The New Yorker Covers Obama

[MaGZ]

I think this is the part that makes it problematic. There are too many people out there who won't see this as satire, just as confirming their views (how many actually read the New Yorker is a different story). Pat Buchanon tonight claimed as much. No, people might not think these aspects are exactly true, but they will see it as confirming their questions about who Obama really is.

Seriously. If this is supposedly so over the top exaggeration, why would it cause people to question Obama's real traits? Unless, of course, they are ready to believe it...

I can understand the New Yorker claiming it is exaggeration for effect, but I can also understand Obama's folks saying, we are fighting a huge smear campaign and the media is only feeding them, knowing they are bs, by perpetuating the stereotypes.

I heard earlier about how 12% think Obama took his oath of office on the Koran. My jaw dropped pretty hard. I wonder where they are getting that idea? You have to want to be so ignorant - it doesn't come by accident.

Well we do have a black congressman who is a Muslim sworn in on the Koran. We have black congressmen who were formerly members of the Black Panther Party. These of course were all Democrats.

Why would anyone think Obama would be any differed when it came to polling opinions? The black members of the Democratic Party have laid the ground work for this misconception.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1167467665822&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

 

[MaGZ]

but hey, i am not barak nor michelle, maybe they are offended. burning the american flag is pretty harsh.

Burning the American flag something one of their buddies Bill Ayers would do.

 

[MaGZ]

Because appearing in a liberal magazine (yes, the New Yorker is liberal) it is seen as a betrayal. If the Wall Street Journal endorses John McCain (as I am sure they will) liberals will not howl in anger. If the New York Times endorses John McCain (not going to happen of course), you don't think there would be an uproar?

Maybe The New Yorker will surprise us all and endorse Nader.

 

[Upchurch]

Those ignorant hayseeds in mid-America, how could those yahoos ever get the idea Obama was ever a Muslim?

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Image:Obama-robes.jpg

My grandfather brought Japanese robes from home with him when he returned from WWII. He was obviously Japanese this whole time and I never knew. Thank you, MaGZ, for opening my eyes to my (apparently) Japanese heritage.

[/sarcasm]

If that is where people, mid-America or otherwise, get the idea that Obama was Muslim, then you are absolutely correct: they are ignorant hayseeds and yahoos.

 

[MaGZ]

My grandfather brought Japanese robes from home with him when he returned from WWII. He was obviously Japanese this whole time and I never knew. Thank you, MaGZ, for opening my eyes to my (apparently) Japanese heritage.

[/sarcasm]

If that is where people, mid-America or otherwise, get the idea that Obama was Muslim, then you are absolutely correct: they are ignorant hayseeds and yahoos.

Obama was drawn to put on the Muslim garb when he returned to his roots in Africa. The Muslim faith is the faith of his father and grandfather and on and on and also his step-father Lolo Soetoro.

Where do people get these ideas Obama could be a Muslim?

 

[Upchurch]

Obama was drawn to put on the Muslim garb when he returned to his roots in Africa. The Muslim faith is the faith of his father and grandfather and on and on and also his step-father Lolo Soetoro.

Where do people get these ideas Obama could be a Muslim?

That's like saying I'd be drawn to wearing lederhosen while playing my tuba in Germany because of my German roots rather than just because it is kinda fun to put a costume on. When in Rome...

I think you nailed it on the head earlier: People get these ideas that Obama could be a Muslim because they are ignorant hayseeds and yahoos.

 

[Cicero]

You cited your source, AP, and it was relatively easy to find. As were the right-wing forum boards and bloggers who pretty much foretold what you were all in a huff about.

So predictable.


Well, he trotted out the ol' "ID and Evolution are just theories" baloney, for one.



Weren't you the one who defended E.D. Hill's unattributed "terrorist fist jab" attack? Just sayin'.



Noting that Snow expressed his conservative views is an attack? Interesting...



His musical talent is not what he was known for.


As a journalist, Tony Snow was no Tim Russert.

It's your contention that the AP had Snow's column in mind when they slighted Snow in the quote you selected?

"With a quick-from-the-lip repartee, broadcaster's good looks and a relentlessly bright outlook — if not always a command of the facts — he became a popular figure around the country to the delight of his White House bosses"

Did Tony read this column he wrote in August of 2005 at the podium as press secretary from May 2006 to September 2007? No. Columns are opinion pieces. If they were historical documents, Buchanan would have been fired after his first one.

So again, what were these facts that he was not in command of as press secretary? You know. The job that he WAS known for.

When the AP singles out Snow's political leanings, but not other journalists obvious political leanings in their obits, then yes, they are definitely attempting to marginalize Snow as a journalist. You know. The same way you did with equal transparency.

Did you know that Russert was a creationist? Doesn't that change your opinion of his journalists integrity?

I did not defend Hill for her comments. I said her show was cancelled for her silly transgression. Too bad MSNBC has a tin ear when it comes to Olbermann's faux pas.

BTW: Your MediaMatters screwed the pooch in their article attempting to argue the facts with Snow. They had to add a correction about their misconception of "'Lucy' and her ilk strongly indicate that humans are descended from apes."

 

[Cicero]

That's like saying I'd be drawn to wearing lederhosen while playing my tuba in Germany because of my German roots rather than just because it is kinda fun to put a costume on. When in Rome...

I think you nailed it on the head earlier: People get these ideas that Obama could be a Muslim because they are ignorant hayseeds and yahoos.

Just because JEH dressed up in dresses didn't make him a transvestite....Ah, never mind.

 

[gdnp]

Did you know that Russert was a creationist? Doesn't that change your opinion of his journalists integrity?

Not unless he let his beliefs interfere with the objectivity of his reporting.

Back to the New Yorker cover. What I find offensive is that caricature requires an element of truth. You cannot draw a caricature of someone with big ears or a big nose unless they have those traits. The essence of caricature is the exaggeration of true characteristics, not the creation of those that do not exist. So the McCain cover above works, because it places McCain in a cage similar to the one he was in in Vietnam, but replaces his Vietnamese captors with Democrats.

The Obama cover? Does he hate America and support those that burn the flag? Is he Muslim? Does he support OBL?

As others have pointed out, the cover tends to reinforce misconceptions. "Well, maybe he doesn't burn flags, but he doesn't really love America. Maybe he doesn't hang Bin Laden's picture on the wall, but he really isn't going to be tough on terrorists."

 

[Cicero]

Not unless he let his beliefs interfere with the objectivity of his reporting. "

Russert wasn't a reporter; he was an interviewer. But his religious views were on display whenever he had Chris Hitchens on his program. Since Russert never got his chance to interview the Pope, we will never know how he would have cornered the man from the Vatican on creationism.

 

[pgwenthold]

Well we do have a black congressman who is a Muslim sworn in on the Koran. We have black congressmen who were formerly members of the Black Panther Party. These of course were all Democrats.

Why would anyone think Obama would be any differed when it came to polling opinions?

So you are saying people get the idea because they are racist.

Got it.

 

[UserGoogol]

Because appearing in a liberal magazine (yes, the New Yorker is liberal) it is seen as a betrayal. If the Wall Street Journal endorses John McCain (as I am sure they will) liberals will not howl in anger. If the New York Times endorses John McCain (not going to happen of course), you don't think there would be an uproar?

Just to be a pedantic git, I would like to point out that the New York Times endorsed McCain in the primaries.

 

[Brainster]

Latest take: Obama is a humorless prig who can't take a joke:

Flash forward to the kerfuffle — and Obama’s icy reaction — over this week’s New Yorker cover parodying fears about the Obamas.

“We’ve already scratched thrift, candor and brevity off the list of virtues in this presidential cycle, so why not eliminate humor, too?” wrote James Rainey in The Los Angeles Times, suggesting “an irony deficiency” in Obama and his fans.

Andy Borowitz, eager to help out, issued the media a set of Obama-approved jokes:

Q: What's black and white and red all over?
Barack Obama: The New Yorker magazine, which should be embarrassed after publishing such a tasteless and offensive cover, which I reject and denounce.

A Christian, a Jew and Barack Obama are in a rowboat in the middle of the ocean. Barack Obama says, "This joke isn't going to work because there's no Muslim in this boat."

However humor-impaired he may be, Obama didn't miss an opportunity to pander to a small slice of America:

These fallacious e-mails and The New Yorker cartoon are "actually an insult against Muslim Americans," he said. There are "wonderful Muslim Americans" across the country, Obama said, and "for this to be used as sort of an insult, or to raise suspicions about me, I think is unfortunate."

 

[gdnp]

While the other 95% of people think more along these lines:

The New Yorker faced a different kind of hostility with its cover this week, which the Obama campaign criticized harshly. A campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, said in a statement that “most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive — and we agree.”

I'd say Obama burning an American flag with a picture of OBL in the oval office is about as tasteless as a picture of McCain napalming Vietnamese children would be.

 

[boloboffin]

This joke isn't going to work because there's no Muslim in this boat.

Now that's funny. I don't care who you are.

 

[Cicero]

I'd say Obama burning an American flag with a picture of OBL in the oval office is about as tasteless as a picture of McCain napalming Vietnamese children would be.

Since McCain spent about 20 hours total flying in combat in Vietnam, and as a pilot, he lost 5 U.S. aircraft, sort of a Vietcong ace, he was much more dangerous to the North Vietnamese as a POW then he ever was as a Naval aviator. So while such a picture would be tasteless, it would also be reinforcing a false image just as the Obama cartoon.

 

[corplinx]

Joe Bob! Lookie Here! Shazam! This new copy of the Nooo-Yawka done confirmed my bigoted feelin's!

Still this.

I am starting to think this whole flap about the cover is just a cynical way to try to score points by trying to smear his opposition.

I mean Jeez, the New Yorker was making fun of Jerome Da Gnome. This should rise to about a 2 on the care-dar. It strikes me as self-serving to turn this into a bigger story since you can imply that these sorts of smears that lead to this cover as satire are coming from mainstream opposition.