Alternative version of magazine cover!

[n2doc]

[ColbertWatcher]

1. That didn't take long.

Can't wait to see what the Maestro Doctor Professor Field Marshall The Reverend Stephen Colbert, Esquire has to say about it tonight.

11:00 p.m. EST, MST, PST, Comedy Central.

Check your local listings.

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. Is Colbert live tonight?

I thought they were on break.

[ColbertWatcher]

5. They won't let him go live.

He's due back form vacation tonight.

[gateley]

2. I especially like the Constitution aflame in the fireplace! nt

[ColbertWatcher]

4. THAT'S NOT FUNNY! n/t

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

6. I'm extremely confused and I need context, damn it!

I will only understand that this is an exaggerated portrayal of the way John and Cindy are seen by their opponents and the "liberal media" if you put them inside a little thought balloon with Katrina Vanden Heuval dreaming in her Lazy Boy.

Is this, is this, that there satire stuff???

[ColbertWatcher]

7. I think the context is written in the picture. n/t

[whathehell]

8. Yeah..Too bad

we're unlikely to see that anywhere but on this site :eyes:

[randr]

9. Did I miss something?

The NYer cover depicts false images of Obama while the National Review depicts images that have basis in fact.
If one of these is "satire" what does that make the other?
Which is which?

[lastliberalintexas]

10. Shh, you're interrupting a lot of people who want to pat themselves on the back

for their own intelligence and discernment. Joe Sixpack doesn't get the New Yorker cover because he's a provincial yahoo who has never actually heard of the New Yorker anyway. The fact that the cover fails to actually lampoon its supposed target, fails to in any way undermine those right wing smears from which it drew its jibes and fails to provoke any real thought just shows the deficiencies of the reader, not the artist.


The problem with this issue is that it breaks down along the lines of those who are intellectually superior and those of us who are not. Too many seem to be defending the cartoon on the basis that it makes them seem so much more intelligent than those who don't get it.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

12. It's a reverse-post-modern parody of pre-anti-satire.

You had to not be there. :*

[WhiteTara]

11. difference is, this is characterized

the Obama thing was not.

Cindy McCain was (maybe is) a drug addict

John McCain is old and seems senile and at the age 71, may need a wheelchair...Phil Gramm doesn't even think people should live to be 70.


Michelle Obama does not advocate violence or guns, but is depicted as a gun slinger ready for war.

To "fro" her hair is code for "we hate black people and she really is one"

nope, to me it was mean and racist and not funny nor ironic, and the racist who runs the magazine should examine the darkness in his/her soul.

[nightrain]

13. yep.