http://michellemalkin.com/
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/200...er-barack.html


No liberal outrage here for the Rolling Stone Cartoon



This Big Lipped racist Condi Is OK Too http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/002864.php


Where Were The Libs On This One?


And All These Are OK> http://www.democracy-project.com/archives/000763.html

OH MY GOD! HOW COULD THEY DO THIS! THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!! ALL THE CARTOONS ABOVE ARE OK BUT THIS ONE IS IN BAD TASTE!

Um, some questions:

1. Why do you believe that "liberals" think the other cartoons are all okay, but this one isn't?

2. Did you notice all the conservative outrage about the cartoons Malkin mentions? So how is that different from some liberals objecting to the New Yorker cartoon?
http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog/20...ietnamese.html
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=67418
http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=707941
http://worshippingchristian.org/blog/?p=4198

3. Does Obama "finding a pair" mean he can't say he thinks a cartoon is "tasteless"? I don't think he called for it to be retracted, or suggested the New Yorker had no right to print it, or anything like that.

__________________
Man up.

If your going to delete my message how about deleating the one that is missing the pictures? But Im sure thats too much to ask. Talk about fixing the post!

Your first post has all the pictures that were in the second one, as far as I could tell; that's why I deleted the second one.

I see a McCain cartoon, a Condi cartoon, the Petraeus ad and the New Yorker cover.

__________________
Man up.

So you can see all the (4) pictures on your computer? They are still visable in the origional post for you but not me?

If he does, Jesse Jackson will just cut them off!

Now thats Funny!