What I don't understand is - why is Obama so upset with joking about this subject matter when it was Obama himself in June who said the following to a laughing crowd:
"They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?
He’s got a feisty wife."
Why was it funny from him but not so funny from The New Yorker?
I believe that upon seeing the cover, Obama said, "I don't have a comment for that." Later his campain--and McCain's I might add--issued a singular paragraph that basically said that the cover was inappropriate...where's the whining? If anything it is the MSM that tends to perpetuate inane issues, beating them past death.
The New Yorker cover is funny and on the mark - and liberals' sanctimonious fury regarding it shows the cartoonist has well locked on the target. All the cartoon's elements are drawn from Glibama's authentic yet radical past which, this kind community activist! hoped will never be hold accountable for (yes, the burning flag - what about the 2002 photo with Ayres stepping on the US flag?) But the scandal (maybe by design) skips the real issue, which is the the New Yorker written piece on Glibama - that’s a GREAT JOB! It shows what so many people still, simply do not want to recognize - what a calculated (and oftentimes brutal) operator mastro Glibama has ever been, from his early Chicago years to the present “hope we can believe in” New-Age scammer. THAT is the real source of liberals’ fury - situation resembling the Jackson bruhaha, where it wasn’t Jackson remark’s terms that caused the liberal hysteria - it was the remark’s underlying significance that many blacks don’t see Glibama as a real black person, and like that situation, there are many, and potentially very dangerous rifts within the grand "salade-de-beuf" that the Democrat Party is (since here, has the liberal media decided that the Hillary affair is closed? Methinks it ain't closed.)
"Does it frost Jackson, Jesse Jackson, that... an Oreo should be the beneficiary of the long civil rights struggle which Jesse Jackson spent his lifetime fighting for?" McLaughlin said, and the Dems again were hit by convulsions. McLaughlin's remark confirmed what I stated before - it is not the notion in itself that infuriates Dems & libs, IT IS THE FACT that the emperor mustn't be described as naked, i.e.: a) that many blacks don't find Glibama black (enough) b) that there are big rifts, racial and otherwise, within the Democrat Party conglomerate which can crack wider at the elections time. And that spooks the daylight out of the "change we can believe in" crowd - and for good reason.
The Dems' panicky responses in these situations, the slowing pace of their money scheme, the shyness of the potential Dem VP-s and the latest poll which finds Glibama sorely lacking as a commander-in-chief when compared with McCain shows that the public, lately, has become more and more reluctant to buy Glibama products.
Posts
4 comments:
Great retort!
What I don't understand is - why is Obama so upset with joking about this subject matter when it was Obama himself in June who said the following to a laughing crowd:
"They’re going to try to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?
He’s got a feisty wife."
Why was it funny from him but not so funny from The New Yorker?
Hey, heyjude, could it be that--and I now this is shocking--he didn't mean what he said in June?
Or that he meant it only because he was lecturing--sorry, speaking to--a friendly crowd?
Whatever, this guy and his affiliated navel-gazers and spinmeisters and gaffe-explainers have no sense of humor.
To heyjude et all,
I believe that upon seeing the cover, Obama said, "I don't have a comment for that." Later his campain--and McCain's I might add--issued a singular paragraph that basically said that the cover was inappropriate...where's the whining? If anything it is the MSM that tends to perpetuate inane issues, beating them past death.
Hussein & Ulrike Meinhoff, Che & Michelle...
The New Yorker cover is funny and on the mark - and liberals' sanctimonious fury regarding it shows the cartoonist has well locked on the target. All the cartoon's elements are drawn from Glibama's authentic yet radical past which, this kind community activist! hoped will never be hold accountable for (yes, the burning flag - what about the 2002 photo with Ayres stepping on the US flag?)
But the scandal (maybe by design) skips the real issue, which is the the New Yorker written piece on Glibama - that’s a GREAT JOB! It shows what so many people still, simply do not want to recognize - what a calculated (and oftentimes brutal) operator mastro Glibama has ever been, from his early Chicago years to the present “hope we can believe in” New-Age scammer.
THAT is the real source of liberals’ fury - situation resembling the Jackson bruhaha, where it wasn’t Jackson remark’s terms that caused the liberal hysteria - it was the remark’s underlying significance that many blacks don’t see Glibama as a real black person, and like that situation, there are many, and potentially very dangerous rifts within the grand "salade-de-beuf" that the Democrat Party is (since here, has the liberal media decided that the Hillary affair is closed? Methinks it ain't closed.)
"Does it frost Jackson, Jesse Jackson, that... an Oreo should be the beneficiary of the long civil rights struggle which Jesse Jackson spent his lifetime fighting for?" McLaughlin said, and the Dems again were hit by convulsions. McLaughlin's remark confirmed what I stated before - it is not the notion in itself that infuriates Dems & libs, IT IS THE FACT that the emperor mustn't be described as naked, i.e.:
a) that many blacks don't find Glibama black (enough)
b) that there are big rifts, racial and otherwise, within the Democrat Party conglomerate which can crack wider at the elections time.
And that spooks the daylight out of the "change we can believe in" crowd - and for good reason.
The Dems' panicky responses in these situations, the slowing pace of their money scheme, the shyness of the potential Dem VP-s and the latest poll which finds Glibama sorely lacking as a commander-in-chief when compared with McCain shows that the public, lately, has become more and more reluctant to buy Glibama products.
Post a Comment