The serious lefties over at the Washington Monthly think this cover will read like scripture to most people.
[From The Washington Monthly]
And they’re moderating comments, so I have enclosed mine below.
Dear Moderators,
ya know, it really bollixes things up when you remove comments that other people have responded to. You’re under no obligation to moderate comments, so why invite people to speak their piece and then toss it in the Memory Hole?
That said, this is entertaining, to see the humorless and uptight “serious left” get their tightie whities in a bunch about a satirical magazine cover. For those of who say the art in question is not satire, it might help to refamiliarize yourself with the word and its meanings:
1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such compositions.And confidential to Albert Champion, the New Yorker does indeed have a masthead and many ways to contact them. Look harder. Also, Condé Nast left us in 1942, so I doubt any boycott of his magazines will matter much to him.