The Republican National Committee, with Rove clone Mehlman, has gone bottom fishing again, this time in Tennessee with an ad that makes Healey’s handlers look like they run a charm school.
The ad is a faux man-on-the-street piece, with a white woman, shoulders exposed, claiming she met Ford at a Playboy party, and at the end, winking seductively, saying “Harold, call me!”
Sorry, don’t know how to put the item right into the post, but here is the link at the NY Times
Please share widely!
I think the ad is tasteless, obnoxious and clearly appeals to the lowest of the low, but I also think the ‘R’ word gets thrown around a little too freely around here.
<
p>
Just because Harold Ford Jr. and Deval Patrick are black, doesn’t make every obnoxious attack against them racist.
Apparently they’re running a radio ad where they play jungle drums in the background when discussing Harold Ford and soaring inspirational music when talking about Corker. I mean, it’s not even subtle anymore.
Jungle drums? That is disgusting.
<
p>
I’m not saying there aren’t some blatant examples of race-baiting in both campaigns, such as the latest LaGuer parking garage ad. I’m just saying that calling everything negative ‘racist’ cheapens the meaning of the word. In my opinion, the commercial cited in the post above is not racist. It’s immature and shameless, but not racist.
Watch the ad again. All but two of the “people on the street” make comments about issues. Gun control, taking money from the porn industry, etc.
<
p>
The two that don’t are the black woman in the begining “well he looks nice” and the white chick (who has no clothes visible in the frame) “I met Ford at the Playboy party!”
<
p>
I think it’s racist.
Wookie, this is not just an “obnoxious attack.” The clever thing is that only a few white folks still get unbalanced by the thought of an attractive white woman chasing after a black man — back in the day, this might get the black guy lynched (Have you seen/read To Kill a Mockingbird?). Today, the majority of people aren’t bothered by the idea of interracial sex and they just see it as a silly ad. But for a few (thankfully fewer and fewer) have a Pavlovian response to something like this — they got the message loud and clear. The GOP tried to have its cake and eat it too — get a few people really agitated against Ford without much of a backlash from everyone else.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but I’m still not convinced.
<
p>
The folks who are most likely to get “agitated” over this aren’t likely to be voting for Ford in the first place and, if it is too subtle for the vast majority of voters, then why risk it?
<
p>
Two of the issues that have been played out in this race are 1. That Harold Ford Jr WAS at a Playboy party at the Super Bowl 2. That some of his donors were peripherally involved in the porn industry. They may seem like silly issues on the face of it, but this is the Bible Belt we are talking about. I think this ad could just as easily be used against Bill Clinton or any of the other “immoral liberals” running in the South.
Well, a bit.
<
p>
As pointed out by others, most of the “speakers” are addressing real issues… but the white woman (“Harold, call me!”) is clearly speaking to rumours that Ford, a handsome single black man, is dating a white woman.
<
p>
Up here in MA, we’re not intimately familiar with such stories, but I understand most folks in Tennessee are certainly aware of them, and it’s my belief that “Harold, call me” is playing to this particular rumour.
<
p>
Which, I think makes it a bit racist. Or at least anti-miscegenist (if that’s even a word).
The ad plays on the rumors that Ford was at a Playboy party during the Super Bowl in Jacksonville. That’s why she says she met him at the Playboy party before she says “Harold, call me.”
From what I heard on the radio this morning (Barnicle?) was that the party was the biggest corporate party at the Super Bowl.
<
p>
The blonde in the ad? Not cute at all. She’s got a long wait for Harold to call.
…it plays on that too. Can it not play on both at the same time?
Corker has tried to distance himself from the RNCC ad, but he put out his own nasty ad against Ford, featuring African jungle drums as background music. Here’s an excerpt from a TPM post:
It might be possible to write off isolated incidents, but the pattern across the board is clear. I’m sure Corker feels the people in Tennessee will accept this message that caused a backlash in Massachusetts.
<
p> – Dan
Last night on Nightline on ABC they showed both negative ads.
<
p>
And the Democratic pol analyst, Donna B…oh I forgot her name, ( Senility setting in) LOL, but she was is the one that worked for Kerry or Dean, or well, any way, she tell it as this Corker ad is in response to Ford answering the question does he like women……..His response was, of course I like women….and super-spin begins…..
<
p>
I got to meet Rep. Ford a couple of years ago, in his first year in office…..could not be a sweeter, kinder, caring man and he and Deval are the two younger African American candidates the press is focused on.
<
p>
If the press didn’t chase the salacious, then we might actually get to hear more about candidates solutions…..
<
p>
Healy’s new ad this morning…..Hi! I’m calm, sweet and dry as burnt toast…..does anybody who’s been near a television in the past month, BELIEVE that as of today, THIS is the Real Kerry Healy?????? As one of the Dems said last night, (can’t remember which one), said Do the Republicans think we’re ALL that stupid?
<
p>
The link to Dean Reynolds report on Nightline, though the commentary mentions nothing about the fact they did show Healy’s “would you compliment a rapist” ad. And an interview with Deval.
link to Nightline site:
http://abcnews.go.co…
<
p>
Barb in Worc.
<
p>
Donna Brazile.
would agree and so do I.
Ken Mehlman was on NPR this morning talking about the Harold Ford/Playboy ad. It was financed by the RNC, but it was developed by an independent agency. According to campaign finance law, “independent expenditures” (as I believe they’re called) by political parties are meant for this type of transaction. As part of the law, the RNC is not allowed to co-ordinate at all with the agency who develops the ad.
<
p>
The Republican candidate and Mehlman asked for the ad to be taken off the air and spoke out against it.
<
p>
Independent agencies and 527s like MoveOn.org scare me, no matter who they’re supporting. It always appears like the message is coming from the candidate. This could particularly undermine someone like Deval Patrick, whose message revolves around a dignified campaign and shunning fear-based tactics.
But you can bet if a similarly controversial ad were being run on behalf of a Democratic candidate, Mehlman would be right out in front demanding that the DNC pull the ad immediately.
<
p>
I also worry about the influence of 527s, though I think the current situation is at least slightly preferable to the days of unlimited soft money; but I’m not holding my breath for a real solution.
I agree with the people here who refuse to pull the race card. Whether the attacks use race, or call Democrats weak on crime/national security, or say gay marriage weakens the social institution of marriage, they’re really just using fear.
<
p>
If we circumvent the “hair trigger” words like race and focus on the disdain that is shown for voters’ intelligence when all of these fear tactics are used, we win.
<
p>
Calling “racism” doesn’t help anyone. However, the more we as citizens show that fear campaigns don’t work, the less they will be used. They’re only used right now because the politicos think they work.
Part of the problem is that a lot of these ads are attempting to be subliminal. Calling attention to the ways in which an ad is manipulative helps to diminish its effect.
<
p>
The way for the Republicans to not get the race card played is to deal something else.
<
p> – Dan
Maybe the question isn’t whether the ad is overtly racist. If you read a script, it’s just a blantantly offensive ad, nothing more.
<
p>
I don’t think one can deny that it is meant to appeal to racists.
<
p>
Perhaps a more cunning linquist can determine whether that is racism or whether it should be given some other name.
“Race-baiting” is more precise.
<
p>
I’d be happy to hear Ken Mehlman and his cronies discuss whether race-baiting is different from racism or is a form of racism.
<
p> – Dan
Ford’s campaign has made a great effort to whip up and exploit anti-gay sentiment, reinforcing right-wing frames and undermining the many Democratic candidates across the country who are doing a good job speaking about gay issues in moderate, non-divisive ways. Here’s the latest example, his gratuitous and factually innacurate (since the court rejected marriage equality) response to the NJ court decision:
<
p>
“I do not support the decision today reached by the New Jersey Supreme Court regarding gay marriage. I oppose gay marriage, and have voted twice in Congress to amend the United States Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage. This November there’s a referendum on the Tennessee ballot to ban same-sex marriage – I am voting for it.”
<
p>
Yeah, it sucks when candidates use subtle racism to try to win over the bigot vote, but it also sucks when they use blatant homophobia to do the same.