New Yorker:Obama cover and the aftermath (1)
Yesterday Adam posted on the controversial New Yorker magazine cover of Barack Obama, more importantly he posted on the Ryan Lizza article on Obama’s political history.
As foreshadowed yesterday the cover has become the issue to many.
The You Tube clip below from MSNBC has a New Yorker journalist talking about the cover and about a second article also
This second article is about Obama’s flip flops.
Here is a link to the MSNBC item.
As expected the predictable feeding frenzy from both sides of the spectrum has emerged.
What was also predictable, disappointingly, was the wide-spread disapproval of anyone attempting to probe the Obama legend.
I have no axe to grind regarding Obama, but increasingly I dislike the man, because his supporters make him so difficult to support, with their one eyed view.
I will post on other aspects later, but watch the video.
“The most depressing aspect is how many on the left are using this as an example of Republican Party dirty tactics, …”
Eh? Haven’t heard of anyone using the cover as an example of Republican Party dirty tactics. It depicts various examples of Republican Party dirty tactics, but that’s not the same thing. What having you been snacking on, Ed?
The most depressing aspect is how many on the left are using this as an example of Republican Party dirty tactics, whereas of course the New Yorker is about as republican as Nader. To make the Obama campaign complaints even more ridiculous one only has to look at the vituperative venom that anyone on the right has to bear (and isn’t allowed to complain about) for years, the jokes about McCain’s teeth (damaged as part of the torture he underwent as a POW, POW by the left’s heros, the Vietnamese too), the Kill Bush cartoons, T-Shirts etc, the “Uncle Tom” caricatures of Rice and Powell, the trashing of Bush’s wife, etc, etc, and etc.
All not just condoned by the left but actively cheered on, yet one lightweight “ironic” cartoon portraying the left, and it’s completely unacceptable and racist. Too far fetched even for a Tui ad you would think. Perhaps the NZ vernacular would be appropriate here, “Diddums”.
Adam, Predictable because it was justified.
Of course he’s ruthless about getting where he wants to go. Even in NZ you have to be really hard-nosed — outside the Green Party — if you want to succeed in politics. Most people would be very surprised at just how hard-nosed.
And why hold his supporters’ zeal against the man himself?
PS I didn’t see you had posted on this earlier, or would have linked to your post.