–barackAngel

–Jesus

–Superman

–The totally awesome, glowing, superhero/savior spawn of Jesus and Superman

–The radioactive president of America’s dreams

–A dewy Venus, majestically stepping forth from a serene ocean mist, but, like also a guy who’s running for president.

–The late-90s sitcom character, Teen Angel.

–Not just the president of the ShinySuit 3000 Club For Men, but also a client.

–Zeus for a new age.

–Some kind of space hero, or whatever

–Mr. Cloudo, President of Heaven

This cover is a grand gesture on Rolling Stone’s part, because even if Obama loses, he can hold this issue in his (blessed) hands and know that he will always be President of the pretty cloud that sits in the middle of their art director’s imagination.

Actually, they showed a lot of restraint here. There are no cherubs, or halos, or harps, or gold-tipped scrolls passed from the hand of God directly to Obama’s open palm or anything.

@ Donna L, yeah… it’s a bitch. The deepest thing about Geraldine’s 1988 statements, for me, is not that she pulled the race card, but that she pulled this behind the race card:
in knowledgeispwr’s DU thread on the subject:

Poster: aint_no_life_nowhere
Response 84: And Ferraro called his views “radical”

It gives some insight into Geraldine’s state of mind. Jackson’s platform in 1988 called for homes for the homeless, comparable worth and day care for working women, a higher minimum wage, a commitment to the family farm, and an all-out war on drugs. Is Ferraro even a Democrat for calling these campaign proposals “radical”?

“When we form a great quilt of unity and common ground” Jackson told delegates at the party convention on July 19, 1988, “we’ll have the power to bring about health care and housing and jobs and education and hope to our nation”.

When he didn’t win, Jackson campaigned for the VP spot at the Democratic National Convention. He wasn’t chosen. I guess no one else besides Geraldine Ferraro thought that being black was an asset and an advantage.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/A_Ferraro_flashback.html#comments

Ferraro used the same racial attack on Jesse Jackson in 1988.

She’s angry, jealous, and crazy.

They’re still playing the race card hoping to create a backlash among white voters. This time it’s Geraldine who’s not exactly a surrogate so the Clintons can separate themselves from her comments.

Do you notice how she implied Axelrod and the campaign were directly behind the angry emails she got? She called it an angry attack against her..and painted herself as an innocent victim who only wants to help Obama but won’t if he doesn’t stop ATTACKING her.

It’s a setup. I kinda felt that way when I saw her initial comments. As always, they want to paint him as the BLACK candidate and create an US against THEM narrative.

From the perspective of the Democratic party however, it is dangerous to repeatedly offend the African American community with racially based insults and young people by suggesting they are delusional and don’t know how things work.

It really is like that abusive parent who repeatedly tells their child they will never amount to anything. This is such a reckless, ill-advised tactic. How dumb is it for this woman to taint her legacy in order to support Hillary Clinton?

“Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let’s address reality and the problems we’re facing in this world, you’re accused of being racist, so you have to shut up,” Ferraro said. “Racism works in two different directions. I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white. How’s that?”

Obama needs all the help he can get in the media with fools like this out there.

Ferraro on Fox talking about her comments:
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=HOIwQSq9y8o

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/opinion/11patterson.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

Sullivan linked to this op-ed this morning. Rikyrah — I think Patterson is giving voice to something that was definately flying below the conscious radar. I thought the NIG thing was sort of a crazy stretch — but after reading this article, I am thinking there was something to it.

You make a key point, perhaps they are playing to the perceived “fantasy” aspect of his candidacy.

Afterall, it seems many still cannot believe it is possible to elect a Black man as President and even as we get closer to the possibility, there seem to be many who want to put the brakes on his momentum despite popular opinion.

I don’t think it will hurt him but it could be construed as just one more subliminal mockery of his character and potential.

Paintings are ‘unreal’, fantasy. It’s not as bad an image as USA Today continually ONLY showing him from the back or the side-turned-away… but it’s suspect in its own way.

I think this hurts him. Plenty here to criticize and exploit. That’s my first impression.