This weeks New Yorker cover is a hoot!

[Resuscitated Ethics]

Summer Getaway has at least a double meaning. What a riot! Those lobsters must've heard the screams from the night before.

Any canceled subscriptions last week?

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine

Nice interview with NY editor (bonus!)

. “I’ve had dinner with newspaper editors of all ranks, and the conversations sometimes feel like a suicide watch.” He says the best way to read a magazine is still on paper, but, “for those for whom it is second nature to read online, I want to be there. I’m unwilling to make idiotic predictions about what’s going to be in print and what’s not going to be in print, I just don’t know. But I’m damned if I’m not going to be there.” Remnick

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7928c176-4ef3-11dd-ba7c-000077b07658.html

[Tarc]

1. Anyone who canceled their subscription because they thought the cover disparaged the Obamas

rather than it disparaging the media-fueled perception of the Obamas, wasn't really bright enough to be a real New Yorker reader in the first place.

[hlthe2b]

2. LOL....no, I still subscribe and support my fav publication...

But, I think Tarc has taken the prize for most "elitist" response to the debate...

[Tarc]

3. It isn't elitist to call someone a moron

if they do something, y'know, moronic.

[bean fidhleir]

5. Yeh it is.

Only an elitist sneers at occasional imperfection. That's 'cos theirs doesn't stink, yknaw?

[Tarc]

6. /yawn

Any more trolling to do, or did you meet your quota for the day?

[bean fidhleir]

9. If you spent more time thinking and less time calling names, you'd be better off

Or at the least, the lives of those around you would be more pleasant.

[Tarc]

13. Perhaps if don't act like an ignorant asshole, we won't have to call you out on it.

[MsTryska]

7. I'm right there with you.

irony isn't for everyone.

[TahitiNut]

10. "bright enough to be a real New Yorker reader "???

:eyes: :eyes:

[Tarc]

12. Looks like that includes you

[NNN0LHI]

16. What is this Insults R US?

Called you on your bullshit and you insult the man.

Whats the matter with you?

Don

[Tarc]

17. There is no bullshit here, nublet

Plain and simple; if you were offended by the New Yorker cover, thinking that it was an offensive slam against the Obamas themselves, you were simply too stupid to "get it".

Get it?

[Resuscitated Ethics]

11. I think the calls for cancellation

were from non-subscription holders. Much of the outrage was orchestrated

I remember back in the day I canceled my subscription to Time when the beast Coulter was leering on the cover, wrote to ask them to please refrain from giving the riotous instigators the spotlight, and used the extra leverage for Mother Earth News and American Photo.
I got Newsweek as a gift and it sucks almost as much as time.

[MinM]

14. Exactly right.

Subscribers of the New Yorker have come to expect this type of 'satire'. As this story points out:
http://www.counterpunch.org/reed07212008.html

[gratuitous]

4. Oh

I figured that in the oh-so-fair-and-balanced world that is the byword for today's media, we'd be treated to an Oval Office tableau of a desiccated John McCain in a wheelchair with a laprobe and several IV bottles with various special interest labels on them as he's attended by Cindy, dressed as a nurse, with the makeup troweled on like a streetwalker while little gremlins wearing corporate logo t-shirts ran amok around their feet.

It would be hilarious I tell you!

[MonkeyFunk]

8. It would funny/satiric

only if the left were spreading tons of lies about John McCain being "secretly" old.

[EstimatedProphet]

15. It's amazing how many people simply don't get the point of that cover, isn't it?