<p>“Don’t buy it: the ad was aimed at our famous “family values” folks. The woman at the end could’ve been black or white, no matter. I wasn’t fond of the ad myself; it was silly and obvious. But there is no way to prove that it was intended to be racist.”</p>
<p>That’s a pretty naive pov there HH. Do you really think they put that spot together and it was “dumb” luck they found a blonde skinny white girl? </p>
<p>It was chance? It was done for a reason, a clear reason and it worked. </p>
<p>It’s great to believe in your party, either one. However, don’t suspend your common sense just because the side you like punches below the belt. </p>
<p>Do you honestly believe the white girl/black man sexual issue was not planned for the effect it would have?</p>
<p>I just got an e-mail from a friend in Boston who I consider to be very politically astute. She said it was a done deal: Gore vs. McCain. I didn’t even know Gore was thinking of running!</p>
<p><em>Nothing</em> can possibly be a “done deal” at this point and any such assertion is idiotic. I’d be embarrassed for anyone making it. Gore has said that he’s not running and I take him at his word. While Gore has some fanatical support, it’s by no means clear that he would get the nomination should he decide to pursue it.</p>
<p>“The woman at the end could’ve been black or white, no matter. I wasn’t fond of the ad myself; it was silly and obvious. But there is no way to prove that it was intended to be racist.”</p>
<p>It was the ol’ miscegenation fear of the big Black boogie gimmick; they knew EXACTLY what they were doing, and it worked, and Corker was very embarrassed, but he’ll “take it”. No way to prove - what do you want - the Republican National Committee to issue a press release saying, “Today, we are releasing a racist ad because our focus groups show it is the best way for us to keep the Senate seat in Tennessee”? or would you like, after the fact, “We apologize for playing on the racist sentiments of the good people of Tennessee, and had no idea that they’d actually fall for it”?</p>
<p>Ouch. I don’t now if that’s a nominee for the “Painfully naive” award or the “Stand by your party, right or wrong” one. Either way, even though the year’s young, you have to figure HH will be being interviewed on the red carpet at the next awards show.</p>
<p>“We, the Party of Appeasement and Family Values, wish to express our deep apology for the fact that some members of the Tennessee electorate saw our million dollar advertising effort as having racial overtones. In our extensive focus group testing of the ad on white, rural Tennessee voters, not a single one told us that they were racists, or that they would be moved by the ad in any way. We invested in the ad, expecting that it would have no impact on white, rural Tennessee voters, and are as shocked and surprised that it did, and in such a short period of time, as anyone else. Next time - when we get to Obama - we will be more careful to choose only those ads that we know, in advance, will be ineffective.”</p>
<p>Oh, my goodness: I didn’t know the entire population of Tennessee holds racist sentiments! In my opinion, in 2007 I don’t think that a black man dating a white woman is exactly earth-shattering news, especially since Ford was known for dating white women, by all accounts.</p>
<p>Some people’s condescension knows no bounds.</p>
<p>Democrats are such sore losers: When Michael Steele lost I didn’t hear much whining about it; he’ll be around for more. Ford will probably pack it in after this.</p>
<p>No Democrat here, so I don’t know whom you are addressing. The Party of Intellectual Emptiness (PIE) didn’t run million-dollar racist ads against Michael Steele.</p>
<p>More excuses: They had more money. Boo-hoo.
You can keep calling the ad racist and accuse the entire population of Tennessee of being racists if you want to, but somehow I don’t think it reflects well on you or anyone else who does that. I think the final outcome was something like 51 % to 48%. Somehow the other 48% of Tennessee residents who voted for Ford are racists also according to you (as are, of course, the 51% who voted for Corker): whatever.</p>
<p>“Somehow the other 48% of Tennessee residents who voted for Ford are racists also according to you (as are, of course, the 51% who voted for Corker): whatever.”</p>
<p>It isn’t a matter of all, it’s a matter of a few. The majority doesn’t elect our president, governers or school boards… just a minority that gets out and actually votes and ends up with majority. No one here said every person from Tenn. were racists… you did. Again kind of naive in logic. </p>
<p>If you can’t acknowledge the concept of political advertising and target markets…well. You did get one right, the family values crowd, but inside the family values crowd especially in the south is the stay within your own race family values. Yea, that’s spliting hairs, but if the president can call a 1% margin a “MANDATE from the voters.” those little things count.</p>
<p>Opie - do you really think there’s any point in trying use reason to discuss this? Here are sequential posts from HH:
</p>
<p>To sum up: The ad wasn’t an appeal to racism, the Democrats are racists for saying so, and anyway, the guy “was known for dating white women, by all accounts.” And none of those posts were tongue in cheek, either.</p>
<p>You can’t make that kind of stuff up, I swear.</p>
<p>I think somebody made you up though.
The statement “the guy was known for dating white women” is racist in your book.
Ah, it’s going to be an ugly Obama season when we can’t even say that. ;)</p>
<p>“I’d rather elect someone who appears to be honest about youthful transgressions than to elect yet another obvious liar or person who dodges such questions.”</p>
