I had seen a reference and commentary on this ad over at Talking Points Memo (to which I shall repair in a moment), but it was watching it in this post at Hullabaloo, in which dday points out that McCain has hired the guy responsible for the Harold Ford "Call me, Harold" ad, perhaps the most transparently racist ad since the Jesse Helms "white hands" ad in 1990, that I was gobsmacked.
Here's the thing. Those images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton last barely a second, fading out as images fade in. The image of Ms. Hilton fades directly to a picture of Barack Obama smiling. Do I have to spell this out for you? I will be honest and say that, before I saw the ad, I thought this was a bit of a stretch. Indeed, textually, the ad seems to imply that Obama is an empty-headed celebrity, famous for being famous, with policies that don't quite jibe. That might even be a fair criticism to make. Seeing the ad, and the way those images fade out over one another, with the final shot of Obama smiling fading in over a photo of Paris with the only expression she ever wears - I just sat here in my empty house and said, "Wow!"
To be clear, I want to quote at a bit of length from digby's discussion of "racist dogwhistles":
I think we need to have a little discussion of what "racist dogwhistle" means. It is a word or phrase that conjures up certain subliminal images in those who are predisposed to see things in racial terms. It doesn't mean that everyone who hears the word as a criticism sees it in that way --- only those who get "the code." So, when Karl Rove sends out McCain's minions to spread the word "presumptuous" all over the place, the idea is to signal to the racists among us that Obama is "uppity." It doesn't mean that if you think Obama is presumptuous that you are a racist. You might just think, "yeah, he's acting like it's in the bag already." But racists hear that Obama is an uppity black man.
See, it works on two levels. That's why it's called a dogwhistle --- only the racists can hear the racism in it.
This is a complicated mode of communication that's been developed on the right for many decades. It's not something I just made up. There are dozens of examples: "welfare queen" and "Willie Horton," the "Hands" ad by Jesse Helms and most recently, the Harold Ford "Call Me" ad in 2006. The most famous of all was Ronald Reagan slyly beginning his campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, where one of the worst atrocities of the civil rights movement happened. Over the years it's gotten more subtle as the nation becomes less tolerant of overt racism, but it's never completely gone.
Josh Marshall has a couple things to say about this particular bit of garbage as well.
[I]t is the norm that obvious campaign tactics that are treated as obvious after a campaign is over are nonetheless treated by most reporters as ambiguous or unclear during a campaign. But in this case it would be nice if that were not the case. Because here we have a candidate, John McCain, who is running on a record of straight talk and honorable campaigning running a campaign made up mainly of charges reporters are now more or less acknowledging are lies. But there's precious little drawing together of the contradiction. What's more, as everyone will acknowledge after the campaign, the McCain campaign is now pushing the caricature of Obama as a uppity young black man whose presumptuousness is displayed not only in taking on airs above his station but also in a taste for young white women.
Not only is he an empty-headed preener dazzled by all the attention he's getting, but he's a (nudge, nudge) black guy who likes (wink, wink) blonde white women (a nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat, eh?). Obviously, the McCain campaign and his supporters will cry foul - how dare they call Sen. Straight Talk a racist? I am not doing any such thing. What I am doing is calling out the subtle racist message encoded in this ad. It is one of those things you can take or leave. If you take it though, you were looking for it, and I mean that in both a positive - Yeah, he's an uppity Negro with a hankering for white meat! - and negative - What a bunch of racist claptrap! - way. Just because it's subtle doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
8 comments:
That's really, really, really subtle. I just don't see it, Geoffrey.
It reminds me of Hillary's Kennedy assassination remark of a couple months ago. I thought way too much was being read into that then, and I think too much is being read into this, now.
Had the Republican Party never once in their history had candidates who ran subtle racist messages, I might understand such a reaction. Had the person who McCain hired as campaign aide never once been involved in racist ads against a black candidate, I would agree with you. Had the ad in question flashed a picture of Brad Pitt or Matt Gyllenhall, I would agree with you.
Instead, we have thirty years of dogwhistle politics - Nixon's "Southern Strategy", the "Law and Order" crap, Ronald Reagan beginning his 1980 campaign in Philadelphia, MS, Willi Horton, the aforementioned "white hands" and "Call me, Harold" ads, the last of which was designed by the same person responsible for this attack on Obama. Context is everything. Since this follows immediately on all the "presumptuous" talk (which is a polite way of calling Obama "uppity"), it should be clear we are dealing with a developing narrative, as those commentators to whom I linked make very, very clear.
The Hillary/RFK assassination business was a case of the press making a mountain out of a grain of sand. This ad is the latest in a long history of very subtle, but also very clear, racist digs by Republicans against African-Americans and African-American candidates.
As digby says, these ads work on multiple levels. I was stunned, however, by how blatant this was - a smiling Barack Obama image fading "over" an image of Paris Hilton? Please. They might as well have run that clip from Blazing Saddles where the guy yells out, "Where the white women at?" Obviously, they used the images of the two most vapid fake celebrities to make Obama look like an empty-headed slut. Yet, the fact that they are also young, white, and blonde pretty clearly shows that, as Atrios says in his headline on this topic, "He's a Black Man and He Wants to Fuck Your Sister".
In ordinary circumstances I might give McSame the benefit of the doubt. But, since he is a racist I dont really think its a stretch at all. Perhaps he shouldnt have gone around spreading his hate before going down this road.
I do not know if McCain is racist, although AZ politics is rampant with them (after all, they had a governor who tried to preempt the federal MLK holiday, arguing that King didn't make any contribution to life in AZ; the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist made his bones in the Goldwater and Nixon campaigns as a state aide from the Grand Canyon state, keeping minorities from the polls). I am not accusing him of personal animosity toward anyone. I am pointing out that this ad, of which he approves, carries subtle (sort of) cues that refer not only to Obama's race, but to historic fears of black men desiring to couple with beautiful young white women.
Thats fine. Feel free to be on the fence with him. But, he makes no apologies dropping the g-word. He is a ridiculous candidate. One day, he just may join the rest of us in the 21st century.
The correct title of Atrios' post is "He's an Uppity Negro Who Wants to Fuck Your Sister".
I just saw the video...
Who watches these videos? This is how McCain spends his money?
anyway, I know Paris hilton is a Catholic. She'll probably vote McCain.
I don't even know what your last sentence mean, Edgar.
Honestly, I doubt whether Ms. Hilton knows or cares all that much about the election. I wonder in all seriousness if she can read.
Post a Comment