Thursday, August 06, 2009

Why So Socialist?

This poster is said by some to be popping up all over Los Angeles. Personally I live in Los Angeles and I've only seen it on the web. And when I look for pictures of it they're all this one. But hey, I'm not writing about it to question its authenticity. I'm questioning its effectiveness.

My problem with it is that it is one gag too many.

I can get that its a parody of Shepard Fairey's famous HOPE poster. If it was just Obama, primary colors, and the word SOCIALISM under it, it would be effective parody. I'd disagree with the sentiment, but I'd understand it. And if it was the Obama as the Joker with no word under it, or VILLAIN, same thing. But you can't equate Obama with socialism AND the Joker. The Joker was an anarchist. In fact, when you think about it - wants to destroy Gotham, won't offer a valid reason for it, only bent on destruction - RUSH LIMBAUGH is the joker.

A blogger named Candace tried to explain it to me this way: "The poster of Mr. Obama in Joker Face is witty. The wit specifically is this: "It was a big Joke, this presidency. And you all bought it. I'm a Joker." It's a poignant aim at some very disturbing behavior by this administration: Promise one thing, but deliver another." That just doesn't feel right to me. The right isn't responding to this because they think that the Joker promises one thing and delivers another.

What does make sense to me, I think, is the Glenn-Beck-Like abject terror of Obama. Obama is like the Joker because the right sees him as a really really scary sociopath. It certainly fits in with these images:

And the right is returning to its more conservative roots, which are by definition to fear and oppose change. This is comforting. Admittedly it's manifesting in childish ways but ultimately we get the useful Republican party we always had - fighting government spending and the opposing expansion of bureaucracy. While I wish it hadn't happened at one of the few times in history where massive government spending is a good idea, I'm glad to see the tendency returning. Besides, no one is listening to them anyway.


Publius said...

Must be awfully close to home if you have to bend over so far to say it doesn't work.

I don’t mind being a fishy Republican, it’s those Vichy Democrats that are the problem!!

Danielk said...

I'm not really bending much. This is a post I dashed off before bed. Bad comedy annoys me.

All Ears said...

"Besides, no one is listening to them anyway."

Maybe you should check your facts before you write something else you apparently don't know a whole lot about? .html

Look - another one like you - doesn't check facts:

I know it will require ALOT of reading and ALOT of reading comprehension for you, but at least try to read one link, and then tell us again 'Besides, no one is listening to them anyway.'

Danielk said...

Sorry, I meant to say, "since the liberal far left media never reports on opposing viewpoints, no one is listening to them anyway." The links you provided must reinforce that opinion, rigtht?

Chris Matthews said...

You betcha.

Since that's the case, you gonna take time to educate yourself?

Danielk said...

I looked at some of them, though I'm puzzled by what point you're making with the electric cars thing. Are you suggesting that the president doesn't have the hypnotic power to force us to buy the cars he wants us to? I'm with you then.

Anyway, the economy is improving and the jobless rate may be slowing, so I don't care what other people think of Obama's performance. I APPROVE of his performance. You should have also linked to that CNN poll in which more people thought Obama was a failure at this point in his presidency than they did of Bush. You're not doing your research!

Anonymous said...

Didn't want to bring you down too much on a Friday afternoon.

Danielk said...

"Anonymous" - tired after a long week?

Hey let me ask, am I off base with this poster? If you like it, why? How does it resonate with you?

Jack Nicholson said...

It's a form of free speech, altho perhaps a poor one.

Just as I didn't have a real issue of a very similar one of GWB in Vanity Fair (with a much larger circulation than that of a cement beam of an underpass, mind you) about a year ago, I don't have a real issue with this one, either.

My question to you is, if and when BO starts getting portrayed like this, instead of a simple Joker painted on his face, will you be upset?

Danielk said...

If it's isolated crazies like the Malkin examples, I'll just shrug it off. Well, I'll probably post it like Malkin did, but I won't be upset. If its coming from major media figures then that's a different story and to their credit, I haven't seen anything suggesting assassination in the right wing media.

Warner Todd said...

I'd imagine that no matter who is president there are those that think of assassination (Garfield, anyone!? Really, GARFIELD? Was there ever a more innocuous prez than Garfield?).

But no sane conservative wants Obama assassinated. The Dixie Chicks, maybe. Cat Stevens... or Yousoph Mohamad Cats-n-jammer, er what ever his name is this week, perhaps. I'd even bet there's a few that wouldn't mind seeing Michael Moore have a freak sandwich slicing accident... but not political assassinations.

Wait... would it be so bad if a team of ninjas took out Keith Olbermouth, though? I mean... would it hurt anyone, really? His death by a thousand ninja throwing stars certainly wouldn't hurt his ratings any... I mean, who would even notice his absence? Or is that too much to hope for?

Let's hope your pals at Wankette don't read your blog.