The illustration hit right on mark. It was satire of what image the conservative propaganda machine is making of Obama by playing on his race and name. The educated citizen seeing how outlandish this characture is of Obama.

What the comments that come in here if they aren't censored. You will get writers that see this cartoon as the way things are in fact.

Art can be confrontational. Art is meant to challange how we see things.

I caught the humor in the cover of the new yorker. but one cant always expect everyone to "get it".
There are alot of untruths being spread about the Obama's this was just a jab at those that try to feed these rumors.

Indeed, it was just a satire on the rightwingers who persist in spreading the rumors and lies about Obama and his wife. He's not a Muslim, Michelle is not Andrea Davis with an AK-47, and his kids aren't going to be suicide bombers and yet about 15% of the American population believes such garbage. Sean Hannity lied about Michelle Obama's thesis at Princeton in order to spread the rumor that she is a bomb-throwing radical. Limbaugh continues to question subtly whether Barack really is a Muslim or a Muslim sympathizer. All intended to keep the lies alive to gain votes for the Arizona moron.

"The New Yorker" cover is easily seen as satire but only if you're smart enough. Those 15% see it as the truth. But they see WMDs and Saddam Hussein in a homosexual relationship with Osama bin Laden as the truth.

Senator Obama HAS been endorsed by the terrorist group Hammas, he HAS offered to meet unconditionally with extremist Iranian leader Ahmadinijad, he HAS made numerous comments demonstrating his weakness in the war on terror, he HAS made comments that may be considered anti-Israel, and he DOES reject the American flag as a symbol of patriotism. Mrs. Obama HAS made comments about her perception of America which she has later had to "explain" or in other words spin or retract. And virtually ALL of the rhetoric regarding race as an issue have come from their own party, their own campaign, and even from Mr. and Mrs. Obama themselves. So while this caricature is meant to ridicule the supposed view of the right, perhaps it has been received as such a clunker because it hits the notes Mr. Obama himself has been playing.

For all you whining Marxists, The New Yorker is not
a conservative magazine. As far as I am concerned, they got the picture right!

The New Yorker is the most painful read out there! I'd rather gouge out my eyes than read a sentence in that sorry excuse for a magazine.

Your editorial depicting VP Cheney as a jack-o'-lantern is about as funny as cancer!

Love reading the New Yorker and the cover is funny. Oh wait, that makes me an bright but aloof observer when compared to the DN's brave editorial writer who slogs along in the spirit of unappreciated earnestness putting their heart on soul on the line.

I'll take the New Yorker's intellectual irony over the DN's juvenile editorializing (Mr. Tilly is now Mr. Silly) any day.

Note the stupidity.

There is no way to see that cover objectively.

If you are a frustrated racial supremist (Cosmo/On The Other Hand) or Conservative religious fanatic, you see a timorous attempt to expose a deeper truth. If you are an America-bashing leftist or intractable minority you see an affirmation that your difference is what the powerful (Conde Nast) continues to wedge between you and the popular culture with exaggerated detail.

Anyone politically in the middle has to admit that these are the only possible interpretations or admit that they a lying about their impartiality.

DN is pretending to be dumb here, I guess. The New Yorker cover is brilliant, precisely targeted satire. DN is totally wrong -- earnestness is easy. Satire is hard.

This is about a funny as Rush Limbaugh flopping around on camera trashing Michael J. Fox's incurable disease.

And this of course is hilarious to Limbaugh's fans because after all - Fox is a liberal.

Obama doesn't see the flag as a symbol of patriotism.

He's got a point. Anyone can wear a flag pin. What shows you support our troops: wearing a flag pin or paying for the war they are fighting?

My support for America was wearing green when uniforms weren't in style. I enlisted and served when many conservatives shrugged serving. Today, these sunshine patriot love to tell me about patriotism.

Please crawl back under you rocks. You denied us then, and you embarrassed us today.

If, you had served our great nation, you would have seen Americans disagree but pull together when things got difficult.

That black soldier who believed in black power one day might be risking his life the next to pull you to safety the next day.

That cover on the New Yorker showed the hatred that Rush and Fox News exploit daily that is dividing our nation better than any terrorist could plan on doing.

As usual, people want to rant about the most insignificant things.

Magazines have "done a number" on just about every politician over the last three or four decades. Its part of what they do.

If the Obama backers would stand away for a minute, and instead of attacking Rush Limbaugh, it would be good for them to actually explain who Obama is, because no one seems to know.

No business experience. No national leadership experience. In the Senate less than two years when he quit serving his state, to run for President. He is easily the most far left senator in the Congress, beyond even Kennedy and Kerry, and yet suddenly, he is in the middle, simply lying his way into the presidency.

I suggest you all vote for him, and put and end to this country, once and for all, because he is the man to do it. Seems fair that within 70 years of becoming a free nation, hundreds of thousands of white men gave their all to give freedom to the slaves, and it will only take less than four years for a black man, to destroy the very country that gave him the opportunity.

Most comments miss the point of the editorial. An editorial this incisive that clearly understands the core of the dilemma where reality and art intersect, is not typical of the Deseret News. Must have had a revelation.

For the very well informed, seeing that irony or sarcasm of the cartoon was a breeze. For those less informed (like the vast majority of Middle America), what it meant was much less obvious, and may have only added confusion.

Those who still think Obama is a Muslim, not a Christian, unpatriotic or even, perhaps unAmerican, still have much to learn.

John 2:55 tells us:
"instead of attacking Rush Limbaugh, it would be good to actually explain who Obama is ..."

The problem is Limbaugh daily tells his loyal and rabid fans (and there are tons of these in Utah) THIS:
"His name is ODumbo" and "he pretends he is white."

This leaves one alternative - fight fire with fire.

Obama's "anti-Israel" comments would actually be nice to hear, seeing as how he's bent over for AIPAC like the rest of "our" leaders.

I'm so sick of "Won't somebody think of Israel?" in this country. Enough of supporting Israel, enough of OUR soldiers dying for them, enough of sending them weapons, enough of our war-mongering for their defense. If Israel has so many problems, and if Israel is so much a victim, then maybe it is time that ISRAEL starts defending Israel!

More on subject, though, the New Yorker's characterization of the radical - and sheep-minded - conservatives was spot on. Personally, I too think they misfired a bit with their attack, but the message of the attack was accurate.

Look, I'm no Obama fan ever since his true colors were shown on the FISA vote, but if you want to critique the man there are plenty of facts that can be used. There's no reason to resort to fear-mongering and lies to try to keep him from achieving office.

Or maybe it's just that there's little positive to say about McCain?

Ask the surviving crew of the USS LIberty what they think or Israel. Conservative believing anything less than writing checks isn't support.

I guess a conservative would want a friend to tell him his fly is open