"New Yorker" Cover Depicts Barack and Michelle Obama as Terrorists

The progressive e-telligentsia, cable news pundits and Beltway politcos are in a feeding frenzy over the latest zeitgeist in the politics of outrage. Barry Blitt's provocative new cover of the New Yorker debuted this morning and depicts Sen. Barack Obama in a turban, fist-bumping his gun-slinging wife as the American flag burns in the fireplace. The editors say the cover art "satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the Presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign." The Obama campaign calls the caricatures "tasteless and offensive."

The cover art struck a nerve with many people—or, we wouldn't be discussing it—but the outrage seems much ado about nothing. There is nothing racist here, just political satire, and, frankly, not the very best. Surely no one can credibly suggest the iconic, liberal, pro-Obama New Yorker is legitimizing right-wing smears, or, introducing imagery that hasn't already been well established. Or does someone seriously believe right-wing talk radio hosts and bloggers eagerly subscribe to the New Yorker to glean their latest conservative talking points? Now that would be satire.

You May Want to Read ...
Video of CNN Comparing Obama to Axis of Evil [R20]
CNN Compares Barack Obama to Ahmadinejad [R20]
Newspaper Headlines Michelle Obama as "Sassy" [R20]
Paging John Edwards and Barack Obama [HuffPo]
This Barack Obama Should Tell Bob Novak [HuffPo]
Columnists Debate Michelle O's "Entitlement" [R20]

Comments

[Derrick Voss]

I was surprised you didn't post this earlier because you have been so diligent in reporting smears of Obama. However, this cover art was not a smear. It was a caricature of the smears that surround Obama's campaign. I'm an Obama supporters and recognize plain satire and a cartoon versus a smear. I'm sorry, but some of my friends are just too dang politically correct.

[Dale]

Some of these people need to lighten up. It is just a cartoon and its amazing how the pc police wants to establish a huge protective net around the Obamas. This cartoon is no different than the New Yorker's cartoon with Ford and Kissinger in a foxhole or Reagan as a cowboy. The bloggers and Obama defenders are mostly outrage junkies. They get off on this hysteria just like crack. It's a cartoon, no one was smeared or libeled, relax kiddies.

[Erich H]

It wasn't racist or offensive per se but it definitely was tasteless. But I'm not upset, I've seen much worse, but this was a tacky rendition.

[ID]

Meh.

[Me]

Am I bad for laughing when I first saw this? I immediately thought about how the media has been trying to portray them, and I didn't think of it as racist at all. But that's just me. I've heard the accompanying article is quite good too. If people want to see this man get elected, they've gotta grow a thicker skin.

[Derrick from Philly]

Thank God the idiots who would believe crap like this don't read The New Yorker.

They made Michelle look like Sigorney Weaver in Aliens II.

[Duwayne]

Erich: I agree with you, I do think it was tasteless, something about that cover just rubs me the wrong way...

[CANTON]

Sorry, but you're wrong Rod. The cover is tasteless. Not necessarily racist, but certainly in poor taste. I'm not really sure is there much ado about nothing here, but, one really wonders what the editors were thinking.

[iemmathu]

an afro AND combat boots. . . really?

[Dex123ter]

I just can't even compose a comment for this one.

[DR]

'Me' is right. We all know the cartoon has no basis in reality. It's satire, grow some thicker skin. Some of these fanboys are outrage junkies.

[blkbandit]

it thought the picture was actually funny and the obamabots are way to sensitive.

[ff]

i agree with ID....Meh.

can we expect a wheelchair bound McCain
or a half-Bush/half-McCain picture (a la the NBA playoffs) for the cover next month?

the Olympics and football season can't start soon enough :-)

[Fred]

I DO NOT find anything funny at all about that picture. It's tasteless and offensive. The picture has the American flag burning in the fireplace and a picture of Bin Laden up on the wall, the man who was responsible for 9/11. I am disgusted. And Michelle has "nappy" hair and Barack is wearing a head wrap. Come on, folks. Wake up and smell the HATE......

[IsleZeus]

Fine, YOU may be able to tell it is not offensive... what about Bubba living in a trailer down in Oklahoma who is an avid fan of FoxNews and Sean Hannity who will say: "Well naw if dem here liberal papurrs believe Osama and his nigra wife is a terrist then it MUST be true... and to thank, I was consid'rin' voting for that mongrel!

[elg]

The cover is a satire. The New Yorker is a glossy, liberal, "literary" magazine and they love Obama. During the primary season, the magazine's political writers clearly favored Obama over Hillary Clinton. They made no effort to appear "objective". Jumping on any and every imagined slight is not doing Obama any favors. Bubba in a trailer in Oklahoma does not read the New Yorker. Bubba has probably never even HEARD of the New Yorker (maybe he has now).

[Mark]

One should never underestimate the power of an image to work on the subconscious mind. Some people are already half-willing to believe this garbage, and having to overcome their own bad internal programming to vote a black man for president, and this cover just adds fuel. Moreover, a picture is worth a thousand words and is absorbed in an instant, with no need to read or use logic. This was a stupid stunt by the New Yorker.

But on the hopeful side, who knows, maybe it will be just the push some people need to confront the ridiculousness of these Obama fears.

[Jim]

I think the cartoon makes Michelle look really cute. It makes me nostalgic for Angela.