Obama Campaign & NewYorker Mag Cover!
 

Obama Campaign Calls New Yorker Magazine Cover "Tasteless and Offensive"


http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008...and-offensive/

Who pays these people to put stupid stuff like this on a magazine? This is just dumb!

WTF is that!? Are they out of their minds at the New Yorker? I don't care how they excuse it, that's just reckless and inflammatory. Makes me want to puke.http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/mad.png

Its obviously a satire of what his political opponents have been saying.

Dont you get it?

Alternatively, if it was supposed to be literal, isnt Obama's father from an African tribe? Did he not wear such an outfit as a boy? If not, didnt his father? Not sure what his wife's assault rifle is about - but she is a fighter for justice and probably wears the pants.

He had better get used to it - because when hes president the satire is going to be a lot worse.

I just want to see McCain being depicted in a jet napalming Viet soldiers eating noodles while wearing a 19th Century Scotchman's costume.

Submit your own alternative front covers for the New Yorker here!

Tenenbaums submission will be here soon!

I just noticed she is wearing the pants.

Fvck I am brilliant.

Nuff said.

I take the cover as satire, in fact it probably encompasses most all the negative feelings toward BO, all in one pic.

Its about time we had some more pointed satire in cartoons.

It does nothing but enliven debate, which is a good thing.

His wife wearing the pants has to be the best thing about this.

And, just like IRL, Hilary isnt even in the picture.

What do you guys make of the flag in the fireplace.

SUBMIT YOUR ALTERNATIVE SATIRICAL NEW YORKER COVERS HERE!

It only works as satire if people do not believe what is actually being placed on there.

The sad part is that, in teh eyes of some, this is not an exaggeration. They have called him Muslim, and American hater, they have called the bump a terrorist symbol, they are also quick to play on the "Osama" name.

All these things are actively being used to campaign against him using the misinformed voting stock willing to believe just that.

Sarcasm should show McCain flip flopping on things like Off Shore Drilling, not a picture of him schtupping a black woman. The same thing goes for Obama.

The New Yorker just showed an ironic lack of tact and taste with this one.

I am sure that Cleopatra Terrorists would wear camoflaged skirts.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.png

Any person sitting on the "Is Obama a Muslim?" / "Is Obama a true American?" fence and who now believes that their fears are confirmed by The New Yorker cover were not going to vote for Obama anyway. They might tell you they will -- they might even think they will -- but anyone that conflicted wouldn't pull the switch for Obama come November. They'd be too afraid about where that vote might lead.

Hence the title of the artwork: "The Politics of Fear" (as is clearly written on the title page of the latest issue).

One great thing about the cover is that it's forcing a conversation about the idiocy behind rumors regarding Obama (& Michele's) religion and patriotism.

It's stinging satire - a mirror. It's not the Obamas that are being satirized, but us, the electorate (and media) obsessed by the depicted symbolism.

Radical Negroes in the White House. Is that a young Angela Davis?

You wince a little as an Obama supporter, but it's not the magazine's job to protect his image.

Correct.

Anyone who has followed the story would know immediately that its a satire.

It has to be one of the most brilliant commentaries of the presidential campaign to date. All in a one page picture.

Brilliant commentary of this type isn't going to win this election. I don't give a damn about intellectual crap right now, I want MY COUNTRY BACK!!!!!!!!!Yeah, of course we know it's a satire,http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.png we're mostly on the ball here at WNY.
Still, It makes me want to scream with frustration because this does nothing to help Obama. NOTHING. Just like I'm wanting to scream when I listen to progressive radio all day and hear all the "left" radio hosts going negative or picking at details that smart people understand, but smart people aren't the problem on November 4th. Fact is there are lots, LOTS of folks who believe this stuff is real and this just fans the flames needlessly. We progressives, and that includes progressive publications, need to all fall in line just like the fascist right wingers do every four years,exercise some good judgement and not sit around analyzing clever satire that will sail past the heads of at least 20% of the people in flyover country. It makes me sick, the way the progressives in America love to create needless controversy by trying to be so damn clever and brilliant.

The point is not a recognition of how this magazine cover will be used, but a recognition of what is already being used against Obama - in a more insidious manner.

In all polling before the magazine was published, the percentage of people who think Obama is a Muslim has held at around 13%.

There will be ads, cleverly done, that question Obama's religion and patriotism, as there were in 2004. Unlike the fuzzy ads which will be difficult to target, the blatantly satirical magazine cover affords Obama the opportunity to deal with this issue on his own terms, not in a defensive posture. And he must answer these questions that have been out there from the start.

A truism of any well-run campaign: Leave no question unanswered.

Is this sort of comment necessary?

This cover is going to be showing up from now until Nov.

I have to agree with Midtown and Zephyr. It's summer, couldn't they have done something cute about BBQs or sandcastles? Tie in the high price of oil?

We just don't... need this.

^ I agree. I think it is a very provocative cover, but I don't find it offensive.

It shows how ridiculous the Fox News commentary about the couple has become. If the masses find this offensive, then let them deal with the commentary on Fox.

^We both posted at exactly the same time.

Hot.

Don't know how you reconcile that with this.

Like I said - this stuff is already out there.

But do we need the NewYorker to fuel the fire?

Look, personally I find the cover halarious. I just wish they hadn't done it.