New Yorker Obama Cover: "The Politics of Fear"

I only came upon this about a minute ago, but I can't decide how I feel about it yet.


I know it's supposed to be satirical, but I think The New Yorker swung and missed.

Notice that the Obamas are in the Oval Office, Bin Laden's portrait hangs on the wall, the American flag is burning in the fireplace and the "terrorist fist jab" is thrown in for a nice touch. I wonder why he didn't include the Obama daughters in burkas?

Artist Barry Blitt has yet to decide if this was a mistake or not, though he defends the cover.

"I think the idea that the Obamas are branded as unpatriotic [let alone as terrorists] in certain sectors is preposterous. It seemed to me that depicting the concept would show it as the fear-mongering ridiculousness that it is."

And in retrospect, given the outcry, is he glad he made the art?

"Retrospect? Outcry?" he wrote. "The magazine just came out ten minutes ago, at least give me a few days to decide whether to regret it or not..."

Yeah, I've decided. It's tasteless. I'm not just saying that because I'm an Obama guy, it's just that it's over the top and since the right wing is trying to portray Obama in this light already, the irony and satire will be lost on those to whom it was meant for.

And as Reef at Kos put it so succinctly, "They got the new McCain Manchurian Candidate cover lined up for next week right?"

UPDATE (7/15/08, 10:20pm): From the Rude Pundit:

"...the Rude Pundit's problem with the whole Barack-as-Muslim and Michelle-as-Black-Panther plus burning flag and bin Laden's picture in the Oval Office isn't that it's particularly offensive. It's that it's just not very funny. It's not even enough to make you go, "Hmmm." You glance at it once and think, "Yeah, some people think that, don't they? That's a shame." And there the whole joke ends. There's no more levels to it. It's like an Upper East Side version of South Park, an elitist attempt at crude humor, like an ironic fart at a wine tasting.

...Here's the thing: anyone who doesn't see the cover art as satire already believed that Obama was a terr'ist out to secretly destroy American and get rid of apple pie and porn. No one's gonna look at the cover and say, "Well, right there, it proves Obama hates this country."

Unfortunately, right after I read that last line, I saw this.

Ex-convict G. Gordon Liddy, who masterminded Watergate break-in of the DNC headquarters in 1972, and who for some reason people take seriously and give him a radio show, said the following to a caller:

"Yeah, I don't suppose you've, by any chance, have seen the cover of the latest issue of The New Yorker magazine, which is, you know, a huge thing. It's got Obama in his Muslim dress with a turban, and he's there with his wife. His wife has a "mad at the world" afro, circa 1968, she -- she's got bandoliers and an assault weapon, and there in their fireplace is burning the American flag. The New Yorker finally got it right."

Go read the rest of the Media Matters article if you're the least bit interested in increasing your blood pressure by seeing what kind of shit comes out of this toady's mouth as well as the mouths of all Republican water carriers on the airwaves.

I've also heard differing opinions on the New Yorker cover from, "It's offensive" to "It's brilliant satire." But is it brilliant if it has to be explained?