Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

Comments (22) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. cubefarmer

    cubefarmer said, 12 months ago

    It takes some serious effort for those has-been worshippers to stoop to a new low, this did it.

  2. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, 12 months ago

    While it is freedom of the press and he hasn’t been convicted (yet) of his crimes, this is still extremely poor taste and they are likely to lose a lot of readership over it. Not only that, but they just glamorized a (alleged) terrorist bomber. Good job RS: You just accomplished more with a single magazine cover photo than the terrorist organizations could have ever dreamed in a lifetime. Great recruiting tool.

  3. algurka

    algurka GoComics PRO Member said, 12 months ago

    What’s next? Time’s “Man of the year” award?

  4. STAN

    STAN GoComics PRO Member said, 12 months ago

    Gerome Project, are you against freedom of speech?

  5. rixtex

    rixtex GoComics PRO Member said, 12 months ago

    @Genome Project

    I don’t see anyone saying the govmint should keep them from publishing. Of course, I exercise my right not to buy and to criticize their lack of decency.

  6. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst GoComics PRO Member said, 12 months ago

    @Genome Project

    The press is free to say what it will, and we are all free to react as we do.

  7. denis1112

    denis1112 said, 12 months ago

    @Genome Project

    No we’re not against freedom of the press.We’re against spending our money on liberal crap like this and we won’t.I wonder how long before the dems want to give the useless magazine a tax supported subsidy so they can continue to publish this sort of crud,like PBS and NPR?

  8. Cynthia

    Cynthia GoComics PRO Member said, 12 months ago

    This is the media. They make big money by drawing ATTENTION, no matter if it is for the right or wrong reasons. So far, it works.

  9. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 12 months ago

    The problem here isn’t who is on the cover, it’s what we think being on the cover means.
    .
    This nation has become so Pavlovian to the methods of “Fame” that we assume that being on the cover means they are all “Cover Girls” and are to be admired for the fame that comes with such.
    .
    In this nation we have stopped distinguishing between “Famous” and “Infamous” (cue the references to The Three Amigos, the film that brought the word “Plethora” to the public attention and tried to do the same with the misunderstanding of the word “Infamous”). If one is famous, then they must be revered (see George Zimmerman as a case in point).
    .
    Have we been so indoctrinated into the world of the disclosure statement that when there isn’t the words “The views and actions of the pictured person do not reflect the views and opinions of the writers, photographers, management and/or staff of this magazine.” that we assume that the opposite is true?
    .
    Used to be that we would laugh that people needed such disclosure statements, like the ones on paper cups that said “Caution: Contents may be hot enough to melt the wax we use to hold this cup together.” And we’d laugh at the coffee seller that thought that just warning the person that they were in danger of serious bodily injury was enough cover such that they had no further worries.
    .
    Used to be… But now this example shows us just how important it is to warn Americans that their preconceptions may just be challenged each and every time that they are.
    .
    Ask yourself, “am I one of the people that needs to be warned about absolutely everything? Or am I the kind of person that is smart enough to figure these sorts of things out by myself?”
    .
    If you are offended by the picture of this fellow on the cover of a magazine, then you are probably a member of the former group. Therefore, your opinions only tend to dumb down the nation.

  10. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, 12 months ago

    @David

    Yes

  11. jack75287

    jack75287 said, 12 months ago

    @David

    Oh yes thats much better.

  12. jack75287

    jack75287 said, 12 months ago

    The issue with the Rolling Stones Magazine is will, what is its purpose, it was a Counter Culture product and now that Counter Culture has all the failings of what they were rebelling against.

    Lies about Vietnam by President Johnson, lies about Afghanistan and Iraq, abuse of power, look at the IRS, one of their lawyers is coming forward and naming names. Yes it is on Fox News. Believe it or don’t, I really don’t care.

    What happens to Stones now? Unless they go after the current administration they have no reason to be called any form of good information.

  13. jack75287

    jack75287 said, 12 months ago

    @onguard

    Oh yes thank you!

  14. ReasonsVentriloquist

    ReasonsVentriloquist said, 12 months ago

    @Nantucket19

    Valid point.
    .
    But I see this as being about the public perception, not about the actual matter of the facts.
    .
    My observation was more the “meta” than the phore.
    .
    You are right, the “Monster” does serve as a “disclaimer”, but not enough of one for those prone to think that “any press is good press”

  15. d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release

    d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release said, 12 months ago

    @David

    They would rather see this since women don’t interest these guys:

    Wipe yourselves after you’re done.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (7).