Replies

The left's panties are in a bind because it is too believable to be satire.

I wonder if the New Yorker mentioned it was the Clinton campaign that found and released the photo of Obama in full Muslim garb, not “right-wingers”.

The kernels of truth in this cartoon stoke rage in the cultists.

Nice article ma'am!

I didn't know it was you until I went back to the byline.

It must be fun to see the fireworks, no?

Both the Obama and McCain campaign call it “tasteless and offensive”.

So both candidates are opposed to the First Amendment. We already knew that.

More whining from the left.

Here is what some of the Kool Aid drinkers posted on the Boston Globes web page on the New Yorker. Funny how the Libs get upset at SATIRE...... The News paper of John Kerry and Teddy Kennedy

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/07/new_yorker_cove.html

31 comments so far...

It's about time

Posted by lucille MacCue July 14, 08 12:18 PMHow typical of the left. They are the true bastions of racism and intolerance in this country. Always have been and always will be. They live on false accusation. They keep the fires of racism alive by stunts like the New Yorker cover and then blame the republicans. Grow up people. Stop listening to the left and start looking at their actions. That is the true measure of their vile intentions. And the measure is very bad.

Posted by reason July 14, 08 12:18 PMKKK How about a cover showing McCain in a KKK outfit alongside his wife who happens to be wearing a dominatrix outfit? Aren't they white supremicists? How does the New Yorker get away with it? Simply awful. Posted by Josh July 14, 08 12:21 PMAgree: it's tasteless and offensive. It reinforces prejudice, the hateful, and the absurd, in a sort of stupid way.

Posted by Walt July 14, 08 12:22 PMNew Yorker Staff: closet republicans and/or closet racists, or just stupid and offensive?

Posted by Larry Kane July 14, 08 12:25 PMThis kind of so-called satire is incendiary and insensitive to those of us who see a change in the political landscape. I was recently influenced by a liberal friend to subscribe to the New Yorker. The covers were usually satirizing us all in a way that we all could learn from it. The readers of this magazine already know how ignorant some of those on the extreme right are concerning Obama. We don't need to have this stereotype perpetuated especially in this kind of publication. I am cancelling my subscription today.

Posted by Anika July 14, 08 12:27 PMProbably done by a sore-loser that supported Hillary-or is a right wing Republican nut case, or even worse an anti-black ( might call a racist) Worse of all it demeans the freedom of the press for reporting (and in this case-distorting the truth) the truth

Posted by lawrence moser July 14, 08 12:29 PMTHE COVER IS OUTRAGES AND SHOWS A LACK OF POLITICAL SENSITIVITY. What ever happened to editorial oversight and a bit of just common sense!

Posted by Irena July 14, 08 12:29 PMTasteless and offensive? I find it funny and closer to the truth. Better than that, ole Osoma-Oboma just lost a bunch of votes. Now THAT tastes good. Real Good. HA HA HA Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah ..... (gasp)

Posted by G.I. John July 14, 08 12:29 PMRegardless of The New Yorkers stated intent the cover is appaling and a smear politically and racially and promotes exactly what it proposes to expose: prejudice ignorance and stupidity. The New Yorker should be ashamed and publically appoligise.

Posted by Patrick Quin July 14, 08 12:29 PMHmm. Check out the satire on www.thehumanhybrid.com

Posted by TommyT July 14, 08 12:31 PMI love the cover. Obama better learn how to take a joke.

Posted by Dan July 14, 08 12:31 PMOh I am sorry "New Yorker" I misunderstood you, so when you ran all the ANTI-Hillary articles about Senator Clinton it was satire. When you defended oil speculators this past week, it was satire. Come on the only satire here is your explanation. I say this as a long time subscribe, with family members who have worked for your publication!

Posted by Clueless Upstate Resident July 14, 08 12:32 PMThe reality is, beyond New Yorker subscribers, when the masses see the cover, on newstands, the disgusting photo fortifies what the fear mongers have been beating into their heads. This is not intellectual satire...it's beyond sickening.

Posted by Mike Martinovich July 14, 08 12:32 PMPretty sad when you have to go to the extremes when you don't know about someone...i have heard the "Muslim" "Anti American" statements from these back wood, gun toting sister loving Republicans for too long...(these are all true labels and I approve this message)

Posted by Tom July 14, 08 12:32 PMShame on the New Yorker mag! Satire is one thing but this is something else and it is low down and dirty. But then again you will probably boost circulation, is that the real story here?

Posted by Sunny July 14, 08 12:32 PMRegardless of The New Yorkers stated intent the cover is appaling and a smear politically and racially and promotes exactly what it proposes to expose: prejudice ignorance and stupidity. The New Yorker should be ashamed and publically apoligize.

Posted by Patrick Quin July 14, 08 12:32 PMAs a life long Republican ... i agree it is tasteless and beneith John McCain and we Republicans. Satire is an excuse to get some publicity

Posted by Robert Mack July 14, 08 12:34 PMArt is good at kicking us all in the A..nkles, and fires a deeper set of neurons in our sleeping reptile. Artists do not have to conform to the righteous tyranny of verbal constraints. What makes you mad? What is your deepest fear? What's your problem? I find this no more troubling than the NYT magazine cover portrait of the Rush Meister sucking on a fat one. Both covers are brilliant! Do not throw out the baby with the bathwater, or kill the messenger. We have met the enemy and he is...

Posted by Tom Upton July 14, 08 12:34 PMMy complaint is not with the New Yorker, but with the view that the public is so stupid that it hasn't any notion of satire or nuance. It is offensive for the campaigns to feign protecting the public from complexity, rather than educating the public in the same. But this whole election is so vulgar anyway, I've come to expect as much.

Posted by Bill July 14, 08 12:35 PMRight on New Yorker!!! I love it. Congratulations for your courage, satire, and insight. Tasteless? Perhaps ... but hey! this is politics! If Obama can't stand the heat, then he should go home and let better qualifed candidates step in who are used to "the heat"....

Posted by Lee Morgan July 14, 08 12:36 PMAmerican Insanity: If Barry Blitt chooses to deal in deranged stereotypes then were is the cover illustration depicting John McCain as a war mongering baby killer-“turn about is fair play”. Ron P

Posted by Ron Paquette July 14, 08 12:37 PMI will cancel my subscription to the New Yorker. I will also ask my mother in law, her best friend and any other family member and friend to cancel their New Yorker subscription if they haven't already. The untrue cartoon picture of Senator Obama and his wife is awful and not funny. As an American, I am ashamed of the cartoon picture and someone needs to be fired for approving that cartoon cover of the Obama family.

Posted by Kim July 14, 08 12:38 PMThe New Yorker editors are relying on typical reader's enlightenment to recognize the cover as satire. A very iffy proposition. But now that the media likes of FOX have picked it up, the cover will be seen by millions, who may not have that ready sophisticated/satirical sense of humor, especially if they already have the wrong perception of the Obamas from listening to too much talk radio. So the New Yorker will actually be reinforcing the ridiculous beliefs of a few and spreading it across the country - positioning a negative image in the minds of many. The editors showed bad judgment. That's the problem with thinking that everyone thinks like you do. I'd say they should have to pull it under the threat of libel, but that just might make things worse. It'll probably sell like hotcakes among the most ignorant and intolerant of Americans. I certainly hope that wasn't their hidden underlying motivation. I also hope the editor isn't a disgruntled Hillary supporter - altho that wouldn't surprise me, being the New Yorker and all. Naw, they wouldn't stoop that low anymore. It was just poor, poor judgment of an editor who thought it'd be funny. I will wage my own little protest by not buying anymore New Yorkers for fun -for a long time.

Posted by Sylvia July 14, 08 12:41 PMI am a Barrack Obama supporter. I am also a New Yorker reader. I am not at all worried about this cover. It will have zero effect on the outcome of the election--the only ones who might see truth in the depictions don't read the New Yorker. Images are such a part of the modern experience of our world. I am not offended, though I think McCain's campaign was astute enough to say they were.

Posted by Drew Woodall July 14, 08 12:41 PMYeh....that is the kind of spirit that American presidential elections are run on.....a pathetic spirit not befitting the mightiest, the greatest Nation on earth.....An election for one of the most powerful political positions on earth....the most awful display of how not to run what should be dignified process.This cover is offensive and undignified and sinks to the bottom of the muck heap.....satire at it's absolute worse. We go through this muck every four years...the media love it because it befits their tawdry level of reporting, Americans tolerate it with a shrug and the rest of the world can see our political process for what it is... nauseatingly perverse and more befitting a school playground brawl by a bunch of unruly kids.No wonder we end up with kind of presidents we get.....No one with any sense would ever take part in such a fiasco.

Posted by Ashamed and Extremely Annoyed July 14, 08 12:41 PMI'm a republican and that cover was in bad taste. I think there are a lot of real reasons that Barack Obama should not be president. This is just Bullshit. We are talking about a person that is nominated to run for the President of United States.

Posted by Frank July 14, 08 12:41 PMWe need satirical cover of McCain in KKK suit. Fair is fair. Just kidding, they know they're wrong.

Posted by Chicken Chits July 14, 08 12:42 PMI think the cover in question by the New Yorker preaches the Magazine's position on the Obama candidacy and is an intentional insult to Obama, his wife and the Democratic Party and meant to harm the Obama campaign. Is this the level of the New Yorker? Thanks for letting the U.S. know your your caliber.

Posted by C.N.Banks July 14, 08 12:42 PMIt's oil on the racists' fire and Fox News stirs it, just read the blogs on Fox. To think that the average voter will see the satire is absurd. The New Yorker must realize that. Wrong timing, very sad indeed. Sales of the magazine may go up but so will the cancellation of subscriptions. This cover was unnecessary in a racial heated campaign and Obama's supporters are right to be upset.

Posted by Brigitte Kahan July 14, 08 12:42 PMRacist, despicably, grotesque, and unforgivable. Posted by Whys July 14, 08 12:43 PM

The New Yorker Criticized for Satire

Isn't that like criticizing Don Rickles for insulting people?

Here is a message from DU...... You have to really know they Koolaid drinkers are steaming.....

Radio_Lady (1000+ posts) Mon Jul-14-08 06:00 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. Here’s what I emailed to them:
I could not believe my eyes when I saw this on Raw Story, and then linked to www.democraticunderground.com . Is this the same New Yorker magazine I read frequently and held in such high esteem when I lived in NYC — 1962-69?

This is not satire; this it is swiftboating. We saw this sort of reprehensible coverage with Kerry in 2004 — the politics of destruction. Who would authorize running such a cover? What goes through the minds of people who pass judgement on the information we receive about our candidates — especially prior to either political convention?

Is it fair? Is it right? Does it come from a Republican funded magazine, employing editors, publishers, and artists who have an axe to grind? What is your excuse?

By the way, I am a Hillary Clinton (and Bill Clinton) supporter. Is there anything in the history of your magazine covers over the years that equals this kind of “political satire” for any other presidential candidate and spouse? If so, please send me the link.

I am sorry. Your cover is offensive and degrading. You own Senator Barack Obama and Michelle Obama an apology.

Respectfully,

Ellen Kimball — 69 year old woman, wife, mother, stepmother, grandmother and stepgrandmother — and pioneer TV and radio talk show broadcaster — 1957-2008.
Ellen Kimball | Homepage | 07.14.08 - 5:55 am
Direct link to this comment

Hi Raquel! Thanks for the ping & the excellent post. Even if the mag’s intent is to poke fun at those evil right-wingers (like us), I’m going to buy a copy and carry it around just for the fun of watching some Upper West Side liberals pee in their pants.