(Kudos to Peter Sobczynski for the idea and David Cornelius for the Photoshop skillz.)
36 COMMENTS
Brilliant!
Awesome.
I see the humor, but it’s as distasteful as the “Chelsea is ugly” jokes that we had to endure 16 years ago. Raking teenagers across the coals in front of a national audience just ain’t right.
I don’t think it’s that funny.
So when the President of the United States has extra-marital affairs while discussing troop deployment in Somalia (an affair with a subordinate no less), it’s perfectly cool. As long as he’s liberal. If the daughter of a republican does something most teenagers do, it’s something we should all hold her and her family accountable for, in the national spotlight. Classy.
Why did nobody ever make fun of Chelsea? Oh, she’s liberal. Only republicans should have dirty laundry about their children spread in the national spotlight and mocked.
“So when the President of the United States has extra-marital affairs while discussing troop deployment in Somalia (an affair with a subordinate no less), it’s perfectly cool. As long as he’s liberal.”
Does the word “impeachment” ring a bell?
“Why did nobody ever make fun of Chelsea? Oh, she’s liberal.”
No, because she didn’t get pregnant. (Although, of course, a swell guy by the name of John McCain did make fun of her once.)
John Doe: Do you live in a parallel universe where Clinton’s affairs weren’t the topic of discussion 24/7 for over a year? Did everyone just give Clinton some privacy and leave him alone in this parallel universe? I don’t remember it happening that way here in this universe.
I think John Doe’s point might be along the lines that all the liberals thought it was okay that Clinton did what he did, not that everyone in the world ignored it and thought it was okay.
Regarding the picture, this is a sucky ‘shop and not very funny. And that’s not just ‘cuz I like Palin. I wouldn’t like it if it involved The One’s children either. As much as I disapprove of unmarried teen pregnancies, I don’t think that Bristol should be dragged around and humiliated like this.
Palin’s daughter made a choice and is pregnant and she has chosen to do the right thing and have the baby, rather than get an abortion. If she were The One’s daughter and had had an abortion instead, would everyone be dragging his daughter through the mud like they are doing to Palin’s? I don’t think so, honestly.
Also, if you were Bristol and you saw stuff like this floating around the internet, how would you feel? I know I would probably be pretty upset. I don’t care how light-hearted it’s supposed to be, it’s still pretty dang mean. She didn’t have a choice about her mom running for VP and I doubt she had any idea that this would happen when her mom talked about the implications of it with her. You’d think the libs would have enough class to leave the girl alone, but no, they have to try and rip her apart. So stupid.
Sorry Eric. Most of the time I find your stuff funny, even when it’s anti-republican, but this time I don’t agree.
I think it’s hilarious.
It’s ok. John Doe can’t be serious anyway. No one ever made fun of Chelsea? Everyone thought it was “cool” that Bill Clinton messed around with Monica?
The liberals did not think it was “okay” how Clinton acted. For the most part, they thought it was a sexual act that had no bearing on actually performing the office of President. You may not agree with that, but if you remember, the argument was never if what he did was reprehensible (pretty much everyone was in agreement on that) but whether it affected his job.
Anyway, of course there is a double standard for morality between people who preach it and those who don’t. The scandal isn’t on the act, it’s on the hypocrisy; the deficit between what one preaches and what one practices. If someone has a free-love philosophy and is promiscuous, whatever. If someone is a devout Christian with an abstinence only philosophy and has sex once, scandal.
But whatever. If Obama had a daughter that age and she got pregnant, it would be devastating to his campaign, no question.
The poster needs a little polishing, but come on people. It’s hilarious. I love the superimposed McCain.
Skizat: I can’t answer for everyone else, but the fact that he committed perjury and his wife blamed an imaginary “vast right-wing conspiracy” before acknowledging reality bothers me more than the fact that he decided to have an affair.
As for the poster… meh. Maybe all the attention on her womb will make Bristol forget she doesn’t have a real name.
Wait. There’s a girl named Bristol?
Now if Bill Clinton would get pregnant, THAT would be funny.
The picture doesn’t even make sense – unless it is suggesting that McCain is the father of Bristol’s baby. Which it isn’t (at least I don’t think it is). Regardless, not that funny.
I think it’s funny.
Hilarious!
Come on people. This is at the very least funny for the visual of McCain dressed up like Paulie Bleeker. Stop making it about politics.
Didn’t even crack a smile. Not even about McCain. Mostly I’ve just had it up to here with anything to do with the upcoming election. However, if you were to Photoshop the candidates into a poster for “Much Ado about Nothing,” . . . .
It’s funny. Not comic gold, buy funny. If it were liberals in the same position that would be funny too. *shrug*
Savvy Veteran Says:
“Come on people. This is at the very least funny for the visual of McCain dressed up like Paulie Bleeker. Stop making it about politics.”
How can you stop making it about politics? Then it wouldn’t be funny at all.
If you need proof of media bias against conservatives involved in sex scandals, ask yourself why this is the cover of Us this week when we never saw a cover like this.
To whome:
What I meant was that it is ridiculous to get offended simply because the picture depicts people who share political parties with you in a negative/humorous light. People come to this site to laugh at Snide Remarks columns, but when Eric posts anything even slightly related to politics people think he is attacking their beliefs.
I’m a conservative (not a big McCain fan but I’m voting for him by default) and I think it’s funny. Liberals are usually the ones who can’t take a joke politically. They are too sensitive and everything has to be politically correct. GWB wasn’t the greatest president, but he has a good sense of humor and could laugh at himself.
I thought the poster was funny simply because so many stupid things are being said about Palin and her daughter and how this makes her a bad choice for VP. It’s always fun to poke fun at stupid stuff. I think the poster is more about the criticism than the actual pregnancy situation. Plus, since I loved “Juno,” and because McCain looks so silly in the picture, it’s cute.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised, either, if Bristol did have a say in her mom’s choice to accept the nomination.
“Anyway, of course there is a double standard for morality between people who preach it and those who don’t. The scandal isn’t on the act, it’s on the hypocrisy; the deficit between what one preaches and what one practices.”
So you’re holding a child to a parent’s standard? And I don’t recall Clinton ever saying “I have affairs and I love them and you should elect me anyway.” So I don’t get the double standard.
I do remember “It’s just sex” and “everybody does it” and “it’s a private matter that we shouldn’t even know about.” Strange that when the President is being investigated for rape and lies under oath about it, and publicly lies to America about it: then it’s a private affair that doesn’t matter. When a child of a politcal figure has sex, none of these standards apply. The liberals are the hypocrites right now. If “it’s just sex” and “everybody does it” and “it’s private” when the president, who was married, does it, then why doesn’t the same standard apply to a child who neither holds nor seeks political office?
Where are the jokes about Obama being supported, educated, and helped by a known and unrepentant terrorist? Where’s the poster making fun of his relation to Rev. Wright? Obama chose these relations and used them to get where he is. Bill Clinton, as a husband and in the Oval Office as President, chose to have an affair with an intern. Palin didn’t choose to get her daughter pregnant. If people can’t see the ginormous difference between condemning and mocking the daughter of a political figure, and condemning and mocking the actions of a political figure, then there’s a problem.
Sorry for the second post, but I just want to make something clear:
Make fun of all the politicians you want. Make fun of them for whatever reason you want. But I think that relatives, especially children, should be out of bounds for any reason. Unless they have done something to seek the spotlight themselves.
My problem isn’t the politics, it’s that I don’t think someone’s children should become targets. Especially when going through something as difficult as pregnancy while unmarried.
(Here’s a metaphor for Mormons) Pretend it’s another world. Imagine, if around the time President Monson became President of the Church, a grand-daughter got pregnant out of wed-lock. Imagine that news was plastered all over the world and nation and mocked President Monson and the grand-daughter for this. Imagine President Monson’s face up there where McCain’s is and his grand-daughter’s face where Bristol/Juno’s is. Is it so funny now? Ignoring the fact that I hate McCain and he’s nothing like Pres Monson, the point is: whether President Monson is a loser, or you hate him, or you disagree with him and want to make fun of him: go ahead. But don’t you think you should leave the relative who didn’t seek the spot-light out of it? Especially one who is still a child and is going through a tough time?
Whoops, the links I put up earlier have been broken. So to repeat:
If you need proof of media bias against conservatives involved in sex scandals, ask yourself why this is the cover of Us this week when we never saw a cover like this.
I think that all the attacks on Bristol Palin are despicable. This poster, however, is just lame. Perhaps if I had actually watched Juno, it might be somewhat funny, but without that, it’s just lame.
I like the use of Calibri in the poster. It’s fast replacing Garamond as my favorite font.
I agree that the children of politicians should be left alone. But if Palin wants her daughter’s pregnancy out of the media, she should stop putting Bristol and the boyfriend in front of cameras. If there are photo-ops, it’s going to be commented on, plain and simple.
But if she doesn’t bring Bristol out in front of the cameras, then there will be questions about why is she hiding her daughter? Is she ashamed of her? etc, etc. It’s a lose lose situation in that case. Anyway, she had to preemptively acknowledge the issue because of some of the vile rumors floating around.
Agreed, Bob.
Almost every single candidate brings their children with them on stage and to photo-ops… so does that mean open season on everything they’ve ever done as well? Your point is dumb, treen… you’re just spouting out what the media said today in defense of their mud-raking.
Can I now ridicule Obama’s little girls all I want? What’s the difference between them and Bristol, besides age? They are brought to photo-ops too. They support their dad… so I think I’ll report all the things they’ve done too.
That is a valid point. If bringing children to photo-ops is grounds for making fun of them and airing their dirty laundry for the whole nation to mock, then Obama’s kids are fair game. They’ve even appeared in commercials supporting their father.
I’d just like to point out that Obama even made a statement to the media to leave Bristol alone. He said that children should be off-limits. I’m not voting for him, but I appreciate that he did that. It tells me that it’s not necessarily the librals (at least, the politicians) that are ripping the poor girl apart, it’s mostly the media. They just seem to jump on scandal wherever they can find it – especially when it’s the Conservatives screwing up. It makes me sick. That poor child didn’t seek the spotlight, but she has every right to support her mother publicly, and she should be allowed do that without having all of her mistakes point out and mocked. I’m sure she’s already feeling them without the media’s help.
Here’s a completely dumb quote from a letter to the editor that was in our newspaper this morning:
“How can we now tell our children to abstain from sex before marriage when this spectacle was applauded by the delegates at the Republican National Convention?”
This doesn’t really have anything to do with anything, but I find it a little funny that on the B-sides soundtrack to the movie Juno, a band called The Bristols contributed a song titled “Little Baby.”
Brilliant!
Awesome.
I see the humor, but it’s as distasteful as the “Chelsea is ugly” jokes that we had to endure 16 years ago. Raking teenagers across the coals in front of a national audience just ain’t right.
I don’t think it’s that funny.
So when the President of the United States has extra-marital affairs while discussing troop deployment in Somalia (an affair with a subordinate no less), it’s perfectly cool. As long as he’s liberal. If the daughter of a republican does something most teenagers do, it’s something we should all hold her and her family accountable for, in the national spotlight. Classy.
Why did nobody ever make fun of Chelsea? Oh, she’s liberal. Only republicans should have dirty laundry about their children spread in the national spotlight and mocked.
“So when the President of the United States has extra-marital affairs while discussing troop deployment in Somalia (an affair with a subordinate no less), it’s perfectly cool. As long as he’s liberal.”
Does the word “impeachment” ring a bell?
“Why did nobody ever make fun of Chelsea? Oh, she’s liberal.”
No, because she didn’t get pregnant. (Although, of course, a swell guy by the name of John McCain did make fun of her once.)
John Doe: Do you live in a parallel universe where Clinton’s affairs weren’t the topic of discussion 24/7 for over a year? Did everyone just give Clinton some privacy and leave him alone in this parallel universe? I don’t remember it happening that way here in this universe.
I think John Doe’s point might be along the lines that all the liberals thought it was okay that Clinton did what he did, not that everyone in the world ignored it and thought it was okay.
Regarding the picture, this is a sucky ‘shop and not very funny. And that’s not just ‘cuz I like Palin. I wouldn’t like it if it involved The One’s children either. As much as I disapprove of unmarried teen pregnancies, I don’t think that Bristol should be dragged around and humiliated like this.
Palin’s daughter made a choice and is pregnant and she has chosen to do the right thing and have the baby, rather than get an abortion. If she were The One’s daughter and had had an abortion instead, would everyone be dragging his daughter through the mud like they are doing to Palin’s? I don’t think so, honestly.
Also, if you were Bristol and you saw stuff like this floating around the internet, how would you feel? I know I would probably be pretty upset. I don’t care how light-hearted it’s supposed to be, it’s still pretty dang mean. She didn’t have a choice about her mom running for VP and I doubt she had any idea that this would happen when her mom talked about the implications of it with her. You’d think the libs would have enough class to leave the girl alone, but no, they have to try and rip her apart. So stupid.
Sorry Eric. Most of the time I find your stuff funny, even when it’s anti-republican, but this time I don’t agree.
I think it’s hilarious.
It’s ok. John Doe can’t be serious anyway. No one ever made fun of Chelsea? Everyone thought it was “cool” that Bill Clinton messed around with Monica?
The liberals did not think it was “okay” how Clinton acted. For the most part, they thought it was a sexual act that had no bearing on actually performing the office of President. You may not agree with that, but if you remember, the argument was never if what he did was reprehensible (pretty much everyone was in agreement on that) but whether it affected his job.
Anyway, of course there is a double standard for morality between people who preach it and those who don’t. The scandal isn’t on the act, it’s on the hypocrisy; the deficit between what one preaches and what one practices. If someone has a free-love philosophy and is promiscuous, whatever. If someone is a devout Christian with an abstinence only philosophy and has sex once, scandal.
But whatever. If Obama had a daughter that age and she got pregnant, it would be devastating to his campaign, no question.
The poster needs a little polishing, but come on people. It’s hilarious. I love the superimposed McCain.
Skizat: I can’t answer for everyone else, but the fact that he committed perjury and his wife blamed an imaginary “vast right-wing conspiracy” before acknowledging reality bothers me more than the fact that he decided to have an affair.
As for the poster… meh. Maybe all the attention on her womb will make Bristol forget she doesn’t have a real name.
Wait. There’s a girl named Bristol?
Now if Bill Clinton would get pregnant, THAT would be funny.
The picture doesn’t even make sense – unless it is suggesting that McCain is the father of Bristol’s baby. Which it isn’t (at least I don’t think it is). Regardless, not that funny.
I think it’s funny.
Hilarious!
Come on people. This is at the very least funny for the visual of McCain dressed up like Paulie Bleeker. Stop making it about politics.
Didn’t even crack a smile. Not even about McCain. Mostly I’ve just had it up to here with anything to do with the upcoming election. However, if you were to Photoshop the candidates into a poster for “Much Ado about Nothing,” . . . .
It’s funny. Not comic gold, buy funny. If it were liberals in the same position that would be funny too. *shrug*
Savvy Veteran Says:
“Come on people. This is at the very least funny for the visual of McCain dressed up like Paulie Bleeker. Stop making it about politics.”
How can you stop making it about politics? Then it wouldn’t be funny at all.
I would probably snicker except HotAir beat you to that joke on Monday sans photoshop.
If you need proof of media bias against conservatives involved in sex scandals, ask yourself why this is the cover of Us this week when we never saw a cover like this.
To whome:
What I meant was that it is ridiculous to get offended simply because the picture depicts people who share political parties with you in a negative/humorous light. People come to this site to laugh at Snide Remarks columns, but when Eric posts anything even slightly related to politics people think he is attacking their beliefs.
I’m a conservative (not a big McCain fan but I’m voting for him by default) and I think it’s funny. Liberals are usually the ones who can’t take a joke politically. They are too sensitive and everything has to be politically correct. GWB wasn’t the greatest president, but he has a good sense of humor and could laugh at himself.
I thought the poster was funny simply because so many stupid things are being said about Palin and her daughter and how this makes her a bad choice for VP. It’s always fun to poke fun at stupid stuff. I think the poster is more about the criticism than the actual pregnancy situation. Plus, since I loved “Juno,” and because McCain looks so silly in the picture, it’s cute.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised, either, if Bristol did have a say in her mom’s choice to accept the nomination.
“Anyway, of course there is a double standard for morality between people who preach it and those who don’t. The scandal isn’t on the act, it’s on the hypocrisy; the deficit between what one preaches and what one practices.”
So you’re holding a child to a parent’s standard? And I don’t recall Clinton ever saying “I have affairs and I love them and you should elect me anyway.” So I don’t get the double standard.
I do remember “It’s just sex” and “everybody does it” and “it’s a private matter that we shouldn’t even know about.” Strange that when the President is being investigated for rape and lies under oath about it, and publicly lies to America about it: then it’s a private affair that doesn’t matter. When a child of a politcal figure has sex, none of these standards apply. The liberals are the hypocrites right now. If “it’s just sex” and “everybody does it” and “it’s private” when the president, who was married, does it, then why doesn’t the same standard apply to a child who neither holds nor seeks political office?
Where are the jokes about Obama being supported, educated, and helped by a known and unrepentant terrorist? Where’s the poster making fun of his relation to Rev. Wright? Obama chose these relations and used them to get where he is. Bill Clinton, as a husband and in the Oval Office as President, chose to have an affair with an intern. Palin didn’t choose to get her daughter pregnant. If people can’t see the ginormous difference between condemning and mocking the daughter of a political figure, and condemning and mocking the actions of a political figure, then there’s a problem.
Sorry for the second post, but I just want to make something clear:
Make fun of all the politicians you want. Make fun of them for whatever reason you want. But I think that relatives, especially children, should be out of bounds for any reason. Unless they have done something to seek the spotlight themselves.
My problem isn’t the politics, it’s that I don’t think someone’s children should become targets. Especially when going through something as difficult as pregnancy while unmarried.
(Here’s a metaphor for Mormons) Pretend it’s another world. Imagine, if around the time President Monson became President of the Church, a grand-daughter got pregnant out of wed-lock. Imagine that news was plastered all over the world and nation and mocked President Monson and the grand-daughter for this. Imagine President Monson’s face up there where McCain’s is and his grand-daughter’s face where Bristol/Juno’s is. Is it so funny now? Ignoring the fact that I hate McCain and he’s nothing like Pres Monson, the point is: whether President Monson is a loser, or you hate him, or you disagree with him and want to make fun of him: go ahead. But don’t you think you should leave the relative who didn’t seek the spot-light out of it? Especially one who is still a child and is going through a tough time?
Whoops, the links I put up earlier have been broken. So to repeat:
If you need proof of media bias against conservatives involved in sex scandals, ask yourself why this is the cover of Us this week when we never saw a cover like this.
I think that all the attacks on Bristol Palin are despicable. This poster, however, is just lame. Perhaps if I had actually watched Juno, it might be somewhat funny, but without that, it’s just lame.
I like the use of Calibri in the poster. It’s fast replacing Garamond as my favorite font.
I agree that the children of politicians should be left alone. But if Palin wants her daughter’s pregnancy out of the media, she should stop putting Bristol and the boyfriend in front of cameras. If there are photo-ops, it’s going to be commented on, plain and simple.
But if she doesn’t bring Bristol out in front of the cameras, then there will be questions about why is she hiding her daughter? Is she ashamed of her? etc, etc. It’s a lose lose situation in that case. Anyway, she had to preemptively acknowledge the issue because of some of the vile rumors floating around.
Agreed, Bob.
Almost every single candidate brings their children with them on stage and to photo-ops… so does that mean open season on everything they’ve ever done as well? Your point is dumb, treen… you’re just spouting out what the media said today in defense of their mud-raking.
Can I now ridicule Obama’s little girls all I want? What’s the difference between them and Bristol, besides age? They are brought to photo-ops too. They support their dad… so I think I’ll report all the things they’ve done too.
That is a valid point. If bringing children to photo-ops is grounds for making fun of them and airing their dirty laundry for the whole nation to mock, then Obama’s kids are fair game. They’ve even appeared in commercials supporting their father.
I’d just like to point out that Obama even made a statement to the media to leave Bristol alone. He said that children should be off-limits. I’m not voting for him, but I appreciate that he did that. It tells me that it’s not necessarily the librals (at least, the politicians) that are ripping the poor girl apart, it’s mostly the media. They just seem to jump on scandal wherever they can find it – especially when it’s the Conservatives screwing up. It makes me sick. That poor child didn’t seek the spotlight, but she has every right to support her mother publicly, and she should be allowed do that without having all of her mistakes point out and mocked. I’m sure she’s already feeling them without the media’s help.
Here’s a completely dumb quote from a letter to the editor that was in our newspaper this morning:
“How can we now tell our children to abstain from sex before marriage when this spectacle was applauded by the delegates at the Republican National Convention?”
This doesn’t really have anything to do with anything, but I find it a little funny that on the B-sides soundtrack to the movie Juno, a band called The Bristols contributed a song titled “Little Baby.”