Your Turn

'Vanity Fair' Takes On Obama 'New Yorker' Cover

Vanity Fair


Vanity Fair

So ... what do you think?

Related: Vanity Fair Covers The New Yorker

Comments

 

Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the NPR.org Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

I love Vanity Fair!!!!

Sent by ladybee21 | 3:13 PM | 7-22-2008

Sure ladybee21... but what do you think about the cover?

Sent by Jon | 3:30 PM | 7-22-2008

Clever!

Sent by bitpakkit | 3:43 PM | 7-22-2008

The 'New Yorker' will have its vengeance.

In this life or the next.

Sent by Jarrett | 4:09 PM | 7-22-2008

It rots

Sent by Zupe | 4:11 PM | 7-22-2008

I'd find it harsh if the New Yorker hadn't done it first!

Sent by michael | 4:32 PM | 7-22-2008

The only thing missing is the image of his crippled first wife, abandoned by McCain after she waited for him while he was a prisoner of war (he decided to trade her in for a younger model when he learned that she had been injured in a car accident)

Sent by Chefr Mark | 4:32 PM | 7-22-2008

Death is easy; comedy is harder. Satire is death with a laugh track. Let's ask Johnathon Swift next time we meet how tough satire is.

That said, this may be political equal time, but I don't think the "New Yorker" gets it. Because of racial sensitivities in this country, a send-up of all the criticisms of John McCain will not be treated the same way as that of Barack Obama.

Now, if the "New Yorker" could only show that it could satirize itself on this issue, that might show they get it. Here's an idea: same picture, but replace John McCain with Conde Nast, Cindy McCain with Annie Liebowitz (sp?), W with Rush Limbaugh, and, oh, maybe the Constitution with a DVD of "Do the Right Thing." That, I might say, would show you got it. It is, after all, always better to laugh at yourself than at others.

Sent by Matthew C. Scallon @mattsteady | 5:43 PM | 7-22-2008

It's not getting coverage. I want
to see it on the news and covered in
the paper. I have not seen it but one
time. Let's go with it. It is still
not as bad as they did Obama.

Sent by Kiddie | 5:52 PM | 7-22-2008

Very nice work

Sent by Michelle McCormack | 11:17 PM | 7-22-2008

The "VANITY FAIR" cover IS a SATIRE of the "NEW YORKER" cover, but the "NEW YORKER" cover was Only a SATIRE to those who KNEW that what it depicted was TOTALLY FALSE, which that Same weeks "NEWSWEEK" poll showed that a LARGE percentage of voters DIDN'T KNOW. To the 12% who believe he is a practicing Muslim, the 12% who believe he was educated in a Madrassa, the 39% who believe he was raised a Muslim, the large percentages who believe that he and his wife are Unpatriotic and Refuse to salute the flag, or wear a flagpin, or say the Pledge Of Allegiance and took his oath of office on a Quran; To THEM the "NEW YORKER" cover depicted THE TRUTH, and NOT SATIRE. (The Other difference is that the "VANITY FAIR" cover depicts images that have some basis in TRUTH; Cindy McCain has acknowledged a drug problem. John McCain would be our oldest elected President, and has had some ongoing health problems, and he supports Bush's anti-terrorist policies that many view as Un-Constitutional, such as warrantless surveilence of Americans.) While everything depicted in the "NEW YORKER" cover was False (except him wearing the Hat during a visit to his father's homeland Kenya.) This reminds me of Norman Lear's creation of a SATIRICAL BIGOT named Archie Bunker, only to discover that Bunker was ONLY a SATIRICAL charactor in New York and Hollywood, while in what we've come to call the RED STATES, he was taken as seriously then as RUSH LIMBAUGH is today. In otherwords, one man's SATIRE can be another man's TRUTH.

Sent by Sandy K. | 11:42 AM | 7-23-2008

So is this supposed to satirize the New Yorker cover or make up for that dispicable Lebron James/Giselle cover?

I appreciate the attempt but fear of Islamic terrorism is far more compelling that an old white man running the country. For the majority of Americans that is par for the course.

Sent by Melle G | 4:56 PM | 7-23-2008

This isn't satire, it's truth. It's only satire if it hasn't been used before. Shame on you.

Sent by sunny123 | 6:05 PM | 7-23-2008

Love it! This is satire. You're putting a spin on the truth, not exploding stereotypes. I mean, you don't know if Mrs. McCain is holding the drugs for herself or her husband! And that picture of the President is just precious! He's a real cutie.

Sent by Devil Ina Bluedress | 6:53 PM | 7-23-2008

Not funny. Satire is a dish best served hot, this is just cold leftovers.

Sent by Bill M | 6:55 PM | 7-23-2008

Let's Hear It For Lady O!
Both of Them!
Hell! All of Them!

Congratulations Lady O!

Regards
dePaul Consiglio

Sent by dePaul Consiglio | 7:22 PM | 7-23-2008

Great! Says it all!

Sent by Paul | 9:52 PM | 7-23-2008

lawd lawd lawd! why do they torture me so... why did i see this and the first thing that came to mind was -"i'm your mama, i your mammy, i am your pharma queen and you need a boost my daddy...I'm your FDA Pushress... You know me, I know you, I gots money to burn and good certified pills too, I'm your Heiress Pushress...." i'm sorry Curtis..know really.. i was listening to you and the Impressions in the background and i feel out doubled over on this one but that are making me go off the deep end up....

where is my walker i need a reason...

Sent by KMJUMBE | 2:26 AM | 7-24-2008

This doesn't even come close. This makes people want to cheer for them. The Obama cover reinforced stereotypes, lies and groundless fears. McCain is old. The Obamas are not Muslim or terrorists.

Now Blacks will be admonished, "McCain and his supporters didn't complain about his cover, see how overly sensitive you all are?"

Sent by Day Chou | 4:14 AM | 7-26-2008

It's only "Fair"
Why not? What has ailed liberals all along is the negative portrayal of their representatives as being friendly to terrorists. Why shouldn't we use the same type of ammo? Yes, most of our own shudder at the idea, but isn't this exactly what politics has been since the beginning of time?
In coming face to face with an electorate more concerned about personal wealth/health than that of their nation, both candidates--previously viewed by most as honest, caring, concerned individuals--have fallen into the trap we ourselves have created.
Didn't they both agree to run clean campaigns? I only pray that ethics becomes the biggest concern of the electorate before November.

Sent by william shields | 4:14 AM | 7-28-2008

I dont think this is anywhere near as damning as the New Yorker cartoon of Obama.

Sent by Miami Myu | 10:04 AM | 7-31-2008

About