Unless you've been living under a rock (or posting on DemocraticUnderground, which is pretty much the same thing), you've heard about the controversial New Yorker cover featuring caricatures of Barack and Michelle Obama. Barack is featured in what looks to be Islamic garb giving a fist bump to Michelle, who has a wild Afro and is dressed like a black militant. As you might expect, the Obama campaign came out and blasted the cover. John McCain jumped into the fray and said it was disgraceful. The New Yorker defended the cover as satire, saying the intent was to poke fun at the various rumors circulating about the Obamas.
Maybe it's me, but I thought satire was supposed to be funny.
Anyway, the cover got me to thinking about a couple of things, ranging from whether it wasn't a stunt to give Obama a boost (like the recent flap involving Jesse Jackson) or if we weren't making too much out of a minor issue. But there's one possible angle that isn't being considered yet, but should be because it's just as plausible.
The New Yorker cover is the Left's first broadside against Obama.
Make no mistake, not everyone in Democrat ranks is happy that Obama is the presumptive nominee. There are a number of diehard Hillary Clinton supporters who still trash Obama, and it's a safe bet that a number of them are in the media in one medium or another. And considering Hillary's a Senator in New York State, where the New Yorker is based...
Let's just say the conspiratorial side of me isn't convinced the cover is satire. It's a tidy explanation, given the New Yorker's reputation for satirical covers, but it's not nearly as tidy as they hope. There are some questions that can be and should be raised to determine whether there's a political angle to the cover beyond featuring the Obamas. It may be a flight of fancy on my part, but if Hillary's involved, nothing is ever too farfetched to be believed.