Congrats, Jonah, you’re on the cover twice!

Wise Dumb Latina-

Isn’t that (wait for it) sophomoric?

*ducks thrown objects*

To be followed soon by another plea for donations, I’m sure, since subscription cancellations will roll in like April avalanches in Colorado.

I’m just waiting for the takedown notice from Rupert. 😉 He does own that awful rag of a magazine, right?

This is just to see who’s at home intertubing of a Fri. night, isn’t it?

So I’ll have you all know I’m sending this from my Blackberry or iPhone or something, from a club in L. A. so trendy & hep I’m not allowed to reveal its name.

Also, the concept (& Photoshoppery) is effing perfect!

Now will someone run down to the newstand or shell out for a digital subscription & get us Jonah’s self-defense attempt?

Not Murdoch, it’s some Buckley Family Trust or non-profit org, I think.

And it’s going to be mighty hard to take down a printed dead-tree magazine cover. Ha ha.

So I’ll have you all know I’m sending this from my Blackberry or iPhone or something, from a club in L. A. so trendy & hep I’m not allowed to reveal its name.

As long as it’s not from the grotto of the Playboy Mansion, in which you’d no doubt be cavorting with Michelle Malkin.

Isn’t that (wait for it) sophomoric?

Yes. It’s also a fairer and more well reasoned response than is deserved.

Pools & hot tubs in this town lead to hideous infections. STD soup.

Wait, when did Obama nominate Tojo from outlandish anti-Japanese Propaganda circa 1944 to to Supreme Court

Hmm, I don’t think this one’s wise.

Senator Dodd: Judge Lopez, can you explain your understanding of ‘original intent’?

K-Lo: Umm. Are you going to eat that donut?

Man, did I just laugh. Thanks Sadly No! artisans.

With the magazine industry also circling the bowl, how is NR doing anyway?

Is the point of the cover to make obvious to everyone how uninformed the National Review is? What does a Latina have to do with Indian (the ones from the real India, the ones Columbus thought he had found) mythology?

I need about 40% of the Latino vote to get re-elected. Thanks guys.

You tell’em John.

When did the Editors start writing for National Review?

National Review cover designers are easy marks.

That’s not *really* the cover, is it? It can’t be. Even they can’t possibly be that dumb. Right?

And if it is, how the hell do they get paid more than I do?

Hey all,

What I don’t get is why they went for such a bigoted version of the eyes there. I mean, traditional renderings of the Buddha don’t have a look like that. What’s the point other than to say “chingy-chong-chong, ching-chong-ching.” (Imagine a tune you’re familiar with from depictions of Asians in Western cinema.) Pure ignorance?

See: http://images.google.com/images?q=buddha Eyes depicted horizontal, like you know, normal people’s eyes.

Now, normally caricature is about exaggerating existing features, so maybe this is some sort of abstract impressionism. http://images.google.com/images?q=sonia+sotomayor vs. http://images.google.com/images?q=caricature

And the teeth, Sheesh, don’t forget the teeth.

Meh… could be better. The deer should be on fire.

Hey Yue,

Well she has smiled at least one time on camera, so of course a caricature is going to have huge teeth — look at every version of Obama that isn’t all ears.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/05/26/sotomayor.latino/art.sotomayor.latino.jpg

The thing is, Tintin’s parody is far more respectful to J-Lo than the NRO parody is to Sotomayor or Chinese Americans.

I congratulate you on your photoshopping–both ideas and technical skills. Your improved cover is a thing of beauty.

I am puzzled at the approximation of human thinking that is presumably behind the original cover. I guess this is the original of the picture. It is the second image resulting from a search on “Buddha” using the Great Gazoogle. (Finding images is hard work.)
Scroll down almost to the bottom.
http://www.lilasakura.com/index.php?pr=Meditation,_Japa,_Healing
However the same elements occur in multiple images because the picture represents a very specific event in the life of the Buddha, the “first sermon of Gautama Buddha at the Deer Park.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautama_Buddha

After becoming enlightened, two merchants whom the Buddha met, named Tapussa and Bhallika became the first lay disciples. . . . The Buddha thus journeyed to Deer Park near V?r??as? (Benares) in northern India, he set in motion the Wheel of Dharma by delivering his first sermon to the group of five companions with whom he had previously sought enlightenment.

So, the Buddha is supposed to be a bit more than “wise” at this point. He has attained the supreme state of liberation called Nirvana.

So what makes this image particularly appropriate for an American, Catholic Latina? Well, typically Buddhists have been less likely to call for the death of people parodying images of their prophet than Muslims. And naturally the Goldbergs and Lopez’s of the world won’t parody Christian icons. I think their real inspiration was the old stereotype of the guru on the mountaintop frequently resorted to by the B.C. comic strip.

Whatever, National Review. But I’m an atheist. Possibly believers of various other creeds will see things differently.

I’m at wit’s end trying to imagine what that staff meeting was like:

“Wait, you guys, I have this great idea: why don’t we dress her up like Buddha, but give her some ‘O Hri! I hrappy Sino-Jap!’-eyes.’ The wetbacks know how much better we like the slant eyes, how could they not take it as a compliment?”

Because really, that’s their defense: Asians are better than Latinos, so you can’t call us racist if we compare Sotomayor to an Asian.

Hey Cowalker,

I agree that’s it’s obviously just a straight Photoshop on top of something like http://home.swipnet.se/gostaratna/Buddha18.jpg — I think maybe that the thought process started out more along the lines of “Confucius say!” but it wouldn’t be as easy to ‘shop the caricature onto some old shangshui-style rendering of Confucius and get the same news-stand recognition. Do they call that ‘pop’ or something in the biz? Whatever.

In my book being compared to the Buddha wouldn’t be an insult; except for the laughable caricature it’s really nothing at all. I mean the Buddha-part is just a prop, filler to project the bad caricature on to.

I enthusiastically endorse the Republican Party of the Confederate Free Market Baptist Dixie Uprising working every moment to ensure that no non-Southern non-white voters ever vote for them. They should focus on remaining pure. That’ll do it.

The scariest image on this cover is “Jonah Goldberg ON his critics.” Critics, do NOT allow Jonah to get on you.

Then they were like, she’s from Puerto Rico, right?* You know, the West Indies? India? It’s friggin’ perfect!

In reality, though, I think they are going for a ‘Dalai Lama’ look. Check it: http://www.toonpool.com/user/1667/files/dalai_lama_215925.jpg

*Or the Bronx, same diff

Whatever, National Review. But I’m an atheist. Possibly believers of various other creeds will see things differently.

Not offensive, but does show a complete lack of comprehension about Buddhism, but no surprise really.

I don’t think the buddha is technically at ‘Nirvana’, looks like contemplation or some kind of thing. However, this make the whole scene even less comprehensible.

Fun/boring fact: The fat, smiling Buddha you sometimes see is actually Buddhai, a different chap who’s known as the “Laughing Buddha” and is all about eating and pleasure and indulgence and all that malarkey. The thin, effeminate-looking version of Buddha is actually Buddha, which makes sense if you think about it, as Buddha wasn’t exactly the type to be constantly stuffing his face like, say, the staff of the National Review.

“Jonah on his critics”. Jesus pole-dancing Christ. You can just imagine the Wilde-esque wit and ironclad reasoning behind that one. Or maybe it’ll just say YOU ARE POOPYHEADS AND ARE NOT SERIUS LIKE ME AND MOM.

That cover is a joke.

I mean the real…uhhh original one.

Hey Kiki,

You can just spell it Budai, since it’s from his Chinese name. Those curious can check out the WP page at Budai.

She needs to be holding a sammich. Or a slice. Or something from the pastry cart.

I LOL’d — for realz.

The thing is, Tintin’s parody is far more respectful to J-Lo than the NRO parody is to Sotomayor or Chinese Americans.

Yes, exactly. Just what I was thinking. And leave it to NR to manage a racially offensive twofer.

Traditional depictions of Shakyamuni (Gautama) Buddha show his eyes in the meditation pose in which the eyes are horizontal, barely-open slits. NIrvana is what an enlightened individual achieves at the moment of death. IIRC Buddha was considered fully enlightened during his lifetime and went to Nirvana when he died. Thus ends the Buddha lesson for the day, and now that I’m feeling all Buddhish I can’t add the entirely non-compassionate and negativity-laden thoughts that have crossed my mind about this mag cover.

You realize of course that the NRO’s cover is all in fun and not meant to be offensive to anyone and anyone who does say it is offensive is just a PC Nazi liberal fascist. Whereas your cover is full of icky nasty sexism and racism and PROVES you’re just a hypocrite who is jealous because conservative women are way hotter than liberul women.

So, does NRO go out of their way to be offensive in order to create controversy and thus boost sales among moron-americans . As in “the Liberal Fascists are trying to silence us! You’d better support freedom by purchasing our magazine, or the Terrorists have won!”

Cuz I can’t explain that caricature otherwise.

I see the P.C. crowd is really angry at the cover, and revealed them for the anti-free speech totalitarians they really are.

Mission Accomplished for NR!

Not Murdoch, it’s some Buckley Family Trust or non-profit org, I think.

Whatever it is, it’s not enough to keep them from begging for money every time they turn around. You’d think that Buckley would’ve left enough to keep them at least close to solvency, even if they still had to sell subscriptions and the like….

Doughy answers his critics- that should keep the presses rolling for another year or so.

Yet another WTF moment from this crowd. They keep coming, like the candy on Lucy’s conveyor belt.

I guess they bounced the version of her half-asleep, wearing a sombrero. Someone at the top thought this one was “more subtle”.

Hilarious.

I see the P.C. crowd is really angry at the cover, and revealed them for the anti-free speech totalitarians they really are.

Egad — the cover has opened a fissure in the time-space continuum, and people are rushing through from 1989!

“and revealed them for the anti-free speech totalitarians they really are.”

Assuming this isn’t parody and is meant sincerely…

Did somebody forget to sign up for that free troll upgrade? Why are we still dicking around with trolls who don’t know the difference between disagreement and a totalitarian suppression of free speech?

Do I (read: Brad, Tintin, Gavin, HTML, D. Arist., etc.) have to do *everything* around here?

The fat, smiling Buddha you sometimes see is actually Buddhai, a different chap who’s known as the “Laughing Buddha” and is all about eating and pleasure and indulgence and all that malarkey.

Also known as Hotei in Japan. He’s a jolly fellow. I’ve got a small statue on my desk.

Why are we still dicking around with trolls who don’t know the difference between disagreement and a totalitarian suppression of free speech?

More the point, why are we still dicking around with trolls who don’t know the difference between being “really angry” and ridiculing?

The NR is highlighting Judge Sotomayor’s 380-3 judicial record. That’s really a winning strategy. Actually, NR doesn’t care about winning, just scoring (what they think) deep points. She will be Justice Sotomayor when the new term starts in October, and NR will be further marginalized. If this was planned by Obama, it couldn’t have worked out better. Have the wingtards expend all their fire on a middle-of-the-road nominee like Sotomayor, and when the next Justice is replaced, enter Judge Diane Wood, a real liberal.

Where are the Frito Banditos?

They keep coming, like the candy on Lucy’s conveyor belt.

I could make several jokes about fat fRighties but I won’t ‘cos I’m classy that way.

The NR is highlighting Judge Sotomayor’s 380-3 judicial record.

Guess they want to ape Rove’s “Use Their Strengths Against Them” schtick … but sadly for them, with no real means to abuse that statistic, it’s just free press for Sotomayor’s flat-out phenomenal legal skillz.

Or, to translate into Wingnuttian, a “slam dunk!!1!!1!”

Almost as if they were going to leave a flaming bag of dogshit on liberals’ doorsteps, knock & flee – but liked the pretty design on the bag so much that they took it home instead … while it was still on fire.

Mmmmmmm, Wingnut Patchouli!

I think the whole strategy of the NR is to be brain-numbingly stupid. Someone thought (and in a kind of crafty way) that if enough raw dumbness could be inserted into the marketplace of ideas the entire national conversation would grind to a halt, thereby guaranteeing that little or nothing would change. And that’s the whole point of conservatism, to maintain the status quo. To tiptoe towards change.

Bringing the entire political conversation to a screeching halt is the very point of the NR. Injecting massive amounts of Stupid into the national conversation simply drives out rational players who get tired of being offered hubcaps and burning insulation for dinner.

The only problem with this strategy is the fact that conservatives lack a sense of the absurd. Snark and humor at least keep the rest of us sane while they self-immolate.

Just swell. Bravo.

Jonah answers his critics:

“While it’s true that my critics have found 99% of what I write to be false, and that they have provided citations and documentation to prove as much, they have failed to engage my arguments in any substantive way. Pointing out that something I wrote is factually incorrect is, really, just another ad-hominen attack from poopy-pants jealous people. Which really demonstrates my point.”

Wow. They’re not even trying to hide that they’re just petulant children.

Original is as subtle and edgy as a cinder block.

Fool for Thought said,
June 6, 2009 at 16:31

“I see the P.C. crowd is really angry at the cover, and revealed them for the anti-free speech totalitarians they really are.
Mission Accomplished for NR!”

Isn’t it cute when the wingnuts try to argue constitutional law or free speech? Its like getting fashion advice from a circus clown. “One should never where big red floppy shoes after labor day!” “Your rubber nose should always match your belt buckle!”

Where = wear

I did not know Tiny Tim was a Latina. Where’s his uke?