Drew Friedman: Barack Obama portrait

 Time Daily 2008 0807 Wponnuru 0811 Earlier this week, I posted artist Drew Friedman's terrific portrait of George W. Bush as The Joker. "Now, the flip side," he wrote me today.
Drew Friedman's Obama portrait (Time)

Previously on BB:
Drew Friedman: George Bush as The Joker
Get Illuminated! podcast: Drew Friedman, comic artist


  1. not witty enough to be acceptable Mike, also, please lose the sig.line, they are frowned on, thanks

  2. I find that more offensive than the New Yorker cover.

    The NY cover was poking fun at the ridiculous straw men the media was using to scare the public about Obama, whereas this poster uses a ridiculous straw man to scare the public about Obama (ie – people are attracted to him because of his rock star like fame, not because he has anything interesting or different to say… an absurd oversimplification when the current administration has an approval rating almost in the negatives.)

  3. Available for pre-order from your local comic shop: a t-shirt with an Alex Ross painting of Obama pulling his shirt open to reveal his superhero costume underneath.

    For serious.

  4. #4

    If you’ll look a bit more carefully at the image, you’ll see that the adulating crowd closest to Obama is the media.

    I’m not the least bit offended by the suggestion that the media’s enthusiasm for a particular candidate might be inappropriate.

  5. “ahhhh! baby you’re thinkin’ that i’m outta site! i know you saw me kickin’ at the gig last night, well…. maybe baby, that’s why they call me….the Twang Bar King!” -a. belew

  6. There is so much art being created about Obama. For several weeks I have been following a site called The Art of Obama – each day they post a new one.

    If you haven’t seen the variety, you should check it out. From billboards to t-shirts to graffiti – Barack has really inspired the art community.

  7. A pathetic “cry me a river” piece from Time. Aww Republicans brand is messed up and Obama did the smart thing and warned ahead about the dumb Roveian politics that’s sure to follow.

    This whole attack vector – Obama is popular and that’s bad – is just more FUD from the right. Get over yourselves already.

  8. Does Obama actually play electric guitar? Any other instrument? Reasonably well?

    (Seriously; musical skill can be an interesting character datum. Means a lot more than a lot of the nonsense that’s been debated, anyway.)

  9. “I’m not the least bit offended by the suggestion that the media’s enthusiasm for a particular candidate might be inappropriate.”

    It still seems reductionist, like the artist is deliberately ignoring the reasons why Obama has a more compelling story to tell. Since their overwhelming concern is chasing ratings and profit margins rather than pushing some secret agenda, I rarely see the media as more than passive participants in the creation of media darlings.

    But maybe my first posts were just overanalyzing. Nigel Warburton once wrote that we are often tempted to mistake visual art for an actual discussion of ideas, even though most works are, at best, just one liners.

  10. The day that Obama becomes synonymous with rock is the day that I stop listening to it.

    Friedman certainly wears his opinion on his sleeve.

  11. Well, Obama foes and fans alike should admit that when he wins, it will be because of his message and not because of his “image”.

    This isn’t to say that he hasn’t gained his share of “rock star” fame – people are mostly ignorant and easily swayed by imagery and symbols (remember when everybody liked Bush for awhile basically because there had been a terrorist attack and he looked stoic about it? It wasn’t substance but we still fell for it).

    A bunch of people will vote for McCain because he’s the Republican candidate and will provide lip service to principles that conservatives pretend to believe in, like smaller government and lower spending. Because neocons have hijacked the GOP, true conservatism no longer exists and both parties are porkbarrel all around.

    As a libertarian-conservative, I’m forced to make the decision: allow social spending I don’t believe in, or bombs and tanks and soldiers and napalm and war and death in the guise of patriotism? No dice – until a candidate comes along who represents my beliefs to the fullest I’m not voting for the Military Industrial Complex.

  12. (remember when everybody liked Bush for awhile basically because there had been a terrorist attack and he looked stoic about it? It wasn’t substance but we still fell for it)

    Who is this “we”? My main thought on 9-11-2001 was “wow, this is just like that Lone Gunmen episode a few months ago“.

    Depends on who your terrorists are. The men who conceived of it in the first place; a small faction. The Cold War is over, but with no clear enemy to stockpile against the arms market is flat. But bring down a fully loaded 727 into the middle of New York City, and you’ll find a dozen tinpot dictators all over the world just clamoring to take responsibility and begging to be smart-bombed.

    My secondary thought was how this will be sure to usher in a new era of police statism, and how all those hard wins against the clipper chip and arms restrictions on the exportation of strong cryptography would become meaningless. Then the U.S.A.P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act was passed and you should know the rest of this “War on Terror” smoke and mirrors fear-mongering.

  13. if we must sling epithets, let us do the responsible thing and use them against the helpless: There is still no proper legacy label for the drain-circler. At the moment I am torn between; “The Cheney Presidency” and “The Bush Tragedy”.

Comments are closed.