Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Hypocritical DUmmies Love New Yorker Cover Of Cheney


It seems like the DUmmies are completely unaware of their astounding level of hypocrisy. As we saw YESTERDAY, KOmmie (also DUmmie) heads were exploding in outrage over the New Yorker cover featuring Barack Obama and his wife. Fast forward just a few hours later and the DUmmies are expressing admiration for a New Yorker cover that made Vice President Dick Cheney look like an evil pumpkin as you can see in this THREAD titled, "Do you remember this New Yorker cover from 2007? I still have it!" No sense of irony in DUmmieland over their hypocritical reactions to these New Yorker covers. If an EVIL Republican is mocked on the cover of the New Yorker it is fine and dandy but if they use a Democrat for satire it is a crime against humanity. If memory serves correctly, I remember ZERO outrage from conservatives over the Cheney cover. In fact, most who saw it were probably amused. This is why I have frequently used a favorite DUmmie fantasy, Karl Rove being frogwalked across the White House lawn, as a graphic in DUFU editions. So let us now watch the DUmmies swim in their own hypocrisy in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, who would love to see Li'l Beaver satirized on the cover of the New Yorker, is in the [brackets]:


Do you remember this New Yorker cover from 2007? I still have it!

[Do you remember all the conservatives heads exploding over that New Yorker cover from 2007. I don't.]

Oh, now THAT was a good one. HeeHee; thanks for the laugh.

[Posted a DUmmie who was probably outraged over the New Yorker Obama cover.]

They should have posters made out of that! LOL!

[Can I order a poster of the New Yorker Obama cover?]

The artist that did the Obama cover is questionable I posted his past work below.

[So the quality of his artwork is determined by his subject matter?]

I posted a number of covers criticizing the Bush administration last night. I have to admit, the difference is that the covers lampooning Bush were lampooning actual flaws in character or policy. The Obama cover is lampooning false perceptions of Obama. There should be an interesting cover in response to all this in a few weeks.

[So which such flaws were demonstrated in the Evil Cheney pumpkin New Yorker cover my hypocritical little DUmmie?]

That's very different- a pumpkin doesn't have anything to do with Cheney's race

[Rationalized a DUmmie not very convincingly.]

They weren't mocking Obama, they were mocking the lies spread about Obama. The problem is that they were too subtle about it.

[Humor must be unsubtle in order to be appreciated by the DUmmies.]

The New Yorker cover does work. It's only the Perpetually Outraged who are SO afraid of those darned ignorant hordes (tm) that they think it didn't. There's plenty of ignorance to go around on all areas of the political spectrum, but the New Yorker cover is some great satire.

[LOUSY FREEPER TROLL!!!]

Is the pirpose of this cover to defend Cheney from
absurd characterizations from his enemies? To show he is being treated unfairly using "satire"? Or do they have check boxes on the inside covers where they mark: This Caricature Is: Satire ___, -or- We really mean it this time ___.

[Let us overanalyze the Cheney cover. Myself I ENJOY leftwing artwork portraying EVIL conservatives because it gives me humorous insight into their mindset.]

Excellent point! Well done! Yes, this pic is obviously ripping on people who think Cheney is evil. I don't know how people can be so unintelligent as to not see it!

[DUmmie microanalysis at work.]

At least he didn't rip off Ziggy.

[Or Zippy...the Pinhead. My FAVORITE newspaper comic strip. Perhaps the only newspaper comic strip left that I truly enjoy. I love reading it while munching on corn nuts and polysorbate 80. Check out the last Sunday's ZIPPY THE PINHEAD.]

I understand that a lot of people won't get the Obama cover, but I believe in my heart of hearts several things: The New Yorker in no way intended to harm Obama with either their cover or their article.

[Of course not since the New Yorker is liberal when it comes to politics. However, their other articles are really terrific.]

Was he running for office at the time?

[So is that your criteria? It's okay if he is not running but an outrage if he is running for office?]

17 Comments:

Anonymous Corona said...

Ah, that Zippy. So subtle. Libs can learn a little phrenology by feeling the shape of their receded pointy heads.

PJ, you have too much fun. Thanks! :)

10:02 AM  
Anonymous DumbAss Tanker said...

"I have to admit, the difference is that the covers lampooning Bush were lampooning actual flaws in character or policy. The Obama cover is lampooning false perceptions of Obama."

Not really, it's just that the ones on Bush and Cheney happen to agree perfectly with the false perceptions held dear by the artists, editors, and readership of New Yupper.

10:13 AM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

"They were't mocking Obama, they were mocking the lies spread about Obama. The problem is that they were too subtle about it."

About as subtle as a 2X4 upside the head. But it seems even a 2X4 can't alert lefty dolts. I'd wager more than half of them needed a alert label on the cartoon stating "Satire Here" to get a hint.

I just hope they don't read "The Onion".

2:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Zippy/troggy/DUmmies, what's the difference?
They all wear clown suits.

Skul

4:44 PM  
Anonymous Skully said...

Hey that pumpkin looks just like Cheney. So the satire in this cover is that they think that we think that they think Cheney is a Jack o' Lantern??

It's actually a pretty cool picture. I saw a corn flake that looked like Cheney once.

7:57 PM  
Blogger Dave said...

Skully, doooooood!! You coulda sold that corn flake on Ebay for really big bucks. Teh Dummies would have paid a lot to buy it just so they could crush it (which is about the extent of the strength of most of those pipe-stemmed trolls living in Mom's basement).

11:13 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"No sense of irony in DUmmieland over their hypocritical reactions to these New Yorker covers. If an EVIL Republican is mocked on the cover of the New Yorker it is fine and dandy but if they use a Democrat for satire it is a crime against humanity." PJ

As you have said PJ, again and again, the 'New Yorker' is liberal. They tried, and failed, at being ironic (unlike you champions of the art at being ironic). At least The New Yorker tried. I hope they try again. And again. They'll learn to polish the message which was this: Crazy people view Obama as a Muslim flag burning terrorist. Crazy people view Mrs. Obama as a gun-totting Black Panther. That was the message of this drawing/cover. It's accurate. You're all frigging nuts.

If you think the Obama people didn't know this was coming, you're doubly insane. They knew. Highlighting the wingnut's psychosis is smart politics because you jackasses are, in fact, insane. Let's remember, dumbasses, you morons have fucked up everything.

The Dems did this. Risky. On the other hand, pretty much everybody knows the country's being run by a bunch of baboons. That'd be you.

12:29 AM  
Anonymous Kirk Johnson said...

Um, last time I checked the Powers That Be in WDC were all democrats, along with a milquetoast liberal lame duck at the other end of the street.

1:30 AM  
Anonymous Skully said...

T-man we get the satire. We know it was an attempt to make the right look bad, by portraying Obama on the cover as the Moonbats think we see him. This is why this attempt at satire fails. It's not based on reality, its based on the Moonbats’ perception of reality.

Of course the elitist lefties are all upset cuz they think the average American is too dumb to get it. Most people of my political persuasion don't view Obama this way...We just think he's a Marxist Lib who will raise taxes and screw the millitary. The few people I've had to correct because they think Obambi is a Mooslim and all this crap, were not politically astue folk who mostly voted for Gore or Kerry, and would've voted for Hillary. Even after telling them he's not Mooslim, they still say they'll vote for McCain.

7:58 AM  
Anonymous Ray said...

"On the other hand, pretty much everybody knows the country's being run by a bunch of baboons. That'd be you."

Better this country be run by baboons than a bunch of babies. That would be YOU!

10:59 AM  
Anonymous Shambhala said...

Um, last time I checked the Powers That Be in WDC were all democrats,

Trog's description thus stands: baboons.

2:12 PM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

t-man,

As usual you're missing the point. Of course the New Yorker is liberal bum wad and, of course, cartoon was satire of right wing loons and, of course, the Obama people knew it was coming.

But the thump headed lefties at Kos and the DU missed the satirical point entirely. Their first reaction was rage, followed by hysteria, followed by howls to put the NYer out of business. The purpose of the cartoon had to be carefully explained to these Stalinist idiots before they were mollified.

The Dummies and Kosites are so dumb they'd have to think twice to pass a stupidity test. Which is why they're supporting a candidate who shares their cluelessness.

4:36 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"T-man we get the satire. We know it was an attempt to make the right look bad, by portraying Obama on the cover as the Moonbats think we see him. This is why this attempt at satire fails. It's not based on reality, its based on the Moonbats’ perception of reality." skully

Thanks skully (terrorist knuckle bump or whatever it's called, my brother). Are you sure you want to delve into "the Moonbats perception of reality"? Because the moonbats have been proven to be right about just about everything.

Pollution: bad.
War: bad.
Deregulation: bad.
Haliburton: bad.
Enron: bad.
torture: bad (because they're war crimes)
Republican sexual deviants: bad
Duke Cunningham: bad
Tom Delay: stupid bad
Vitter: Diapers? (OK. You have to admit this is frigging weird. Why would someone be wearing diapers during sex? Do they piss and shit themselves while copulating or have a gastric bypass problem or what?)

The Whole Republican Neocon Jerkoff Nation: Haven't been right yet.

Talk about dumbing it down (thanks elrond): "Of course the New Yorker is liberal bum wad."

How bad does it have to get, skully? And you're worried about my perception of reality? Get a grip.

1:00 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Um, last time I checked the Powers That Be in WDC were all democrats," sham

Really? You're delusional. That's all.

1:48 AM  
Anonymous Skully said...

T-man. I wasn't worried about your perception of reality...cuz you ain't got one. Your list was kinda strange. Pollution bad...Who thinks its good?? The rest was just typical Libby tripe.
My point was that the right isn't the one who thinks Obama is this Mooslim terroist type dude. At least from my expierence it seems to be the folks who pay about 15 seconds of attention to politics per election that have this notion. Of course the New Yorker cartoon will be more a confirmation of their view; seeing as they won't look for the hidden meaning(satire) in the picture, or read the fluff piece article inside. These are the people who are going to swing this election one way or the other.

6:47 AM  
Anonymous Shambhala said...

I, Shambhala, used to think it was fun having Tman as the resident contrarian. An echo chamber is so boring.

However the stupid list you created is ... stupid. It is just a menu of dumb lefty points that require no thought to put together and no intelligence to argue. It is the Michael Moore version of reality.

PJ, can we possibly get a GOOD troll somehow? The TMan punching bag is 'broke'.

10:24 AM  
Anonymous elrond hubbard said...

t-man

"...thanks elrond"

No problem, glad I could clarify things for you.

4:59 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home