July 22nd, 2008
06:40 PM ET
13 years ago

Vanity Fair out with New Yorker parody

[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/07/22/art.vfcover.cnn.jpg caption="Vanity Fair is out with their own takeoff of the New Yorker cover"](CNN) - John McCain’s campaign complained Tuesday morning that the press wasn’t treating the presumptive Republican nominee like they had covered Democrat Barack Obama. Tuesday afternoon, they got an unexpected jolt of equal treatment: their own parody magazine cover, modeled on the controversial illustration that graced last week’s New Yorker.

Earlier: New Yorker editor defends cover

In the picture, which debuted on Vanity Fair’s Web site Tuesday afternoon, John McCain and wife Cindy are shown in the Oval Office giving each other daps, the fist-jab greeting that Barack and Michelle Obama traded on the cover of the New Yorker.

Other elements have been tweaked so the illustration – like the New Yorker cover – reflect stories and stereotypes the candidate and his wife would most like to leave behind. Cindy McCain isn’t clutching a machine gun – she’s cradling vials of pills. There’s no Muslim garb in sight, but the Arizona senator is leaning on a walker. The American flag isn’t burning in the fireplace; instead, the Constitution smolders.

In place of the portrait of Osama bin Laden in the original art, the liberal magazine has opted for a likeness of President Bush.

Watch: Obama responds to New Yorker cover

“We had our own presidential campaign cover in the works, which explored a different facet of the Politics of Fear, but we shelved it when The New Yorker’s became the ‘It Girl’ of the blogosphere,” wrote the editors, in a tongue-in-cheek statement posted on the magazine’s Web site. “Now, however, in a selfless act of solidarity with our downstairs neighbors here at the Condé Nast building, we’d like to share it with you. Confidentially, of course.”

But don’t go looking for the cover on a newsstand near you: it will remain a virtual production, posted on the Web site alone.

Filed under: Candidate Barack Obama
soundoff (226 Responses)
  1. Nancy


    Beware of what u r wishing for!!!

    July 22, 2008 05:52 pm at 5:52 pm |
  2. Teddy California

    I guess McCain would joke about the picture. Remember he often joked himself he is really old! I do not think McCain will make a fuss about it.

    July 22, 2008 05:52 pm at 5:52 pm |
  3. Anita from Arizona

    Was I the only one who watched Obama chuckle at the New Yorker's cover? I thought to was funny, but some people out there will believe the hype. Don't Believe the Hype on Either Candidate.

    July 22, 2008 05:53 pm at 5:53 pm |
  4. jonny

    The difference between the two covers is that this one is actually somewhat accurate. The cover with the Obamas was blatant lies.

    July 22, 2008 05:53 pm at 5:53 pm |
  5. DJ, LA, CA

    Beautiful portrait of GW Bush on the wall next to him. Nice touch.

    July 22, 2008 05:54 pm at 5:54 pm |
  6. Nancy

    i'm crackin here! LOL!

    considering the magazine name and wat Mc Cain was complaing abt LOL!

    CNN simply post!

    July 22, 2008 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  7. Rave

    That is less than what he really is..
    The should have shown McPain in a wheel chair of a mental institution getting shock treatment.
    He cares more for Iraqi people and calls us Whiners.. Maybe he should go an live there in his favorite land
    OBAMA (2008 -16)

    July 22, 2008 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  8. Wayne

    Bravo Vanity Fair!
    Vanity Fair is trying to show the absurdity of the smears on both candidates. But the real obsurdity is people fly off the handle and don't even read the article.

    July 22, 2008 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  9. Ben

    Big difference here people!!
    The depictions on the Obama cover were false (He's a terrorist, she's a radical, they hate America and love Osama)
    The depictions on the McCain cover are true (He is old, she did have a pill problem, he would continue the Bush policies)

    July 22, 2008 05:56 pm at 5:56 pm |
  10. ABB

    People give each other "dap" not daps. The only people who give daps use the "internets."

    July 22, 2008 05:56 pm at 5:56 pm |
  11. JC in SC

    Sometimes, the best response is no response. Responding lends credence to the original outrage. This does nothing but soften the New Yorker's blunder, and we need to stay outraged until that type of media is a figment of a racist's imagination!

    July 22, 2008 05:56 pm at 5:56 pm |
  12. RuperttheBear

    Uh, those are all largely factually correct (Cindy's drug use, McCain's frail physique, etc.) whilst the one of the Obamas reflected lies. Or, as John McCain says "GET OFF MY LAWN, YOU DARN KIDS!"

    July 22, 2008 05:57 pm at 5:57 pm |
  13. Regan, NH

    The New Yorker is still filth, and owe the Obamas an apology. Understand this–no cover of McSame and Cindy Lou will justify what they did to the Obamas.

    You burned the American flag on the Obama cover and that was just mean and a vicious lie.

    The only cover I will accept is one where the New Yorker is burning in the fireplace, they're dirtbags.

    July 22, 2008 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  14. Chavis, MA

    Unfortunately, the McCains are still seen as patriotic, and the Obamas were not dipicted this way. It was awful what they said about Senator Obama and his wife.

    Whoever wrote the article about the Obamas is a fool because I'm told the article was pretty good. I will NEVER read it because it is wrapped in garbage. No matter what the article says about the Obamas, the cover still stinks.

    July 22, 2008 06:01 pm at 6:01 pm |
  15. Megan, IN

    Is this supposed to be an apology to the Obamas? It is not and the New Yorker is still garbage.

    July 22, 2008 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  16. Dan, TX

    There are many angry people on the left and right. Very rude crude people. Prejudice and avarice. Hatred masked as holier than thou. The news media feeds it. Don't sit down calmly and consider the options, that's too boring. Pick up a gun and start shooting! That's how to get your political views noticed by CNN. That's what most people posting here have chosen. Irrationality over reason. Look at you all. Shame on you. You do not represent real Americans to me.

    July 22, 2008 06:03 pm at 6:03 pm |
  17. Donna

    At least McCain isn't scary.
    Obama is so frightening.
    What do the American people have to do to make the media understand they are scared to dealth of this man.

    July 22, 2008 06:04 pm at 6:04 pm |
  18. Sharon

    Doug – I'm for one agree with you.

    July 22, 2008 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  19. Sally


    Oh my god, now That's Funny !!!!

    July 22, 2008 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  20. Roofin Reality, Houston, Tx.

    I like how they dolled up Mrs. McCain. Quite a contrast to how Mrs. Obama was portrayed.
    Problem with this is that the senior moments are actually possibly true. The New Yorker was clarly just fodder.

    July 22, 2008 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  21. Jim P

    The difference is relevance, Obama's is relevant and McCains is just stupid. This is what this country has come to, we are a pathetic nation and we will get what we have coming!

    July 22, 2008 06:06 pm at 6:06 pm |
  22. BOYCOTT the New YUCKER

    This picture of the McCains is still American. That is what is so awful about their depiction of the Obamas. No American burns a flag–that was just mean spirited, and awful.

    Your attempt to apologize to the Obamas won't work. Your rag is still filth and you are a slimey, scummy dog of a magazine. You put that garbage out about the Obamas and you and your ilk had a good laugh. May you and your magazines burn in hell.


    July 22, 2008 06:06 pm at 6:06 pm |
  23. Rick

    Would the media please do specials on Wright, Rezko, Farrakhan and Obama's father.
    If you forgot, Willam Ayers would be one to discuss also.

    If McCain was connected to any of these people, the media would be all over it.

    Please hear Americans. They don't want Obama as " ruler"

    July 22, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  24. Kimberly

    Still, no comparison to the New Yorker cover...not even close.

    July 22, 2008 06:07 pm at 6:07 pm |
  25. Philadelphian trapped in Texas

    Unlike the candidates, I appreciated the New Yorker's satire even though I am supporting Obama. The satire was evident to anyone with an IQ above that of a toad, and the accusations it debunked were those of lowbrows even further down the scale.

    Vanity Fair's McCain cover is clever as a satire of a satire; but it hits too close to too many partial truths to be comparably tongue in cheek to the New Yorker's. The Obama cover was brilliant in all aspects. The McCain cover is mean-spirited in its depiction of McCain's age and Cindy's past addiction, even if it is on the mark in its placement of W's portrait on the wall and the Constitution burning.

    July 22, 2008 06:08 pm at 6:08 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10