Obama is NOT a laughing matter
Barry Blitt, "The Politics of Fear," The New Yorker, July 21, 2008
Thanks to everyone who’s called, written, e-mailed and phoned about my Sunday column, “The First 83 Days.” I apologize to those who were offended, but I’m stunned at the reaction. It’s hard for me to believe so many people took this column seriously. My intent was to poke fun at all the absurd rumors about Barack Obama’s intentions as president. I figured if I lumped them all together and took them to a ridiculous extreme, people couldn’t possibly miss the joke.
In the words of a soon-to-be-former president, I misunderestimated.
Now I know how David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, felt after his magazine printed this cover last summer. Here’s how Remnick answered his critics:
Obviously I wouldn’t have run a cover just to get attention — I ran the cover because I thought it had something to say. What I think it does is hold up a mirror to the prejudice and dark imaginings about Barack Obama’s — both Obamas’ — past, and their politics. I can’t speak for anyone else’s interpretations, all I can say is that it combines a number of images that have been propagated, not by everyone on the right but by some, about Obama’s supposed “lack of patriotism” or his being “soft on terrorism” or the idiotic notion that somehow Michelle Obama is the second coming of the Weathermen or most violent Black Panthers. That somehow all this is going to come to the Oval Office.
Satire is a dangerous thing. It should only be handled by professionals.
Kevin Horrigan is deputy editor of the editorial page. He writes editorials on local, state and national politics and public policy and also contributes a signed column to the Sunday Commentary Page. "The Old Sport" is a former sports columnist for the Post-Dispatch and for 10 years hosted radio talk shows on KMOX and KTRS in St. Louis. He lives in South St. Louis with his wife, Kate, and a dream of one day starting a professional catfish noodling tour. 
I am glad for the clarification. I’d hoped that the journalist’s intentions were exactly as he has explained. It is unfortunate that so many of us, both who propagate and we who disavow such rhetoric, didn’t get it.
Mr. Horrigan - Thank you for your message that explains your “satirical” attempt at humor. Satire aside, media should be very careful about igniting those who truly hold these absurd views. Some of your readers (especially here in Missouri) believe those 83 points to be gospel. A better article would have been to explain the fallacies of these points.
Kevin, did you really sleep through the primaries and the general election campaigns? The core of Obama’s support comes from MoveOn/DKos extremists. They will truck no criticism, scrutiny, or satire surrounding the president elect; even where misinterpreted by pot simmered brains. After four decades of struggle the sixties radicals have their coup. This is their Age of Aquarius. Things have “changed” dude. Weren’t you watching, man? I mean, wow. This is going to be far out, man…
I’ll bet your cartoonist got a few calls this morning about his depiction of the One. Did you see his spokesgal said this morning that “he will be ready to RULE on January 20th”. Are we having an inaguration or coronation? I thought that issue was settled in 1776? That and the “Office of the President-Elect”. Somebody ought to send them a definition of pretentious. Its like Mickey Rooney is running things and just said, “Let’s put on a show!”
I’m so glad to hear this, Kevin. My faith in you has been restored. You’re right…satire is indeed a dangerous thing. There has been so much mean-spirited satire during this entire electoral race, perhaps we’re a little “raw around the edges”. I guess I’m so filled with hope, as are so many, we just don’t want anyone else trying to destroy that feeling. Thank you for explaining your views.
It may have been satire but you have to admit a lot people believe these things, I am judgeing that by the many e-mail I have received about those same things. I enjoyed it because I am a litlle tired of all the worshipping the man as if he is a God, he is not he is just a politican and time will tell.
Subject: Color discrimination burial
Tuesday was the final burial of color discrimination in the US. Dr. Martin Luther King would be proud because voters voted the quality of the person, not the color of the skin. Does that mean that there is no discrimination in the US, not so? Some will always discriminate because of skin color (black, white, etc.), tall or short, fat or skinny, etc.
Our brains were made to categorize and that causes discrimination. But for the most part, Americans look at skin color as a physical characteristic like color of eyes or color of hair, not a reason to vote for or against anyone.
The only instance of color discrimination in this election was from blacks. They voted 80% for Senator Obama and probably half of them voted that way just because of the color of skin, not the quality of the person, which is color discrimination. If 80% of whites would have voted for Senator McCain, there would have been color discrimination outcries and condemnation.
The groups and terms that cause this separation were good at one time but are now counterproductive and cause continued discrimination. It is now time to dismantle NCAA, Black Caucus, Rainbow Coalition, National Urban League, etc., and drop African American and other separating titles.
Example: Statistics on unemployment should not be by color which has absolutely nothing to do with color but with skills and education.
We are now not Americans of any color or size, only Americans.
Thank you for recognizing the error of your ways. I understand that this was a compilation of satire, but, come on, several items were not satirical but downright racial. And… I’m a white, female!
Kevin” My faith in you has been restored a little. But you have to remember. That you are talking to a lot of us Country boys who don’t take lightly to good people being degraded. I believe like I said in my first letter to you. “Unless I misread you” You should have given us some warning in the beginning. I’m sure all the other letters were not all from bumpkins.
I realize that the column was a satire about Obama, but many don’t know the difference between satire and regular writing and thus believe that what is written in print is truth - I think that the intro should have stated that this article was satire and maybe they MIGHT understand.