Monday, July 14, 2008

BARACK OBAMA

A Theory on What The New Yorker Was Thinking

Adding to Byron's point, let me offer a theory on The New Yorker cover: there has not been sufficient out-of-line or obnoxious "Obama is a terrorist" accusations coming from prominent Republicans to suit the editors of the magazine. (Sure, you're hearing it from the fringe, but you hear all kinds of comments from the fringe. That's what makes it the fringe.)

If Obama loses, the editors of The New Yorker would prefer to be able to blame it on "paranoid fearmongering" rather than the public actually rejecting Obama on the basis of his positions or lack of experience.

Inevitably, in response to this cover, we will hear several days of discussion about the cover, whether it was out of line or tasteless (yes), and what spurred this decision, etc., what Obama's actual ties to Islam are, what his ties to various shady donors are, his ties ot longtime supporters who tried to blow up the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol, etc.

Thus, if McCain wins, we will see someone — probably in the pages of The New Yorker — write, "Of course the Republican smear artists fooled the American people into seeing a great man as a terrorist; Google the terms, "Obama," and "terrorist", and 80 bazillion links come up," even though the context could just as easily be, "Obama pledges to capture terrorists" "New Yorker cover portrays Obama as terrorist" and "McCain denounces New Yorker cover portraying Obama as a terrorist."

07/14 09:06 AMShare