I'm Not A "New Yorker"
Posted 7 weeks 4 days ago byAs a conservative Republican, I carry no water for Barack Obama. Still, at least a modicum of respect must be employed for the presumptive nominee of one of the two great political parties of this country. The New Yorker magazine has shown none.
The mother of satire is intelligence and nuance that essentially knocks people over with a feather. The New Yorker used a chainsaw. Stupid. The editors seemed to take the easy way, certainly knowing the images would titilate, and, of course, sell magazines. Internet competition has made more than one editor make decisions they would not make ten years ago.
I wonder what would happen if a magazine such as National Review decided to depict the New York publishing industry as a bunch of hook-nosed, reformed German jews hell bent on subverting the country with thinly disguised chimeras of Marxist ideology. Just a little satire, right?
A picture of Osama Bin Laden on the wall!!! Are you kidding me? Obama deserves better and so does the country.
Thoughts
a cover for a cover ?
Submitted on July 16th, 2008 by John 2000Do you believe in the possibility that the outrageous cover was a device used to help drown the newscycle of the Obama web site being scrubbed of all of Obama's prior statements regarding the surge over the weekend?
This was not the first time the site has been scrubbed. (eg. Wright, etc)
PS- Charles. Your sympathy for the Obamas' is duly noted!! Welcome to the cult?
NYer chainsaw massacre
Submitted on July 16th, 2008 by rom12921Treating candidates and office holders with respect is important to having a conduit to disagree and influence policy.
Name-calling and ridiculing gets you ignored rather than heard most times.
well I did find one flattering HRC mag cover
Submitted on July 15th, 2008 by John 2000http://coverawards.com/2008/06/03/covera...
That is a great image I think ... thought it at the time I saw it. I will just say that I agree with you ... but I have been unable to fully separate the pure Obama-fanaticism from the pure sexism in many cases.
BUT OF COURSE !!
Submitted on July 15th, 2008 by janmbOF COURSE -- Now that its about a MAN = OBAMA there is a MEDIA and public outcry about ONE silly cartoon.
The deafening, depressing silence of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean or other leading Democrats, who to my knowledge (with the exception of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland) haven't publicly uttered a word of outrage at the unrelenting, CONTINUOUS sex-based hate that has been hurled at a former first lady and two-term senator from New York. Among those holding their tongues are hundreds of Democrats for whom Clinton has campaigned and raised millions of dollars.
Don Imus endured more public ire from the political class when he insulted the Rutgers University women's basketball team. So has the NEW YORKER.
NO!
Submitted on July 15th, 2008 by REEDDARRELLObama deserves just what he and Michelle gets which is nothing from me.Anyone from Iowa that would be interested in helping me start a P.U.M.A group in Iowa send me an e-mail at those of you who don't know what P.U.M.A. is it's party unity my ass!it's for Democrats who will not support Obama.
they protect him too much
Submitted on July 14th, 2008 by John 2000to even allow anyone to directly challenge him. I think if anyone ever got seriously in his face that he would crack one way or the other. I have seen him come close to that in debates ... he gets real shaky real fast. Still plenty of time for that. Let his confidence get even more hyper-inflated.
sick of the sound of his name
Submitted on July 14th, 2008 by AnonymousYes,Obama knows this won't really hurt him but it does give him free airtime and it keeps his name being talked about. I am sick of hearing his name. Why does he always give the impression that so much about him is off limits? If we don't handle him with kid gloves, he scolds us and expects us all to toe the line.He likes this type of thing because it keeps people from asking the real questions. The more we talk about rev wright etc the more he does not have to explain his leftist, socialistic views.
For the National Review
Submitted on July 14th, 2008 by John 2000For the National Review analogy to hold, Charles, I think it would have to be depicting a cartoon of George and Laura dressed up in Nazi regalia or something with boxcars in front of the Superdome, or something like that. But the National Review would never do that.
Two good comments I found in comments elsewhere that I agree with are :
"I think they chose this cover to distract from their not-so-glowing review of this empty suit. NObama ‘08!" ... and
"Basically, projecting a negative on their behalf to try to become a victim of an attack they never made."
I particularly like the 2nd comment because this is the canned technique that has been used time and again for months by the Obama campaign. They create a controversy and then blaim the opposition.
No matter what, it keeps the news cycle as being name of Obama Obama Obama 24/7 7 days a week. I'd like to see someone seriously challenge the noisemaker for a change. Anyway, the more you make of it, the more they win.