Would he piss on an image of Obama?

Larry David found comedy fodder in piety on the latest episode of his series, “Curb Your Enthusiasm.’

On the show’s most recent installment, which aired Sunday, David urinates on a painting of Jesus Christ, causing a woman to believe the painting depicts Jesus crying.

During Sunday’s episode, David, who created, wrote and produced “Seinfeld,” visits a bathroom in his assistant’s home and splatters urine on a picture of Jesus. Instead of wiping it off, David leaves the restroom. Minutes later, David’s assistant enters the bathroom and concludes that Jesus is crying. She then summons her mother to the bathroom, where both women kneel in prayer.

I’ve never seen this show, does anyone know if the assistant is recognizably ethnic? Is this “brave” comedian also taking a swipe at Hispanic (or for that matter Italian or Irish) piety? I’m just asking.

Look, there is aways some satirical fun to be had at the expense of those people who find images of religious figures in piece of toast, and in tree stumps and oil stains, but there is also a line. An image of Christ is merely an image, true, but it is an image that is sacred to over a billion people on the planet. Deal Hudson, in the linked article says:

“Why is it that people are allowed to publicly show that level of disrespect for Christian symbols? If the same thing was done to a symbol of any other religions — Jewish or Muslim — there’d be a huge outcry. It’s simply not a level playing field.”

Forget Jewish, forget Muslim. If, let’s say, Kelsey Grammer had done precisely the same thing on his show, but using an image of, oh, let’s just say ferinstance, Barack Obama, do you think he’d still have a career?

Frankly, the idea of an image of a pissed-on Obama “weeping,” and some of his fans falling to their knees over it, would have a lot of satirical value; it would offer commentary both on the excesses of religious and political worship, and offend fewer people than David’s cowardly joke.

It takes no courage for an rich, unbelieving “artist” to piss on Christ. After all, that’s been done before. And Jesus voluntarily submitted himself to much worse, which means nothing an “artist” does to any image of Christ can do anything but reflect on the spiritual poverty of the “artist,” himself. For an “artist” to use Jesus for a cheap joke is about as “courageous” and “bold” as making a joke about George W. Bush before an audience of like-thinkers; it takes no courage at all.

But for an “artist” to make an identical satirical “joke” on Obama and his adorers? That would take great courage. That would be bold, and daring. And it would speak reassuring volumes about free speech in America.

I would not want to see it. I would not want to see the image of any American President so ill-used; he’s my president, too.

But if Larry David could see the humor in pissing on Christ and the excesses of Catholic piety, surely he must see the humor in pissing on Obama, and the excesses of Obama worship?

Haha. It’s all so funny, isn’t it? Are you laughing? Are you not entertained?

UPDATE: Instalanche! Thanks, Glenn!

Deacon Greg: Davis has his moments of brilliance; this wasn’t one of them

Christians in Exile; The Past is Prologue
Madonna, the DaVinci Code & Milk and Honey
Hot Air has the clip

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • http://domestic-vocation.blogspot.com Christine the Soccer Mom

    For a really touching view of Catholic piety (especially in relation to images), you could watch Henry Poole is Here. It had humor, but it was quite respectful of Catholics.

    Personally, I’m glad I stay away from most TV, and especially anything on the BBC. Yuck.

  • Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » THE ANCHORESS: Would Larry David Piss On An Image Of Obama? Of course not. That would be sacrileg…

  • http://www.savkobabe.blogspot.com Gayle Miller

    Using such “stunts” in a so-called comedy program is quite indicative of intellectual bankruptcy! And ethical poverty.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Would he piss on an image of Obama? » The Anchoress | A First Things Blog -- Topsy.com

  • seguin

    It offends me. Not the peeing thing, but how damn LAZY that joke is. Nothing more than a cheap laugh for the “sophisticated” set. Basically it’s a fart joke for the pseudo-intelligentsia.

  • BJ

    Q: How many Anchoresses does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

    A: That’s not funny!

  • http://n/a kevin barry

    How about a joke where Larry David urinates on the constitution?
    Oh wait, his buddy in D.C. is already doing that.
    Never mind.

  • Rob S.

    The assistant was an overweight, thirtysomething, white woman who exposed her paunchy midrift

    [Oh, so she's "fat and stupid"? -admin]

  • http://www.khaaan.com furious

    Great, another show that I used to enjoy even when it irritated me has now crossed the line.

    If this were another religion whose name I won’t mention, Mr. David would be sharing a security detail under an assumed name with Salman Rushdie.

    But that’s why he chose Catholics, I guess.

  • J.

    I had a priest once explain in a sermon that while Senfeld was “funny” it was at the expense of the characters and audience and therefore, it humor was cruel and actually unfunny if thought about on it’s own (i.e. the Soup Nazi is funny but it funny at the expense of those who must deal with this person). The Senfeld characters were vapid and thoughtless even with each other.

    On the other hand, the priest pointed out, Home Improvement (which was showing during the same time Senfeld was) was humor which although self deprecating, was encouraging, en aging moments in a family as the grew closer to each other and people they met. He said he stopped watching Senfeld and started watching Home Improvement.

    After that sermon I realized what I hated about watch Senfeld…it was cruel bully-like humor. I stopped watching too. Although I hadn’t seen Home Improvement I tuned in to see what it was like and found it took everyday family situations and with humor discussed issues that families and others address everyday versus the humor at the expense of my best friends oddities.

    David’s humor is largely expressed on Senfeld, stupid, demeaning and really lacking in humor (though easy to laugh at because it isn’t you).

  • JJ

    This is what happens when a show is going down the tubes. They have to do something “outrageous” to try and get some play. They act like they have balls because they do something like this, let’s see them piss on a pic of MO(pbuh) if they think they got some.

  • MarkJ

    “Mr. David?”

    “Yes, what is it?”

    “There’s a call from a Mr. J. Christ on Line 2. He sounds pretty upset. He says he’s got your number and that he’s already prepared a ‘special welcome’ for you in the next world. Should I ring him through?”

    “Umm, errr, no. Uhhh, tell him that, ummm, I’m pitching a movie deal and, errr, I’ll call back. And while you’re at it, call Sprint. I think that guy has been calling my cell all morning and I need to change my number PDQ. Oye vay!”

  • http://domestic-vocation.blogspot.com Christine the Soccer Mom

    Seguin, good point. It’s petty bathroom humor for those who consider themselves too smart for that opiate of the masses stuff.

  • Jeff

    You know a situation is completely hilarious when you laugh less at the joke itself than you do at the people who can’t take the joke.

    Maybe if Jews or Muslims had long traditions of seeing Abraham or Muhammad in tortillas, firewood and grilled cheese sandwiches, they would have made logical targets for the satire. But they haven’t. It’s the same reason Groundskeeper Willie referred to the French as “cheese-eating surrender monkeys.” It wouldn’t have made any sense if he had tried to apply the insult to Brazilians or Norwegians instead.

    Wikipedia documents this phenomenon pretty well:

    Sadly, I don’t think the word “Allah” with a tear on it would have had quite the same believability.

    [If you actually read my piece then you know I DID say that there is room to joke about this stuff. There is also a line, and I think my question is a valid one. Would people be doubled over with laughter if the circumstances were as I described them re Obama and the same sort of satire -satire that actually WOULD have a basis in the absurd "He's the One" Messianic excess we've seen among Obama's "true believers". I wonder how well they'd take that joke. I wonder how quick they'd be to accept the advice that they should learn how to laugh at it. My experience with the left is that they mostly cannot laugh at themselves. The right is only slightly better, but better.-admin]

  • http://primordialslack.blogspot.com Joan of Argghh!

    C.S. Lewis addressed this in That Hideous Strength. Remember that our protagonist, Mark, was asked to stomp on a crucifix:

    “This,” said Mark, pointing with an undefined reluctance to the horrible white figure on the cross. “This is all surely a pure superstition.”


    “Well, if so, what is there objective about stamping on the face? Isn’t is just as subjective to spit on a thing like this as to worship it? I mean–damn it all–if it’s only a bit of wood, why do anything about it?”

    “That is superficial. If you had been brought up in a non-Christian society, you would not be asked to do this. Of course, it is a superstition; but it is that particular superstition which has pressed upon our society for a great many centuries. It can be experimentally shown that it still forms a dominant system in the subconscious of many individuals whose conscious thought appears to be wholly liberated. An explicit action in the reverse direction is therefore a necessary step towards complete objectivity. It is not a question for a priori discussion. We find it in practice that it cannot be dispensed with.”

  • http://www.erud-awakening.blogspot.com Gina

    Such “art” reflects an absolute poverty of spirit. We’re supposed to pity such people and consider them better than ourselves. Maybe there’s some saint somewhere who can do that..

    We started to watch this series on DVD, but I vetoed it because I found it dumb and unfunny. Looks like I was proven right.

  • jill


    Why would it be the word “Allah” instead of an image of “Allah”?

    Oh, yeah. Graven images are punishable by death in the ROP. Maybe a tear on the graven image, then mass beheadings would get a laugh.

  • RL

    Jeff said: “Maybe if Jews or Muslims had long traditions of seeing Abraham or Muhammad in tortillas, firewood and grilled cheese sandwiches, they would have made logical targets for the satire.”

    Yeah, maybe if Muslims had a recent history of launching suicide attacks, it would be appropriate to print a cartoon highlighting this violent trend.

    Oh, and here’s a story of a nine-month old baby whose birthmark is said to be verses from the Koran (it’s not just Catholics that claim these small miracles)

    But I agree any such attempt to parody President Obama would have been met with outrage.

  • clorox

    “It’s simply not a level playing field.”

    Are you suggesting it should be?

    [Are you mistaking me for a Deal Hudson quote? -admin]

  • CD

    Mr. David could have achieved the same point, that is, skewering those who see evidence of miracles in ‘weeping’ statues and pictures, by having the character wash his hands and flick them dry, flicking water onto the picture. Same point without the bathroom vulgarity.

  • Terry

    Jeff, Jeff, Jeff,

    Christians (and Jews) can take these jokes and have for a long time, so no marks for originality here. The reason you don’t see the Larry Davids of the comedy world joking about Mohammad is because they are afraid that someone would kill them – they are chickenshits. What does Wikipedia say about killing or threatening someone’s life over a joke?

  • Marty

    Seguin—absolutely correct, a joke for the lazy

    JJ–it’s called “Jump the Shark”

  • PS

    OK, OK, here. First off, there is a running gag in this show that Larry is completely lost when it comes to his own religion (Judaism) and, whenever Christianity shows up, (his wife/ex-wife and her family are Christian) he usually makes an ass of himself. He has, to date: set a living nativity scene on fire, winds up stabbing some dude through the hands with a Passion of the Christ Nail (I think that was what happens), eaten the cookies baked for a cookie nativity scene and now this.

    He has also asked for (and received) from his Rabbi (on the show) approval for a one-time extra-marital affair.

    Aside from religion, he has also done such things as pick up a hooker so that he can take the HOV lane, screamed at a blind man, pretended to be mentally handicapped so that he doesn’t have to share office space, refused to use anything other than the term “mulatto” for a mix-race child, screamed at his 12-year old nephew for not teaching him a magic trick, etc, etc.

    Like Seinfeld, Larry exists in a world where just about everyone is morally bankrupt, self-involved, and terrible. Unlike Seinfeld, Larry is by far the most morally bankrupt and self-involved person of all.

    This show is sort of like a couple of the stories in Cantebury Tales. Everyone is repugnant and their repugnance is generally simply the matter of taking our own flaws and vices and kicking them up a notch.

  • dry valleys

    I laud those cartoonists who mocked Mohammed, especially since they were physically threatened for doing so. Theirs was a brave act which needed to be done.

    There’s no glory in pissing on Christ. But I do think if people hadn’t stood up & laughed at the church decades & centuries ago, we would not have the freedom of open belief or non-belief that we currently enjoy. The work of the pioneering atheists, the people who founded Freethinker & so on, is something I also laud. Their mockery, & the likes of Life Of Brian, ended up being forces for good in my view.

    I take the paleocon criticism that it was the opening of the floodgates, the beginning of the end etc. But then, is it not the right who are actually largely responsible? Look at that well-known Trotskyist agitator, Rupert Murdoch, one of the main forces behind dumbing down, who was directly enabled in ways that can be proven (& are from time to time cited as great achievements) by known left-wing firebrands like, erm, Reagan & Thatcher.

    Damian Thompson’s vicious and crazy attack on Richard Dawkins

    I am led to believe Thompson is a pal of yours. He is not really my cup of tea. But I prefer him to “Archbishop Cranmer” (right-wing Anglican), whom I dislike quite strongly.

    I have been wondering why social cons defend neoliberalism when it is an agent of the changes they deplore. Though I myself am no friend to popular culture, & don’t have a TV.

  • PS

    Terry, I am pretty sure there are at least a couple Muslim jokes on this show.

  • dries

    Jeff, Muslims got their collective panties in a bunch some years ago, when a graphic used on the lid of Burger King ice-cream cones resembled the Arabic spelling of ‘Allah”, then CAIR got pissed off at Nike’s logo for exactly same reason. Apparently Nike swish was holy too. My favourite exercise in stupidity was recall of “blasphemous” Yokohama tires in Middle East. Allah’s name was spotted amid tires threads. One cannot make it up.

  • AT

    Since Mr Davids is such an ‘icon’ of the entertainment industry, revered for his comedic ‘genius’, a little golden shower on his image (or person) giving him the appropriate odor of Hollywood sanctity would certainly make me laugh.

  • EJHill

    When Seinfeld was on it was hailed as “the show about nothing.” In the Wikipedia entry it says “Seinfeld focused on minutiae, such as waiting in line at the movies, going out for dinner, buying a suit and, basically, coping with the petty injustices of life.”

    Those of a “certain age” recognized that format. For twenty years it was called the The Jack Benny Show. Only Jack was funnier and found a way to be entertaining without resorting to masturbation jokes.

  • PS

    Dry Valleys: lot of name dropping going on there.

    I’m not sure who you think these atheists are that “stood up to the Church.” The country with perhaps the strongest protections for religious practices (the US) was founded by a bunch of protestants. Atheists (of the old school, meaning, not Dawkins) worked hard for atheism as a competing belief system (this would be the atheists that started appearing in the 19th cen. Very few open atheists exist before then in western society), which is true. That isn’t to say, though, that by and large competing views weren’t already permitted. New Atheists, like Dawkins, ought to have their positions shown for the little messes of bigotry that they are. I will never forget, being an atheist at the time, the absolute scorn and condescension with which I saw Dawkins treat my Methodist friend at a lecture.

    If the right was to blame, then they ought to be blamed. That doesn’t prohibit them from fixing the problem.

    A “social con” of certain strains may defend neoliberalism. Catholic social cons sometimes fall into this category, but it’s been my experience that, with the exception of pundits who are clearly in it for the ideology and not the dictates of their perceived vocation as Catholics, there are few informed Catholics who take neoliberalism as the ideal, though perhaps as the best system possible at the time. Both the current and previous Popes, often considered harbringers of a new conservative Church movement by folks on the left, expressed a lot of discomfort with capitalism itself, much less neoliberalism.

  • Greg

    If we get too upset about things like this are we not almost rewarding people like Larry David with our outrage? He WANTS to provoke us, does he not?

  • c matt

    You know a situation is completely hilarious when you laugh less at the joke itself than you do at the people who can’t take the joke.

    No, the joke was stupid because it was insulting – I could rewrite the scene to make it less insulting in two seconds -

    Rather than pee, he could simply accidentally splash water on it while washing his hands, some dilemma as he decides whether he should try wiping it off and risk smearing the picture, or just leave it as it is.

    But then, he probably doesn’t wash his hands.

  • Joe Y

    I applaud the earnestness of this conversation, as it demonstrates the seriousness and respect with which conservatives treat culture, even semi-hostile popular culture.

    I can’t always watch “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” for the same reason I occassionally couldn’t watch “Seinfeld:” the squirm-inducing behavior of many of the characters.

    However, I disagree with the majority view. First of all, and most importantly, Larry David’s character is someone who endeavors to do the right moral thing and frequently does, but is torn to pieces by his own petty selfishness and self-obsession. The great thing about it is that it is all right out in the open, a caricature of every man and woman’s daily struggle to behave morally.

    In that sense, it’s a step up from “Seinfeld,” the closing episode of which, for those who remember, featured an hour-long trial of the four characters on charges of violating a “good samaritan” law, and watching apathetically a woman getting mugged. Every person whom they had wronged in the past testified against them, and they were all sentenced to a year in jail. The final scene showed them in a cage, waiting to be transported away.

    Larry David wrote that episode and was one of the few people who thought it the perfect ending to the show. Frankly, I think CS Lewis would have loved “Curb Your Enthusiasm.” Think of Screwtape’s advice of ensnaring mortals with the temptation, sin, egoism, and self-justification of the everyday, the prosaic, and the quotidian.

    Equally, however, humanity can find salvation there too. One of my favorite episodes is when Larry brings all manner of trouble upon himself by refusing to give candy to two older teenage girls on Halloween, because they weren’t wearing costumes. When challenged, one says, “I’m going as my sister.” He still refuses, though his wife insists he give her candy. Overnight, they trash his house. He calls the police. “Why didn’t you just give them the candy?” the ask. He explains, but they look at him incomprehendingly.

    All of one season was of the compications incurred when Larry and his wife take in an entire family made homeless by Hurricane Katrina.

    It’s a very subtle show, but also very moral and honest–and obsene and at times disgusting. Essentially, it’s the hopeful Jewish comic version of Flannery O’Connor.

    [See, if I watched tv, I might be inclined to look into that...sounds interesting. -admin]

  • Joe Y

    Oh, and by the way, I’m sure he’d love to piss on a picture of Obama.

  • Jeanie

    The funniest–and most honest–comedy about Christianity was in the BBC series, Coupling. The episodes in which Jane dated a Christian (season 3, sample) treated Christianity with respect. The Brits seem to be able to be funny about it without turning the Christian into the joke.

  • http://vita-nostra-in-ecclesia.blogspot.com Bender

    Enough already with the passive-aggressive tactic of pissing on someone and then indignantly asking, “What’s the matter? You can’t take a joke?”

  • NanB

    I agree with Jeanie; the Brits have one up on us when it comes to humor. It seems as though a lot of American humor is based on vulgarity.

  • KansasGirl

    What a sad small self-loathing little jewish man. I’m not concerned at all, Jesus isn’t either.

  • dry valleys

    PS- I understand that social cons may be against socialism, & there are ideologies which go out of their way to persecute religion & are thus worse than classical liberalism- but this, as a staunchly individualist creed, is something I’d find it hard to reconcile with Catholicism- which I’d think was easier to fit with a Rod Dreher- esque belief or paleoconservatism.

    These atheist pioneers I was talking about are people like my model, Bradlaugh. His persecutors claimed to be Christians, but were exploiting religion for political gain. They were slapped down by Gladstone, a fervent believer who preferred honest doubt to fraudulent religion.

    I know that popes are sceptical of unfettered capitalism. I would expect nothing else. But I see little more than token nods in that direction here. Yes, yes, it’s possible to have doubts about neoliberalism & still totally oppose Obama’s agenda (paleocons manage it) but I see amongst right-wing Catholics more a celebration of status-quo capitalism as it is.

    Myself, I am quite sceptical about the state as I think it is not very efficient & often does more harm than good & is an unacceptable incursion into individual liberty. But I am not dogmatically anti-state & am not a libertarian. Thus, & because I am socially liberal on every matter except immigration, I identify with “the left” rather than “the right”, inasmuch as those terms mean anything.

    As for Dawkins himself. I like his books. I have not seen this arrogant, dismissive attitude others identify in him. I think his brusqueness is due to frustration at people ignoring what he says & misrepresenting him, & because he has a genuine passion for a naturalistic worldview & is exasperated. I wouldn’t view him as a natural authoritarian.

    I prefer him to the Hitch. As a liberal universalist, I am (for example) on the side of the Iranian opposition or the Afghan women & girls doing battle against the Taliban. But under the influence of Larison etc, I have become more sceptical about military means & American presence being teh ways to deal with these. I am not well disposed towards the Republican attacks on Obama for not being hawkish enough.

    [See, I prefer Hitchens...but that could simply be because I think he is a hell of a writer -admin]

  • ECW

    Larry David is probably the funniest guy on TV. I love Curb and love(d) Seinfeld. I’m also a God loving, practicing Christian. I vote republican. While I can see the offense and do not excuse it, in the context of the show it fits right in with every episode of Curb – ugly, uncomfortable misunderstandings. No, Mr. David probably wouldn’t piss on an Obama pic. And, yeah, it was probably on purpose that he chose an image of Jesus Christ to offend. But, as a Christian, this sort of thing rolls off my back. It should yours too. We’ve been taught that this is what unbelievers do. It’s part of our calling. Does that mean I can’t laugh at a genuinley funny show? Heck no. I’m thankful that I have a belief and God that lets me appreciate offensive idiot humor even at my expense. God plays his own jokes, after all. Larry David’s left-wing wife left him and took half his money so she could be with some rugged deadbeat “republican” bloke. Enough with this immediate lashing out. Trust your faith, your savior, yourself. Stop worrying or bringing attention to people who want nothing more than to offend you and garner your caterwauling. Larry David is very funny. But he’s also a miserable man whose wife left him for his philosophical antithesis. If you must, take solace in that. :)

    [Longtime readers know I am not easily offended...nothing Madonna does, or Ron Brown writes, bothers me, and I found the chocolate crucifixion to actually be a beautiful bit of sculpture. Like you, I figure this is part of what Christians should expect from the world. I merely wonder what the reaction would be if David played the same scene with an Obama picture in an Obama-loving household. I somehow doubt that would be shrugged off. admin]

  • dry valleys

    Comment has done a runner- I was responding to what PS said.

    It is good for me to be challenged- I sort of sometimes forget that there are other people besides me. I suppose it is because my reading material is different to yours, & there’s no good reason why you’d care about the books, magazines & blogs I peruse, so it is wrong for me to assume fluency in things that don’t matter to you :)

    It is funny that I have acquired an interest in America, whereas I neither know nor care a great deal what happens in most other parts of Abroad :)

  • Pingback: Gateway Pundit

  • Michael

    The question answers itself about Obama.

    The symptom of some underlying diabolos is a loss of things like courage and humor.

    We should make fun of Obama now, and we would – if people didn’t sense that there is a dark malevolent power or powers at work here, maybe even deeper than Obama, where he is just their tool. Don’t know.

    But we won’t poke fun at him now when it could do both him and us some good.

    Later, when it is too late, people will want to p*ss on his picture – and the few who do will disappear.

    Still later, people will p*ss on his picture the way the Romanians did on Ceaucescu, or else after he is gone and they are under the boot of some other foe.

    History is pretty clear on how such matters work out over time. We’re all in for hell I’m afraid.

  • newton


    Dang! You got to my point first!

    Lanny, Lanny. You do things like this because you KNOW you can get away with them. No one here is going to demand your proverbial head on a platter. Unfortunately, things like this have a way to come back to bite you in the behind… or maybe even crush your head… You don’t seem to know what you can unleash with this kind of thing. Don’t you have any judges at the gates, so to speak, which would detain you from doing stupid things like these? (FYI, read Deuteronomy. Jesus made A LOT of references to it, and to the Torah, of course… but maybe you never cared about that…)

    I’ll up the ante on you, Lanny. Try doing that with a picture of Mohamed. You might well start World War IV.

    But again, that’s “nothing”… or is it?

  • newton

    As for whether Lanny would do that to a picture of Obama…

    A good link from OpenSecrets.org should answer that question easily.

  • dry valleys

    “Later, when it is too late, people will want to p*ss on his picture – and the few who do will disappear.

    Still later, people will p*ss on his picture the way the Romanians did on Ceaucescu, or else after he is gone and they are under the boot of some other foe.”

    No hyperbole here!

  • PD Quig

    I don’t know, maybe y’all are onto something here. I think the world is now ready for “Piss Obama.”

  • deeb

    I can’t believe how offended some people are pretending to be in this forum. In the episode, he was on some medication that caused him to urinate forcefully – causing backsplash which happened to land on a Jesus painting, leading a character to later see it as a miracle. It, along with various other occurrences, was part of a setup for a final scene at the end of the episode which ties everything together. He didn’t “piss on a picture of Jesus”.

    Actually the real target of David’s comedy was chubby people who wear revealing clothing – not superstitious Christian miracle seekers. Any intelligent person could have figured that out having watched the episode.

    Before you criticize something, its important to view it first if you want any credibility. Larry David is not one to shy from criticizing anything – be it lack of decency in one’s attire, ridiculous worship of idols, or whatever. I could see him making fun of Obama worshipers too.

    Lighten up people.

    [Yeah, the real target was the fat, stupid Catholic girl. Pissing on the image of Jesus and making fun of piety was only a secondary thing. People should lighten up and take the joke, dammit. And ignore the whole point of this post, which was not about being offended but wondering how well the joke would play among Obama fans, if it was his portrait being peed on and kneeled before...admin]

  • ECW

    Admin said: “I merely wonder what the reaction would be if David played the same scene with an Obama picture in an Obama-loving household. I somehow doubt that would be shrugged off.”

    I suspect it would get Curb Your Enthusiasm the most attention ever. I also agree with Joe Y’s superb post. Upon further thought, and also after reading Joe Y’s later amendment, I’d have to agree that I COULD see Larry David peeing on an Obama pic in a black household. It would fit perfectly with the show. Especially, considering the recent context of the show, in this season. It’d probably be among the funniest episodes ever. If someone could suggest to him that he follow up the episode with the Jesus picture with the Obama picture under the same circumstance, I’m sure he’d laugh out loud.

  • ECW

    By the way Anchoress, I did not mean to address any posts or responses to you or at you directly. I very much like what you are doing here. When I say “you” or any variation thereof, I mean and meant “christians” or even “readers”. I’m genuinely sorry if anything I’ve written seemed directed at yourself, your thread, or any single person. That was not my intention. The context is all.

    [Not at all, and I agree with your point. I just thought I should make it clear that this is not a habitually offended site! :-) -admin]

  • http://misskelly.typepad.com Kelly Two

    Jeff, shows what you know about Muslims seeing the name of Allah in “tortillas, firewood and grilled cheese sandwiches”: link