Satan & Obama controversy--> vote here:

[marions ghost]

So, does Ouazanni as Satan look like an aged Barack Obama or not?

50 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes--Ouazanni/Satan looks like Obama--resemblance intentional
	38 (76%)
	Yes--Ouazanni/Satan looks like Obama--resemblance accidental
	4 (8%)
	No--Ouazanni/Satan does not look like Obama--no resemblance
	7 (14%)
	No--Ouazanni/Satan looks like Satan
	1 (2%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[ICallBS]

1. To me there is a resemblance, yes.

[NavyDavy]

2. of course it was intentional.......just listen to the religious reich and Im surprised more

of this hasn't happened........and since Murdoch and Disney have ties with the History Channel, no surprise here.

[union_maid]

3. That was no accident

Ok, if the actor looked lots like Obama, that would be one thing. He doesn't, but he ended up looking like that. Gimme a break!

[slackmaster]

4. The resemblance between those two images is phony, contrived; the product of selective...

...lighting and obvious image manipulation, especially in the image on the left.

The two men bear very little resemblance to each other.

Please stop supporting Glenn Beck buffoonery.

[marions ghost]

5. You will accept that

however the still image may have been manipulated, it is the artifact that is disseminated in the culture?

I will politely ignore your comment about supporting Glen Beck. The pictures are out there. I don't think this poll supports one side or the other.

Re. what DUers think--I don't expect all to agree. It is a poll based on the two images and people have different eyes.

Re. Dissenting views to mine. all good

[slackmaster]

6. I'm sticking with the line that Glenn Beck touched off the phony controversy

http://www.michronicleonline.com/index.php/rtm-news-reel/10133-glenn-beck-says-the-bible-series-satan-looks-like-obama

[marions ghost]

12. Or did he pick up the football and run with it?

...as expected, perhaps?

Would it have gotten any traction if there was no strong resemblance?

Controversies are whipped up constantly for political gain. All I'm asking is, what is the hunch of DUers--acknowledging the fact that Beck found it useful--about this?

[Life Long Dem]

79. Wrong

Beck didn't pick up the football. He passed the football starting all this shit.

"On Saturday, a day before “The Bible” aired, Beck tweeted the following message (pictured above):

“Anyone else think the Devil in #TheBible Sunday on History Channel looks exactly like that Guy?”.

Seems to me Beck wanted this out there before the airing so to cause this disturbance. So why and how did Beck know how satan would look before the show even aired? Seems odd. I would believe someone in the know about the show tipped Beck off to get the most out of this.

[marions ghost]

81. Possibly a tip to Beck

--somebody who wanted him to do the dog whistling...who knew the implication was there.

IF Glenn Beck could tweet this the day before (plant the seed) and then have so many people who watched it agree with him--
there must have been a pretty good resemblance. (I didn't see the actual show)

And the photos that are now circulating reinforce the point, so the message is clear. And everybody responsible now has their little haloes on, and it's the liberal media's fault for making a big deal of it

I guess they got what they wanted, but I'm not so sure.

[randome]

7. Seconded.

[HereSince1628]

8. I didn't watch the show, and don't want to jump to intentionality.

BUT if Satan was presented as a pragmatist with a Hawaiian accent ...I'd take it all more seriously

Seriesly

[dem in texas]

9. Why was the Satan Character Black?

Even if the actor did not look like the President, why was the devil portrayed as a black man? Mark Burnett was playing to the lowest of low human traits with this portrayal.

[nolabear]

11. Yeah, Samson was black and the angels are Asian.

Their choices are very strange overall. Typical European Jesus, though, so they got that right.

[moondust]

17. Exactly.

The creators are advancing old racist boogeyman stereotypes even if they aren't aware of it.

[TommyCelt]

54. I thought

the chick who played Satan in Passion of the Christ looked evil-er.

[nolabear]

10. Now and then when the light is just right I look like Angelina Jolie.

Otherwise Kathy Bates. I agree the photo looks a lot like Obama, but the video looks nothing like him. And I mean nothing.

[OriginalGeek]

63. Ha! and I look like Brad Pitt when the light is right

and by "right" I mean "out"

and by "looks like" I mean "take my word for it".

[Lint Head]

13. When this much money is spent on a television event every detail is decided own.

I guarantee the look of Satan was discussed in a script conference.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

14. What I find more annoying is that the bad guy has to be portrayed by a

person of non-European origin. This is not the face of Joe Corporation. This is the bigots bogeyman.

Donald trump, Bill O'Reilly, the golden boys of Wall Street and assholes like them have more in common with Old Scratch than most of the oppressed peoples on the planet.

I guess it would have been too much, or too close to the truth, to make the Anti-Christ blond haired and blue eyed.

[marions ghost]

23. This guy was available, but

didn't make the cut...too stereotypical.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

24. Probably too drunk to do the walk through as well.

[Puzzledtraveller]

15. I can't help it

It's still so LOL to me.

He's a dead ringer for the pres, do I think it's intentional? Heck yeah, does it matter. No, it's funny as hell. This is nothing new, both sides have done this to their respective bogeymen.

[FSogol]

16. So, Glen Beck thinks all blacks look the same, and everyone takes it seriously?

The proper thing to do, is to laugh at Glen Beck and the other clowns promoting that theory.

[marions ghost]

18. The actor is middle eastern

made darker with make-up.

[FSogol]

25. And he suddenly looks like Obama if someone digital manipluates an Obama photo?

Isn't everyone allowing Glen Beck to punk them?

[marions ghost]

42. Glenn Beck (or somebody) has already punked millions

...it's the audacity...the malice...the real evil involved in the creation of "buzz" in this way

[brush]

43. Exactly my thoughts

I watched the show as it ran and it never crossed my mind that the Satan character (moving images) looked like the President, same with my wife. Then someone possibly manipulates a still shot to resemble the President and it's plastered everywhere. That's what's intentional about the whole thing, some right winger keeping the "Obama is the Anti-Christ" meme alive. Yeah, I'd say we're being punked too and we shouldn't fall for it. Just let it be a one-day story instead of keeping it going.

[marions ghost]

48. Don't you understand how discussing it

helps it backfire?

[brush]

53. I think it keeps it going

[marions ghost]

55. Oh it'll keep going

whether we on DU discuss it or not, I'm sure. It's everywhere. The damage is done.

I think it's important to analyze what is going on here. Many people watch The History Channel, but do they realize that it's a part of the News Corp empire (Murdoch) that owns Fox?

I wouldn't mind seeing it get so big it explodes and splatters.

[Orsino]

19. They don't look alike.

Eyes, nose, brow, mouth, skin color. Nothing really matches.

Blurring Satan's ethnicity might itself have been a bit of a dog whistle, I suppose, but this controversy is a little thin. Or is there relevant context to be found in the source?

[marions ghost]

20. Is the source

the makers of the film or Glenn Beck?

I'm assuming you mean Beck, but film-makers are people whose business is manufacturing images in a precise way. It is to the History Channel's benefit to create controversy. All the "sources" have motive.

"Relevant context." Yes, could be IMO.

[Orsino]

33. By source, I meant the production itself.

I was wondering whether the character acts or sounds like the president, because all I've seen is the picture, and I'm not feeling the outrage yet.

[marions ghost]

40. All the rightwingers who have been following the show

will now see only "That Guy"-- that (epithet) hijacker B Hussein Osama --in the Satan costume.

Whether that was intentional or not is a fair question, esp from a network calling itself The History Channel.

[tridim]

41. Yep, and thousands of mentions of "Obama" and "Devil" in the same sentence all over TV

That's exactly why the producers did it.

Oh, and they lied about it after the fact too, which is typical.

[marions ghost]

72. Yep, the doppleganger damage is done

I agree the producers are to blame. And the innocent act is unconvincing. They've gotta worry about pushing those DVDs on Fox now tho. Beck did a nice little favor there.

So now the producers have put their little halos on.

Anyone who believes in the Christian God knows...this crap doesn't have much to do with Jesus.

Irony is so thick you can step in it.

[Glassunion]

21. Where' the gimme a break option?

I just think that the actor Mohamen and President Obama look quite similar.

[NaturalHigh]

22. Oh hell...here we go again.

It must be cool to make up something to be pissed off about. The guy looks like a Star Wars character. Un-f***-ing believable.

[randome]

26. WE ARE VICTIMS! THE REPUBLICANS ARE BEING MEAN AGAIN! MOM! MAKE THEM STOP!

[NaturalHigh]

69. Some people make up stuff just so they can be angry.

I swear - angry must be a narcotic for some people. Apparently, if you're not absolutely 100% pissed off about something all the time, you're not "down with the cause" or not doing it right or something. I'll never get it.

I read somewhere that some right-winger actually came up with this picture controversy and put it on the internets to stir things up. If so, he or she must be laughing like hell at these picture-gate threads.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

28. He looks like an older version of the villian from the first Mummy movie. (n/m)

[Johonny]

27. I'm starting to forget all the stuff history channel taught me about the Nazi's

please history channel get back to doing what you are good at

[marions ghost]

31. The Mayan Apocalypse didn't happen

and The North Americans had to accept an Obama presidency. Nothing to do but go Biblical.

[Ganja Ninja]

29. There is no Satan.

It's all nothing but superstitious nonsense.

And for the record if there was a Satan he would look like this man.

[marions ghost]

46. Yep...Rupert Murdoch--just one of the owners of the History Channel

The History Channel is a joint venture owned by GE, Disney, Rupert Murdoch and the Hearst Corporation. This group has a dominating hold on shaping views of historical events through this channel and others they control like A & E, Biography, History International, and the Military History channel.

Some might argue that these right-wing corporations are sympathetic to the subject at hand for one reason or another. For example the Hearst Corporation has a long and checkered history with fascist causes. William Randolph Hearst (1863-1951), the Rupert Murdoch of his day, came to embrace fascism and all the dictators that went with it. In the 1930’s, he hired both Mussolini and Hitler to write columns for his newspapers. He used newsreels to pass along unedited Nazi propaganda, he even went over to Germany and personally met with Hitler, and even attended to the Nuremberg rally.

[Paul E Ester]

50. That is sooooo funny....nt.

[Dr. Strange]

30. I thought this was a mostly made-up controversy...

until that scene in which Jesus asked Satan for his birth certificate. And then he said, no, the one from Kenya.

I don't think that's in the Bible. So it's gotta be deliberate.

[Arugula Latte]

34. *spray*

[marions ghost]

36. Many controversies are made up

doesn't mean they don't have wings...

How about that scene where Sarah Satan announces that the President needs a "background check"?

[brush]

32. Let's not fall into in this

I'm betting the source of that still image is some right wing site/organization with an agenda. I watched the show as it ran (moving images) and didn't think for a minute of any resemblance to the Satan character and the President. It never occurred to me, my wife either.

Let's leave this alone and stop perpetuating it. It only plays into the teabagger agenda.

[marions ghost]

38. When Glen Beck tries to take back his words

as he is doing now--makes ya wonder.

Maybe the film makers meant this resemblance to be more subliminal? I mean, casting a Middle Eastern guy as Satan & making him more swarthy (Jesus as European, should have been Mid Eastern as well?). For starters, it might be stereotyping Muslins, doncha know? B Hussein O y'know. If I'm paranoid, it is the culture that has done that.

These cultural controversies have a lot of impact. Best not to ignore.

[Brigid]

35. There is some resemblance.

But I don't think it was intentional. And there are too many real issues to get worked up about. Ignore the Glenn Beck nuttiness! Life is too short.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. I prefer this image..

Jack Nicholson as the devil in "The Witches of Eastwick"

[marions ghost]

39. LOL Nicholson must've turned it down

I like his red shoes...

[Paul E Ester]

44. Who are the executive producers, directors, and network

That produced this show. It's not likely "black satan" snuck into the show.

[marions ghost]

47. Owners of The History Channel:

The History Channel is a joint venture owned by GE, Disney, Rupert Murdoch and the Hearst Corporation. This group has a dominating hold on shaping views of historical events through this channel and others they control like A & E, Biography, History International, and the Military History channel.

Some might argue that these right-wing corporations are sympathetic to the subject at hand for one reason or another. For example the Hearst Corporation has a long and checkered history with fascist causes. William Randolph Hearst (1863-1951), the Rupert Murdoch of his day, came to embrace fascism.

[Paul E Ester]

49. Shocking to find

Murdoch creeping about on this.

[marions ghost]

52. More than creeping...

Rupert Murdoch's News Corp owns 67% of National Geographic Channel. Which explains why Nat Geo is suddenly looking like the once-great History Channel.

I think he has owned this for a few years now.

[nyquil_man]

45. He looks like a middle eastern Palpatine to me.

Then again, I don't think Palpatine is any more real than Satan is, so...

[kjackson227]

51. Well, I think it was deliberate...

so I will be writing and complaining to H-2, and I will not be watching future episodes.

[Cha]

56. I do know one thing.. they've portrayed "satan" as a scary black

man in a hoodie. I call bullshit.

My image of satan is more like an ugly white man..

Take your pick..



http://theobamadiary.com/

[NaturalHigh]

58. "My image of satan is more like an ugly white man.. "

Yeah, nothing racist about that at all.

[Cha]

59. Oh, I should have left out the "white" part? n/t

[marions ghost]

66. Not necessarily

since we are inundated with black-hearted white men at the highest levels of government, statistically speaking, it's correct to see the devil more in white men than black. Don't think anybody's saying black men can't be evil. But look at what we are dealing with in this country--really despicable white men at the controls of just about everything. Corporations, media, government, the courts, banks...you name it.

[marions ghost]

60. Yeah doncha love the hoodie?

I think Mz Palin would have made a good model for Satan as well as about 50 despicable white men I can think of....

Great cartoon.

[Cha]

62. It's too bizarre. Evil comes in all colors and genders. n/t

[marions ghost]

57. I have a question...

...other than what's out on the internet--

Have any of you guys heard about this controversy through friend/relative channels? Just trying to get a fix on how effective this manufactured "buzz" really is....

[MFM008]

61. who are they kidding?

they could have used another middle eastern look. period. I havent watched nor will I. The Walking Dead has more truth to it than this.

[Marrah_G]

64. Pass

There is a resemblance but I don't know enough about the decision makers on the film to make any judgement as to motive or lack there of.

[brush]

65. It's a still image . . .

. . . possibly doctored in Photoshop. I watched the episode with my wife and it never occurred to us that the Satan character looked anything like the President. We were watching moving images, not some still image that may have been manipulated. It wasn't until the next day that this still image was plastered all over the place by right wingers to stir up division and controversy. I think we're doing exactly what they want by making this more than a one-day story. They've been trying to equate the President with the anti-Christ and every other bogeyman they could think of since he took office. This is just more of it and we need to just let this die and not contribute to it.

[marions ghost]

68. No --Glenn Beck is NOW blaming the controversy on The Media:

http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/19/media-focuses-on-manufactured-controversy-on-history-channels-the-bible-ignores-powerful-message-and-meaning/

Beck is pointing the finger everywhere else. He is blaming the (Liberal) Media for spreading it! And so you're saying we should be quiet about the thing that he (they) started??

Beck: “Now here, here is this media so completely out of control that for their own agenda of, I think believe it or not, I think to try to teach Mark Burnett a lesson: Don’t you do anything like this ever again because we’ll ignore you and then we’ll smear you.”

[brush]

70. Don't panic, and don't give Beck so much credit

He's been discredited, even lost his TV show. He's talking to the choir, not converting anyone. And DU is part of that "Liberal Media" believe it or not, that is now spreading this crapola.

[marions ghost]

71. Oh look I'm not hung up about Beck (tho I think he does still have influence)...

I think the blame is on the makers of the movie. Just pointing out that now Beck is walking it back after he got the dogwhistle out there--and blaming the liberal media who are "keeping it going." You and Beck seem to agree on that.

I think the way that politics and religion have been intertwined here is reprehensible.

And the History Channel & Nat Geo--are owned by Murdoch, Hearst, GE and Disney...and what do those corps have in common? I think you know.

[LittleBlue]

67. Am I the only one who thinks Satan looks really cool?

Wouldn't mind seeing that guy in a Star Wars remake.

[coldmountain]

73. He was made up to look like Obama

There are pictures of the actor out there without makeup and he looks quite different.

[marions ghost]

74. Yes "he was made up to look like Obama"

DELIBERATELY And THAT is the point.

Devil = Obama = Muslim = Antichrist

DELIBERATE

It does not matter that the resemblance is less without make-up. The point is they intended the association.

Political propaganda mixed with religion. Study up on how effective this has been in the past.

(Edit to say--if you are kidding me here, OK thanks for the bump).

[treestar]

75. I'll go with intentional

Insane right wing fundies think Obama is Satan as it is.

[Kalidurga]

76. Yep the pictures definitely were messed with to make him look like Obama.

I did an image search and they don't look alike without manipulation, so it was on purpose because there is no way it could have happened by accident.

BTW I think that Satan looks pretty cool and he probably didn't kill any kittens with a flood.

[marions ghost]

78. I accept that the picture was messed with

to create this buzz. But do you think the producers did not know their guy looked like BO when they got the swarthy make-up on? At the very least he looks like an ethnic minority ( Arab if not African--actually he is Moroccan) --while the show has been criticized for painting the good guys as very white.

Given the political climate as it is, do you NOT think this was intentional? (Histerical Channel is owned by hard core right winger corporates).

The thing is--the comparison is out there. The damage has been done. The dog whistle has been blown. And people who like their religion and politics mixed are gettin off on it.

So we should not be so suspicious?

[Kalidurga]

83. I have been hearing dog whistles since 2008

So I totally believe they knew exactly what they were doing. What I learned though is that the History Channel is owned by RWers which explains why it is such a shit channel when it should be a good one. I don't think this is damaging though. The people that care about this sort of thing are the same people that listen to dog whistles and respond favorably to them. We hear them and understand that they aren't a good thing.

[marions ghost]

85. The producers have higher hopes....beyond the 13 million that watched it already

"Burnett’s (producer's) elation is understandable. Just before the first segment aired, he said, “We believe our Bible series has the potential to reach not only those who already go to church but could reach a whole new generation of people who have never been to church. Our greatest hope is that this series will affect a new generation of viewers and draw them back to the Bible.”

In an introductory video he also said, “We’ve told the stories of the Bible in a way to grab viewers’ attention and draw them in to want to know more. The footage is exciting, it’s compelling, poignant and powerful. Our hope is this series will reach millions of people around the world.”

Huge mail-order houses are already accepting pre-orders (Amazon: $29.95, shipped April 2) and mega-pastors Rick Warren and Joel Osteen are among those urging Christians to base Bible studies and worship around the new media.

Warren, the leader of the huge Saddleback Church in California, is has based five sermons to be delivered each week before the segments are shown on the History Channel. Last Saturday he urged other pastors around the world to do the same,. “Don’t miss this opportunity,” Warren said. “This is a wave. Part of leadership is catching the wave. God is about to do something really great.”

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2013/3/6/245978/Roy-Exum-13.1-Million-Watched-The-Bible.aspx

[Kalidurga]

86. Oh yeah that's gonna bring em into church...

Seriously do they really believe that a tv show that is watched by mostly Christians will bring people back to church? I am very skeptical on that working. It might make a lapsed church goer go back for a bit. But, I seriously doubt it will have any impact on any non church goer.

[marions ghost]

89. Let's hope they have delusions of grandeur

I don't know anyone who watched or was influenced by the show. And I sure as Satan am not buying the DVD.

The image Obama/Satan is going to stick though...

[arely staircase]

77. i'm gonna go with

who is Ouazanni? but yeah, it does look like him.

[marions ghost]

80. Mohamen Ouazzani

an actor from Morocco who is lighter skinned but resembles BO when darkened up. The picture is likely enhanced but the guy does resemble an older Obama. Why did they choose this? Satan is not exactly a benign character--very real to some people.

But the point is really--that the Satan = Obama thing is in the culture. It's everywhere actually. And once again reinforced. And once again people are rolling their eyes and going, America is lost.

[WinkyDink]

82. Let's see; the producer is a Right-Winger. Hmmmm... Of course, maybe it's Trayvon.

[6000eliot]

84. I was just going to say "They made Satan Obama in a hoodie. How subtle."

[Fearless]

87. Could be

But I will point out that the actor is Moroccan, which while "Black" isn't the same as the President.

Their eyes are also distinctly different.

You'd have to ask yourself, how do they look alike. And be descriptive.

Near as I can say: They have similar jawlines, although the president's is more pronounced.

They have thin faces, yet the president's is far less gaunt.

And they both appear to have rather pronounced ears.

Otherwise, pretty different.

Now the question is, did they try to make him look like the President? We can't tell from photos. We'd have to ask the person or people who knew the person who cast and/or filmed the scene this photo is taken from. Further study is needed. That does not however diminish the possibility of either case being true.

[marions ghost]

88. Doesn't matter what the reality is

it's all in the image and the associations that come to mind.

We're not trying to prove they were Separated at Birth here.

The point is--the concept has once again been reinforced in the Fundy mind, and in anyone who followed this when it went viral (ie. that is a lot of people). Very nasty. Very clever.

It remains to be seen what effect this will ultimately have. Maybe it can't make anything worse. I'd really like to hear from some people who have conservative or tea party relatives and get their take on it.

[Fearless]

93. Reality always matters

Those who twist or distort it for their own ends, they are the ones who need to be watched.

[Lurker Dave]

90. I think this may have been accidental.

I did a little digging around and found out a few things about the producer, Mark Burnett. Apparently, he donated money both to the President and to the DNC in 2008. Here's a link I found:

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/03/chill-the-creator-of-the-bible-donated-money-to-president-obama

And now, I'm gonna try out some smilies.



Cool stuff.

[marions ghost]

91. Fox Noise and Rupert Murdoch also donated to Obama

and your point is....?

"Fox News and Rupert Murdoch’s other News Corp properties hate Obama so much that they have donated nearly $59,000 so far this year to reelect him.

According to Open Secrets, News Corp has donated $504,162 to individuals and PAC’s. The surprise comes in who the individual is that has gotten the most money from News Corp. President Obama has received $58,825 from News Corp. The top eight recipients of News Corp cash are the president and congressional committee chairpersons. News Corp must not think much of Mitt Romney’s chances because they have only donated $2,750 to the Republican nominee in 2012.

While Rupert Murdoch’s personal donations have gone to Republicans, News Corp understands that keeping Barack Obama in power is good for business. The delicious irony is that some of the revenue earned from viewers and readers that can’t stand President Obama is being used to help reelect Barack Obama."

-------------

But hey thanks for the drive-by bump and your homage to the makers of The Bible. They don't really need your help. They've swamped the media & the net with their disclaimers and rebuttals and denials.

[Lurker Dave]

92. My point is simply that...

...it isn't at all clear that the Ouazanni was cast because he bears a resemblance, or can be made to bear a resemblance, to the President, and that this is because there is some evidence that Mark Burnett is a supporter of the President. I thought I made that clear. I'm sorry if I left it ambiguous.

You post, as an ostensible counterpoint, claims that Murdoch's News Corp also donated money to the President's reelection campaign. But I fail to see how News Corp's political donations contradict the fact that Burnett donated money --and, if I understand the issue correctly, donated the maximum allowable contribution --to the President's campaign. Furthermore, I fail to see how the contributions of a multinational mass media corporation stand as counter evidence to the the proposition that the donations of a private citizen indicate that citizen's political support.

And I find this somewhat odd:

But hey thanks for the drive-by bump and your homage to the makers of The Bible. They don't really need your help. They've swamped the media & the net with their disclaimers and rebuttals and denials.

My post was hardly a drive-by. I just thought, in the interest of being helpful, that since I had taken an interest in this story a day or two ago, I'd share what little information I had found out about it. And I certainly don't see how my post is an "homage to the makers of The Bible," seeing as how I didn't mention the show itself. Nor do I see how making a post here on the DU can be interpreted as "helping" anyone, or even who "them" is.

Maybe it was all the smilies I used in the post? In hindsight, I can see how using all those smilies may have given the impression that I was trolling your poll. If you took that as my intention, please allow me the opportunity to apologize. I wasn't using the smilies to refer to the topic in any way; I've just always wondered where posters get those smilies from, and was interested in trying them out.