as a pejorative.
-----

I was misled by that definition of satire at first. But it is misnaming the subject that allows the argument that it could not have been satire as allegedly intended. It was not a satire about Obama or his traits, it was a satire about the mischaracerizations (the mischaracterizations are the "absurdities" in the definition) of his traits. The picture therefore meets the definition of satire as claimed, albeit at one level out.

It doesn't matter that other covers directly satirized character traits of, e.g. Rumsfeld.