To me it seems like an attempt to show how ridiculous all the crypto-Muslim/anti-American whisper-campaigning has been, especially since the New Yorker has been more or less been banging the Obama drum for months (especially Hertzberg). I chuckled, remembering some of their other covers lampooning the ridiculous assertions being made in this campaign. And though I get how it may look out of context — which is the way most people will almost certainly view it — is the New Yorker responsible for them missing the point?
The folks over at Jack and Jill Politics are absolutely apoplectic (to be fair, that’s sorta their default setting).
You CANNOT pull this satire-oh-so-smart cover bullshit with BLACK PEOPLE.
What the fuck is wrong with The New Yorker. [sic]
This is INSANE.
I don’t know what country they live in, but I live in A-merry-ca.
And this racist drivel isn’t funny.
Ta-Nehisi and his partner debate the issue.
She’s a little more pissed than me–particularly about the Michelle Obama pic and the Afro. I think the problem is that it’s very hard to satirize the rumors around Michelle and Barack. Satire needs overstatement. But the cover doesn’t actually overstate the beliefs of the scaremongers. Indeed its the sort of image you’d expect to see at one of the nuttier websites or publications, and so in that sense it doesn’t work very well.
ABC’s Jake Tapper:
Intent factors into these matters, of course, but no Upper East Side liberal — no matter how superior they feel their intellect is — should assume that just because they’re mocking such ridiculousness, the illustration won’t feed into the same beast in emails and other media. It’s a recruitment poster for the right-wing.