The week in review: momentous change read more
Election blog: Spin and reality read more
Blog: Where to for Pakistan? read more
Super Bowl blog: Patriots v Giants read more
Road to Beijing: Is that an elephant or a Tibetan antelope in the room? read more
Who do you think will make the best President of the United States?
"Who cares,the U.S. is about to callapse in a pile on the floor and no candidate has the will to d..."
Who do you think will make the best President of the United States?
"If John McCain did drop dead as someone said,I'd be happy by far to have Sarah Palin as President..."
Who do you think will make the best President of the United States?
"The question is who do you think will make the best president of the United states? And the answe..."
This is some sponsored link copy. This is editable in the CMS. This is some sponsored link copy. This is editable Read more.
ANGER OVER 'TERRORIST' CARTOON
Tuesday, 15 July, 2008IN-DEPTH: US election
RELATED CONTENT
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Is this cartoon offensive? US presidential hopeful Barack Obama is angry over a cartoon on the New Yorker portraying him and his wife as 'terrorists'. The magazine's editor says it's a satire on the way Obama is portrayed by his rivals. Is this cartoon offensive , or is he being too sensitive?
COMMENTS
First [1][2] LastI think its pretty funny.
If Obama cant take it on the chin than there is no hope for the U.S. Not that there was to start with.
Ok, ask yourself this, if a cartoon came out that potrayed say president hopeful McCain as an inbred would you as a white take offence or would you translate it as satire that McCaine's rivals may think that way????? I would say the more "probable" translation would be the first which is really offensive. But I reckon that this "war on oil holders" thinggie has made some really dirty tricks permissible as long as they are committed on the "other parties".
I think it is offensive, particularly in context of the American election.
What I find absurd is that the artist is remorseless and tried to have them overturn the decision to pull the cover. It's incredibly offensive and I can't believe it went to print, to be honest. Has anybody here actually read the article? I have, and it's written very tongue in cheek and almost as offensive as the cover itself, however it doesn't cross the line because it's clearly marked as being a piece of satire, but even then, there's only so far a magazine should go. This is too far. I'm not suggesting we go to Denmark and start torching copies of the New Yorker or calling Jihad on them, but they need to be brought in line over this. I'm typically rather centrally based, but in matters of US politics, a little more right than left, but can't believe a right ended magazine would choose to do something like this. it's classless and tasteless.
It is offensive to Barack because there is no basis for it, it is offensive to target politician\'s partners and it is offensive to muslims because it implies negative things about them - so yes it is VERY OFFENSIVE. People can email complaints to the New Yorker editor at their website - i have.
How would you feel if a major publication put on its cover a picture of you and your wife depicted as an entity you are known to despise? How about if we dressed you and your wife up to look like a couple pedophiles and published it nation-wide? Art is about meaning and symbolism and the point of this image is to portray Obama and his wife as terrorists, albeit satirically. They are fully justified in being offended.
Republicans anyway to slow Obama down.
Compared with what Condi Rice, Colin Powell and George Bush have had dished up to them by the world's cartoonists I'd say suck it up precious one. and stop your whining. No free rides here.
This cartoon is incredibly provocative at first glance. Taken in context however (on the cover of a left-leaning magazine; the cartoonist quoted as \"I think the idea that the Obamas are branded as unpatriotic (let alone as terrorists) in certain sectors is preposterous\") the satirical image is powerful in illustrating the absurdity of recent accusations brought against Obama by his opponents. It is an excellent example of the capacity of imagery to inflame emotions. Unfortunately - as is the case with many illustrations - I do not expect this will be viewed \'in context\' by the majority.