How many find this offensive:
Printable View
How many find this offensive:
Nah man, it's kind of cool. It's politically misguided, but it's well done. I do wonder, what does the Joker have to do with Socialism?
If your answer is different from http://straightrazorpalace.com/conve...ty-pt-2-a.html please explain
Am I offended by it? No.
Is it offensive? To many people, it most likely is.
I answered "no" to this, and part 2, but like Jim, I have a hard time drawing a connection between the joker and socialism.
Between the two sets, I think the "Part 2" pics are better because they are non-specific attempts to demonize a political figure. I voted for him twice, but still appreciate the satire.
Being specific to Obama's socialist leanings, but using an image that is unrelated to socialism makes this less compelling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeeDubb65
Well put! I think it's kind of a rough attempt at using a well known "villain" to make negative associations, without actually making VALID negative associations.
Precisely. It just would have been more compelling had the artist used a figure who was known for socialist beliefs. Of course, that trouble with that is that you would probably have to use a real historical figure, rather than a comic book villian, and that could get ugly in a hurry.
I voted no 2 times. I think they are stupid and polarizing, and showing lack of intelligence on the part of the author. But they don't offend me.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMS
I'm fascinated by the concept that the exercise of free speech should offend Americans. Content, like all art, is subject to interpretation. Like many things, sometimes it's well done, and sometimes it's not.
Personally I "like" these much better, less edgy.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/...sh_moebush.jpg
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/..._jackassfp.jpg
And for a little balance: http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/...ck-Obuddha.jpg
Frankly, Obama does not give the same rich farmland to plow up satire in the same way that the previous administration did.
I voted yes simply because I look at the picture and see a reverse "black face". The vaudeville type actor with the shoe polish and white eyes.
That is offensive. The picture is not.
I agree if you mean the artist and not the 'author' of the thread..... although there is room for debate there.....:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Brought to the heights and the dropped to the lowest depths.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHAD
Thanks Jimmy...I am crushed...
And then some.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
I answered "yes".
Whoever made that picture has a perfect right to do so and to publish it if he likes. I reserve my right to say that, whoever he is, he's a d**ned fool and should probably keep his mouth shut in order not to interrupt people who have something useful to say.
Rant over.
goshawk
The exercise of free speech is beautiful. That doesn't mean that the concept expressed can not be offensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Blue
Examples: White power, Black power, whacko right wigers, whacko left wingers, and anyone who says "I'm just sayin' what I'm sayin'" when you disagree with them...of course you are, you half witted troglodyte...your misguided unclever tautology doesn't MEAN anything. But I digress.....