8/06/2008
Paris Hilton's Revenge
************************************************************************
By Jose Antonio Vargas
Wednesday, August 6, 2008; 9:48 AM
Paris for President?
Well, check out her energy policy.
Yep, you read that right. In a two-minute online video posted last night on the comedy site FunnyorDie.com, Paris Hilton announced her candidacy -- thanks to Sen. John McCain's "Celeb" ad comparing Sen. Barack Obama to Paris and Britney Spears -- and boasts an energy policy that should make every screenwriter proud. Though her parents have contributed to the Republican senator, Paris is no McCainiac. (The ad begins with a voice-over referring to McCain as the "oldest celebrity in the world," before cutting to a photo of the senior citizens of "The Golden Girls.") But she's not for Obama, either. True to form, she's all about Paris. She wants pop star Rihanna as her vice president and might paint the White House pink.
"Hey America I'm Paris Hilton, and I'm a celebrity, too. Only I'm not from the olden days and I'm not promising change like that other guy. I'm just hot," she says, sitting on a lounge chair and wearing a skimpy one-piece leopard swimsuit -- with a copy of Conde Nast Traveler in hand. "But then that wrinkly white-haired guy used me in his campaign ad, which I guess means I'm running for president. So thanks for the endorsement white- haired dude. And I want America to know that, I'm like, totally ready to lead."
Paris then summarizes the difference between McCain and Obama's energy policies -- "Barack wants to focus on new technologies to cut foreign oil dependency and McCain wants offshore drilling" -- before offering her own sober take on the issue.
"Well, why don't we do a hybrid of both candidates' ideas?" she says. "We can do limited offshore drilling -- with strict environmental oversight -- while creating tax incentives to get Detriot making hybrid and electric cars. That way, the offshore drilling carries us until the new technologies kick in which will then create new jobs and energy independence. Energy crisis solved!"
ad_icon
She then continues: "I'll see you at the debates, bitches."
With a few film credits in her resume, this might just be her best acting role yet. The McCain camp seems to think so. "In reality, Paris Hilton may have a more substantive energy policy than Barack Obama," they said in a statement.
************************************************************************
7/16/2008
New Yorker Cover Disses Obama
Below are some reactions to the controversial New Yorker cover depicting Barack Obama as a closet Muslim and his wife Michelle as an AK-47 toting terrorist inside the Oval Office.
What boggles the mind is that apparently the New Yorker had a CAPTION/TITLE for this controversial cover that would have clearly explained what they were trying to do. HOWEVER some morons at the New Yorker decided to place this caption INSIDE the magazine INSTEAD OF ON THE COVER. The caption is "THE POLITICS OF FEAR". Had that been placed on the cover itself, it would have made much more sense, and people won't be so mad at them right now. As it is, the cover just looks like a total tasteless piece of crap that looks like it was commissioned by the Republicans.
Obama himself has tried to be nonchalant about it, saying it is their right to publish the thing, but that it probably fanned misconceptions about him. A good move for him I think...he looks like it doesn't bother him much, but leaves it to his subordinates and supporters to roast the New York Times editors for their crude tastelessness.
-----------------------------------------------------
Cartoonists Not Fond of Obama Art on 'New Yorker' Cover
By Dave Astor
Published: July 14, 2008 5:13 PM ET
NEW YORK Barry Blitt's satirical July 21 New Yorker magazine cover showing a Muslim Barack Obama and a gun-toting Michelle Obama is not getting rave reviews from other artists contacted by E&P.
Association of American Editorial Cartoonists President (AAEC) Nick Anderson said he understood what Blitt was trying to do (show how the Obamas are perceived by some people, not as they really are). But he noted that the cartoon was done "clumsily."
The Houston Chronicle/Washington Post Writers Group (WPWG) creator added that it would have helped if the cover art had a title such as “The Politics of Fear,” or showed enemies of Obama painting or imagining the picture.
AAEC President-Elect Ted Rall said "everyone with two brain cells to rub together gets" Blitt's cartoon, but the drawing is "shallow and non-contextual."
"If The New Yorker wants to get into the political cartoon business, it ought to hire some political cartoonists," added Rall. "Until they hire some smart editors, The New Yorker ought to stick to what they do well: gag panels about Upper East Siders at cocktail parties."
The Universal Press Syndicate cartoonist also criticized the "dull, Taliban-like humorlessness" of the Obama and McCain campaigns, which both decried Blitt's cover. "Will the two candidates ban sarcasm if they win?," quipped Rall, who's also acquisition and development editor at United Media.
Philadelphia Daily News/WPWG editorial cartoonist Signe Wilkinson's first reaction to E&P's query was: "If you're spending time on this, it must be summer!" Then Wilkinson, who also does the "Family Tree" comic for United, added: "After the obligatory 'tasteless and offensive' huffing and puffing, Obama strategist David Axelrod said they weren't going to be spending a lot of time on it. I would recommend that the rest of the media do as David Axelrod does. It's satire."
Ann Telnaes, whose work includes animated political cartoons for WashingtonPost.com, said: "I think people need to get a grip. The cover was meant to be a satirical comment on the rumors about Obama's religion and so-called lack of patriotism."
She added that there are more important things to get outraged about. "Just this morning I read a Wall Street Journal article about the Dutch cartoonist who was jailed and his computer and sketchbooks confiscated because his work was considered offensive by the government," Telnaes noted by way of example.
Scott Stantis -- who does editorial cartoons for The Birmingham (Ala.) News and Creators News Service, and the "Prickly City" comic for Universal -- said The New Yorker is "usually pitch-perfect in its use of satire for its often-provocative covers." Among those "perfect" covers, he recalled, was the famous one showing an Hasidic man and African-American woman kissing in a way that imagined the healing of the rift between the New York communities those two people represented.
But Stantis added that the current cover "struck me as remarkably tin-eared. While I understand they're trying to portray the Obamas as their more strident opponents would have them seen, I take the opposite view away. Maybe it's not over-the-top enough? Or perhaps the anti-Obama forces have been too good and this is, indeed, how they are portrayed in the popular mind. Either way, this piece of art did not work for me on any level."
Detroit News/United editorial cartoonist Henry Payne said "Obama's campaign overreacted. The New Yorker has every right to run the cover."
But, Payne added, "I think a point that's being missed is that Blitt's satire has little basis in truth -- the foundation for satire after all.... No respectable figure in the GOP, or McCain's campaign, or any editorial publication I know of has suggested Obama is Muslim.... The Obama/Muslim confusion is one of ignorance; a view held by a minority of the electorate, Dems and Republicans alike."
Payne e-mailed E&P a few minutes later: "On further reflection, I think the cover is just plain fun. Sometimes we in the satire biz take ourselves too seriously."
Mike Smith, whose Las Vegas Sun editorial cartoons and "Stockcar Toons" comic are distributed by King Features Syndicate, asked: "What's the point of being provocative if you're not communicating clearly? The intended message in this art is lost because the execution of the message allows for different interpretations."
Ron Rogers of the South Bend (Ind.) Tribune said he understands that The New Yorker art is "caricature -- an exaggeration of the rumors surrounding Barack and Michelle Obama. But knowing the inflammatory atmosphere in this campaign, I think they went over the line. I think more thought should have been put into the presentation of the artwork and its impact.”
In an E&P story posted earlier today, "Tom the Dancing Bug" cartoonist Ruben Bolling of Universal said "more indicators should have been utilized in the cartoon in order to make the target of its satire clearer."
---------------------------------------------------------
What boggles the mind is that apparently the New Yorker had a CAPTION/TITLE for this controversial cover that would have clearly explained what they were trying to do. HOWEVER some morons at the New Yorker decided to place this caption INSIDE the magazine INSTEAD OF ON THE COVER. The caption is "THE POLITICS OF FEAR". Had that been placed on the cover itself, it would have made much more sense, and people won't be so mad at them right now. As it is, the cover just looks like a total tasteless piece of crap that looks like it was commissioned by the Republicans.
Obama himself has tried to be nonchalant about it, saying it is their right to publish the thing, but that it probably fanned misconceptions about him. A good move for him I think...he looks like it doesn't bother him much, but leaves it to his subordinates and supporters to roast the New York Times editors for their crude tastelessness.
-----------------------------------------------------
Cartoonists Not Fond of Obama Art on 'New Yorker' Cover
By Dave Astor
Published: July 14, 2008 5:13 PM ET
NEW YORK Barry Blitt's satirical July 21 New Yorker magazine cover showing a Muslim Barack Obama and a gun-toting Michelle Obama is not getting rave reviews from other artists contacted by E&P.
Association of American Editorial Cartoonists President (AAEC) Nick Anderson said he understood what Blitt was trying to do (show how the Obamas are perceived by some people, not as they really are). But he noted that the cartoon was done "clumsily."
The Houston Chronicle/Washington Post Writers Group (WPWG) creator added that it would have helped if the cover art had a title such as “The Politics of Fear,” or showed enemies of Obama painting or imagining the picture.
AAEC President-Elect Ted Rall said "everyone with two brain cells to rub together gets" Blitt's cartoon, but the drawing is "shallow and non-contextual."
"If The New Yorker wants to get into the political cartoon business, it ought to hire some political cartoonists," added Rall. "Until they hire some smart editors, The New Yorker ought to stick to what they do well: gag panels about Upper East Siders at cocktail parties."
The Universal Press Syndicate cartoonist also criticized the "dull, Taliban-like humorlessness" of the Obama and McCain campaigns, which both decried Blitt's cover. "Will the two candidates ban sarcasm if they win?," quipped Rall, who's also acquisition and development editor at United Media.
Philadelphia Daily News/WPWG editorial cartoonist Signe Wilkinson's first reaction to E&P's query was: "If you're spending time on this, it must be summer!" Then Wilkinson, who also does the "Family Tree" comic for United, added: "After the obligatory 'tasteless and offensive' huffing and puffing, Obama strategist David Axelrod said they weren't going to be spending a lot of time on it. I would recommend that the rest of the media do as David Axelrod does. It's satire."
Ann Telnaes, whose work includes animated political cartoons for WashingtonPost.com, said: "I think people need to get a grip. The cover was meant to be a satirical comment on the rumors about Obama's religion and so-called lack of patriotism."
She added that there are more important things to get outraged about. "Just this morning I read a Wall Street Journal article about the Dutch cartoonist who was jailed and his computer and sketchbooks confiscated because his work was considered offensive by the government," Telnaes noted by way of example.
Scott Stantis -- who does editorial cartoons for The Birmingham (Ala.) News and Creators News Service, and the "Prickly City" comic for Universal -- said The New Yorker is "usually pitch-perfect in its use of satire for its often-provocative covers." Among those "perfect" covers, he recalled, was the famous one showing an Hasidic man and African-American woman kissing in a way that imagined the healing of the rift between the New York communities those two people represented.
But Stantis added that the current cover "struck me as remarkably tin-eared. While I understand they're trying to portray the Obamas as their more strident opponents would have them seen, I take the opposite view away. Maybe it's not over-the-top enough? Or perhaps the anti-Obama forces have been too good and this is, indeed, how they are portrayed in the popular mind. Either way, this piece of art did not work for me on any level."
Detroit News/United editorial cartoonist Henry Payne said "Obama's campaign overreacted. The New Yorker has every right to run the cover."
But, Payne added, "I think a point that's being missed is that Blitt's satire has little basis in truth -- the foundation for satire after all.... No respectable figure in the GOP, or McCain's campaign, or any editorial publication I know of has suggested Obama is Muslim.... The Obama/Muslim confusion is one of ignorance; a view held by a minority of the electorate, Dems and Republicans alike."
Payne e-mailed E&P a few minutes later: "On further reflection, I think the cover is just plain fun. Sometimes we in the satire biz take ourselves too seriously."
Mike Smith, whose Las Vegas Sun editorial cartoons and "Stockcar Toons" comic are distributed by King Features Syndicate, asked: "What's the point of being provocative if you're not communicating clearly? The intended message in this art is lost because the execution of the message allows for different interpretations."
Ron Rogers of the South Bend (Ind.) Tribune said he understands that The New Yorker art is "caricature -- an exaggeration of the rumors surrounding Barack and Michelle Obama. But knowing the inflammatory atmosphere in this campaign, I think they went over the line. I think more thought should have been put into the presentation of the artwork and its impact.”
In an E&P story posted earlier today, "Tom the Dancing Bug" cartoonist Ruben Bolling of Universal said "more indicators should have been utilized in the cartoon in order to make the target of its satire clearer."
---------------------------------------------------------
2/21/2008
Texas Debate a Stalemate . . . But That's Good News for Obama
I'm sure, many of you were wondering, as I did, what kind of debate we would have tonight. Will it be the fiery one like we saw in South Carolina, or will it be the polite "conversation" we saw in California.
Frankly, I was expecting some fireworks. This is after all Clinton's last stand. If she loses either Texas OR Ohio, she is done. I mean done as in stick a fork in her!
So I was surprised that Clinton was actually polite except for that pathetic bit about the "xeroxed" lines again. The audience certainly let her know what they thought about that desperate act...with a loud series of boos!
Essentially what we got tonight was more like the California debate with bits of the South Carolina one thrown in to make it a bit exciting.
After the debate was over, the consensus seemed to be that it was a tie. I agree with that. But see...that is GOOD NEWS for Barack Obama. The Clinton campaign's plan was to trip up Obama or hope that he stumbles. That didn't happen. Clinton did get a standing ovation at the end, but really that's not gonna matter much. The debate was still a tie. And the latest polls show the Texas race to be very tight. Basically what this means is, even if Clinton wins, it will be with a very narrow margin...not enough to close the delegate lead that Obama has over her. Her campaign will still be alive, but just barely...like a person in a hospital bed on life support. Obama, on the other hand DOES NOT need to win either Texas or Ohio. He just needs to make a good showing to get enough delegates out of them. He can scoop up the other states after these March 4 primaries.
However, I have a feeling that Texas is it. People will look back on March 4 as the beginning of the new dawn for America. Because I believe that Obama will win Texas (barely maybe), and that this will be the final knock out blow for Clinton. He's already won 11 in a row. And a 12th straight win will be the knock out blow. Even Bill Clinton knows this, and has said so in public.
So here's the message to Hillary: Kiss Your White A** Goodbye!
Vote OBAMA 2008!
BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH!
Frankly, I was expecting some fireworks. This is after all Clinton's last stand. If she loses either Texas OR Ohio, she is done. I mean done as in stick a fork in her!
So I was surprised that Clinton was actually polite except for that pathetic bit about the "xeroxed" lines again. The audience certainly let her know what they thought about that desperate act...with a loud series of boos!
Essentially what we got tonight was more like the California debate with bits of the South Carolina one thrown in to make it a bit exciting.
After the debate was over, the consensus seemed to be that it was a tie. I agree with that. But see...that is GOOD NEWS for Barack Obama. The Clinton campaign's plan was to trip up Obama or hope that he stumbles. That didn't happen. Clinton did get a standing ovation at the end, but really that's not gonna matter much. The debate was still a tie. And the latest polls show the Texas race to be very tight. Basically what this means is, even if Clinton wins, it will be with a very narrow margin...not enough to close the delegate lead that Obama has over her. Her campaign will still be alive, but just barely...like a person in a hospital bed on life support. Obama, on the other hand DOES NOT need to win either Texas or Ohio. He just needs to make a good showing to get enough delegates out of them. He can scoop up the other states after these March 4 primaries.
However, I have a feeling that Texas is it. People will look back on March 4 as the beginning of the new dawn for America. Because I believe that Obama will win Texas (barely maybe), and that this will be the final knock out blow for Clinton. He's already won 11 in a row. And a 12th straight win will be the knock out blow. Even Bill Clinton knows this, and has said so in public.
So here's the message to Hillary: Kiss Your White A** Goodbye!
Vote OBAMA 2008!
BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH!
2/12/2008
Victory, 8 in a row!!!!!!!!!!!!
Obama sweeps Virginia, Maryland and D.C. primaries today! Woohooo!!!
The Obamentum just keeps getting stronger. And by March it will be strong enough to smash Clinton's so-called Texas-Ohio "firewall" like a giant fist through paper. Clearly Clinton is attempting what is now known as the "Guiliani Maneuver". Basically it is ignoring a bunch of "insignificant" smaller states and putting all your bets in one or a couple of big states. Well, after Florida, we all know how that maneuver turned out. Clinton apparently has not learned Giuliani's lesson. Too bad for her.
Clinton's goose will be roasted, toasted and burned to a crisp in Texas. A defeat there or a very strong second by Obama will convince more superdelegates to abandon Clinton's sinking ship and jump to the mighty U.S.S. Obama.
Obama did not just win all 3 primaries tonight. HE WON BIG. NO. HE WON HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He won the white vote. He won the young vote. He won the blue collar vote. He won the low income vote. Heck, he even won the WOMEN'S VOTE! These demographics were formerly on Clinton's side in previous primaries. NOT ANYMORE!!!!
YES. WE. CAN.
Next place where Clinton will be crushed & humiliated: Wisconsin, Febuary 19th. Mark your calendars.
Vote OBAMA 2008!
BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH!
The Obamentum just keeps getting stronger. And by March it will be strong enough to smash Clinton's so-called Texas-Ohio "firewall" like a giant fist through paper. Clearly Clinton is attempting what is now known as the "Guiliani Maneuver". Basically it is ignoring a bunch of "insignificant" smaller states and putting all your bets in one or a couple of big states. Well, after Florida, we all know how that maneuver turned out. Clinton apparently has not learned Giuliani's lesson. Too bad for her.
Clinton's goose will be roasted, toasted and burned to a crisp in Texas. A defeat there or a very strong second by Obama will convince more superdelegates to abandon Clinton's sinking ship and jump to the mighty U.S.S. Obama.
Obama did not just win all 3 primaries tonight. HE WON BIG. NO. HE WON HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He won the white vote. He won the young vote. He won the blue collar vote. He won the low income vote. Heck, he even won the WOMEN'S VOTE! These demographics were formerly on Clinton's side in previous primaries. NOT ANYMORE!!!!
YES. WE. CAN.
Next place where Clinton will be crushed & humiliated: Wisconsin, Febuary 19th. Mark your calendars.
Vote OBAMA 2008!
BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH!
2/09/2008
Obama Sweeps Clintons Butt on the Floor
What an absolutely awesome night for Barack Obama it is tonight!
Obama wiped Clinton's butt on the floor, not in one state, not in two states, but in ALL THREE STATES with caucuses/primaries tonight! As if that wasn't enough...Obama knocked her butt out completely off the ring in the U.S. Virgin Islands (a perfect cherry to top his mainland victories tonight).
Obama is also projected to sweep or at least win most of the Potomac Primary states next week. Clinton is planning to stop him in Texas and Ohio. However, Obama is rapidly expanding his organizations and volunteers in those states. He might lose in those states, but he will still grab a lot of delegates. If he continues winning all Potomac states...his momentum will be extremely hard for Clinton. Electability has become a very strong factor for the Democrats now that the Republicans have a presumptive nominee.
We here at Vote Obama 2008 believe Clinton will suffer further floor arse-wipings next week, and will be unable to stop Barack Obama's building momentum. It will be like trying to stop a speeding locomotive by parking a 70's VW Beetle on the tracks. Yeah...you get the picture. Obama will totally wipe Clinton's butt off the election map. The past cannot defeat the FUTURE.
Vote OBAMA 2008!
BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH!
Obama wiped Clinton's butt on the floor, not in one state, not in two states, but in ALL THREE STATES with caucuses/primaries tonight! As if that wasn't enough...Obama knocked her butt out completely off the ring in the U.S. Virgin Islands (a perfect cherry to top his mainland victories tonight).
Obama is also projected to sweep or at least win most of the Potomac Primary states next week. Clinton is planning to stop him in Texas and Ohio. However, Obama is rapidly expanding his organizations and volunteers in those states. He might lose in those states, but he will still grab a lot of delegates. If he continues winning all Potomac states...his momentum will be extremely hard for Clinton. Electability has become a very strong factor for the Democrats now that the Republicans have a presumptive nominee.
We here at Vote Obama 2008 believe Clinton will suffer further floor arse-wipings next week, and will be unable to stop Barack Obama's building momentum. It will be like trying to stop a speeding locomotive by parking a 70's VW Beetle on the tracks. Yeah...you get the picture. Obama will totally wipe Clinton's butt off the election map. The past cannot defeat the FUTURE.
Vote OBAMA 2008!
BARACK OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!
A VOTE FOR MCCAIN IS 4 MORE YEARS OF BUSH!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
