Tonight would have been a perfect time for me to post about Miss. America doing her own version of the "slip n slide" at the Miss. Universe Pageant, and how it's a perfect metaphor for so many things that's screwed up with our republic these days . But alas, I have some other things on my mind, mainly presidential politics and the latest bru ha ha over his "O" ness.
Now first, I am going to surprise a whole lot of people and say that I understand what the "New Yorker" was trying to do with their cover. It was meant to be satirical, and I might be the only black person that's not a republican in these divided states to see it as such. If anyone should be offended by this, it's Muslim A-merry-cans, but then I am sure that they are so used to facing prejudice on a daily basis, that a magazine cover lampooning the people that show them prejudice, probably isn't all that offensive to them. Even Mr. Morton's people have gotten into the act: " The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree." Yeah right, sure you do Mr. Burton. And I am quite sure that most of the people it's lampooning will be voting for your candidate. Of course, as is usually the case, you Obamaholics have been losing your natural minds over this dis from the rest of A-merry-ca.
But isn't this a case of shooting the messenger? If you Obamaholics don't think that a significant number of your fellow citizens feel that the idiotic caricature on the cover of this magazine is accurate, well then I have a nice little antique bell with a crack in it to sell you from my hometown. Which, if you believe the Editors of this magazine, was the point of the cover: To make fun of the ignorant folks in A-merry-ca who actually believe that the pic is an accurate portrayal of his "O" ness. Ahhh field, come on, if this was FOX you would be all over them. I smell a double standard here. If you smell double standard, you have a heck of a good nose, because it probably is on my part. You see it's like this: FOX has a history of doing ignorant and racist shit, and they cater to the very folks this magazine happens to be lampooning. The clowns over at FOX are the ones who gave us the terrorist fist pump, the intentional mispronunciation of Obama's name, and the studio pundits who make fun of his wife and call her angry. So you damn right that if this was FOX I would have been all over their backwards ass behinds, and I make no apologies for that.
But not these folks, they don't have that history. This is not Vogue, who tried to take a serious picture and came off looking just flat out stupid, racist, and insensitive. The "New Yorker Magazine" folks know that this picture looks stupid and insensitive, and that was their point. What is a shame is that this cover created such an uproar, because the article in the magazine--I wonder how many people actually read it-- was a pretty good one. It chronicled the "O" man's rise as a typical South side Chicago politician, and featured an interesting cast of characters who seemed all too familiar to me. If some of you Obamaholics read it, you will find that your boy is a politicians like all the rest of the politicians here in A-merry-ca. It doesn't mean he won't do a good job, or that he doesn't deserve our vote, but I swear that wasn't water I saw him walking on.