// you’re reading...

Asides

Obama & Wife Portrayed as Terrorists! / The New Yorker Cover

The New Yorker Obama cover:

Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 03:05:04 PM PDT

Anybody got any opinion on this new New Yorker cover?

 title=

I got one: I’m sure it’s some kind of joke right?  There’s no other ulterior motive to publish cartoons like this right?  They got the new McCain Manchurian Candidate cover lined up for next week right?

This is disgusting.  Might be worth cancelling a subscription or two.

Link to the original article source at Daily Kos

Link to article on this story featured in more detail at The Huffington Post

A Telling Thoughts comment

This type of defamatory material needs to be stopped in its tracks. Obviously subscription and advertising revenue at the New Yorker must be well down. Publishing this type of rubbish says much about the quality of people responsible for its production.

Please comment below.

[signature]

Discussion

Comments are disallowed for this post.

  1. This could be looked at as Mark Twain’s version of a piece called “The Obamas Through the Eyes of Prejudice and Stereotypes: Distinguishing fiction from non-fiction.

    Those that have done research and are working toward ridding their hearts of the past, should sit back and laugh at this.

    We know a lie or untruth when we see one. We know the voice of our commander and chief and the first lady that will sit by his side when we hear them. Those that do not know their voice will be led astray.

    Posted by Johnathan | July 14, 2008, 1:24 pm
  2. This is an outrage!!! The New Yorker should run a cover of apologizing to the Obama’s.

    Posted by Dan | July 14, 2008, 1:59 pm
  3. O come on !! This is a great satirical piece exposing the hateful ignorant stupidity of ultra right smear tactics. Don’t get so bent out of shape. People who subscribe to the New Yorker or read it see the cover for what it is-satire. O boy what a monday news day this will be.

    Posted by thomas a smith | July 14, 2008, 3:22 pm
  4. I’m not surprised. But I am outraged. I feel so bad for the Obamas. I am so embarassed for America. The rest of theworld knows how ignorant we are.

    Posted by Sam | July 14, 2008, 6:22 pm
  5. It is easy for me to see how stupid this “joke” is. However, there are lots of stupid people in this country (and who read the New Yorker) who will take it seriously! The New Yorker should apologize!

    Posted by Michael | July 14, 2008, 7:12 pm
  6. I’m sure if we could read the inside story it would clarify the cover. But the problem is for the people who do not read the inside, they only pass by the cover at a news stand, or book store or grocery store stand and they see this. They do not read but they do vote and this image will stick to their subconsciousness and they will say things like, I think they are Muslim or terrorists. And this could lose votes for Obama because of a few ignorant people looking at such an ignorant picture. Remember a picture speaks a thousand words. These are not the words we want anyone to hear about the Obamas. Next time use your brain before you choose a cover for the world to see and you should formally apologise.

    Posted by Aileen | July 14, 2008, 8:14 pm
  7. Cartoon (picture) without context misses the mark of satire! I read ther cartoonist remark about the intent of his picture and I find it shallow. A satirist makes VERY CLEAR the intent of his/her message. Without context, the message here is to fan the flames of those would believe and/ or promote these ideas of fear, hatred, and mistrust! Aileen is correct in her assessment of the situation this cartoon presented. I for one, believe that the editors and cartoonist knew what they were doing and how it would be interpreted, at a glance, on the front cover. That meaning is clear and as I stated. One of fear, hatred, and mistrust!

    Posted by Robert Earl Lewis | July 14, 2008, 9:20 pm
  8. This is disgusting. Not even John McCain would stoop so low, seriously pitiful stuff. This is a BIG MISTAKE on their part hell is gonna break loose over this.

    Posted by Talia | July 14, 2008, 10:22 pm
  9. There is no inside story.

    Posted by Lydia Lindsey | July 15, 2008, 2:10 am
  10. Good for the New Yorker! Michelle thinks she is the new Jackie Kennedy. She is no Jackie Kennedy and never will be.

    Posted by D Allen | July 15, 2008, 10:30 am
  11. The New Yorker showed very poor judgment and a sinister sense of humor. We don’t need any reinforcement of false, defamatory imagery.

    Posted by Jolanda Whaling | July 15, 2008, 12:26 pm