PETA: Presumptuous Endorsement-Taking Advertisers

Originally posted 2010-01-05 20:30:56. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

They’re back!

Parody PETA Logo Animal “rights” nutjob group and selective-intellectual-property-enforcer PETA has photoshopped a picture of (my dear, dear friend) Michelle Obama into an ad, creating an unauthorized endorsement by her of its harebrained efforts at interspecies moral confusion and human protein deprivation.  Thus is created one of those grand moments when two seemingly distant LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® streams — PETA’s hypocrisy on IP and the Obamas’ ongoing problems with First Family image appropriation — coalesce.  It is blog nirvana.

PETA has a very logical answer to why it did this without asking.  It’s the same basis as the one on which PETA was appointed class representative for beasties, vermin, fauna and, presumably, flora too:

PETA President Ingrid Newkirk says the group didn’t seek Mrs. Obama’s consent because they know that she can’t make such an endorsement.

Very special.  Especially with a burger.

By Ron Coleman

I write this blog.

Related Post

6 thoughts on “PETA: Presumptuous Endorsement-Taking Advertisers”
  1. Let me correct her statement to make it more in line with the truth:

    “PETA President Ingrid Newkirk says the group didn’t seek Mrs. Obama’s consent because they know that she can’t [actually do anything against PETA for PR reasons, such as bring a lawsuit.]”

  2. […] Did someone say paid witness? Judge tosses decade-old animal rights case vs. Ringling circus [Orlando Sentinel, Zincavage] Bonus: Ron Coleman, Likelihood of Confusion, on PETA and Michelle Obama; […]

Comments are closed.