I don't like the cover, for so many reasons. First, it's cheaply incendiary. This isn't high level political discourse, and it's not even very sophisticated satire. It's just shouting "fire" in a crowded theater. The New Yorker wanted to make a scene, and they did. Second, when I first saw it, I both instantly understood the "joke" and nonetheless found the image repugnant. On its face, it's not an attractive representation of Barack and Michelle. And I don't want to see them made unfairly to look ugly, regardless of the reason. Third, and relatedly, when rumors are repeated, even in an effort to repudiate or ridicule them, they lodge more firmly in everyone's conciousness. Barack = Secret Muslim and Michelle = Black Panther. Those concepts are becoming linked too closely and too often. It's irresponsible for the New Yorker to pair them so indellibly in this image. Finally, I think that the rumors and misconceptions that the image exaggerates and ridicules are themselves exaggerations of real underlying concerns that some Americans have about the Obamas, and those concerns should not be dismissed as smugly as the New Yorker does. Many people who know full well that Barack Obama is no turban-wearing terrorist are nonetheless worried that his international, madrasah and ivy league educated background might have left him with an attitude toward the muslim world that is different from that of the average American, and perhaps more sympathetic toward it. Similarly, while she's no flag burning Black Panther, it's not illogical in view of some of her statements to wonder if Michelle Obama has some unresolved racial anger that might make her unsuitable to represent all Americans as first lady. Personally, I don't believe these concerns are legitimate, but I do think that they deserve respectful and thoughtful discussion, not smug ridicule. As usual, the New Yorker has set out to make Americans who are less liberal and erudite than they are look ridiculous. And also as usual, they just end up making themselves look ugly. It's unfortunate, though, that this time they also had to fix an ugly image of Barack and Michelle Obama in the national consciousness in the process.

it's a frequently used tactic in an election to caricaturize your opponent with a silly picture. Dukakis's head sticking out of a tank was a 1988 GOP favorite. Kerry in a spacesuit during the 2004 Democratic convention. The shot of Obama in Muslim garb that the Hillary camp "didn't" send out during the primary...

Looks like the GOP already has their favorite for this year.

But Obama isn't the "opponent" of the New Yorker - he's the guy they're backing! It seems perverse therefore for them to make a "silly picture" of him.

BO knocked out their "favorite daughter" Hillary. Pay back is a bitch.

gimletrose:

But Obama isn't the "opponent" of the New Yorker - he's the guy they're backing! It seems perverse therefore for them to make a "silly picture" of him.

It comes from a long history of liberal elites outsmarting themselves and self destructing.

How many times have you heard "leave it to the Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory!"? Google the last half of that and you'll see almost all liberal/Democratic websites.

"I can't believe I'm losing to this guy!" -1988, John Lovitz on Saturday Night Live as Michael Dukakis, vs. H.W. Bush

"Nobody's gonna buy these bogus Swift Boat stories." -majority of liberal pundits, 2004 election

"It'll be funny to the folks that 'get it'. Those that don't get it don't read us, anyway." -New Yorker, 2008

wait and see...