Posted on July 15th, 2008 by Gavin M.
One of the minor Acelings over at Ace of Spades HQ, one Dave in Texas, has become informed that this week’s infamous New Yorker cover is “satire to show how bigoted and ignorant the red-staters are,” and is moved to correct the notion that right-wingers are bigoted and ignorant:
…The New Yorker sucks canal water. It’s a pimp-rag read by snooty snoots and the effete.
We’ve also noticed the degree to which jazz music has been infiltrated by high-hat British snobs like Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Next thing you know, the hoity-toity rooty-toots will be. . .well, if you don’t wish to be jolly, then definitely don’t click this link.
But here’s ol’ Confederate Yankee again, explaining the class struggle in which The Heartland (™) has been consumed since exactly the cover date of March 29, 1976, when a certain Saul Steinberg watercolor changed the American landscape forever and for all time:
[The Obama cover] is tasteless and offensive, but then, much of the content of the New Yorker falls into that category if you live outside the neo-Copernican worldview of a magazine that sees Manhattan as the center of the universe.
And by ‘tasteless and offensive’ he means not just the centerfolds, not just the Dykes of Dalton spread or the fatefully wah-hoo Butts of Barnard series that saw so many bright young women disinherited without a penny, but the articles too. It has articles, right? No, yes — articles. About arugula, and things like that.
What are the odds, do you think, that Confederate Yankee has ever picked up a single ding-dang issue of The New Yorker in his entire dang-dong life?
Those of us outside of that self-involved hemorrhage of land between the Hudson and East Rivers are simply part of a bitter and clingy “not us” to the magazine’s erudite familiars.
Indeed, they should change the name of the magazine to something which reflects its urban parochialism.
But then, Pam Atlas lacks even his degree of self-knowledge:
The New Yorker is calling their latest cover “satire”. I call it wonderful.
Obama is not laughing I hear. Why not? En the gonif brent a hitel.1 🙂
[…] I say blow it up and make campaign posters out it. It rocks!
Ol’ Pam’s commenters help to twist it into the full Möbius:
This will be turned around by them saying it was a right-wing attack. Well, I think it perfectly captures these two black racist, Muslim-terrorist-loving, America-hating assholes.

New Yorker Magazine at the Newstand: $6.95
AK-47 on the Black Market: $800
American Flag burning in the Fire Place supplied by Presidential Advisor William Ayers : FREE!
Obama’s Native Costume from his hometown Souk: 17.5 Dinars
When the New Yorker’s attempt at “Satire” backfires because it turns out to be 100% TRUE: PRICELESS!
Looks like the “joke’s” on them!

Some may call the New Yorker’s cover “satire.” Some may call it “wonderful.” I just call it the plain, ol’ TRUTH!
As for Ms. Obama, methinks the lady (we use the word loosely!) will protest too much!
Somewhere on the Internet is the perfect self-congratulatory blar-har post saying that the New Yorker cover is not funny because conservatives would never fall for such fat-handed and tone-deaf satire — that the cover’s ludicrous broadness only further underscores the elitist liberal bias against conservatives that is so sadly rife in our lib-lib-liberal media. It is not necessary to find it, because we know it is there.
Update: Oh wait.
Obama was right: Another hateful, bigoted attack from … the New Yorker?
posted at 7:52 pm on July 13, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
[…]
One side in this cycle certainly seems obsessed by identity politics, but so far it isn’t the Republicans. […]
The New Yorker is attacking conservatives, but Obama’s the one taking offense (and for good reason). Obama warned that the Republicans would obsess over his ethnicity, but so far only the mainstream Left has made it an issue.
Oh, okay. Guess that’s that, then.
1 Yiddish expression, lit.: “On the thief, the hat burns.”