Barack fumes about the cover….
…and the blogosphere squawks, but it’s the article inside that really skewers him.
What cover, what article? Why, the New Yorker, that totally liberal rag, appears to have broken ranks and turned on Obama.
The controversial cover I can understand. The editors say lighten up, Obama; it’s really a satire of those who have prejudices and misconceptions about the Obamas, not of Obama himself. It does seem that way to me:
But the same New Yorker issue has also published a remarkable piece by Ryan Lizza entitled “Making It: How Chicago shaped Obama.” I consider it required reading. I don’t see how anyone can digest the information it conveys and still think highly of the man, although I’m sure some of the New Yorker’s readers will manage that feat quite nicely, thank you very much.
What puzzles me is how the article passed the self-imposed censor. Either the editors are so in the tank for Obama that they don’t see how incendiary the Lizza piece is, or for some reason they’ve become scared of the possibility of Obama’s becoming President.
I read that New Yorker cover as a clever bit of misdirection that makes it harder to criticize Obama.
The New Yorker article is only a problem for Obama supporters if they really, really believe that Obama is an old-fashioned Martin Luther King-style idealist. New Yorker readers, I suspect, are more cynical. Sure, they may enjoy reliving the Sixties thrills of hope and change that Obama’s theatrics provide, but they won’t be put off to learn that Obama is first and foremost, an ambitious, shrewd politician. They may even be relieved.
Well, like Michelle Malkin said, “Grow a pair, Obama”. That way when Jesse cuts them off, he’ll know there was something TO cut off.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/14/grow-a-pair-obama/
This New Yorker thing is timid compared to the way other politicians have been portrayed by cartoonists. It also happens to be true.
If he is selected to be p.o.t.u.s., we get what we deserve – a spoiled rich kid, who thinks way too much of himself, and hates the country that put him there. Shame on us for letting it happen.
Shame on us for allowing our society be infested by the likes of this guy, who is no more than a self-glorified street punk. I am so infuriated.
The libs launched Archie Bunker back in the 70s, thinking that the bigots and reactionaries would die of mortification seeing themselves so cuttingly ridiculed. Actually, they were tickled pink to see their opinions broadcast far and wide. Once again our progressive friends have been too clever by half.
That cover sure got a lot of people thinking; cool; and sales are through the roof which means food on the table for the American press; fine.
And it was Hillary Clinton who spread the Muslim rumors and passed along the CLinton in drag picture
Just shows how racial phenomena still lingering in US society and still there even for some the denial is an easy way to them
But the cover is SATIRE! That excuses everything, right? Call someone horrible names, wish death on him and his family, question his sexual orientation and prowess — it’s all okay if it’s SATIRE. Especially if the target is a conservative. I guess the rules are different for the Messiah, and the magic word SATIRE no longer has as much effect.
Say what?
Please to again that try.
Ha ha. See, the cover is satire. The problem with this, as I see it, is after many years of being told liberals were smarter than average, I find them dumber than average. Of course, in a way that is respectfull to all.
The Lizza article will get to some people. It’s not just that Obama is a calculating pol; it is that he doesn’t invest enough in any project to see it through. You see a man with plenty of time to court the power and money folks, but not enough time to seriously study a problem and come up with solutions. He tosses money (not his) at a problem or a useful supporter and then moves on to his next campaign plan. His real goal is to get himself into the only job worthy of him.
unTruth:
“Just shows how racial phenomena still lingering in US society and still there even for some the denial is an easy way to them”
Where are you from and how many black presidential candidates have you guys had?
I thought it was buffoonish satire that fails and is in bad taste. Mind you, I’m an opponent of Obonga who prefers to stick with the serious issues and the truth about who he is. He is not a Muslim. He is, at the very least, a socialist with wide and deep connections with Communists that need to be exposed to the wider American electorate.
If this was an attempt to scorch conservative Republicans, it failed big time. It failed because we are condemning it for the cretinism it is. And if that is what liberals and Leftists think of who we are and what we think, then they are the biggest idiots in America today.
“Self-imposed censor”?! Are you nuts?
Good magazines — and the New Yorker is a very good magazine right now (it isn’t always) — always set themselves against the conventional wisdom of their readership. That’s why it can take on Obama right now. (It’s a sign that the tide has turned from Rep to Dem, by the way.) And that’s why it was the one that broke Abu Ghraib, and the one to publish all of Jane Mayer’s work on torture. This is a literary magazine for heaven’s sake, someplace to go for Alice Munro short stories and theater reviews, but here it is out on the forefront of investigative journalism, breaking major stories. It’s quite astounding, actually – and another sign of how lame the mainstream media has become.
Also, alas, it’s why Fox fails so miserably – that network’s sole function is to assuage the preconceived mindset of its target demographic.
kamper is one big stereotype who traffics in nothing but stereotypes
i bet he thinks he’s really insightful
A cynic might suggest that The New Yorker wants to torpedo Obama because if he gets in one term will
torpedoscuttle the Ship of the Left and it will take at least three terms to raise, as it did after Carter.Hmm, perhaps there are some bitter Hillary supporters at the NYer?
“The libs launched Archie Bunker back in the 70s…”
Heh. It’s always fun to ask people; who supported the family? Who went to work every day and kept a roof overhead and food on the table? Who allowed a man he at times detested to live under that very roof? Yeah, Archie was the adult there, despite the buffoonery.
What puzzles me is how the article passed the self-imposed censor. Either the editors are so in the tank for Obama that they don’t see how incendiary the Lizza piece is, or for some reason they’ve become scared of the possibility of Obama’s becoming President.
In the tank for Obama.
Sergey: “Gringo, the facts from AWEA website that you cited, even if true, are misleading. It is useless to compare payback times for wind farms and coal or nuclear plants, because they belong to different segments of energy market, and can not substitute each other.”
My posting was with regards to Den Beste’s opinion that ‘“And I’m still not convinced that it won’t take years before any given windmill finally yields as much total energy as it took to make it, transport it and install it.”
THAT is what I was posting on. Again, changing of the goalposts.
Here is further support for my reply to Den Beste’s comment.
. Try changing the goalposts on THAT, Sergey!