Obama goes for the shut-in vote in Second Life

by Tony Carnevale { Mar 30th 2007 at 3:14PM }

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama continues to revolutionize politics by making an appearance in controversial virtual world Second Life on March 31. A simulated (but still totally dreamy) version of Obama will mimic the motions and posture of the real deal as he chats up a small group of Iowans.

This gig wasn't organized by the Obama campaign, but by a "virtual event and promotions" company. Do you think Obama's handlers have any idea that he might be ambushed by e-penises?

Tags: BarackObama, obama, SecondLife

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Parasite_Evil @ Mar 30th 2007 3:27PM

Awesome. I'd vote for him if that picture is true.

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 3:28PM

Wait, he WANTS to be associated with Yiffing.... I guess it's better than vores or whatever the hell it's called.

Alisha Karabinus @ Mar 30th 2007 3:29PM

Best. image. ever.

ScreamingSkull @ Mar 30th 2007 3:35PM

I know I will regret this, but what is a vore?

GhaleonQ @ Mar 30th 2007 3:39PM

...I find Obama politically overwhelmed and intellectually lacking, but I would truly consider dooming the country if he ran that poster nationwide.

Silver R. Wolfe @ Mar 30th 2007 3:46PM

I'm so gonna be there with my furry AV.

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 3:46PM

"I know I will regret this, but what is a vore?"

For some reason, it's a sexual splinter of furries that find either eating or being eaten a sexual thing. Whatever you do, stay far, far away from a goodle image search.

As a freelance artist, I get all sorts of request. A Vore request was one where I stared at the person for a solid minute before saying "fuck you, that's just wrong."

lvlarx @ Mar 30th 2007 3:51PM

Fuck Barack Obama. If he has his way we'll continue to rape the resources of the Middle East. The fact that he's appearing in Second Life only cements his phoniness as a 'candidate of the people.'

shase @ Mar 30th 2007 3:52PM

@sheppy

Lol thats funny.. So what was the worst request you ever had and what was the worst request you actually went through with?

jsn @ Mar 30th 2007 3:53PM

shit like this is going to make the gaming / polinoob crowd actually vote for this rookie.... FEAR

Joshua @ Mar 30th 2007 3:54PM

At least it's not the OFFICIAL Obama campaign that's running the Second Life part of it. I really can't stand the developers and the players of that game...

No matter what, though, Obama is better than Clinton. :)

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 3:58PM

The worst request I went through with was a tattoo for a guy who was in a band with a friend. He wanted a fairly HR Gigerish motorcycle screwing it's female demon passenger. Giger himself has a similar picture. Let's just say you don't just sit in the seat. It was an interesting challenge which is the only reason why I did it.

The worst request I didn't do was the one hinted at here. The guy actually wanted a werewolf screwing a bunnygirl doggystyle but chomping and tearing the skin away from the girls back as she is moaning orgasmically and blood drips from her mouth. No, I'm not kidding. The guy actually wanted a drawing of this....

JJ @ Mar 30th 2007 3:59PM

Well i dont think anything was wrong with clinton, he made a good president, lacking in moral goals, but as long as it didnt effect me i really dont care what his stances are on his own personal sex life.

Either way i like Obama, but this upcoming presidential election will truly be a sight to see, but then every election is that way, as my mother puts it, you vote for the best of a bad bunch.

Unfortunately these last eight years that "bad bunch" seemed to just be the top end of the lowest rung...

But by my line of thinking...stuff cant get any worse can it? =)

jsn @ Mar 30th 2007 4:00PM

Joshua:

I wouldn't say that. I wouldn't vote for either of them, but at least Clinton has experience. Obama is so far over his head it's silly. You could tell he was going to be fast tracked into the white house from the start. I don't like career politicians, but politicians of opportunity (obama) are flat out terrifying.

hvnlysoldr @ Mar 30th 2007 4:03PM

@JJ I think Joshua meant Hilary Clinton. You know two Dem candidates.

jsn @ Mar 30th 2007 4:04PM

it's funny how the sheep act as though the current administration is bad for not backing down to a culture that promotes violence. Every major war, genocide or refugee situation on the planet currently involves militant Islam yet people act like Bush is evil for being one of the few who was willing to stand up to it. He sure as hell didn't do everything right, but don't be a left-acting sheep and pretend that they're incompentent or evil for doing so.

JodyAnthony @ Mar 30th 2007 4:18PM

sorry about that sheppy, I just thought it would be a cool picture.

(side note: really like your da stuff)

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 4:22PM

@jsn

I don't think people take offense to fighting against the genocide or social intolerances and such, but the fact that we've been lied to every single fucking step of the way. And to top it all off, while we were all signing away our rights under the patroit act and enabling the government to help prevent disasters like 9/11, what do we get? Another disaster and a huge clusterfuck of preparation and even response from our side of the government.

And what is the ultimate goal and benefit of the Iraq war? Congrats, we not only failed to establish a decent government over there but also fostered a fear of Americans and yes, even bredd more terrorist and terrorism due to our actions over there. And what of home?

Well, cutting tax breaks for corporations while middleclass sees a rise, allowing companies to outsource to developing nations for our jobs, aloowing the rich to get even richer, selling Iraq wholesale to Haliburton (yet another company in the process of completely relocating out of the country because minimum wage is too expensive), keeping the cycle of unaffordable health care, continued funds being pulled from public education AND public services, and Katrina.

You can applaud the fuckabilly all you want. But this country needs repair. This country needs better healthcare and better education. This country needs a social security reform OR better healthcare so that social security isn't anywhere near as important as it is right now. This country needs reforms in the ways businesses are ALLOWED to do business (Enron, anyone?). This country needs reformation in our gun culture and violence (Yes, the US is still leading in gun related deaths this year, more than tripling the tolls of warzones). This country needs a better welfare system.

We have a hell of a lot wrong with our nation right now and yet we're being told, as we stop to worry about this stuff and question the money being spent on vietnam... er, I mean, Iraq, we're being told we are unpatriotic for questioning this shit.

C. Grant @ Mar 30th 2007 4:24PM

Worst Google image search: I was looking for an image of Old Grandma Hardcore for a post. Don't Google "old+grandma+hardcore." Just don't. Please don't.

JJ @ Mar 30th 2007 4:26PM

I never said militant islam is a good thing jsn, and something DOES need to be done about it.

But by the same token just because he's sort of kinda standing up to em, doesnt make the current administration great for doing so, there's far more threats in this world than just militant islam in Iraq (North Korea, Iran, etc) heck North Korea probably has the capabilities to make a nuke now and their crazy ass leader probably would use it, but all of a sudden we have to be diplomatic?

Yes they have made mistakes but at least they should be even on who they go after, have we even got the guy that made us start this whole campaign on terror yet? Thats what i thought.

Now once again just because i dont like the current administrations handling in matters, doesnt mean i dont agree with its fundamental concepts.

Taylor @ Mar 30th 2007 4:30PM

i cant wait til giuliani is elected an i can laugh in the faces of hussein fans cuz of a moronic campaign

JodyAnthony @ Mar 30th 2007 4:33PM

LOL @ #19

DSR7997 @ Mar 30th 2007 4:37PM

@Sheppy
Whew! How long did it take you to cut and paste that from Moveon.org? Now that it is clear that you are a hardcore left leaning nut, all of your other posts suddenly make sense.

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 4:43PM

Actually, I don't try to lean any particular way. I just consider it downright laughable that a large amount of people have to LEAVE this country to afford their medicine. Education is slipping because someone working at Wal-mart for four years makes a comparable salary to a teacher of 15 years.

I want to see this country improve but that won't happen so long as our administration spends their efforts worrying about "damn dirty immigrants" and other country regimes WE established.

Mr Khan @ Mar 30th 2007 4:44PM

Oh, you don't want me to get involved in this argument

I get most of my opinions from here

http://www.cpusa.org

DSR7997 @ Mar 30th 2007 4:58PM

Sheppy,
I retract my earlier comment. I agree with the whole Wal-Mart/Teacher comment and the immigrant comment I just don't think socialism is the way to achieve it which is what I read into your first post.

DSR7997 @ Mar 30th 2007 5:00PM

Mr. Khan
Your right, I don't want you to get involved.

rTwelve @ Mar 30th 2007 5:02PM

This is a hilarious mix of commentary.

shase @ Mar 30th 2007 5:02PM

@sheppy
Wow thats kinda sick... do you have like a website of your pictures/designs?

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 5:10PM

@sheppy

Nothing could do more for health care in American than the democratization of the Middle East. You seem like an intelligent fellow, so I'm going to assume you've seen all the statistics on Israel's contributions to medicine. And, I will also assume you know that Israel has a conscripted armed forces.

Now, imagine if the entire Middle East was not bent on the destruction and annihilation of Israel. Isreal would not need to devote such a large percentage of its population to the armed forces. Israel could devote a larger percentage of its population to medicine.

To sum it up: defeat islamo-fascism, cure cancer and aids.

ManekiNeko @ Mar 30th 2007 5:14PM

I like to call them e-nises.

JR

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 5:22PM

@DSR7997

I say I try not to lean because both sides infuriate me so. Both are bitching about problems without even looking at ways to solve them. Politics in general just pisses me off, actually.

@shase
"Wow thats kinda sick... do you have like a website of your pictures/designs? "

Sadly, all I have right now is a devart account and that mainly hosts sketches. Most of my professional work stays tucked away although I've been working on several webpage templates but my time in front of a computers tends to be limited to either my freelance shit or the 3D assets for the game I'm currently working on. So, yeah... my dev art isn't exactly the best...

http://sheppyboy2000.deviantart.com/

Two little notes.

1. I took a creative writing class for fun, discovered I sucked at writing, but a friend convinced me to drop those in the dev art account anyway. So stay far, far away from the fiction.

2. Currently working on a newer version of Waverider (I played with a 005 micron so the inkjob looks much, much better... but the coloring is a painstaking process right now and I'm even creating the background for her in Maya....)

reppy @ Mar 30th 2007 5:26PM

Half of you guys are belligerent retards that don't know Obama's positions on anything. Maybe more people should have listened to him about Iraq and we wouldn't be in this mess. Oh that's right, he wants to rape* the Middle East's resources.. ;)

* I will admit the fact that he's getting money from AIPAC now worries me. Am I going to have to vote for Nader again?!

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 5:32PM

@reppy

Okay, sure, if we had listened to Obama about Iraq, we wouldn't be in this mess. I will agree to that. You just have to acknowledge that if we had listened to Obama about Iraq, Saddam would still be in power. That's all I ask.

And, since we (fortunately or unfortunately) did not listen to him about Iraq, we are there now. I'd like to know his position about how we solve the mess we are in. Can you share it with us, or do his supporters know as little about his positions as policies as his opponents?

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 5:32PM

^^^^"positions AND policies"

ALH @ Mar 30th 2007 5:33PM

its nice to see that foxes, cats,wolves and lions are being represented in this forthcoming elec..wait, what?!

GhaleonQ @ Mar 30th 2007 5:46PM

Sheppy is actually Lou Dobbs or 3/4 of the Los Angeles' Times editorial board behind that username. He/She should have SOME excuse prepared for that mess of bile and excrement that he spewed.

DSR7997 @ Mar 30th 2007 5:52PM

Sheppy
Politics aside, your website and work are very good.

sheppy @ Mar 30th 2007 5:56PM

Thanks DSR...

One of my NDAs recently lifted so I'll be putting some 3D models up here pretty soon (just as soon as I can write an OBJ viewer since I'm not allowed to use the one provided by the client for promotional purposes).

Rubang B @ Mar 30th 2007 5:58PM

Obama right now has more experience than Lincoln did when he was elected.

If Saddam was still in power right now, would Americans be dying every day in Iraq?

(I'm not voting for Obama, just sayin' ya know.)

shase @ Mar 30th 2007 6:00PM

@sheppy

I like your blood raven picture. So you do designs for games too?

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 6:02PM

@Rubang B

No, American civilians would be dying in America. I know I'm selfish, but I'd rather have American soldiers dying in Iraq than American civilians dying in pizzerias and coffee shops.

Rubang B @ Mar 30th 2007 6:13PM

Wait, when was Saddam's regime ever a threat to American civilians on American soil? Only 2 times I can remember people dying on American soil in the last hundred years were 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, and Iraq had nothing to do with either of those. Saddam's regime wasn't involved with Al-Qaeda in any way.

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 6:22PM

@Rubang B

I don't believe I said that he was involved with Al-Qaeda.

Whether you view it as a good thing or a bad thing, our presence in Iraq has drawn the near-complete attention of Al-Qaeda. They are focusing all their efforts on the war in Iraq. So, regardless of whether you or I view the war in Iraq as central in the war on terror, the terrorists think its important enough to devote all their resources.

And that's all I'm saying. Better they devote their resources to killing soldiers in Iraq than civilians in America, which is what they were doing before we invaded.

Zach S @ Mar 30th 2007 6:35PM

Personally, I think that Bush's shadyness and mishaps will actually end up being a good thing for the next presedential race. All of the candidates on both sides seem to be making an effort to be more transparent and also to be more moderate, both things that have been severely lacking these past seven years or so. When you only see one way, like someone who is a hardcore republican or democrat, it's hard for compromise and it's hard to get things done for the good of the people. This is one of the reasons why I like Obama - he makes it a point to bring up the rift between Republicans and Democrats and realizes that we need to stop going for each others throats and instead work together to fix some of the things that have gone wrong, whatever those things might be for you. I don't think anybody can disagree with that (although you may disagree with any of his other policies).

Rubang B @ Mar 30th 2007 6:41PM

Oh ok, I see what you're saying now. Well I don't think it's getting all their attention, what with the train bombing in Madrid and the bus bombing in London and all. And over 60,000 civilians have died in Iraq so far.

And I think you're supporting the war due to a wacky fringe benefit that shouldn't have allowed us to invade in the first place. We should've finished the job in Afghanistan (the Taliban are already back, so it was a waste of our time), and we should've kept hunting for Bin Laden.

We can't just pick dictators at random and then invade their countries. If that's what we're doing, we should be in Darfur, Iran, and North Korea all at once.

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 6:42PM

@Zach S

The fundamental problem with bi-partisanship is that the other side is wrong. Every time a Republican compromises his or her values and votes with the Democrat Party just to "work together," we all die a little inside. I don't need education reform so bad that I'm willing to accept No Child Left Behind just because it's something different.

The only way conservatives should "work together" with liberals is by convincing liberals to become conservatives.

Roger Rees @ Mar 30th 2007 6:45PM

@Rubang B

"We should've finished the job in Afghanistan (the Taliban are already back, so it was a waste of our time), and we should've kept hunting for Bin Laden.

We can't just pick dictators at random and then invade their countries. If that's what we're doing, we should be in Darfur, Iran, and North Korea all at once."

All fine points, and I agree with them all. Although, instead of "we should have kept hunting for Bid Laden," I would say that we should have and should continue to devote increased resources to finding him.

We should definitely be in Iran and North Korea before they become nuclear AND have a method of delivery.

Rubang B @ Mar 30th 2007 6:53PM

Well I highly doubt anybody's stupid enough to use a nuclear weapon these days. If they are, hey, fuck it, we had a good run. There goes the planet.

rowd149 @ Mar 30th 2007 7:22PM

*Roger Rees

Bullshit. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. I agree, the west has been a target for al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations for years, but attacking Americans in America has, obviously, only bben part of their goal. If it was their MAIN goal, wouldn't they have done the smart thing, and perpetrated dozens of small attacks over a number of years rather than one large, go-for-broke attack that would do nothing but provoke American aggression and cause their enemies to make it even HARDER for attacks to be carried out? That's what I thought.

As for Iraq, there was NOTHING that justified us going over there related to terrorism. al Qaeda, if it is indeed them, only showed up there after we attacked. So why are we there? Oil. Vengeance. We didn't get them the first time, and the coming oil crisis mandated that we start claiming resources now. However, the American people never would have gone for that. So, why are we going there? THE TERRORISTS, OF COURSE. CUZ THERI GUNNA USE THEIR WMDS ON US. Right. No, it's because of the oil deal that just got penned that gives American companies the highest percentage of profits from Iraqi oil. Bush wasn't being arrogant when he got on that carrier and gave a speech under a banner that said "Mission Accomplished." For him, it was.

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 50 Comments