The latest cover of The New Yorker, drawn by Barry Blitt, looks like it will be the latest
fake outrage since The Huffington Post has it as the top story with a red headline. (just to let you know how important it is.) I think they should have double underlined it. Let's all cancel our New Yorker subscriptions! Barry Blitt and Jesse Jackson should tattoo "I'm sorry" on their fucking faces! Do they use soy-based inks? Let's investigate! Oh hey, didn't the mortgage industry almost collapse Friday?
You'd think Obama and his supporters would appreciate a sympathetic magazine like The New Yorker lampooning the right-wing caricature of him. But satire is too divisive for Obama. His campaign condemned the image:
“The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree."
They "may think" it's satire? Is it possible that it is something else? A photorealistic illustration of the Senator or perhaps a crossword puzzle?
I'm not so sure about condemning the scary drawing so quickly. It makes his campaign seem like The New Yorker is on their radar. New Yorker=Elitist. Could backfire. They may have some gay friends in those red states, but a subscription to The New Yorker? That's for people who wear a monocle.
Yup. Jake Tapper's ABC
blog: "sophisticates...liberal politics... Upper East Side liberal...superior." Jake is so anti-elitist he includes a hyperlink to the Urban Dictionary entry on "dap" so all his readers--farmers, mill workers, cattle ranchers--will know what's going on.
Wait....my spellcheck doesn't recognize "dap" or "Obama". Racism or satire?