Obama, Spider-Man Appear In Inauguration Marvel Comic

http://goodlife.ask2click.com
Spider-Man has a new sidekick: The president-elect.

Barack Obama collected Spider-Man comics as a child, so Marvel Comics wanted to give him a "shout-out back" by featuring him in a bonus story, said Joe Quesada, Marvel's editor-in-chief.

"How great is that? The commander in chief to be is actually a nerd in chief," Quesada said. "It was really, really cool to see that we had a geek in the White House. We're all thrilled with that."

The comic starts with Spider-Man's alter-ego Peter Parker taking photographs at the inauguration, before spotting two identical Obamas.

Parker decides "the future president's gonna need Spider-Man," and springs into action, using basketball to determine the real Obama and punching out the impostor.

Obama thanks him with a fist-bump.

Marvel comics have featured most presidents, but generally in walk-on roles, Quesada said.

"I think President Nixon might have appeared on the cover, but not in a good way," he said.

Obama has said that as a child, he collected Spider-Man and Conan the Barbarian comic books. His Senate Web site used to have a photo of him posing in front of a Superman statue.

The Obama story is a bonus in Marvel Comic's Amazing Spider-Man #583, available in comic book shops nationwide on Jan. 14 for $3.99 and is expected to sell out, with half the covers devoted to Obama.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• obama
• spiderman
• marvel
• comics
• gaza
• bush
• inauguration
• madoff
• iran
• iraq
• oil
• prices

[cpssnorman]

OMG, cant wait to get one of those

[AMAZONDEFSQUADFAN]

Wonder if Borders or Barnes and Noble will have it?

[TithonusSyndrome]

Sure, but it doesn't amount to much considering that he's already taxing the rich people who have enjoyed unrealistically low tax rates for decades up until now. He's got their money, and unlike charities which can be for perverted bullshit causes like teaching creationism in schools, we can be sure with government revenue that it will go to something that isn't ineffective or even counterproductive charity.

[BoyKagome]

Reagen took it further, though I do congratulate Eisenhower. Well I respect your beliefs I still vote for full capitalism however because of the gilded age I understand why that can become a bad thing.Rockfeller and Morgan were after all republicans. Now I can produce a speech that shows Obama talking about the rich getting less of a deduction for charity donations. Would you like to hear it? I can send the link via youtube mail.

[TithonusSyndrome]

It only has merit if THERE IS HARD SCIENTIFIC DATA SUPPORTING IT. AND THERE IS NONE. YOUR HATRED OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION IS IRRATIONAL AND DOES NOT MATCH THE DATA.

The top tax rate under Eisenhower, a conservative icon, was 92%, and America did better than ever then! As an engineering student, I have to concern myself with what works - and a government that is democratic but has strong government regulation gets the best of both worlds and WORKS better than pure capitalism or communism.

[BoyKagome]

AKA I can't refute the information, so your saying that Obama cutting donations has no merit on the concept of proving that donations flux depending on how much they are of a tax relief?

[TithonusSyndrome]

I'm sorry, I could have SWORN that I called your conservitard bluff and asked for SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE INSTEAD OF THEORETICAL WHINING. I don't see any links to scientific, academic sources in this selfish, pouty post of yours.

[BoyKagome]

Oh I can prove it, why do you think Obama cut down the tax discount that were linked to charitable donations?

[TithonusSyndrome]

An excellent THEORY which is not supported by the actual evidence or numbers, just like everything else you believe in.

[BoyKagome]

Charity donations go up when rich have more money, if they have the extra money that's when they spend it. Take it away from them, and the first thing they will cut is their charity donations.

[TithonusSyndrome]

That's a ridiculous and childish oversimplifications of the issue, since the rich act in their own self interest and do their best to undercut wages as best they can and only raise them when they can't collude with one another. It is painfully obvious that you're just another uneducated plebe who thinks his knee-jerk gut instinct is "logical" and could identify one logical operator if I pressed him to do so.

[BoyKagome]

It is your choice whether you believe someone who favors asking someone with money... or asking someone without money for a job. I'll stick to logic...