Rod Dreher is spot on about the cover of the new New Yorker. The New Yorker is Nuts. But it may be even worse than he says. By the way, Steven Waldman’s observation about the Obamas needing thicker skin, misses the real problem presented by this cover.

The cover is not only outrageous; it is potentially dangerous and certainly demeaning. I must admit that the caricature of Michelle Obama is less disturbing than the one of her husband, and it’s funnier too (maybe). But more on that below.
The portrayals of the Senator and Mrs. Obama should not be treated equally. Whether we see the cover as a harmless expression of satire and irony, or we see it as grotesque and mean-spirited mockery, we need to distinguish between how each image works. If we don’t, we risk falling into overly-facile defense of something quite offensive on the one hand, or remaining tone deaf to the real challenges that the Obamas as first couple present for many Americans.
The image of Senator Obama draws its supposed humor from a series of lies about his lineage and current religious affiliation which are kept in play only because of a deep current of hatred for Muslims that exists in parts of our population. There is no thread of truth about Obama that makes it funny to see him dressed up as an Osama look alike, unless one assumes that not only is he Muslim, but that all Muslims are terrorists. And it should be clear that with a potential army of over one billion, if that were the case we would have all been killed long ago.
In fact, it is conservatives who should be most outraged by this cover because it mocks what they see (not without some justification) as a genuine conflict between civilizations. If people can laugh at Obama being Osama, then they really must not see the real challenges that exist between many elements of the Muslim world and the majority of the so-called West.
If you are on the right, you should be raising the loudest protest against this kind of humor which makes light of a real struggle that costs lives on a daily basis. If you think that everything for which Obama stands on matters of foreign policy is wrong, you should be offended by the New Yorker turning a very serious issue into a laughing matter.
But if you are on the left, you probably need to accept that the cartoon of Michele hits a bit closer to home as it echoes more Black Panthers and Angela Davis that Taliban. Her comments about the country, her once professed lack of pride in it, and longer defense of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, all reflect a level of ambivalence about the country and its dominant culture that her husband does not seem to share.
So even if you think she is right on these issues, you must admit that she has opened herself up to this kind of mockery. Like any spoof, there has to be some element of truth which makes the joke work. And in this case, my guess is that for many people, that is the case. The image of Michelle does not spread hate and it’s certainly why I found it less troubling, if not funnier, than the image of the Senator.
So the real issue with this cover is not the cover at all. It’s us. On what conceptions, misconceptions, hates and fears does the humor base itself? When we know the answer to that, we will know how best to respond.