images.jpg

“The New Yorker” Endorses Obama

No surprise there, I know–nor come to think of it, is there even any surprise in the way the endorsement, which appears in the current issue of the magazine, opens:  ”The morning was cold and the sky was bright….On that day in Washington—Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009—the blustery chill penetrated every coat, yet the discomfort was no impediment to joy.” We’re in New Yorker world, where everything sentence is oh-so-precious and every article moves oh-so-slowly.

Yet the novella-length endorsement–it runs to 3,600 words–is, in a way, perfect, presenting every argument on behalf of Barack Obama that can possibly be mustered while offering an exquisite articulation of a worldview in which reelecting Obama not only makes sense but represents a moral duty.

As I read the endorsement, I kept thinking, What is there to say to people who would write this stuff?  And then–but of course!–it struck me: I’d ask you, the Ricochetti.

Herewith, the first of several excerpts I’d like to post:

Perhaps inevitably, the President has disappointed some of his most ardent supporters. Part of their disappointment is a reflection of the fantastical expectations that attached to him. Some, quite reasonably, are disappointed in his policy failures (on Guantánamo, climate change, and gun control); others question the morality of the persistent use of predator drones. And, of course, 2012 offers nothing like the ecstasy of taking part in a historical advance: the reëlection of the first African-American President does not inspire the same level of communal pride. But the reëlection of a President who has been progressive, competent, rational, decent, and, at times, visionary is a serious matter. The President has achieved a run of ambitious legislative, social, and foreign-policy successes that relieved a large measure of the human suffering and national shame inflicted by the Bush Administration. Obama has renewed the honor of the office he holds.

The question, again, is simple:

What is there to say to these people?

  1. genferei

    The New Yorker gives political endorsements? Who knew? Isn’t that a bit like Better Homes and Gardens or Good Housekeeping doing so? Except that these latter magazines have about 7 and 4 times the circulation of the New Yorker, respectively.

    Anyway, isn’t it a reëndorsement?

  2. Basil Fawlty

    Pick up a copy of Tom Wolfe’s Hooking Up.  He said it all about the magazine in “Tiny Mummies” and “Lost in the Whichy Thickets.”

  3. LCLee

    There isn’t much you can say to them. They are of the same socialist mindset as Obama. The way they view the world is so colored by their goal of the complete government takeover of every aspect of our lives that they will never understand the thinking or desires of people wanting independence and freedom. The only thing there is left to do is to fight the good fight to help more people see the truth of those dangerous socialist policies embraced by Obama and his rabid followers. Thanks ricochet for giving us a place express our feelings. It is great to have a place to lend a voice to the fight.

  4. Paul Stinchfield
    flownover: I said ” please cancel my subscription  ” early in the first Bush term when Hertzberg started to foam at the mouth .

    It was hard after years of faithful readership , but they went south faster than Andrew Sullivan at a Wasilla Prom .

    Haven’t missed much I bet . · 6 hours ago

    The rot began much earlier. Remember Paul Brodeur’s crackpot “Currents of Death”? They have an army of fact-checkers to make sure names are spelled properly and dates are correct, but there are vast areas of knowledge they don’t understand and don’t want to understand.

  5. Cornelius Julius Sebastian

    I would say, “Please leave and move to Europe, where you obviously belong.”

  6. kgrant67

    What is there to say to them?  Nothing.  They’re of the 47%.  Write them off.

  7. Carver

    Well once again I’ve been beaten to the Tom Wolfe punch. But I’ll restate: To anyone that has ever choked on reflux after reading some “About Town” his parodies are hilarious.

    I think yesterday I finally decided (completely) that many of these outlets are just bought and paid for. Otherwise they would not be making themselves laughing-stocks and otherwise repulsing what’s left of their respective market shares.

  8. Leslie Watkins

    Reading the excerpt I pictured a big overstuffed  bed with gigantic billowy pillows and a spread so thick that the only sight of the human underneath (is there only one? who can tell?) is a scrawny, outstretched hand reaching for the wobbly, half-full Cognac glass on the side table.

  9. jhimmi

    Many of the strongest arguments against Obama require a refutation of progressive ideology, which would have no effect on a typical New Yorker subscriber.

    Arguments aainst Obama that a progressive might understand are the precedents established by the aforementioned drone strikes, a general disregard for the rule of law,   abuses of powerscandals and coverups.

    Even if you are not particularly disturbed by the specifics, consider the broader implications of condoning such behavior. I’m sure many centrists and thoughtful squishes did not vote for Mccain in 2008 to express their concern over the press’ constant reminders about the WMD ‘scandal’, and the Patriot Act’s civil liberties violations. Are there any thoughtful squishes on the left? I guess we’ll find out next wek.

  10. Keith Preston

    ramirez-mediabias-lg.jpgRamirez got it right

  11. Carver
    Keith Preston

    Ramirez got it right · 0 minutes ago

    And we know this has affected the crease, right?

  12. Larry3435

    “What is there to say to these people?”

    Nothing.  The way they think is — lefties have good intentions­, so the programs they support must be good. If those programs don’t work, then we obviously have to pump more money into them. We HAVE to do this, because the programs are good. Fortunatel­y, lefties know that there is an endless supply of money available simply by taxing the “rich.”

    Anyone who disagrees with the lefties obviously doesn’t share their good intentions­. Such people have bad intentions­. Such people are malicious. They want to watch people starve in the streets so that hedge fund managers can have bigger yachts. The “teabaggers” want this because their corporate overlords tell them to.

    I’m sure that somewhere, deep down, there is a part of the lefty brain that knows how ridiculous this is – a part of their brain that knows that nobody wants to see people starve in the streets. But it is the only explanation they can conceive, so they stick to it.

    Trying to explain economics to a lefty is like trying to explain calculus to your dog.

  13. Songwriter
    HVTs: Tell them this:

    All one needs to know about Obama’s failed Presidency is that it it took 3600 words to convince readers of The New Yorkerto stick with him for four more years.  If it takes that much effort to make the case with that audience, there is no case. · 7 hours ago

    True enough. But remember, 3600 words in the New Yorker is like two or three short sentences most other places.

  14. TaleenaS

    What do you say?: “Bless your heart, care for more kool-aid?”

     I have friends who will not vote for Romney for “a bajillion million years” and so will cast their lot with Gary Johnson.  They are pro-abortion, socialist, pro pot, etc. – They are still reachable.  Perhaps not this election, but if they can be weaned off Mother Jones, Huffpo, and DNC talking points we can deprogram them.  It is the difference between not understanding the insidious bondage of “free” choice and socialism and those who know it and count such bondage as a goal to be earnestly desired.

  15. Hibernian

    Does The New Yorker really spell “reelection” with an umlaut?  

  16. Sabrdance
    Larry3435: “What is there tosay to these people?”

    Trying to explain economics to a lefty is like trying to explain calculus to your dog. · 40 minutes ago

    You sell your dog short.  He can do calculus in his head, on the fly, to catch a ball or frisbee.  I doubt very much the President could.

  17. Brandon Shafer

    Maybe, because they have been drenched in liberal media for the past four years, they are blissfully unaware of the problems and scandals of the policies of this administration.  A point by point rundown of the failed promises, and the numerous scandals and administrative failings of the administration might make a dent.  However, that is pretty wishful thinking.  I’ve long come to the realization that changing anyone’s mind is a difficult prospect in any sort of area that involves faith, and politics certainly involves a little faith in the policies that one supports.  Like a drugged out vagrant, the liberal has to want to change.  For the liberal I think steadily showing how their policies continue to fail, and how liberals ostracize, belittle, and denigrate those that dare to have a different opinion.  Over time those might work, but it really depends on willingness of the listener.  Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

  18. Severely Ltd.
    flownover: I said ” please cancel my subscription  ” early in the first Bush term when Hertzberg started to foam at the mouth .

    It was hard after years of faithful readership , but they went south faster than Andrew Sullivan at a Wasilla Prom .

    Haven’t missed much I bet .

    Ha, good Sully jab. With all that facial fur he’s almost a bush-pilot composite sketch, but I don’t imagine that that’s exactly his milieu.

    I bailed on the NYer too, but in the Clinton years, way too much cultural and political muck to sift through for the odd gem.

    What to say to a devoted NYer reader? “Now that Romney’s Prez, have you looked at the bargain prices on properties in Provence? With your sophistication I’ll bet you’re a shoo-in for EU citizenship.”

  19. Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    genferei: 

    Anyway, isn’t it a reëndorsement? 

    My, that’s good.

  20. Scott R

    They cite as failures — his fecklessness on Guantanamo, “climate change”, and gun control — the very areas that we Richochetti regard as his limited successes, so, really, there’s just no point in saying anything to these people.