If Muslim Obama New Yorker cover's outrageous, check these out

Our friends over or up or wherever they are on the Entertainment section of LATimes.com took one look at today's new New Yorker magazine cover and plunged into researching nine other outrageous magazine covers that are rather eye-popping.

Thousands have read The Ticket's report from yesterday on the either incendiary or satirical cover of the Obamas -- Barack and Michelle -- in Muslim/freedom fighter gear, armed to the teeth, in the Oval office beneath an Osama bin Laden portrait while they burn the American flag. Other than that, what's to get excited about? That Ticket item is right here.

The new cover story photo gallery is also a hoot -- many political, some not. Remember the Yoko Ono/naked John Lennon cover that made you want to take a shower? Is peace political? Or the Time magazine cover story about Bill Clinton's extra-curricular troubles that perhaps accidentally had a pair of devil's horns coming out of his head?

There's Entertainment Weekly's nude Dixie Chicks cover after they said those naughty things overseas about President Bush and lost so much of their music sales in Tennessee and Texas.

Our personal favorite is the cover story in Vanity Fair titled "Is Barbara Bush as Tough as They Say?" that had a nicely-dressed photo of Demi Moore on the cover instead of the former first lady. Demi, Barbara, hey, it probably made sense at the design meeting. Except when you look closely at the photo, that's really not much of a suit on the Demster.

We actually recommend two places to check out. One is our blogging colleague Elizabeth Snead, over at Dish Rag, who's a lovely lady unless you're a celebrity and since we're not, she's good and has an alternative New Yorker cover some might like better.

And the other spot is the aforementioned, semi-political photo gallery, which you can access by clicking on the also aforementioned New Yorker cover below.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[K Anderson]

It is unfortunate that this New Yorker illustrated cover of Barack Obama in a turban and Michelle Obama with an afro and machine gun is considered satire. The definition of satire is the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc. How is this cartoon exposing a vice or folly of the Obama’s? They are not closet Muslims, or machine gun toting anarchist. Also, why is the afro utilized as a symbol of anarchy? The truth is, most of us work hard, and get along with one another. The media, along with a small minority of the population would like all of us to believe we should dislike each other based on unimportant metrics like the color of our skin, the texture of our hair, what we wear, how we chose to worship etc. I choose not to believe this. I choose to believe that we can be better human beings. Unfortunately, this is nothing more then someone- marked by a lack of intellectual acuity- taking advantage of 'free speech' to denigrate specific religious groups, intelligent women as well as, using it as an opportunity to take a couple of pot shots at African-Americans in general. The hope is that we will begin to rise above this and move into a place where we can have intelligent discourse regarding our politics, religion and yes even freedom of speech.

[walter caldwell]

Considering the fact that you posted what you call a humerous joke about Obama why don't you post one of McCain posing with the KKK? Let's make things equal or is that too much like being right?

[joie spinelli]

The New Yorker cover is the epitome of satirical, and yet many 'sophisticated readers' may find this unsuitable. More alarming is the double digit IQ population that browse the newstands for Hustler or Fox News and find the cover to be all the validation they need to hate and fear.

[Bill]

The main problem with this 'satire' is that (like Ronald MacDonald) it that is just not funny.

[Newt]

Considering the fact that you posted what you call a humerous joke about Obama why don't you post one of McCain posing with the KKK? Let's make things equal or is that too much like being right?

YEAH REALLY!!!

[Doug]

Righteous!

[amycakes]

My Mama always said "you never have a second chance to make a first impression."
This New Yorker cover drives that message home.
This is our nation's first impressions of Barack & Michelle. Whose fault is that?
Theirs, of course! Sorry, you don't get a second chance!
Mama was right!

[Jesse Owens]

M. Obama's thesis sounded like a revolutionist wrote it so the New Yorker's cover of her is to the point. Obama looks natural in his Muslim clothes. Can't you liberals find some amusement in this? After all, the media and newpapers across the country have had so many political cartoons which showed both Bush and McCain in terrible ways. Liberals, if you can't take ithe heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Also people who live in glass houses should not throw rocks. So you just had some rocks thrown back at you, huh, but you certainly can't take it.

By the way, know the difference in Obama and Osama? It's just a lot of B.S. (get the joke?)

[Get Real]

Relax, people. As a fairly New Yorker subscriber, I can tell you that the cover really is both typical and funny to anyone who is familiar with the magazine. It's satire in that It mocks the people who still think Obama is a Muslim. In other words, it mocks a class of people who aren't paying any attention to magazines like the New Yorker.

If you open any New Yorker from the last six months, you'll find a ringing endorsement of Obama in the Talk of the Town section. It's not like the readership of the New Yorker is about to vote Republican.

And regarding the folks at a newsstand who see the cover while scanning for Hustler -- and there are plenty of them in the New York subway system -- I can tell you this: they're not interested in politics at that moment.

And those who are hunting for some Fox News syndicate are already practicing saying "J-Mac". If they see the cover and laugh, it's because they don't realize they're being mocked.

And please, please, don't tell me swing voters will be swayed McCain's way by this cover. Were our democracy really that fragile, and were our populace really that idiotic, that the cover of the satirical New Yorker cover could cost Obama the election, I'd move to Canada tomorrow.

But I have a little more faith in us than that.

[Josephine Simonton]

People, leave McCain out of this one. It just shows your stupidity, immaturity, lack of judgment, meaness, and the fact that you can dish it out but can't take it.

I love The New Yorker today!!

[Jake]

All this does is reinforce these false impressions some people have about the Obamas. I think it was not well thought out. I think in all fairness the New Yorker should put out an edition that deals directly with these false impressions. But no matter because the way I see it the damage is done. It's a real shame too because Obama has a lot to offer this country.

[Jay Johnson]

Obama gets attacked more because everybody knows he will be the next president. The hyenas can only snap at the heels of the elephant.

[Elisha]

I just don't get it. At least add some sort of caption saying, " This is what ignorant American's believe Obama is like". This is very disrespectful. I would never buy a copy of this magazine - not to say that I was interested in buying it before this article. If there was one lying around on the Amtrak train...maybe then I'd peruse it but to spend my hard earned dollars; I don't think so.

[Osamabama]

Aw, is someone offended by this? Wah wah wah. This is what happens when you are in the political spotlight. Satire is used as the excuse for denigrating Christians and Muslims. I guess the Democrats don't like being targeted. When Muslims cry foul the objectionable material is retracted with apologizes. Get used to being offended. It is part of life. This is equal opportunity satire.

[Paula]

Item 1 -- The "satirical" cover that plays into every nutcase theory about "secret" agendas of Obama.

Item 2 - the scathing look at Obama' Chicago political life inside the very same New Yorker.

Item 3 - the new push by a Denver group to allow the delegates to "vote their consciences," no matter what their states voted.

Are these coincidences? Or is it a push by some Dems who are unhappy about Obama's rise to get a do-over at the convention?

[Aaron Mordechai]

Would posting Obama in orthodox jewish clothes be considered antisemitic?

[Kumar]

> Considering the fact that you posted what you call a
> humerous joke about Obama why don't you post one of
> McCain posing with the KKK? Let's make things equal or
> is that too much like being right?

a. I think the word you are flailing for is "humorous" (with an 'o').

b. If McCain's father and brother were members of the KKK, then your idea might make some sense -- but they aren't, and it doesn't.

[PulSamsara]

Just the 'New Yorker' crew playing the regional patsies that they are... pathetic.

[Paul Stewart]

The other covers are not even remotely close to a comparison of how far off base the Obama cover is. In my view, this cover is over the line of something that is acceptable. Its genesis is no doubt something not remotely related to satire or humor. It is also poor taste and I think its slanderous too.

[Joy Black]

I have canceled my subscription to the New Yorker today because of that cover depicting the Obamas".
I wrote them I would renew after they remove all of this issue from news racks and apologize. They sent a lot of the population back into the arms of the Repulicans with that cover. Shame!!

[Denise Poncet]

What an incredible goof. How many people will read beneath the cover as opposed to just SEEING the cover? This is really inflammatory and The New Yorker should pull this edition from the newsstands.

[Paul Stewart]

So many gleeful right wingers saying its all okay. Sorry, its not. And the comment that McCain can't be shown with the KKK is so stupid. That is exactly the point being made - the Obamas are none of what they are being depicted as in this cover. So if McCain could not be on the cover as a KKK member, then this cover with the Obamas should not exist either...

[gin tow]

Get Real? Get real. Start packing. These are the same people who elected George W. Bush (2x) , so they are not likely to get the satire. I am somewhat knowledgeable but, truthfully, when I saw the pictre, I didn't see the satire at all. I saw an offensive picture. Satire works when you don't have to explain yourself. And the inside joke of New Yorker sophisticates is a bit too sophisticated, perhaps... that kind of tongue in cheek can only make you swallow your tongue... it was plain racist.

[Wyll D Sarge]

I'm a fairly literate guy, but I just don't see the satire. As someone noted earlier, a caption would be helpful to define this cover as satire. Maybe even some reference to the "others" that paint Obama in this Muslim, anti-American light might help the cover more easily reveal its satire. Ulitmately though, satire is left up to the interpretation of the viewer (or reader.) This piece of satire is vague at best and should've been spotted by the editors of the New Yorker as something that could've easily been misinterpreted as satire. As with any joke, if you have to explain it it's not funny.

[Alan York]

Freedom of speech and expression. I feel no matter what is said or done someone is going to dislike it, so quite whining and solve our other issues that are more important.