IF... The New Yorker .... does a similar cover with the McCains, will all be forgiven?

[Motown_Johnny]

Or is this simply unforgivable?


P.S. The McCain cover would show him as a crazy man preparing to start wars while Cindy is running up huge charge card bills, selling beer to alcoholics and stealing cookie recipes etc etc etc. (they would do a better job of lampooning them than I can)



EDIT, Please do not focus on my poor example at what the cover might look like. Assume it is equally satirical as the Obama cover

[KittyWampus]

1. Um, no. That wouldn't be a satirical take on McCain at all. DU'ers are really not very as bright

as they like to pretend.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. I agree. A truly satirical one would have them doing all that while trying to act non-elitist. nt

[Motown_Johnny]

9. Forget my poor attempt at an example..... I am clearly terrible at satire

[LowerManhattanite]

2. Never. Fucking. Happen. n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

13. No, the New Yorker would never make fun of republicans

You can't can't really think the New Yorker is a right-wing propaganda organ.

[LowerManhattanite]

17. The question was “If the New Yorker did a similar cover on the McCains...

...would all be forgiven?” (Amended as per OP's note)

Your straw man of running those covers is just that—a straw man. Those guys depicted aren't running for the presidency right now, and the New Yorker would absolutely fear the response from people on the POW-supporter side should McCain's experience—part of how he is perceived—be made sport of. Bush and Cheney? They are easy-peasy targets. Even their boy Leno rips at 'em now. Big whoop.

For them to savage McCain and his wife similarly as posed in the OP—would not happen.

Example: McCain is seen by many as a “Manchurian Candidate”—damaged and possibly manipulated still by his captors. It is unimaginable to see them depicting him laughably with his eyes popped out of his head as let's say...an Ann Coulter stood there in a “Queen Of Hearts” costume as seen in the movie triggering his psychosis.

Or a close-up shot of Cindy McCain's face with a thousand little Botox syringes sticking out—just for shits and giggles.

Would the New Yorker do that? Absolutely not.

My answer to the posed question—NOT the one you answered, stands.

And yes, I've read the New Yorker for over thirty years and I know their covers quite well—from the creepy Gahan Wilsons', to the mordantly dark Charles Addams' and back to the now-shockingly racist Arnos of the thirties.

(Studying cartooning under EC's Bernie Krigstein and Will Eisner in college was a help for me too.)

[Motown_Johnny]

19. the question was... If they did the same thing to the McCains would The New Yorker be forgiven for

the current cover?

[LowerManhattanite]

20. They wouldn't dare do it. Thus the “forgiveness” is moot.

I mean, we could do hypotheticals all over the place.

“If Cheney ate a baby while seated behind Bush during a SOTU would he get away with it?”

Maybe. Who knows.

The likelihood?

Pretty much zero.

[Motown_Johnny]

21. Yes, it is a hypothetical. But the possibility exists. TNY may do a cover that is offensive to the

RW as this is to us.


Honestly, I am not that offended by it. I think that anyone who looks at it and says "see, that is what the Obamas are really like" are idiots. The possibility exists that some of these idiots will have someone who can read, read the article to them. Then it will confuse them because the book does not match the cover..... err, the magazine that is.



I see the possibility of an equal and opposite cover being published in the next few months. Again, I am not that offended, hence the credit card and cookie recipe weak ass example. (yours were much better)

[MonkeyFunk]

23. They've done many covers that are offensive to the right wing

but your statement presumes that THIS cover is offensive to the left wing. IT is not.

It's a caricature not of the Obamas, but of the right-wing smears against them.

The reaction here is just crazy, over-the-top nonsense.

[Motown_Johnny]

24. I agree, but it is to those who are offended that I have directed this post

I do assume that TNY will do something similar with McCain in the next few months.

[MonkeyFunk]

26. You mean mock liberals?

Like this cartoon mocks conservatives? Maybe, but I doubt it.

There doesn't seem to be a concerted effort to spread ridiculous lies about McCain.

[spag68]

27. Someone

did it to Max Cleland and got away with it.

[hedgehog]

3. One problem I see is how to satirize Cindy running up huge

charge card bills and stealing cookie recipes since she really does do those things!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

5. She'd have to be wearing a button that says "I'm just down home folks" while doing it.

Yeah, it's not satire if it's just the truth. It has to have an element that skewers them for their hypocrisy.

[wyldwolf]

6. I can't read your post title without imagining it being said by William Shatner

[rzemanfl]

15. Outstanding! I bow down to your sense of humor. n/t

[rateyes]

7. No. I've purchased my last New Yorker Magazine. nt

[NanceGreggs]

8. The difference being ...

... that McCain actually is a crazy man preparing to start wars, while Cindy actually does run-up credit card bills and steals recipes.

That wouldn't be satire - that would be reality.

[Divine Discontent]

22. that's what I was saying in another thread

what if the NY made a cover that showed the controvery of McCain being a songbird for the N. Vietnamese while ignoring the POW's, and their return, as is documented? It's not satire, as the Cindy stuff you reference isn't either, so what would the media do then? Of course, as you know, they'd throw a huge conniption and potentially hundreds of thousands of emails and calls would go to the New Yorker - but they can run a cover showing Obama as a terrorist lover of Osama, with a burning US flag, and an afro-sporting Michelle dressed like some kind of Black Panther?

I agree with the campaign's quick reaction to this.

[Bicoastal]

10. It may surprise some people to realize that the New Yorker is a fairly liberal magazine...

...so that would be preaching to the choir. So was this latest cover--in a way.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. Two Words

Sy Hersh.

Well known Republican cheerleader, the bastid.

[bluestateguy]

12. Here's one

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/

[MichiganVote]

14. No. This piece of "satire" was personal, racist and sexist. Cookie recipes?

You've got to be kidding.

[Undercurrent]

16. I would be upset if

the cover met the same criteria as the Obama cover did. Not based in fact, and there was the same threat to incite violence towards Obama and his family. In this atmosphere, with all the fear and hate that has been built up by the Bush administration, the undertow of racism that exists in this country, and our history. Under those circumstances, yes, I would be upset.

[TreasonousBastard]

18. Of course not-- most of the people hyperventilating....

over this wouldn't know where to find the magazine and only hear about this sort of thing through internet groups.

[mitchum]

25. That would be documentary, not satire

[Neshanic]

28. McCain holding art "Piss Christ" should make them go insane.