have their 'debunking' wesbsites as well?"
-----
Well, they do, but to be fair, they don't debunk as much as they continue the lie that other Conservatives started in the first place.
I read the cartoon as saying osama wants obama to win because osama bin laden perceives dems to be weak on terror.
For a couple of guys who come to this site to complain endlessly about the content, that smacks of . . . well, conservative!
Yes, it is misinformation
Obviously it is misinformation. Osama does not look like that picture, (although it reminds me some sort of what you get when you cross John Kerry and Al Gore when he had his beard.) Obvious misinformation there.
And nobody can prove that Osama wears that campaign button. Obvious misinformation there.
Thank goodness MMFA is on the ever vigilant lookout. First Imus, (who somehow morphed into a conservative,) and now political cartoons. Oh wait.. make that only conservative political cartoons! Yes, as it is drumbeat into our heads, this website has as its mission to point out conservative misinformation in political cartoons. It is a defacto rule that anyone or anything MMFA criticizes becomes at that instant, a right wing political operative.
You guys keep pretending that outrageous statements that debase the dialogue are NOT part of a bias and misinformation agenda. Fine that is YOUR opinion and you are welcome to it. MMFA disagrees. The thing is this is THEIR website not yours. YOU dont get to demand the right to pick and choose how they see things. I suggest you get your OWN website which you can then run however you see fit, since you really have no possibility of running this one and as other posters have pointed out dont forget to give us the url to said website so we can drop by and tell YOU how to run it.
Why are people like yourself repeatedly annoyed that this site only posts conservative misinformation when the site itself says it's all about monitoring conservative misinformation? Is it a reading comprehension problem? Fanciful thinking? Stupidity?
i think it points out the verbal exhaustion of some of the conservatives on this site that all they can think of to say a good percentage of the time is "why is this here" and "why is this misinformation". dare we admit that this site is what it claims to be? that it's purpose is to monitor conservative misinformation in all it's forms? and given that we admit the obvious, is it possible that our conservative posters move on from their broken record posts? in other words, find a life beyond the endless repetition of the same old same old?
Tommy
I do not know if it is misinformation but to me it is hate. Hate toward Senator Obama . Hate is all forms needs to stop and this is a good thing that MMFA is pointing out.
Doris,
The whole "hate" word gets thrown out so often these days, I would definitely say it's inflammatory and controversial - but these websites are more than free to print cartoons or articles with such content. People to whom these slurs are directed are more than free to take action, legal if necessary, to combat it. Political cartoons have often pushed the envelope over the years. This is no different.
Would that be any different than a cartoon that had someone with a Mitt Romney button and a Nazi uniform? Wouldnt that be considered hate?
I would consider it irrelevant.
You might consider it irrelevant, but when someone submitted a campaign commercial portraying Bush as Hitler (if I remember correctly) to MoveOn's contest, conservatives like yourself went apesh*t and have ever since blamed MoveOn for the contest submission. Yet time after time, conservatives make the comparisons of Democrats not only to Nazis but to terrorists, al Qaeda, Osama, and so on.
Take a look at Doonesbury sometime.
every day, what's your point? That you hate people telling the truth? we already know that.
See Tommy's and Jeter's previous post.
Doonesbury, Mallard Filmore and a thousand others are opinion, not facts
Sure they have every right. Did I miss the posts where someone said they DIDNT have such a right or do they not exist. WE then have the RIGHT to say what WE think about them. Exactly how often does this point need to be made? Free expression doesnt end with conservatives spewing their propaganda and inflamatory rhetoric, it THEN extends to us complaining about them. Get over it.
Hmm I don't know maybe it's just me, but maybe some people find it disturbing and tasteless that the GOP has to resort to pretending that the man that masterminded the worst terrorist attack in the US (killing hundreds of people) supports one of the leading democratic candidates for president because they have a similar name.
I find it disturbing (yet not surprising) that the first words you typed weren't "this cartoon is disgusting".
You are conflating. It was not posted by the GOP anymore than it was posted by the Osa...oops.. Obama himself.
AA - your correct in the specific to this particular comic.
I think it's pretty clear that the GOP has and is going to continue to try and link Obama to terrorism/terrorits because of his background and middle name.
It's a cheap stunt to scare ignorant voters and adds nothing to political discourse.
So it wasnt the GOP just someone carrying GOP water with the same stale propaganda prop OTHER GOP stalking horses use. Got it.
Worst of all, the cartoonist probably got paid in tax dollars, which this administration has so often seen fit to dispense to "journalists", "scientists", "columnists" (and now "cartoonists"?) to cook up some fiction to pass off as "news" or "analysis" - both in Iraq, and domestically.
Cartoons that dovetail conservative talking points about terrorists supporting the Democrats are, yes, conservative misinformation. Print, picture or verbal, misinformation is misinformation. Otherwise I see the Whitehouse disolving the press breifings and passing out Tony Snow's White House Breifings (the Comic) in our future.
I see "The Onion" has some pretty stiff competition.
To be fair both sides are equally guilty.
No big deal as far as I'm concerned and not too surprising at all.
If the 'funny' cartoon is supposed to depict osama bin laden (whose name always causes hilarious laughter), and if the 'funny' button is supposed to mean that osama bin laden would endorse the candidate whose name appears on the button...
Then I don't get it.
Shouldn't the button read "Bush 2008"?
Wouldn't osama bin laden's favorite presidential candidate (if he could run) be George W. Bush?
I'd think that George W. Bush's failure to stop the worst terror attack in world history, and then his failure to get any JUSTICE for that attack... and his covering up for saudi involvement in the attacks of September 11, 2001...
I'd think those things to make George W. Bush the best friend terrorism ever had.
Without knowing the quantity of your years, I would still say you are wise beyond them.
The invasion of Iraq has been a dream come true for bin Laden.
What better way to give Osama the perfect rallying call to his cause?
What better way to incite negativity toward the U.S. throughout the Muslim world?
What better recruiting tool could he have been given?
Bush's bloodbath in Iraq has been far more effective than any propoganda tape finding its way to Al Jazeera.
All the points you make are true (except for the first one, about wisdom).
I'd add: The 'funny' cartoon baffles me a little, because I just can't fathom what's so funny about it.
Admittedly, maybe my sense of humor fell off a few notches, when the WTC Towers fell... I don't know. But as far as funny goes (and I'd never guess it went so far as osama bin laden and terrorism)... as far as funny goes, I guess whatever makes you laugh, is funny.
What other standard can there be? If the 'funny' cartoon cited here, mikes you smile and giggle, then I guess it must be funny... that, and the other thing, of writing "More Funnies Click Here" above it, proves it's 'funny' (because if somebody tells you something's a joke, then it must be).
As far as getting the 'last laugh', I'd figure it to be the saudis who sponsored and directed the attacks of September 11, 2001, and who own and operate this thing called 'al qeada'... it seems to be them getting the 'last laugh'.
Whatever joyful mirth they felt, with the fall of the WTC Towers, just got more joyous and 'funny' as time went on, I think... first, their "good friend" and business partner, Goerge W. Bush, told the U.S. Armed Forces and the American People "Let's saddle up guys... let's lock 'n load... I've got a scheme to kill tens of thousands of Iraqis (and thousands of U.S. Troops) in response to 9/11... follow me!"
saudis must have found that fall-down 'funny', when they saw that (when they saw that, instead of JUSTICE).
And when they saw that their "good friend" and business partner George W. Bush covered up the entire 28 page Findings and Conclusions of the Joint Congressional Inquiry's Report on the attacks of September 11, 2001, the saudi 'royal family' must have guffawed hilariously at that...
And with Iraq destabilized, and sunni-saudi aims at all that oil now within their greedy murderous reach, well... the belly-laughs are still heard, at how 'funny' that is.
I'll look again at the 'funny' cartoon cited here... maybe I'll get it if I try... maybe my sense of humor about this kind of stuff will return to me, after five and a half years being away.
Nice conspiracy theory. The absence of evidence must be all the evidence you need. :-)
Lest you think I am trolling, consider this. Do you think the Democrats on the Committee would let Bush get away with covering up evidence? Hmmm?
Do you have any proof at all that the Saudi's are behind the attacks? My guess is not.
OBL = Saudi Arabian
Since Bin Laden was indeed the person responsible for the attacks, or at least planning them, and the majority of hijackers were Saudi Arabian as well, don't you think it fair to say that indeed that Saudi Arabians were behind said attacks on 9/11? Also, where does al Qaeda get a lot of its money and funding? Yes, Saudi Arabian citizens.
I suggest you read the book Ghost War at some point in time, it is indeed enlightening about where al Qaeda's money comes from, along with a host of other things about al Qaeda.
Why Magnolia,
That smacks of racism.. or at least Saudism. :-) You are trying to get us to all believe that because of the actions of a few from Saudi Arabia that the whole country is behind this?
Using your logic you could say they were all Muslim too. That must mean all Muslims are behind the attack. Obviously that is false.
Now I grant you that some or maybe even most Al Queda are of Saudi origin. But the original post, if you decide to go back that far, posits the theory that the Saudi's, (meaning the ruling class,) were behind the attacks. I challenge you and or Dem to prove it.
Happy to respond... don't know if it's your professional interest to defend the saudi murderers, or just an ignorant hobby... don't care either.
Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers on september 11, 2001 were not only carrying saudi passports, but also possessed 'express visas'... none of these documents were forgeries: How do you think they got such stuff, by being Iraqis?
Two hijackers living in San Diego, alhazmi and almihdhar, had their apartments arranged and paid for by a man named omar al-bayoumi, who was an employee of the saudi-owned Dallah Avco, in addition to working for something called the 'Saudi Civil Aviation Authority' (this civil aviation authority was not only disbanded after the attacks by the saudi 'royal family', but was also the listed employer of atta and others who took flying lessons at Huffman Aviation in FL... they have a habit of doing that, when they teach you how to fly jumbo jets... they ask who your employer is).
Where do you think these guys got the hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay apartment leases in cash, fly all over the world first-class, and pay cash in excess of ten thousand dollars each to pay for flying lessons?
Who has money like that? These saudis who hijacked those planes, they had no visible source of income, no jobs you know.
I tell you what, if you're sincere about knowing all the details of saudis financing and supporting the attacks of September 11, 2001, then call for the declassification of the Findings of the JCI's Report...
That's if you're sincere about clearing up your ignorance on the matter... but if you're just being paid to defend saudi murderers, then hack away guy (although who knows how you sleep at night, doing that for a living).
By the way, my post above should be addressed to to the poster whose name appears as:
ANOTHERAMERICAN
...but it seems that the poster named:
TOMMY
...also defends the saudi murderers (as a job or as an ignorant hobby, I neither know or care which).
Dem,
Your hysteria is not so becomming. Neither are you analytical skills. Otherwise you'd know that we are not defending Saudi terrorists and their bagmen but only pointing out that you are painting with a very wide brush. It is self evident that there were people inside Saudi Arabia bankrolling Al Queda. Wasn't bin Laden himself, a millionaire? Your rant smacks of extemism and not rational discourse.
(Note to self: add this to my list. I have now been accused of being a defender of the 9/11 terrorists.)
Add this to the notes you write yourself:
Make a comment in these comment threads, denying saudi complicity in the attacks of September 11, 2001, and defending those saudi murderers (calling that complicity a 'conspiracy theory', and claiming there's no evidence to prove that complicity)...
...piss on the graves of that day's victims, by defending saudi murderers (as a working obligation, or out of a sincere ignorance, whichever), and you bet I'll respond.
I'm hysterical for JUSTICE... make a note of it to yourself, ANOTHERAMERICAN
CLAP! CLAP! CLAP! CLAP!
Encore! encore!
havent you heard? there was no attack
"Nice conspiracy theory. The absence of evidence must be all the evidence you need. :-)"
-----
This from the guy who accuses others baselessly of stalking? If you ever showed a scintilla of evidence in any of your posts it would be one of the signs of the Apocalypse.
Ahhhhhh!!! (finger pointing your way) >>>>> RACISM!!, RACISM against the Saudis.
Come on now, you know as well as I do that Saudis are NOT a race of people. They are a nationality.
(sarcasm)........jeez
Sorry Tommy. I didn't mean to steal your thunder. I was writing mine while you were posting yours.
No prob.......
I think that's more the point, Demo.Cartoons aren't misinformation in themselves, because they are just cartoons.
Good editorial cartoons find their humor in a solid basis of truth. This is "funny" as it shows either a cartoonist who has a flimsy grip on reality, or a cartoonist who is well aware that he has an audience that is similarly misinformed.
I wouldn't call Townhalls "funnies" misinformation, so much as an indicator of the power of misinformation.
Maybe that is why it is a comic and therefore funny? It is ubsurd to think that "the terrorists" support Democrats and that ubsurdity makes it funny! Hahaha now I get it! But since that wasn't the tracer's point then I stand by it being conservative misinformation and more pointedly, propaganda.
all valid OPINION
And Glenn Beck will say " Please Sen. Obama prove to me you are not working with our enemy since it has been exposed by Townhall.com that Bin Laden has approved of your campaign".
And Beck would look like an idiot and Obama wouldn't even dignify it with a response.
To you and me, yeah. But Beck's nutty audience would eat it up.
Then they'd come here and threadjack endlessly with their "oh yeah? what about x, y, and z?" comments.
You mean that Beck doen't already and always look like an idiot?
(consternation vs incredulity)
"doesn't"
But Imus would.
The lead article is by Tom DeLay????? OUCH!!
Glad someone else noticed that. Good to know they're looking to such a highly ethical political leader for their lead opinion.
Tom Delay is the same hatemonger who wants Rosie fired. Even though Rosie supported Imus for which she was wrong, she is not a hater like Delay and Imus. Shame on Delay and shame on any MSM organization that gives Delay a forum to preach is hate and division.
Tom Delay is the same hatemonger who wants Rosie fired.
Great minds and all that! His hatred of Rosie was the FIRST THING that popped into my head when I saw his name!
The "lead" switches periodically - as do the side-bars. I had to delve far into the site to find the offending Obama cartoon - probably at least 8 windows, and nearer the bottom of the page. I wonder if you also noticed the article criticizing MMFA? Maybe they noticed that we noticed . . .
Ah, but I am warmed by the memory of the "Funnies"; and all the pleasures of reading the columnists, from days of frequenting those righty sites.
How can anyone get upset about this cartoon? If it is trying to identify Sen. Obama with Bin Laden, only those that equate the Iraq with 9/11 misinformation will understand it. Maybe that is what is wrong with misinformation...it can get people killed.
Lt. Pliskin, MMFA also controls the items which it posts on its OWN Website. MMFA only uses quotes and videos. Do they lie or are the liars lying? I would never expect anyone to ban you. And if MMFA can get IMUS fired imagine what it can do to a lowly LT.
you are right...i used to be a colonel...mmfa stripped me of that:(
they blow things out of proportion, thats for sure. this post is another example of that. not only do we now have thought police ala al sharpton, we have humor police too!
Welcome back, "Snake..."
one thing is apparent from the clipping, delay cant write a column to save his life. he stinks.
A "joke" from townhall.com, which regularly accuses the left of being hateful. That's the only thing funny about it.
Actually, this depiction of Osama serves as a reminder of the post-9/11 objective our country SHOULD have had, but didn't. Because our current leader "doesn't really think that much about him".
With all due respect, I can't belive that anybody is truly outraged by this cartoon. It's a freaking cartoon! On a right-wing website! OMG the horrors.
Bruce, who do you think is "outraged"?
Good point HBL, outraged wasn't the right word. I found a few of these you might find funnier since they are leftist. Knee slappers I tell ya! Especially the bottom two.
http://www.liberalcartoons.com/z059.html
Those weren't funny either.
But I also didn't see those cartoons tying Bush onto Osama Bin Laden, or any other terrorist for that matter, and the first few actually had truth in them. Millions of jobs lost under Bush (during 2004 capaign), thousands of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, OBL STILL on the loose today...
Actually, I think the cartoonist blew it by not crossing out the "B" in Obama and writing an "S" above it on the button in Bin Laden's handwriting. That would have made more sense as a cartoon.
It would have been funnier... by which I mean, funny at all.
I still don't get what the joke is supposed to be - I mean, I understand if you think UBL would prefer Democrats to Republicans, but where's the humour in that?
Val, I think both you and I are smarter than the average Joe walking down the street and neither one of us gets the point of the cartoon. So therefore it's not a good cartoon. How's that for unassailable logic? :-)
I agree with you, therefore we are correct. QED.
;-)
No, they werent funny.
Look at what dastardly Media Matters did!
They *gasp* reprinted a Townhall.com cartoon!
Why that's the same as censorship!
Did you notice any demand by MM that the cartoon be taken down? Did you notice any attack made on the cartoon or the cartoonist?
You dishonest bizarro debaters seem to equate disapproval with censorship. You should be free to make any statements you want, without argument or opposition. That's not what freedom of speech is about--and you know it. You make a statement--we're free to tear it apart.
We don't want this cartoon censored: we want everyone to see it. We want this stuff to be brought to the attention of all those people who don't believe that the Right would be that nasty. We want this stuff to be shouted from the rooftops. And we won't bother with attacking it.
Because no attack is necessary.
Censorship? MM wanted everybody to hear Imus's words--as did I. And Media Matters didn't call for Imus's firing. They didn't have to.
But to you guys, publicity is the same as censorship. Direct quotation is silencing. Reprinting is suppression.
Ain't nobody that stupid, so I'll stick with dishonest.
Obama.... sounds like Osama....waaaait a minute.Where IS Osama?
Working for Obama... didn't you see the pin?
Well, I guess that's all the proof right wingers need--a cartoon. It is about as much proof as they had linking Iraq to 9/11.
More, actually.
No. Really. Where IS Obama?
Is he still wanted "Did or alaaahve"?
Are we still gonna "schmoke 'im outta his caaaayve"?
It should have just said "Vote Democrat - 2008!"
or "Hey bedwetting Republicans ! Believe anything we tell you, no matter how removed from reality", but the button would have to be bigger.
Then again, an idea that doesn't fit on a button might not make it through the ol' conservative skulls.
It would have made more sense if the button said repeal the 22nd amendment
If people do vote Democrat in '08, we'll actually have an effort to get the guy who masterminded 9/11.
Who are these Townhall people? Osama's spokespeople?
when did opinions become provable facts?
If the cartoon had shown Bush in a Nazi uniform being hugged by Hitler THAT would have been opinion too. OR Bush standing on a mountain of corpses with blood dripping from fangs in his mouth. AND it would have been offensive also not very funny. It would also have the rightwing screaming bloody murder.
It is obvious that some right wing "comedians" just can't spell correctly, by their continued mistaken use of Osama for Obama.
Thanks, Ed. Sometimes the answer is too obvious.And the joke doesn't lose any of it's humor or logic with that explanation, remaining at zero.
Whoa...I feel like I stepped into 1984. Winston is that you...you're not committing thought crime again are you?
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
-Ministry of Truth