President Obama as the Joker

[Greenday]

Ooh, don't tell people that they already have certain things socialized. They'll petition to have it removed in a heartbeat.

[BlaqueKatt]

A lot of die-hard Republicans have it in their heads that they are going to "treat Obama the same way Bush was treated." To that, I always want to reply, "So, you're going to give him a chance and see how his policies work, and then tear into him only if he screws up?" Because that's pretty much what happened with Bush.

yes because there was no "Bush stolz the elections"!!!!111eleventy at all nope so-sir-re-bob, never happened......

[Greenday]

yes because there was no "Bush stolz the elections"!!!!111eleventy at all nope so-sir-re-bob, never happened......

At least there was some evidence they could use. Like ballots already casted for him before the election even happened the second time around. Even though it's circumstantial, his brother being in control of the state that won the presidential race for Bush.

[guywithashovel]

yes because there was no "Bush stolz the elections"!!!!111eleventy at all nope so-sir-re-bob, never happened......

Did you even bother to read the next paragraph that I wrote after that? Here, I'll quote it for you.

And before anyone tries to tell me that I'm wrong, I will point out that George W. Bush was a pretty popular president during his first few years in office. Heck, his approval ratings were over 70% for quite a while. He had his chance. Sure, people were taking shots at him from the beginning, but that's true of pretty much every president. All presidents find themselves as the brunts of jokes from time to time.

[Flyndaran]

yes because there was no "Bush stolz the elections"!!!!111eleventy at all nope so-sir-re-bob, never happened......

He did steal the first one. Florida was such disgusting display of controlled incompetence it made me sick. He legitimately won the second one.
It's sad that all it take for a republican to be popular is to start a war.

[Tanasi]

When thinking of socialism remember that Adolph Hitler was a socialist. That worked out well for the German people.

[lordlundar]

no, Hitler was a Fascist. And in terms of economy, he was a capitalist. In fact, his efforts made Germany an economic powerhouse from suffering from hyperinflation a few years earlier.

[joe hx]

Hitler was a socialist in the sense that he nationalized industries. Politically he was fascist - as in dictatorship.

"Nazi" is short for the "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" which is German for "National Socialist German Workers' Party"

it worked out quite well for the Germans. not so much for the Jews.

[Flyndaran]

Hitler was a socialist in the sense that he nationalized industries. Politically he was fascist - as in dictatorship.

"Nazi" is short for the "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" which is German for "National Socialist German Workers' Party"

it worked out quite well for the Germans. not so much for the Jews.

Well Germany is one of the most liberal moral governments in the world today, so in the long run they benefited. But those alive in Hitler's day kind of did a lot of dying and losing of a war.

[Rapscallion]

Well Germany is one of the most liberal moral governments in the world today, so in the long run they benefited. But those alive in Hitler's day kind of did a lot of dying and losing of a war.

Interesting thought, but if you want to go down the route of ends justifying the means then that's a different thread.

Rapscallion

[AdminAssistant]

it worked out quite well for the Germans. not so much for the Jews.

Yes, well, keep in mind that Hitler was elected and that the German people really loved him, because he was going to bring them out of their slump, unite German-speaking people, gain back the respect of the world, etc. I think everyone should, at some point, watch Triumph of the Will. It's disturbing, but it really shows the admiration the people had for him.

Honestly, when it comes to "genocidal bastards", I wonder why everyone singles out Hitler, and yet ignores Stalin and Pol Pot. hm.

[PepperElf]

what i thought was funny was the RESPONSE to the joker-satire.
basically a "how dare you make fun of Obama" and "Show yourself!"

the whole demand that the artist reveal himself/herself... sounded ominous...
to me it sounded like they wanted to know who dared make fun of obama
so they could punish him for it.


to me THAT'S the big issue. Not that someone made fun of a president - it always happens no matter who's in office... but how the white house & obama's supporters handled their own reactions.


and i believe that ... if they ever find out who made that drawing they WILL go after that person
it won't be an open arrest because there's no law against making fun of the president (even if it IS obama) but... i feel the whitehouse (or obama's support team) would do their best to ensure that person's life was destroyed.


and that's what i fear the most about this...


as for the "racial" implications of the drawing... I'm reminded of something Sean Hannity said to Obama last year.
"I have no problem with the color of your skin - just the thickness of it."

[Flyndaran]

...
Honestly, when it comes to "genocidal bastards", I wonder why everyone singles out Hitler, and yet ignores Stalin and Pol Pot. hm.

Because the western countries don't care about the deaths of non-whites and non-western countries?

[AdminAssistant]

Because the western countries don't care about the deaths of non-whites and non-western countries?

Well, Izzard said it best, "They killed their own people, and we're sort of fine with that. Hitler killed people next door. Stupid man. After a few years, we're not going to stand for that kind of thing, are we?"

That's a paraphrasing from memory, of course. What kills me is that we were Allies with Stalin, at the very same time he was sending political enemies and formalist artists to Siberia for disagreeing with him. That is, of course, if he didn't just outright torture and kill them. No wonder Mayakovsky committed suicide.

[BroomJockey]

Hitler was a socialist in the sense that he nationalized industries. Politically he was fascist - as in dictatorship.

"Nazi" is short for the "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" which is German for "National Socialist German Workers' Party"

He nationalised certain industries, yes (which isn't socialist, it's more communist), but he still left people the small shops alone, as long as you weren't in a targeted group. He was still very much a capitalist, despite the name of the party. After all, it wasn't so long ago that conservative and liberal had opposite political meanings.