Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

Tenn. Senate: Race-Baiting or Rough and Tumble?

UPDATE, 4:40 p.m. ET: Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman just said on CNN that the controversial ad that the committee's independent expenditure arm has been running in Tennessee is no longer on the air.

The ad went into rotation last Friday, meaning that it ran for just six days. An RNC spokesman offered no comment on the reason the ad was taken down, pointing out that it was being run by a committee independent of the RNC.

Original Post From Earlier Today:

In almost every hotly contested race there comes a make-or-break moment when the momentum of the campaign -- precariously balanced for months -- tilts to one side or the other.

In the Tennessee Senate race that moment came when Republican National Committee's independent expenditure arm launched a TV ad that seeks to turn Democrat Harold Ford's good looks and assured campaign style against him.

The ad, which was produced by Scott Howell, features a handful of fake "man on the street" interviews. (Scroll to the bottom of this post to watch the ad.)

One woman says: "Harold Ford looks nice, isn't that enough?" Another says: "Terrorists need their privacy." A man in camouflage clothing says: "Ford's right. I do have too many guns."

And then there is a young, scantily clad white woman who says in a high-pitched voice: "I met Harold at the Playboy party." She appears again at the end of the ad, whispering: "Harold, call me."

The ad's use of the woman has created a massive uproar in the state and nationally. Some Democrats insist that the subtle message is a racist one -- that connecting Ford to a young, attractive white woman seeks to stoke bigoted thinking.

Republicans push back that the entirety of the ad is satire and that it in no way plays on racial stereotypes. A separate anti-Ford ad from the National Republican Senatorial Committee accuses Ford of partying "with Playboy Playmates in lingerie" -- so one might say the woman in the new ad is simply another reference to Ford's alleged partying. But that topic too has sparked debate over race and racial stereotypes.

GOP nominee Bob Corker has asked for the ad to be taken down but insists he has no control over ads not paid for by his campaign.

Let's break the ad down piece by piece.

From the start, the ad strikes a clear tone of satire with a variety of somewhat stereotypical people making absurd statements. The man in camouflage is one; another is a slick-haired man in sunglasses who asks, "Who hasn't taken money from porn movie producers?"

That said, the woman's appearance is something of a non sequitur as it does not deal with a policy issue on which Republicans believe Ford disagrees with most Tennesseans. It focuses instead on his personal life. The woman's reappearance at the spot's end -- and she is the only figure who makes more than one appearance -- is a clear signal that the ad's producers want her to be the lingering image for voters.

Newspaper editorial boards in Tennessee have come out uniformly against the ad. The Nashville Tennessean calls it "tacky and over the top" and says it is a sign that Corker has lost control of his campaign. The Chattanooga Times Free-Press called the commercial "a new low in political advertising in a Senate race in this state."

To date, Ford has run a near-perfect campaign -- using a series of television ads to insulate himself from attacks on his character that he surely knew were coming. What remains to be seen is whether Ford was able to build enough of a connection with Tennessee voters that they will reject these latest RNC ads as nothing more than a desperate attempt to change the dynamic in the last days of the election.

Two independent polls released yesterday show that the race is tight. In a Mason-Dixon survey Corker led Ford 45 percent to 43 percent. An L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll showed Corker ahead 49 percent to 44 percent.

Republicans say Corker trailed Ford by high single digits as recently as a few weeks ago and has clawed back by focusing the race on the Democrat's character. Democrats insist these tactics will utlimately backfire and believe Ford is well-positioned to win.

Assuming Democrats win the four Republican seats where they currently lead -- Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Montana and Ohio -- control of the Senate could well hinge on which side is right when it comes to the Volunteer State race.

By Chris Cillizza  |  October 25, 2006; 2:07 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Parsing the Polls: Surveying the Senate Battlegrounds
Next: Fight For the Senate: Dole vs. Schumer

Comments

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Roy Pickard | December 6, 2006 7:54 AM | Report abuse

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Roy Pickard | December 6, 2006 7:53 AM | Report abuse

The Rolling Stones cancel a gig in Hawaii and postpone other tour dates as Mick Jagger suffers throat troubles...

Posted by: Tyshawn Potter | December 6, 2006 1:55 AM | Report abuse

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Lloyd Eden | December 5, 2006 12:53 AM | Report abuse

The judge who put coded messages in his Da Vinci Code plagiarism trial ruling has written another...

Posted by: Dandre Ballard | December 4, 2006 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Singer George Michael lends the piano on which John Lennon wrote Imagine to an anti-war exhibition...

Posted by: Jan Shepard | December 4, 2006 12:22 PM | Report abuse

Veteran game show host Bob Barker is stepping down from hosting The Price is Right after 35 years...

Posted by: Jakob Charlton | December 4, 2006 6:24 AM | Report abuse

le fffm de bbw d'adulte lib?rent des pouces bbw wives free dog sex mpeg teen dog beast sex beastiality anime adult beastiality sites The first stage of a £150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers...

Posted by: Luis Coyle | December 3, 2006 9:50 AM | Report abuse

latin sex video sex wife movie galleries creampie wife big butt milfs milf son Pioneering screenwriter Nigel Kneale, best known for the Quatermass TV serials and films, dies aged 84...

Posted by: Maximillian Barnes | December 1, 2006 6:43 PM | Report abuse

big jamaican cock sex big cock streight sex young teen porn drunk teen little lesbians horny nasty lesbians TV host Oprah Winfrey gives audience members $1,000 (£526) each to donate to a charitable cause...

Posted by: Ronaldo Billings | December 1, 2006 7:54 AM | Report abuse

TV host Oprah Winfrey gives audience members $1,000 (£526) each to donate to a charitable cause...

Posted by: Jermaine Estep | November 30, 2006 12:04 PM | Report abuse

A musical about the witches from The Wizard of Oz breaks West End box office records, its producers say...

Posted by: Tommy Hurd | November 29, 2006 5:24 PM | Report abuse

A musical about the witches from The Wizard of Oz breaks West End box office records, its producers say...

Posted by: Tommy Hurd | November 29, 2006 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Borat creator Sacha Baron Cohen reportedly signs a $42.5m (£22m) film deal starring his character Bruno...

Posted by: Bronson Edwards | November 29, 2006 9:49 AM | Report abuse

Borat creator Sacha Baron Cohen reportedly signs a $42.5m (£22m) film deal starring his character Bruno...

Posted by: Bronson Edwards | November 29, 2006 9:45 AM | Report abuse

Thought I'd check back to see if the posters known only as "drindl" and "F&B" had any more words of wisdom for me after I brushed aside their lame insults. As I suspected, they had no more time to respond, perhaps because rhetoric so shallow as theirs simply dies from the weight of its own inanity.

Congratulations boys, your team took back Congress. You must be proud as peacocks. I like a little change on Capitol Hill from time to time myself, so I'm not hurt. One guy I know who is absolutely thrilled with the result is Mr. Bush, who now has a much better chance of getting his amnesty bill passed. Amnesty, rather than Iraq, will be his legacy, because it is amnesty that will be the final nail in the coffin of that 300-year experiment called the U.S. of A. All civilizations die...I just hoped this one would have outlived me by a few centuries, but it appears it will be only years or decades. Maybe I will outlive it, though life won't be worth living at that point.

At least I can say "I told you so" on one point. Sometime last winter I commented on this blog that voters of KY-4 would return Geoff Davis (R) to the House rather than send back Ken Davis (D), who voluntarily left the House two years before. At the time I compared this re-match to the one voters of KY-6 had in 2000 when Ernie Fletcher (R) was facing Scotty Baesler (D), another man who had voluntarily given up his seat two years before. My reasoning was this: If people like Baesler and Davis voluntarily leave the House, why would voters bother sending them back? Voters are smart...they can tell who wants the job and who doesn't. Baesler and Davis obviously didn't when they quit, and they only wanted their old jobs back when their successors inconveniently turned out to be members of the opposing party.

Baeslar was trounced, and I predicted Davis would be, too. Well, Mr. Davis was not trounced as badly as Mr. Baesler, but he lost by a much wider margin than what the pre-election polls were predicting. Actually, I felt somewhat embarrassed for Mr. Lucas for performing as badly as he did under the circumstances.

I had one or two naive yellow dogs dismiss my commentary out-of-hand, as if they had a clue about the local political environment. Unfortunately, I didn't write down their "names" so I am unable to address them personally here. Suffice it to say they were so wrong, and I was so right.

I may be back here in 2008 if I feel confident in predicting the outcome of another Congressional race. If there are dissenters to my predictions, I hope they will be more politically savvy than the yellow dogs whose ship sunk with Mr. Lucas, a man who couldn't seem to make up his mind about whether to serve in the House or not. The people of KY-4 decided for him, and in the way most thoughtful Kentucky political observers would have predicted all year.

Posted by: KY-6 Guy | November 25, 2006 1:37 AM | Report abuse

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Malik Thorpe | November 17, 2006 5:19 AM | Report abuse

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Xander Wingate | November 16, 2006 6:18 PM | Report abuse

The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Posted by: Xander Wingate | November 16, 2006 6:17 PM | Report abuse

The Red Hot Chili Peppers are leading the way at this years MTV Europe music awards with four nominations...

Posted by: Elliott Horner | November 12, 2006 11:52 AM | Report abuse

The Red Hot Chili Peppers are leading the way at this years MTV Europe music awards with four nominations...

Posted by: Elliott Horner | November 12, 2006 11:51 AM | Report abuse

The judge who put coded messages in his Da Vinci Code plagiarism trial ruling has written another...

Posted by: Dandre Hamblin | November 12, 2006 6:13 AM | Report abuse

The judge who put coded messages in his Da Vinci Code plagiarism trial ruling has written another...

Posted by: Dandre Hamblin | November 12, 2006 6:12 AM | Report abuse

As I understand it satire can be a way to tell a joke that works on more than one level. It can be broad (a typical SNL sketch) or it can be subtle. The most successful mass audience satire was "All in the Family". Sadly, a lot of people took Archie Bunker as a validation of their bigotry instead of the ridicule that it was.

A 30 second ad that uses satire is like using a chainsaw for brain surgery: too blunt an instrument for the purpose. In addition to the base appeal to racial fears the ad portrays Ford supporters as dumb as a bag of rocks. To these eyes, the RNC ad is calling Ford supporters (roughly half of potential Tennessee voters) stupid. Is that a good idea in a closely contested election? To me, no.

Posted by: dcexpat | October 28, 2006 2:46 AM | Report abuse

bhoomes wrote:
Two points my sanctemonious [sic] friends, First the add is an independent expeniture [sic]which means Corker and the RNC have know [sic] authority to have the add pulled.

In fact, the credit line at the end of the ad clearly says "The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertisement."

Posted by: jrsposter | October 26, 2006 3:32 PM | Report abuse

One thing seems clear: if our GOP led administration can risk the lives of 3000 Americans to die for implanting democracy some 7000 miles away in the Middle East, but can't resist using racial imagery to win elective office here in America, we then must not shy away from why others in this world question if we have indeed lost our moral compass. While many have seemingly placed this ad in the context of TN, these sorts of things goes around the world many times both among our friends and our enemies alike. And, if foreign countries can wonder aloud: If this is normalcy of an America, still unable to get along with each other, exactly why should we buy into their other rhetoric?

Domestically, this ad is disgusting not just for its implied subliminal message: He is a black man who desires white woman. But, because if in 2006 America, people can't judge people based on their character and personality traits then perhaps it is time for all minorities to assess precisely why they are risking their lives for democracy and freedom, in a land where many still aren't comfortable with them in positions of leadership and power.

J.C. Watts, former (R-OK) found out first-hand that the rhetoric of the big tent GOP still has a back door entrance for Negroes. Unfortunately, as talented as Ford, Jr. is today, his candidancy will come down not to his competence or leadership ability, but the judgment of his skin color. Ford, Jr.'s failure will ultimately be America's failure; for boasting of its democractic greatness, its Christian values thereof; to export something, which in fact and reality simply does not exist.

It is simply stupid to tell the Iraqis to play fair, when many will pull their sheets in TN on November 7th and won't do the same themselves.

Perhaps, if any thing positive will come from Ford, Jr. defeat, it will be the merging of the moderates in the Dem and Rep camps. Together, maybe they can begin to resolve the great chasm of imagery about America and its actual behavior, whilst working to fix this nation, before traversing thousands of miles around the world to fix someone else problems.

Posted by: Vince | October 26, 2006 1:46 PM | Report abuse

This advertisement makes me feel real sad about this country. That this ad reflects the opinion of the governing party upsets me. Are the Republican party considered to be 'decent Americans' when they promote something like this?

It seems to me that they are so focused on staying in power that they justify their actions if they get the results. How about some decent advertising for once instead of all this negativity. How people support these guys I will never know...but how could I? I am an immigrant to this lands from ireland and would probably be thrown out if they had their way?

Perhaps its time that the Republicans move over for as we all know, absolute power corrupts absolutely..and there has been a lot of that

Posted by: Colm Saunders | October 26, 2006 12:37 PM | Report abuse

While Ken Mehlman has said this horrible ad has been pulled, it ran this morning in Chattanooga. WRCB-3 during the Today Show.

Posted by: Grace | October 26, 2006 12:32 PM | Report abuse

The RNC must be grasping at straws if the best attack they can come up with is "women find Harold Ford attractive." Seriously, if I knew Harold Ford was partying with Playboy models, I'd be more likely to vote for him. Ford's probably got half of the male population of Tennessee cheering him on right now. "Call her! Get you some!"

If this is the RNC's attempt to be racist, they sure suck at it. We're talking Temple football team suck here.

And wait, Demsin06, Ken Mehlman's gay? A gay Jewish Republican? My brain just exploded.

Posted by: Jeff | October 26, 2006 11:11 AM | Report abuse

This is not the only example of race baiting in this race. Bob Corker is running an a radio ad in which Ford and Corkers life stories are compared. Check out the contrast between the music that plays when the announcer's talking about Corker and the jungle drums that play when they talk about Harold Ford. Literally- jungle drums. And Bob Corker approves this message.

Hear is a link to judge for yourself. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/images/2006-10-25_Corker_Radio_Ad.mp3

The party of Lincoln should have something better to offer.

Posted by: jmd | October 26, 2006 9:14 AM | Report abuse

The RNC headed by a closeted man?

It takes delusion, fantasy, denial and hypocrisy to head an organization so twisted as the current RNC. Mehlman fits the bill.

So when the Rs are flaming this fall will they burn Kenny boy at the stake? Will the bible beaters drag him off his knees from the backroom of his favorite bar to the nearest lynching post with George Allen at the helm? Will Tony Perkins and his trolls blame the losses on a homosexual conspiracy/agenda? Hmm, makes for interesting drama.

Posted by: Alex22309 | October 26, 2006 6:52 AM | Report abuse

Mrs. Dole isn't making a good argument. Let's cut to the chase. It's hard as nails to unseat a Senator. To simply run, it takes a hill of money and a string of connections. Essentially -that's- why a pickup of 6 Senate seats is more daunting than 15 seats in the House. I'm still waiting for America to wake up. I can't fathom how seemingly good people voted for GWB after the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal 'n the Swift Boat hogwash. Isn't it a little bit funny how Repubs convinced people that being a deserter is more patriotic than being a veteran? And it will be an injustice if Allen or Corker win. Hey folks, it's NOT cool to call someone a monkey, politicize someone's pigmentation, or mimic people with a terminal illness. I can't believe it, but I'm agreeing with a conservative: If Dems can't get a 15 seat pickup now, they never will. Even "stay the course" has become "It depends what 'stay the course' is." Flipflopping about cut 'n run, eh? Rightwing-extremist Repubs and Mrs. Dole can try to spin it all they want. But the current "political climate" is as such, because radical Republicanism in America has made it that way. Dems will take the House this year. Mark my words. You can write it down.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | October 26, 2006 6:42 AM | Report abuse

Koz - no I am not for those things. I believe in a centrist government that helps you out but doesn't tell you what to do. That's actually the democrat plan. Pay as you go government, Accountability in congress and corporations, staying out of my bedroom and church. This is actually what dems want. The current crop of repubs don;t do that. I thought Bush I was a decent prez, not my pick but all in allm not bad, but then he was only fiscally conservative.

Posted by: Will | October 26, 2006 12:26 AM | Report abuse

This from the NYT ( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/26/us/politics/26tennessee.html?hp&ex=1161921600&en=00b9655c05cd202b&ei=5094&partner=homepage ):
"Mr. Ford told his audience here, and elsewhere in recent days, that the attacks coming his way were simply a sign of desperation, a sign the Republicans have nothing else to say. He added, "You know your opponent is scared when his main opposition against you is, 'My opponent likes girls.' " The audience erupted in laughter."

Ford's got a way of rolling subliminal things into simple statements. The GOP is, of late, self-characterized as being gay and protective/encouraging of pedophiles. Ford plays off this while subtly conveying the message that his predilections are more like those of most Tennesseans.

BTW, the ad now appears to be pulled. To their credit, the Corker campaign approves at least in public.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | October 25, 2006 11:42 PM | Report abuse

See a tongue-in-cheek visual that gives Mr. Mehlman a dose of his own "Innuendo" medicine...here:

http://www.thoughttheater.com/2006/10/mister_ken_the_talking_horses_ass.php

Posted by: Daniel DiRito | October 25, 2006 10:20 PM | Report abuse

GOP has long history of using race as a wedge issue. They always skate by.

Here is the trend dating to Bush 1 and Lee Atwater with Dukakis, through Helms and Harvy Gant and now Harold Ford.

The message is this...."He's black!"
This is southern boogey man at work. Notice the GOP seldom runs this type of add in the North where racial tolerance is a virtue. This is all part of the 'Southern Strategy' , Note however, this appeals to the former yellow dog dems who switched from the DEM party to the GOP.

So is it racist...perhaps. Is it cynical absolutely. Is is politics at its worst. Absolutely. However, until the DEms wake up and start fighting back, instead of this constant dribble about complaining, then they will lose this debate. What Ford ought to do is what he was quoted as saying... I am a guy, I attended various functions that had beautiful women in attendance. Why is my opponent Bob Corker trying to change the subject, its the war in Iraq, economic wage stagnation, and health care that we should be talking about.

Posted by: Stick a Fork In IT. | October 25, 2006 9:54 PM | Report abuse

My husband didn't see the ad as blatently racist, either. I was very surprised - but he did see the implied racism - no real difference, I guess. I found the ad to be very racist - anyway - just to point out that not all 'dems' found it offensive.

Posted by: star11 | October 25, 2006 6:30 PM | Report abuse

The Webb ad includes the "Welcome to America!" tag line that Allen threw at the Virginia native.

The race baiting was Allen in Southwest Virginia throwing out red meat to the lions. If Webb's ad is "baiting" anyone, it is those offended by pure hypocrisy. Hardly seems to be in the same arena as the initial offense.

BTW - If Michael J. Fox did those ads while on his Parkinson's medication, would Limbaugh and company accuse him of "Being drugged?" Lots of votes there, nailing an admitted drug user.

Posted by: Nor'Easter | October 25, 2006 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Also, I think these posts today have gotten a bit out of hand in terms of the name calling and personal attacks. My sensibilities aren't offended mind you, I just think generally most of you are informed enought that you don't need to resort to that.

Posted by: TG | October 25, 2006 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Question - the Allen ad in Virginia run by Webb where they run the "maccaca" footage over and over again. Is that race baiting? I mean, I agree that Allen's remarks were racist (or at least the implication is that a person of dark skin is not authentically american), but isn't the point of that add to inflame the passions about race for election purposes?

I think the Ford add is dumb (and funny in parts) but when I viewed it, I was thinking that they had that blond woman in there because of the play boy party allegations, when I think play boy, I think blond. Wouldn't have worked for that point otherwise would it? I didn't see it as racist. Maybe I am naive. Maybe you are. The truth is probably in the middle somewhere.

Posted by: TG | October 25, 2006 5:43 PM | Report abuse

For clarity, by "war powers resolution" I meant the "The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002". Passed in a rush, right before an election.

Posted by: Adam Hammond | October 25, 2006 5:42 PM | Report abuse

Zouk, I'll try to avoid insults. Your statement does anger me. I hope that wasn't your intent. Your detractors call you a troll, so perhaps I shouldn't bother to go through this ...

The middle east is not full of bad people! If we begin with that kind of failure to understand then our policies will be a disastrous failure also. We Americans are not bad just because criminals in our country kill thousands of people a year. There were no more bad people in Iraq in 2003 than there were in many other countries. One of the bad people was in charge, and that was disastrous for the Iraqi people and the rest of the world. I do strongly disagree with the timing of the war to oust him.

At least admit that the Bush administration was using tremendous political pressure to convince democrats to vote for the war powers resolution. I hate the fact that so many caved in, but they were given little political choice. It would have passed anyway, so they caved. Not brave, but not actually an endorsement that you should use in your arguments.

The world did not all have the same information. That is a talking point that you are quoting. The administration had information about disagreement within the inteligence community. I say that that info was purposely covered up to make a stronger case. Therefore, I say that Bush lied us into war.

Posted by: Adam Hammond | October 25, 2006 5:37 PM | Report abuse

The following from a news item posted by wtF/Queen at 4:26, is about as significant as anything which says "Time to Get Out!":

"Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki lashed out at the United States Wednesday, saying his popularly elected government would not bend to U.S.-imposed benchmarks and timelines..." [He also said that another operation like today's, of which he was not informed, will never happen again.]

al-Maliki is saying we'll call the shots, you still pay the bills and take the hits.

Democrats should be all over the Administration about "handing over command of our troops" to the Iraqi government, which is essentially what al-Maliki said.

We'll see if they, or the press, are intelligent enough to read that for what it is.

Do you think that Central Command in Baghdad is already putting out press releases saying that al-Maliki didn't mean what he said?

Posted by: Nor'Easter | October 25, 2006 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I give you Exhibit A in the Zouk Racism Denial Fest:

"Just like with Allen. you paint him with a broad brush because he called a darker skinned person a macaca. If that person had been white, would you have reacted the same. would allen? I suspect he would and you wouldn't. there is no other evidence of Allen being any sort of racist"

Yeah, I see your point. The fact that he called the darkskinned person in the otherwise-white crowd in rural VA a species of monkey should *not* be at all confused with the fact that that has specifically been a racist epithet of the most base order going back decades now. I'm sure it was just a random word he picked randomly out of his solid gold heart. And besides, we know by Macaca he really meant "Mohawk". He's already explained that to us. How dense that I still don't get it.

And you're right - there is no other evidence of Allen being racist whatsoever. His having a noose hanging in his office for years was simply out of deference to the... ropemaking industry (yeah, that's it), which I imagine supports his campaign richly. Or at least, I assume Virginia is the ropemaking capitol of the US.

And the racial slurs he spray painted on the walls during college? I'm sure they were actually a Performance Art project, which were perhaps expressing a sensitivity *towards* the problem of racism. You know, the way those Hollywood films examining racism sometimes have to regretably use the "N-word".

And the lifelong (well, since leaving his surfer roots and realizing he needed to cozy up to a different crowd) obsession with the confederate flag? It's just a tribute to his favorite childhood show, the Dukes of Hazzard. It's got nothing to do with the good old days of slavery.

No, George Allen doesn't have a racist bone in his body, and does not pander to that constituency - and certainly not when he's in southwest VA. And I'm sure the blonde woman whispering "call me" to Mr. Ford had just as little to do with tweaking that latent racist streak in parts of Tennesee. Which we all know died out instantly the moment the Brown v. Board of Education decision was issued.

Yes, Mr. Zouk, you are quite believable. I'm so glad you are here to explain these things to us.

Posted by: B2O | October 25, 2006 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Iraq did not attack us. that doesn't demand that we not attack them. see my belligerent history of america above. the borders in that area mean nothing, much as they do here. you can't clean out a swamp of evil by sticking within a single country in an entire region of killers. you have to go after them where they live. Lots of bad guys lived and still do in Iraq. If you want to get to them, you have to enter the country. If you have decided that talking is no longer working, the next step is to kill them. I think we clearly demonstrated that talking to most of these guys is ineffective. what else would you do assuming that you are not willing to wage a purely defensive war and wait to be struck at home? Sanctions were breaking down and being abused, no-fly zones were difficult and not so rewarding and the world through the UN had issued warning after warning. At some point, action must be taken. You may disagree with the point at which we did take action, but all the R Senators agreed and half the D Senators did. Is it not fair or accurate to state that this was an intentional lie on anyone's part. the entire world relied on similar info and it was not a single issue. for that reason, the choice was a good one. the road is diffcult but the effort is noble. I am ashamed that Dems denigrate this and wish us to lose. what more democratic thing could you do than liberate a country and selflessly return it to them? TTFN. so there you have it. I'm on record. Let the lies and insults fly.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 5:20 PM | Report abuse

BlueDog - it is not a fact that nothing you say could get my support. I tend to agree with you concerning the nation building but this particualr nation needed some additional help. there are other factors involved. Whether it was intended or not, it is the central front on the war on terror now. the terrorists believe it and the arms and manpower are demonstrating it. better there than here. so I would count that as a success.

As far as what drindl and the rest of the moonbats write, I find it amusing but not terribly inciteful. when one can predict every response from a pundit (think about eleanor), it is just not interesting to hear the details (again). I am curious about your viewpoints because you do not exhibit moonbattish behavior and sprinkle your posts with insults, non-facts and talking points. I have sadly found few others here who are capable of that measure of debate.

Adam you have misinterpreted my view on FEd funding of education. If it were up to me I would devolve this down to the parents level. the parents who are not interested would have their decisions made by their neighbors somehow. I don't have all the answers but can easily find fault with the current process.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 5:08 PM | Report abuse

KOZ -

"War - ugly situation, let's make the best of it. we were attacked, cutting and runnning doesn't solve anything, it only makes it worse."

Can I get you to explicitly go on record here on this? Because I see these just other-worldly bizarre poll results that show the majority of the country still thinking that Iraq attacked us, and I keep asking, "who ARE these bliterhing, brain damaged Americans?" Have I met one of them at last? Did Saddam "get us good" that fateful day in 2001? Please elaborate. Your party is a strange species.

Posted by: B2O | October 25, 2006 5:00 PM | Report abuse

What makes you think anyone is falling for anything. Can it be that the voters are educating themselves on the issues and will vote their own interests. Why is the assumption that those folks are gullible or stupid? I would assume that they can decide for themselves who can better represent their views. If your side (or mine) loses, you can also assume that it was for valid policy differences.

but of course the Dem mantra is that regular people are too stooopid to think for themselves, to properly fill out a ballot (may have something here), to plan for retirement, to choose a school, to pick a doctor, to spend their own money and on and on.... that's why we need all you socialist kingmakers, to think for us and make our decisions for us. please tell me what should I have for dinner tonight? Maybe you could start a giant dietary planning department and fund it with profits stolen from fast food restaurants. there might be some poor people out there who don't understand that eating big Macs everyday without your own personal trial attorney can be hazardous to your health. Get started on that right away

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for fixing your style, Zouk. Sorry I had to come down on you, but you are doing much better now!

Isn't condescension fun.

I am surprised that you misunderstand what Dems are for. Who could be for Huge Defecits, and which democratic period are you suggesting as an example? Pork is political expedience, but not a one party phenomenon.

On education, I disagreed with Reagan's action to put education funding on the states. I think it should be federal, so your right on that one.

Posted by: Adam Hammond | October 25, 2006 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Zouk,

At no time did I say we went into wars unprovoked. I said it has happened, I didn't say all the time. I was in Grenada, Panama, and Nicaragua (you missed our involvement there). I believed in all of them, the were just and necessary. We also got the hell out as fast as possible. It's bad enough we went in to Iraq without just cause, but we could have gotten out long ago, but no, we had to Nation Build, a doctrine rejected by Reagan/Bush 1.

As for new ideas, what's the point? Nothing I say will get your support, thus the "troll" label by Drndl. You argue for the sake of arguement, not for education or ellucidation. Base an arguement solely on logic, true fact (not your opinions stated as facts), without the vitriol, without the inflammatory rhetoric, without the peevishness, and you would gain a lot of respect by the readers. No, you play the game for the ego feed, not for the mind.

Wish I could stay and chat, gotta go tho, see ya another day, it's been fun.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Kam:

"We have to wait and see how far Tennesee has advanced, this election is now about them; it is no longer about Ford and Corker."

So well put. I think you're right. Sooner or later it comes down to, "will you fall for this stuff, and if so, what does that mean about you, Mr. or Ms. Voter?"

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 4:48 PM | Report abuse

"Huge deficits, medicare handouts, more Pork than a North Carolina barbecue, forcing states to become totally dependent on the feds, federalizing school care (no child left behind), not to mention appointing tons of activist lawmaking judges, it's already a huge socialist swamp!"
Will, this is why the R base is so upset. all the Rs behaving like Ds. but you can't possibly think I condone this mess. but aren't you FOR most of these things?

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 4:45 PM | Report abuse

"By the way, Bhoomes, "ad" is short for advertisement. Add is what you do with your fingers."

ROTFlafing-til-i-pee-my-pants

let's hope he doesn't have to count to eleven...

Posted by: wtF/queenofkuoz (the anti zouk/bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 4:42 PM | Report abuse

To drindl:

Do you actually believe there are absolutely no voters who normally vote Democrat who will not vote for Mr. Ford because he is black? Talk about having one's head in the sand. There are indeed upper class liberals who preach racial inclusiveness but still conveniently choose to insulate themselves and their children from minorities (e.g. sending their kids to private schools, living in predominately white suburbs), and it is not far-fetched to think they carry such condescending attitudes into the polling booth. If you actually bothered to READ what I wrote, I said this is most likely a small number of Democrat voters, but perhaps a significant amount that may affect the success of Mr. Ford's candidacy.

To F&B:

I am not a neoconservative. I despise neoconservatives, and you are foolish to call me one.

Posted by: KY-6 Guy | October 25, 2006 4:39 PM | Report abuse

BlueDog - I am not disputing the connection from FDR to Truman and finally JFK. this is the Dem party that I would have supported. the current gaggle of "leaders" have nothing in common with them. JFK lowered taxes - no modern Dem will actively support that idea. FDR opened camps for Japs. modern Dems won't vote for a single measure that could defend us. MLK wanted a color blind society but modern Dems want an anti-white society. all the good ideas the Dems had in the 60s have either been enacted or have been tried and failed. when will you all come up with some new ones and be willing to make changes required to ancient social programs. when will you care more about this country then rights for the enemy? when will our collective good mean more to you than a raw power grab?

and the idea that we have never gone into a war unprovoked (I mean attacked directly by that entity) is simply false. The list is long:
Grenada, Bosnia, Lebanon, Panama, Germany,(twice), Spain, Korea, Iraq (twice),Italy, and that's just from the 20th century. follow your own advice and look into a history book before you make statements that are clearly false.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 4:39 PM | Report abuse

dcvoter,

Yes, I think some damage to the GOP is inevitable because of this ad. Historically, ads of this nature are brought out only when the election is close, and they are quite risky. Read the public the wrong way and they revolt. I've yet to see anything in this election cycle that shows the GOPher's have a good feel for what the public wants. Unlike the Willie Horton/Dukakis ad, the mood is not ripe for this sort of thing. West Tennessee will vote heavily for Ford, East marginally for Corker, Nashville barely for Ford, Chattanooga barely for Corker. It all depends on voter volume in each area.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 4:36 PM | Report abuse

'I prefer to post my tax return so you understand my outrage at being fleeced by the government.'

you mean your lobbyist run, 100% republican government? welcome to the club.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the GOP is playing limbo with its morality again.

Posted by: RedStateBlueVoter | October 25, 2006 4:32 PM | Report abuse

zouk you are nothing but peevish. and whiny, and lacking in ideas, substance, and character.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 4:31 PM | Report abuse

This ad is just stupid. It has the look of The National Enquirer as do most of the repub. ads lately. I think most people are just sick of it. I think it reflects much more on the people sponsoring it than who it is attacking. By the way, Bhoomes, "ad" is short for advertisement. Add is what you do with your fingers.

Posted by: Joan | October 25, 2006 4:31 PM | Report abuse

Zouky how can we turn washington into a socialist swamp when y'all already have! Huge deficits, medicare handouts, more Pork than a North Carolina barbecue, forcing states to become totally dependent on the feds, federalizing school care (no child left behind), not to mention appointing tons of activist lawmaking judges, it's already a huge socialist swamp!

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Adam - my posts are not meant to be entirely funny and devoid of other content. if you find them amusing or my writing style to be witty, that is just an added benefit. You may notice the difference between the type of post I submit and many of my feeble detractors. Mine actually contain ideas which can be subject to debate. they may not be devoid of insults but that is not the main vehicle. do a quick comparison of the moonbats posts and try to find a single topic other than insults and vain attempts at humor which are seldom funny at all.

I don't brag about my intellect, experience, income, education, wonderful kids, etc. My ideas stand on their own and are independent of the author. I thought that was the intent of a blog with anonymous naming conventions. shall I post a resume, will that make you more enthralled or less? I prefer to post my tax return so you understand my outrage at being fleeced by the government.

but Adam, you seem to have an efficient, economical and mildly amusing writing style. you could put that to good use here and educate your fellow bloggers about style and substance. but Prof. Strunk wouldn't like the however in the beginning of a sentence. See, I can be peevish too.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 4:29 PM | Report abuse

yo zouky - news alert: if yer Rs are doin' such a great job, how, then, do you account for the lead in this article?:

(Iraqi Prime Minister Lambastes U.S.

By John Ward Anderson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, October 25, 2006; 2:20 PM

BAGHDAD, Oct. 25 -- Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki lashed out at the United States Wednesday, saying his popularly elected government would not bend to U.S.-imposed benchmarks and timelines and criticizing a U.S. and Iraqi military operation in a Shiite slum of Baghdad that left at least five people dead and 20 wounded.)

mirrer mirrer on the wal...

Posted by: wtF/queenofkuoz (the anti zouk/bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Zouk,

By the way, I see what you meant about Queen of Zouk, she's a pip.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Zouk,

You see no linear connection from FDR's Lend Lease Program to Johnson and Kennedy's support in Vietnam? No outgrowth of thier attempts to contain communism? No belief in their belief of defense without imperialism? Get the to a library, read a history book.

When was the policy enacted that says Strike before they Strike you? Was that a Democratic president? No, not even Bush Senior did that, who I voted for (couldn't stand the idea of Dukakis). Not even Reagan believed that. Until now, foriegn policy, particularly the use of force, has been considered "off limits" in using it for political gain. But that changed with Bush 2. I have no problems with going into Afghanistan, although I feel we should have sent MORE troops, and finished the job. But Iraq? Where was the connection to Al Qaida? Made up. Where was the intel on WMD's? Made up. Of course the Senate voted to allow military force, they were given a limited set of facts and had to vote accordingly. Do you really think Bush went into Iraq because he was "Defending America"? No, we all know now it was only the excuse he needed. Yes, other President's have done the same, FDR and Johnson both used false or exaggerated incidents to move the country towards war, but that doesn't make it right.

Besides, you're the one who lumped ALL Democrats together, not me, I'm just showing the error of your ways. If what your were trying to say is MODERN Democrats "believe in war only when they can easily win and don't have to suffer one bit", I would beg to differ with that too, but that's another arguement.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 4:21 PM | Report abuse

This ad was clearly satire. She was no way hot enough to be a Playboy model.

Posted by: Brian | October 25, 2006 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drindl. I was a Republican when I was in the closet, so I can sympathize with their mistake, haha

Posted by: Greg-G | October 25, 2006 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Thanks drind. I was a Republican when I was in the closet, so I can sympathize with their mistake, haha

Posted by: Greg-G | October 25, 2006 4:17 PM | Report abuse

KofZ - a personal attack.
1) Your last post had a point along with the vitriol. However, many of your previous posts have lacked substance while being full of rancor.

2)You add hypocrisy to your list of rhetorical sins when you criticize others for thinking that they are funny.

Finally:
You say, "I wouldn't brag about my intellect and other gifts if I had the capabilites that you seem to harbor."

Its settled then. We agree that you should not brag about your intellect.

Posted by: Adam Hammond | October 25, 2006 4:16 PM | Report abuse

So you all can clearly see into someone's soul. that is quite a gift. And it goes nicely with your desire to create a socialist swamp with all you bureacrats making decisions for the rest of us. but I still don't get how insults and lies will turn into policies somehow? But I can see that failing schools and bankrupt retirements and medical care don't bother you since you want to keep all that just as it is. so you won't need any ideas after all. One fatal flaw with your approach. you can't seem to actually win an election with those putrid (non)ideas. Maybe in 2016 you can try again. all those Dopes running your party will be gone and you may just recover.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Am I overly optimistic, or do you think it remotely possible that the damage done from this ad could swing both ways? I mean, this ad certainly is no good for the Republican image either. But maybe I hope for too much from people.

Posted by: dc voter | October 25, 2006 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Where are the ads letting people know that if they vote for the marriage amendment in VA, they are doing a whole lot of damage to more than those who want to recognize same-sex marriage? I think that with some education on the matter, the proposal might be defeated - the real problem is that people don't really know what they are voting for (or against) most of the time. . .

Posted by: star11 | October 25, 2006 4:13 PM | Report abuse

yo zouky - ya broke yer mirrer yet? how 'bout the pages in yer wingnut thesaurus, have ya wornded em out yet? still loookin' fer yer neocon lexicon fer all us ignernt dems to be impressed upon? ya get a life yet? or is ya still just a wee wittle pissant and repub sycophant? gee, let me guess...

Posted by: wtF/queenofkuoz (the anti zouk/bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 4:11 PM | Report abuse

The ad may have been pulled but the damage has been done

Posted by: star11 | October 25, 2006 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Bluedog, those ex-presidents are so far from the modern Dem party is is hard to imagine the pedigree. Just what do you think you have in common with them from a defense point of view. I don't see a thing.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 4:05 PM | Report abuse

j. crozier -- don't applaud mehlman. he wouldn't have pulled it unless he thought it was hurting them.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Is it just me or are all Bhoomes and KOZ do is whine? Whine about the MSM, whine about big bad Dems, whine about the unfairness of ads or youtube. All they do is whine.
'its a consipracy.'
'You guys did something sorta similar 30 years ago.'
'Clinton was not a nice person.'
'Michael j. Fox isn't being fair when he does an ad.'

Boo-hoo.

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 4:05 PM | Report abuse

The RNC has pulled the ad, the damage has been done...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2006/10/25/8705.aspx

Posted by: wiccan | October 25, 2006 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Oh, Zouk,

"no modern professional pol would use overt racism in today's market"

Really? Truly? Hmm, what about subtle racism, which is what this is. Just a "friendly reminder" to vote white and vote often.

As for Allen, please. I've had to live with him for too many years to know exactly what he stands for, Ol Virginee. All the stories about his racism only made the national news because of the "macaca" incident. He's been a well known bigot in these parts for years. Having been to some of the early fundraisers to take a look before deciding on who to support, his off the cuff comments, good ole boy jokes, were regularly geared towards the white male voter. Many of us heard his "colorful" remarks, knew of his "love of the confederacy" and understood his wink and nod approach to explaining these things away. We've been embarrased about him for years. Unfortunately, I don't see him going away. Fortunately, I also don't see him succeeding at a run for President in 08 either.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 4:04 PM | Report abuse

'here is no other evidence of Allen being any sort of racist and this whole argument shows you don't want to discuss issues that matter. how utterly weak of you. When I say you, you know who you are.'

god you are stupid. i mean, really really incredibly stupid. willfully, purposefully stupid. no evidence. nothing other than the lynching noose in his office and his calling a young brown man a monkey. but that's not racist to you-- becuase racism doesn't exist! it's just a conspiracy theory we dems have.

i don't dicsuss 'issues that matter' with you because you proved long ago that your idea of a discussion is barking and screeching tired and discredited lies and propaganda. get a job. get a life.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 4:03 PM | Report abuse

I applaud Ken Mehlman for pulling the ad, regardless of his reasons why.

Although how Ken can claim that the ad was done by someone independent of the RNC and also claim that it was his authority that had the ad pulled strikes me as a bit weak logically. Either the people who put the ad together are independent and therefore you have no control over them, or they aren't independent and you have enough to control to make them pull the ad.

But whatever. I applaud him for doing the right thing, no matter what caused him to do so.

Posted by: J. Crozier | October 25, 2006 4:00 PM | Report abuse

"Just like with Allen. you paint him with a broad brush because he called a darker skinned person a macaca."

How clueless are you? If he had been white he wouldn't have called him 'macaca'.

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 4:00 PM | Report abuse

And good LORD, zouky. Even you have to realize that Allen would never have used the word "macaca" to reference a white-skinned person. To think otherwise is just plain silly.

Posted by: dc voter | October 25, 2006 3:59 PM | Report abuse

So, Ken M. just announced on CNN that he is pulling the ad. (Sorry, bhoomes.) Meanwhile, our president is slipping deeper and deeper into delusions. First he claims he is not on a "stay the course" policy (Eugene Robinson wrote a fantastic piece on this yesterday), and now he says "absolutely, we are winning" in Iraq, at the same time this is happening:
"Bush acknowledged that radical Sunni Muslims, notably a group affiliated with the al-Qaeda terrorist network, have succeeded in igniting a sectarian conflict in which "death squads" made up of members of Iraq's Shiite Muslim majority have retaliated against the Sunni extremists in an escalating cycle of violence." The emperor really has no clothes, and I pray the voters in November send people to the Capitol willing to stop pretending he does.

Posted by: dc voter | October 25, 2006 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Note above, CC just updated the column with a note that Mehlman has pulled the ad. No reason for the pull was provided, however the RNC tried to distance itself from ownership by claiming the ad was run by a committee independent of the RNC. Funny, doesn't the ad say "The RNC is responsible for the contents of this ad."?

Looks like another attempt by the GOP to deny by lie. Do the words "Stay the course" mean anything? Oh, no, they don't anymore.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 3:54 PM | Report abuse

I totally disagree with the racist premise. this ad is using iconic manipulation of known media messages. When I think of Playboy bunnies, I think of small waisted, large busty blond, white women. Granted Playboy employs all color of women but the other desciptions stick. why would I want to confuse my message by changing the icon? why did Webb use a pointy -nosed Jewish looking banker icon with money coming out of his pockets. Was it racism when a Dem did it? Never heard you all say that at the time. no modern professional pol would use overt racism in today's market. It is an american icon which everyone can understand according to their own stereotyping. you see racism because you want to see racism. Just like with Allen. you paint him with a broad brush because he called a darker skinned person a macaca. If that person had been white, would you have reacted the same. would allen? I suspect he would and you wouldn't. there is no other evidence of Allen being any sort of racist and this whole argument shows you don't want to discuss issues that matter. how utterly weak of you. When I say you, you know who you are.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who doubts the racist undertones of the anti-Ford ad is burying his head in the sand. The violent "defense" of "pure Southern womanhood" from "animal lusts" is not that far in the past. In my lifetime an African American teenager was brutally tortured and murdered for "whistling at or openly flirting with" a white woman. Inter-racial marriage was illegal in a number of states well into the 1960s. I can remember many people saying during the 60's Civil Rights struggles, "Yeah, but would you want your sister to marry one?" And that was in New England. This ad certainly conjures images of inter-racial relationships that will be disturbing to many prejudiced people.

Posted by: JimD in FL | October 25, 2006 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Murphy,

I'm not sure attending a Superbowl football party sponsored by Playboy constitutes being "involved" with Playboy bunnies. It is interesting to note that this supposed Playboy Bunny in the ad merely states she met Ford at the party. She doesn't claim anything beyond having met him. And yet, suddenly simply meeting a Playboy bunny implies a low moral standard? The implication is there that a black guy can't just meet a white woman without jumping all over her.

Maybe it is just me, but I don't check out someone's background to verify that they aren't connected to Playboy in any way before I introduce myself to a stranger at a party. (Or at least I didn't used to. I don't get out much anymore.)

That aside, I can see how reasonable people might disagree that the ad is racist. I think that it is because of the history of the state involved, and because to me it strikes me as a coded message. The playful tone of the advertisement is the offline equivalent of using a smiley face :) after bashing someone online.

Unlike some of my peers on this blog though, I'm not hugely shocked and surprised that some people, including some reasonable people like you Murphy, disagree.

I still think the advertisement is pretty sickening, but that's just one man's opinion.

(Thanks for the positive feedback DC Voter)

Posted by: J. Crozier | October 25, 2006 3:46 PM | Report abuse

zouky sez: "WTF, I wouldn't brag about my intellect and other gifts if I had the capabilites that you seem to harbor."

ROTFLMFAO yer a funy sumbeeeich. yu sur dew make mi laf pally wal. make my day - respond to mi sum mor so i cin moc yer stooopid forking asssssss...som mor.

mirrer mirrrer on duh wal, whos duh palourist uf m al

and zouky, whilst yer hear a trollin', i's makin' a hundert and twety-fiv thaosand dolars a yeer - what do you make fer all yer trollin' eferts? (and monopoly mony dont count, pally wal)

Posted by: wtF/queenofkuoz (the anti zouk/bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Zouk,

There you go again, another inflamatory comment:

"Dems believe in war only when they can easily win and don't have to suffer one bit."

Hmm, FDR - WW2, Truman - Korea, Johnson - Vietnam. No suffering in those wars? Easy to win?

Please, can't you keep the rhetoric down?

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Jack sprat could eat no fact:
I suppose a DJI at all time highs is a bad thing for Dems.
I suppose a President who is willing to take measures against terrorists is a bad thing for all-talk Dems.
"We weren't attacked by Iraq, fool." but indeed 75% of the senate voted in favor of bush at the time and then changed their minds when the going got tough. Dems believe in war only when they can easily win and don't have to suffer one bit. Hard to find a war like that. and if you like foolish retorts, (which you clearly do) try:
No plan. No solution.
All pathetic fools who were/are being used by Republicans
At least they are willing to work for their money...unlike Republicans.

A clear demonstration of the intellectual vacuum you Dems inhabit. You must think this is clever because it is clearly not intelligent or pertinant. the witty reparte only goes so far. I understand it is proper for lighweight blogs like this but it defines your lack of purpose in a more sinister way and points to an immature treatment of serious ideas. What's more, you have demonstrated for all to see that your are a nitwit and can't string two ideas together in comprehensible way.
I am adding you to the moonbat list to be ignored in the future. But I am sure drindl, JEP, FB et. al. will gladly add you to the mutual admiration society. all you need is a few talking points and a bevy of insults. no brains required. you should fit right in.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Zouk,

Of course Steele is going to get a lot of black votes, which is frankly the reason you predict he'll win. (He won't, but it will be close). But they will vote for Steele for the same reason some (small percentage) of whites will vote against Ford. Given Corker's liberal positions on several issues, they wouldn't normaly vote for him, given another choice. But they see this as a "lesser of evils".

I agree, most people vote thier interest, some straight line party. An ad like this is designed to appeal to the base, the straight line voters, and more importantly it's designed to get them to actually vote. Do you really think the "let Canada deal with Korea" line in the ad is a motivator line? Of course not, it's designed to try to soften the upcoming blow, the punch line. Why was the white woman the last person to speak? Why was she blond? Why was she so pale? You know the answer to that as well as I do.

As a political ad, it's brilliant, well done, well scripted, good acting, etc. As an example of GOP willingness to say anything, do anything to keep power, it's shamefull. But Mehlman doesn't care about that. He's trying to stir the pot, get the base riled up because he knows he's likely to lose the swing voters so he has to get the base out in droves. The backlash of this commercial will show when the Dem base comes out in droves also and the swing voters go Democratic. The blogs around the net just on this ad are quite extrodinary right now, where there a few dozen comments on a blog, now there are hundreds, mostly against the ad, even by Rep's.

I understand you can't "denounce" the ad, that would be seen as a weakness, the ultimate GOP sin, but as least acknowledge the obviousness of the racism. To do otherwise dishonors your alleged commitment to colorblindness.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Jack Sprat said "Are you serious? Look at the trade deficit. Price of gas recently? How about that budget surplus? Oooops."

While I agree with your premise, I find some of your supporting data to be, uh, unsupportive. I bought gas 4 hours ago for $1.89 / gallon. Ok, it was Ethanol, but none-the-less, that is CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP. If you want to talk about the economy being in the tank, talk about flat wages, trade deficits, a bearish housing market, etc.

Posted by: bsimon | October 25, 2006 3:33 PM | Report abuse

hey drindl - you said r's are "animals." i didn't know that amoebae were animals.

Posted by: wtF/queenofkuoz (the anti zouk/bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 3:32 PM | Report abuse


"Yes, ma'am, I was there," Ford tells a reporter. "I like football, and I like girls and I don't--I don't have any uh, no qualms about it."

HE'S GOT MY VOTE!

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 3:31 PM | Report abuse

KY-06 guy.

Not only are you SO wrong that you might be shocked to hear what I do for a living. I'll give you a hint: help minorities. SHOCKER!

Get back in your racist neocon den of iniquity that you crawled out of.

Posted by: F&B | October 25, 2006 3:29 PM | Report abuse

"these r's are vicious and dangerous animals." cept fer zouky/bhoomes - hees purfect - just assk him/her/it. after, that is, he consorts wid his mirrer-mirrer-on-teh-wal whossss the palourist troll of em al...

Posted by: wtF/queenofkuoz (the anti zouk/bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

'Tennesseeans who have issues with Mr. Ford's race (and it is safe to presume that includes a small, but perhaps significant number who normally vote Democrat) '

where do these morons come from? those who have isssues with mr. ford's race are dems?

denial, denial, denial. pathetic. the so-called conservative movement is nothing but mass psychoses.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

bhoomes -- Attacking RMill for factually correcting you is just sad. If you want to argue this add isn't racist that's your business, although that simply shows that you're either stupid (which I don't believe) or that you ultimately are willing to at least countenance others racism. The disclaimer on the add stipulates that the RNC is responsible for the content.

Now, is that a conspiracy by the "liberal" media too?

If you advocate smaller government, lower taxes, and the imposition of certain social norms (no gay marriage, no abortion, teach creationism, etc.) then run on those issues. Maybe the American people will agree, maybe they won't. But this kind of ridiculous race-baiting and wedge-issue campaigning does nothing but a disservice to the country.

Posted by: Colin | October 25, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Greg-G,

The NJ Supreme Court opinion will reach far beyond NJ. Several states, such as Virginia, have related proposals on the ballots. This opinion will turn out the evangelical base like nothing else. This opinion from NJ is nothing short of disasterous for the Democrats.

Posted by: Zathras | October 25, 2006 3:24 PM | Report abuse

You know I think Greg is onto something. Maybe if all the closeted gay men in the republican party could get married and have a home life, they might not be obssessing about other people's sex lives all the time.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 3:21 PM | Report abuse

then why won't black Ds vote automatically for Steele. People vote their own interests. If ford happens to be black it is not coincidental that he is also liberal in a conservative state. you can't have it both ways. Rednecks are bigots and Blacks are wise doesn't follow logically. But then coming from a Dem , I wouldn't expect a logical approach.

Notice the intellectual polemic of your Dem friends above who find themselves outrageously funny. If you think this is worthy of humor, then I suppose you will also fall for the empty policies of the left.

WTF, I wouldn't brag about my intellect and other gifts if I had the capabilites that you seem to harbor. You seem to be from the shallow end of the pond from all evidence I can gather here. Is this just more envy from a Dem. too bad you can't start a big government program to redistribute intellect. you sure could use some.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 3:21 PM | Report abuse

"War - ugly situation, let's make the best of it. we were attacked, cutting and runnning doesn't solve anything, it only makes it worse."

We weren't attacked by Iraq, fool.

"Economy - are you serious. Pick up a newspaper."

Are you serious? Look at the trade deficit. Price of gas recently? How about that budget surplus? Oooops.

"terrorism - do you want to fight it or just give up and offer them full citizenship"

No plan. No solution.

"racism - condi rice, colin powell, michael steele. all the color talk comes from Ds. Rs don't care about color and want to treat everyone the same. no special treatment is anathema to Dems."

All pathetic fools who were/are being used by Republicans.

"Immigration - Dems want to open the border wider that it is now. then raise taxes to pay for it all."

At least they are willing to work for their money...unlike Republicans.

"Pedophilia - Rs rid themselves of scandal plauged members, Dems promote them to Senate leader."

Republicans get rid of their scandals ONLY when it's politically expedient.

LIKE I SAID, DENIAL, DENIAL, DENIAL.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 3:19 PM | Report abuse

What an overreaction by all of you (and by your MSM puppetmasters).

I generally don't think satirical ads are all that effective to begin with, especially this one with its subject matter. That said, here's my two cents:

1. Tennesseeans who have issues with Mr. Ford's race (and it is safe to presume that includes a small, but perhaps significant number who normally vote Democrat) weren't and aren't going to vote for him anyway. They will vote for Corker or not vote at all, and that is the truth in a nutshell. This ad will not make a difference as it relates to that fact, so deal with it.

2. The sense of "outrage" by the mainstream media is appalling. Chris Matthews last night looked absolutely ridiculous discussing this...about as bad as when he shouted down Dennis Prager (a Jew) and implied that Prager was an anti-semite!

One of my favorite bloggers was not far off when he said:

"Whites who proclaim their anti-white feelings don't really care much about blacks or other minorities, pro or con. What they care about is achieving social superiority over other whites by demonstrating their exquisite racial sensitivity and their aristocratic insouciance about any competitive threats posed by racial preferences.

To these whites, minorities are just useful pawns in the great game of clawing your way to the top of the white status heap. Which, when you come right down to it, is the only game in town."

This is all this "issue" is about.

Posted by: KY-6 Guy | October 25, 2006 3:19 PM | Report abuse

hey wtf... love your addition to the board... remember that story 'flowers for algernon' which became the movie 'charley'? they're kind of like the 'before' charley...

and dc voter, i can guarantee you everything in that ad is exactly what was intended. if that scares you, it should. these r's are vicious and dangerous animals.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I heard it when he said it. Yeah! I believe Ken Mehlman.

While there is the so-called "Firewall" in place, as the Chairman of the RNC, he has the authority and the responsibility for its conduct.

You seem to think your little condescending snipes have some real effect on my life as you continually use them. I can't remember ever sinking to that level with anyone here. I provide facts and figures and generally, when I offer my opinion, it is done in context of the thread or I point out and apologize if I go off base.

You may also think that because I respond, you have me where you want me. I find you neither humorous, thought provoking or worthy of personal retort. But in certain cases, where obvious prevarication is taking place, I respond to set the record straight, at least as I see it.

On a matter as deplorable as this, leaving the charge unanswered is nearly as much a crime. You just happened to be in the way at the time.

Posted by: RMill | October 25, 2006 3:16 PM | Report abuse

Just the headline of this post alone is R-E-D-I-C-U-L-O-U-S.

Posted by: F&B | October 25, 2006 3:13 PM | Report abuse

"there are very few americans left around who really care about the color of someone's skin"

Now, Zouk, really. You should be ashamed. You know as well as I that's not true, and saying that is deliberate attempt to both distract and antagonize at the same time. Nice try.

As a white male married to a black woman living in Virginia, with two mixed race children, I will tell you there are plenty of people who still have issues about race and are more than willing to capitalize on the issue for political gain. I see it all too often. An upper south state like Tennessee is sure to have quite a number of "old school" voters who will not like Ford because of his race, but will never say so in public.

Of course there are people who did NOT see the racism in the ad, both Rep's and Dem's. That's both good and bad, but those viewers were not the targets of that portion of the ad. Do you really think there's not a significant percentage of Tennessee voters who will be unable to vote for Ford for no other reason than he's black? Of course there is, and with the election so close, that 2-3% could make the difference for the GOP.

On the other hand, I suspect the turnout of voter's angered by such ad's will be even greater. Right now there's a lull, a flattening of emotions as voters calm down for a week, thinking things through a bit, thus the tightening of the races. But that last week, when the absolute worse will come out about everyone in both parties, the anger will return in full force and the GOP will be the ones who suffer the most as the public remembers who fed the fires of anger.

Posted by: BlueDog | October 25, 2006 3:12 PM | Report abuse

"racism is just so damn funny... lynching too. ask george allen."

Yeah, just like the word "macaca".

Hahahahahaha

P.S. I just made that word up. Seriously.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 3:12 PM | Report abuse

I should say, the majority of NJ voters actually support *gay* marriage.

Well, maybe Mehlman can stop running these nasty ads about sex lives and head over to Jersey to get married now...along with Foley, Drier, Craig and all of the other upstanding evangelicals and right wingers.

Posted by: Greg-G | October 25, 2006 3:11 PM | Report abuse

"Spratt: Tell you what smart guy, list all of the books you have read in the last six months and I will do likewise. Let's see who is the most erudite and well read?"

ROTFLMFAO now he wants two have a readin' con test. kinda like shrub this summer, no. "most erudite and well read" - good god, this is the funniest sheeeit i've ever seen.

when yer through, why not start up uh spellings contest two. or a palour contest to see who is the palourest of them all. I kin sea it noww: mirrer, mirrer on the wal, whost is the palourist of thim al. i bet he got palour from al hissssss erudition editions of the readers digesters' condensd zouk-books.

zouky sez: i is smartr then u dems cus i reads and i can spell palour and erudite and other bigg wurds like zouk/bhoomes and besides i aint gots a life so i si will bea a pathetical troll

bwahahahahahahahahahahah

Posted by: wtF | October 25, 2006 3:10 PM | Report abuse

racism is just so damn funny... lynching too. ask george allen.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 3:10 PM | Report abuse

"Spratt: Tell you what smart guy, list all of the books you have read in the last six months and I will do likewise. Let's see who is the most erudite and well read?"

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

You can't even read (and spell) my name right. "The Complete Anthology of Dr. Suess" won't cut it, fool.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 3:09 PM | Report abuse

I don't think the NJ SC ruled in favor of gay marriage. They ordered the state legislature to grant gays their rights in either the form of marriage or civil unions. And the legislature has 180 days to act.

So I don't think this will have much impact on the election. Corzine, Menendez and Kean all oppose gay marriage and I believe all three support civil unions. Polls in NJ, however, show that a majority of the public supports marriage.

Posted by: Greg-G | October 25, 2006 3:08 PM | Report abuse

As an "expatriate" southerner, I've never had much hope for this as a win for the Dems, because I knew this shoe would drop eventually. Even without this ad, too many Tenn.whites will tell pollsters they're voting for Ford and then go behind the curtain and vote Corker. And they wonder why they rank 47th in everything...

Posted by: Cryfire | October 25, 2006 3:07 PM | Report abuse

I found the Ad humerous, and if your only beef is with the "playboy" girl then you have no sense of humor.

Posted by: Squirt | October 25, 2006 3:05 PM | Report abuse

The GOP base is motivated now. NJ made sure of that.

Posted by: Zathras | October 25, 2006 3:05 PM | Report abuse

RMILL: Glad to see you got off early from your accounting job. You bean counters never get enough credit for keeping the books balanced. Just a little advice, stick to counting beans, you are a little over your head in the political arena. PS: ken Mehlman was the one who said he had no authority to have the add pulled, maybe he's lying but I doubt it, you are just wrong again.

Posted by: bhoomes | October 25, 2006 3:05 PM | Report abuse

J. Crozier, thanks for a most direct and articulate explanation for those unable to understand why the ad in TN plays to racist fears and ignorance. The idea that any political arm could sit in a room and strategize this ad scares the living hell out of me. And for those who say the ad is "color blind" and not racist? I do not believe that is the case; I believe the marketers knew exactly what they were doing. But, for the sake of argument, the idea that the developers of the ad did NOT know what they were doing scares me all the more. To advertise in this way without any awareness of the implications this ad would suggest smacks of ignorance of history of the state (and a fairly recent history at that). Either way, stomachs are turned. Hopefully this will generate as much backlash as success.

Posted by: dc voter | October 25, 2006 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Oh I think the trolls still think Saddam and Osama are the same person. You knnow, names are kindof alike, hurts their heads to try to keep stuff like that in their heads. You have to repeat a lot, like Karl and Rush, to help them keep all the complicated stuff straight. Ya gotta catapult the propaganda. In the meantime, there's another group who isn't buying the president's new cut and run proposal--Iraqis.

'Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki lashed out at the United States Wednesday, saying his popularly elected government would not bend to U.S.-imposed benchmarks and timelines and criticizing a U.S. and Iraqi military operation in a Shiite slum of Baghdad that left at least five people dead and 20 wounded.

Maliki's comments came a day after U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said the prime minister had agreed to timelines for accomplishing several critical goals, including developing plans to deal with militias, amend the constitution and equitably distribute Iraq's oil revenues.'

See, the Iraqis think that we're their personal police force and we're supposed to spend all of our country's money keeping them from killing each other.

How do you trolls like having your president kicked in the teeth like this? How do you like knowing US troops are getting blown away by these ungrateful creeeps? You like it when the US is humiliated like this? Oh, I guess so... I forgot yourepugs are heavy into S&M.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 3:02 PM | Report abuse

War: in denial
Economy: in denial
Terrorism: in denial
Racism: in denial
Immigration: in denial
Pedophilia: in denial


Let's look at the reality of the situation instead of the empty rhetoric.

War - ugly situation, let's make the best of it. we were attacked, cutting and runnning doesn't solve anything, it only makes it worse.
Economy - are you serious. Pick up a newspaper
terrorism - do you want to fight it or just give up and offer them full citizenship
racism - condi rice, colin powell, michael steele. all the color talk comes from Ds. Rs don't care about color and want to treat everyone the same. no special treatment is anathema to Dems.
Immigration - Dems want to open the border wider that it is now. then raise taxes to pay for it all.
Pedophilia - Rs rid themselves of scandal plauged members, Dems promote them to Senate leader.

Can any of you Dems make an argument based on fact? Is name calling and obfuscation your only method? If you ever come up with a viable policy that doesn't give the farm away, I'd be interested in hearing about it.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 3:01 PM | Report abuse

J. Crozier,

In all fairness, had Ford not been involved with playboy bunnies, this wouldn't have been a feature of the ad. I wonder how many of the bunnies at the party Ford went to were white? Does that make him an enforcer of your "age-old" stereotype theory?

It's just your "vanilla" (forgive the pun) ad reference to shallow morals. No doubt the lady's double appearance is the lasting image to be taken from the ad as voters head towards the booths.

I have no doubt that had the bunny been a black woman, everyone would be hysterical over this presumed stereotyping of black women as unclean, or some such nonsense.

Posted by: murphy | October 25, 2006 3:01 PM | Report abuse

So, are the Repubs motivated to vote this year? Above, a claim is made that their base will turn out even more than in 2004. Who believes it?

Posted by: bsimon | October 25, 2006 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"Ok, Einstein. Do you think it's because cavorting with playboy bunnies is not a good image for politicians?"

Fine. Why did the "bunny" have to be white?

Also, the RNC is trying to slander a politician about Playboy bunnies, with Mark Foley, et al, running around? Sorry, couldn't resist. Unless you'd rather I bring up Hastert who covered up for Foley. That' a fine example of a Republican.

You really are clueless.

"You guys should learn how to laugh at something, even if it polks fun at your candidate,..."

If I want bad satire, I'll watch SNL, not a political ad.

P.S.
"polks"?
Education. It's a very good thing.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Chris, you realy need to grow a backbone. Call a spade... a spade... for once!

I realize you're trying to stay neutral but I really wonder how you would have reported about the civil rights, womens rights and other freedom movements. Your tap dancing around everything that isn't CW yet makes me cringe.

When it comes to racism in America it is still here. Mehlman already admitted that the GOP did it in the past. Clearly they are doing this again. They'll do anything to hold onto this seat.

Posted by: marcus b | October 25, 2006 2:58 PM | Report abuse

"Ok, Einstein. Do you think it's because cavorting with playboy bunnies is not a good image for politicians?"

Fine. Why did the "bunny" have to be white?

Also, the RNC is trying to slander a politician about Playboy bunnies, with Mark Foley, et al, running around? Sorry, couldn't resist. Unless you'd rather I bring up Hastert who covered up for Foley. That' a fine example of a Republican.

You really are clueless.

"You guys should learn how to laugh at something, even if it polks fun at your candidate,..."

If I want bad satire, I'll watch SNL, not a political ad.

P.S.
"polks"?
Education. It's a very good thing.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 2:58 PM | Report abuse

I think Rove has finally over played his hand. The campaigns he is running now are so overtally racist and so obvious in their preying on people's fears that it is turning the stomach's of just about everyone. Here, it is *the* topic of conversation and even the most die-hard conservatives are flat embarrassed. Even Chris Matthews condemned the Tenn ads as racist. Maybe, after all, we can elect a Democratic majority and put a stop to the insanity of the Bush years. I have hope once again.

Posted by: MikeB | October 25, 2006 2:56 PM | Report abuse

palour?

better yet: kinda like zouky/bhoomes and trolling for a (wingnut) thesarus

yo, zouky/bhoomes - wtf is palour?

my guess is that u jsut tapppppp at the kyebrd and hop somthang coms outt...smthjang cleaver laike palour is a s palour does

Posted by: queenofkuoz (the anti bhoomes) | October 25, 2006 2:55 PM | Report abuse

The GOP's October surprise has occurred. Gay marriage has been legalized in NJ.

Posted by: Zathras | October 25, 2006 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Well, it's now official. Since my Republican friends have long trained me in how to correctly interpret calls for withdrawals from Iraq (cut-and-run, treason, America-hating, weak, etcetra), I'm here to report that one more group "does not support the troops" (tm). And that group is called...

The troops themselves.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N25371819.htm

Tell me now, how did our Armed Forces come to hate the United States so much? Tell me. Try not to use the term "freedom fries" in your answer. You people sound stupid enough as it is.

And while you're at it, give a nice thanks to the mainstream media for keeping these guys (and women) so brainwashed for so long. It sounds like they have just discovered that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 after all. Way to go, MSM pigs.

Posted by: B2O | October 25, 2006 2:53 PM | Report abuse

I apologize for the double post. It was accidental.

Posted by: J. Crozier | October 25, 2006 2:51 PM | Report abuse

'ack Spratt: Sorry I don't spell check for you but this blog is about ideas' -- then i guess you better leave because all you've got is tired talking points and propaganda.

'but as you will soon find out in TN and MD, it is the message that counts and not the palour.'

not sure if that's supposed to be 'pallor' --the trolls are incredibly illiterate, on every board I go to [hmmmm] but the message is racist, pure and simple. you little wingers are in a permanent state of reality denial.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Murphy,

To recognize the ad as the race baiting it is, you have to look at the history of the state involved a little bit.

Historically, one of the big selling points of the Republican "Southern Strategy" (and segregation itself for that matter) was that black men were animals, unable to control their sexual lusts for the pure white women. Left to their own devices, black men would defile innocent white women right and left.

This ad speaks to the residuals of that disgusting marketing of the past. This was an actual spoken argument a few decades ago. Now, with mainstream society rightly having progressed beyond that point, racism has to be more subtle or it causes a backlash. Racism doesn't have to be blatant "black people are animals" to be racist. Indeed, far more dangerous are perpetuated stereotypes about minorities. They do a lot more damage because they are harder to recognize, point at, and criticize.

It is a tacky ad that will be, nevertheless, quite effective. A naked woman of ANY color tends to stick out in peoples' minds, particularly if they are seen multiple times (twice for each time they see the ad in this case).

Good marketing is memorable. It stays in peoples minds, both concious and subconcious. This ad, provided no backlash happens, will likely move the polling one or two percentage points, which in a race as close as this one could make all the difference.

Posted by: J. Crozier | October 25, 2006 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Spratt: Tell you what smart guy, list all of the books you have read in the last six months and I will do likewise. Let's see who is the most erudite and well read?

Posted by: bhoomes | October 25, 2006 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Jack Spratt

"Why would the RNC pay money for an ad to show an actress pretending to be a bunny with a crush on Ford. Riddle me that, Batboy."

Ok, Einstein. Do you think it's because cavorting with playboy bunnies is not a good image for politicians?

And spare me the bait-and-switch tactic of bringing up examples like Foley to ask what a good image of republicans is, or some nonsense like that.

You guys should learn how to laugh at something, even if it polks fun at your candidate, rather than pulling the "Help, help, I'm being repressed" card. Talk about WHINERS.

Posted by: murphy | October 25, 2006 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Better to be on the lookout than to look the other way or stick your head in the sand.

The reason racism is in the nooks and crannies is because that is exactly where it still hides. You can't get elected to Congress wearing white sheets anymore.

And if the Republicans would stop injecting class and race into everything from their platform and policies, Democrats wouldn't have to continually beat it back.

Yes, and please keep trotting out Lincoln because it is so relevant to the state of politics today. Because that is all Republicans have to stand on in matters of race relations, "The Party of Lincoln".

Why is it that African Americans vote Democrat 90% of the time? Is it your assertion that they just too stupid to realize how much the GOP has helped them. They forgot Lincoln was a Republican? Or is it because of condecending attitudes towards African Americans espoused in the policies of Republican leaders and the feeling they (the GOP)just don't get who Black people are.

They say Bush got elected because he made Americans feel like they could sit down and have a beer with him.

Table for one please! I know no one, African American or otherwise who is bellying up to the bar now.

Posted by: RMill | October 25, 2006 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Murphy,

To recognize the ad as the race baiting it is, you have to look at the history of the state involved a little bit.

Historically, one of the big selling points of the Republican "Southern Strategy" (and segregation itself for that matter) was that black men were animals, unable to control their sexual lusts for the pure white women. Left to their own devices, black men would defile innocent white women right and left.

This ad speaks to the residuals of that disgusting marketing of the past. This was an actual spoken argument a few decades ago. Now, with mainstream society rightly having progressed beyond that point, racism has to be more subtle or it causes a backlash. Racism doesn't have to be blatant "black people are animals" to be racist. Indeed, far more dangerous are perpetuated stereotypes about minorities. They do a lot more damage because they are harder to recognize, point at, and criticize.

It is a tacky ad that will be, nevertheless, quite effective. A naked woman of ANY color tends to stick out in peoples' minds, particularly if they are seen multiple times (twice for each time they see the ad in this case).

Good marketing is memorable. It stays in peoples minds, both concious and subconcious. This ad, provided no backlash happens, will likely move the polling one or two percentage points, which in a race as close as this one could make all the difference.

Posted by: J. Crozier | October 25, 2006 2:47 PM | Report abuse

"you Dems just can't help but find racism in every nook and cranny you investigate. Is this your only way of trying to win an election?"

Who aired the ad, you NUMBSKULL!?!?

Typical Republican "stay-the-course" mentality.

War: in denial
Economy: in denial
Terrorism: in denial
Racism: in denial
Immigration: in denial
Pedophilia: in denial

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 2:47 PM | Report abuse

I suppose the ethics of a candidate are important to local voters in TN. Have you been there? I would be interested in hearing from a TN native. I don't know much about ford except I did see him crash the press conference and it seemed unprofessional. Of course the Rs are going to paint him as pro-abortion, free-spending, anti-war, sexed up and liberal. Are these characterizations completely wrong? they sell in Nashville.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 2:46 PM | Report abuse

stupid is as stupid does...or: spelling is as spelling does - kinda like zouky/bhoomes and trolling for a (wingnut) dictionary

Posted by: queenofzouk | October 25, 2006 2:41 PM | Report abuse

If TN voters weren't keen on having a black male as thier senator, they'd vote against him regardless of whether the RNC became desperate or not. Only a brainless imbecile (the majority of whom are in the GOP base) ostrich-in-the-sand voter would think this was not racist. Ford needed to be about 9 plus points ahead of Corker to avoid the Bradley effect and win but having it so tight makes it to me, in a state like TN, to make it less likely Ford could win. No reasonable person would even listen to the RNC.

Posted by: Kinky is not good | October 25, 2006 2:40 PM | Report abuse

couldn't have a good debate without KOZ jumping in, now, could we?

KOZ: Perhaps you can tell us what "issue or idea" the blond girl discusses in the ad in question?

Posted by: Loudon Voter | October 25, 2006 2:39 PM | Report abuse

you Dems just can't help but find racism in every nook and cranny you investigate. Is this your only way of trying to win an election? Ever heard of an issue or an idea? If you abandoned all the race and class warfare you espouse, what would you have left? - zilch! there are very few americans left around who really care about the color of someone's skin, except you boneheads who want to get black votes on the cheap. but as you will soon find out in TN and MD, it is the message that counts and not the palour. how will you explain when MD elects a black Senator and TN rejects one? this is going to be funny to see you worm your way out of this one without mentioning your terrible policies and agenda. ever consider that race had nothing to do with it. Of course not, that would not appeal to your twisted viewpoint. Remember the Republican party was elected to power in its 4th year and freed the slaves shortly after that. Meanwhile the Dems live on a diet of envy and avarice.

Posted by: kingofzouk | October 25, 2006 2:36 PM | Report abuse

First the add is an independent expeniture which means Corker and the RNC have know authority to have the add pulled

Watch again bhoomes

The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertisement. Paid for by the Republican National Committee and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

I know they talk fast at the end and the lettering is kind of faint but c'mon.

Posted by: RMill | October 25, 2006 2:35 PM | Report abuse

bhoomes: This discussion has nothing to do with ads about "Governor Bush." Please stay on topic. If you have nothing pertinent to add, try another board.

Posted by: Loudon Voter | October 25, 2006 2:32 PM | Report abuse

"If you want to talk about a race baiting add, how about the 2000 radio add y the NCAAP that all but accused Governor Bush of inciting Byrd's horrible murder."

Give me a link to the "ad" and I will render an opinion.

P.S.
Education. It's a good thing.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Breaking news!

NJ Supreme Court rules that state constitution does not bar same sex marriage - and unlike MA, the state does not have a residency requirement. . .can you imagien what this will do to the Senate race there?

Posted by: star11 | October 25, 2006 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Wasn't the New Jersey Gay Marriage decision supposed to be announced by 3?

Posted by: Chris | October 25, 2006 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Jack Spratt: Sorry I don't spell check for you but this blog is about ideas and only the truly stupid get hung up in the spelling. If you want to talk about a race baiting add, how about the 2000 radio add y the NCAAP that all but accused Governor Bush of inciting Byrd's horrible murder. Now that was dispicable, but let me guess, creepy people like you don't have a problem when the race baiting is on your side.

Posted by: bhoomes | October 25, 2006 2:27 PM | Report abuse

"Race-baiting? Are you guys serious? Now, admitedly I only watched the ad twice, but I didn't see anything other than an actress pretending to be a bunny with a crush on Ford."

Another idiot. Why would the RNC pay money for an ad to show an actress pretending to be a bunny with a crush on Ford. Riddle me that, Batboy.

"Maybe that's because I'm color-blind."

People who say this are not color-blind. They are racists in sheep's clothing.

"I can't believe that people are so willing to call every little nuance racism...it trivializes instances of REAL racism that still occur."

This IS an instance of REAL RACISM, bubblehead.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and someday, when the D's run ads that are as equally low down and dirty and appeal to the lowest common denominator: look back on this ad when you wonder why the 'tone' in Washington has changed. All you need to do is say "I'm not responsible" and your party can commission whatever character assassination you can imagine.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | October 25, 2006 2:22 PM | Report abuse

I thought the part about "We can rely on Canada to take care of North Korea" (or whatever they said) was unintentionally hilarious. We'd certainly have been better off if Canada had been involved. At least somebody would have been doing SOMETHING rather than the NOTHING we've seen over and over from this administration.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | October 25, 2006 2:17 PM | Report abuse

bhoomes wrote: "First the add is an independent expeniture which means Corker and the RNC have know authority to have the add pulled. 2nd, I saw the add before all the commentary started and i didn;t realize it rascist. So maybe the racist are the ones protesting to much, I don't have a problem with white women being with black men, Do You? That's why I did not pick up on it supposely being racist because to me its no big deal who dates who."

Since we know you're not ignorant -- which is what such silly comments about the ability to control this ad and about interracial dating would otherwise indicate -- you must be nothing but a troll.

Posted by: Loudoun Voter | October 25, 2006 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Bhoomes County,

Pfffffffffffffft. You're an idiot.

First of all, if you try to have the cojones to call someone "sanctemonious", learn how to spell it correctly. Secondly, perhaps you don't have a problem with black men being with white women (or the converse), but the Republican party does have a problem with it (at least in their rhetoric). They probably have "jungle fever" behind closed doors. The point of this "ad" is to motivate their base by using prejudicial imagery. It's an old trick (i.e. Willie Horton) and pretending that it's anything other than that makes you look obtuse.

Posted by: Jack Sprat | October 25, 2006 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Race-baiting? Are you guys serious? Now, admitedly I only watched the ad twice, but I didn't see anything other than an actress pretending to be a bunny with a crush on Ford.

Maybe that's because I'm color-blind. I can't believe that people are so willing to call every little nuance racism...it trivializes instances of REAL racism that still occur.

Perhaps people are suggesting that no white playboy bunny would be caught with a black guy like Ford, only black playboy bunnies? Get a life, people.

Posted by: murphy | October 25, 2006 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I don't know how the rest of the dems on this list feel, but I feel the momentum slipping away. . .as distasteful as this ad is, the unfortunate truth is that there are an awful lot of people who will buy into it. it is a shame that a large number of people will buy into ads like this.

As much as I would like to believe that people are getting smarter and less likely to buy into these ads, I don't think that is happening. Any chance this could this backfire on the Republicans, even in Tennesee?

Posted by: star11 | October 25, 2006 2:11 PM | Report abuse

Quote from bhoomes:

"You dems have a lot more to worry about than Tenn, like holding onto Michigan where Stabenow has only a 5% lead and losing ground everyday..."

Oh REALLY, a 5% lead? Hmmm, that's funny. Rasmussen shows her with a stable 16 point advantage.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/October%202006/MichiganSenate1022.htm

The republicans are scared and desperate, and they should be. If they can't hold onto the freakin' Senate Majority Leader's seat in Tennessee, they're in for a pounding on election night.

http://www.pohlitics.com

Posted by: Zack Pohl | October 25, 2006 2:10 PM | Report abuse

"I propose that the DNC runs ads about how Ken Mehlman visits gay bars throughout the metro area."

Shhhh. You're making it hard for the MSM to help them the GOP keep their hypocritical cover. Remember, that's the anti- Gay Agenda (tm) party. You don't want the evangelicals to realize how laughably they are being used do you?

Do not speak of it again. Ken Mehlman is an upstanding, Christian, heterosexual GOP leader. At least on weeknights. Besides, you don't have pictures. (Do you?)

Posted by: B2O | October 25, 2006 2:08 PM | Report abuse

The question: is it racist? The answer: of course it is.

Will it work? that depends upon whether there is a majority of Tennesseans who will vote for a black man. This ad is simply straight forward, hey, this is a black guy, remember? You gonna vote for this guy? Like it or not, this ad has turned that election into a question for Tennesee: This election is about your willingness to vote for a black man. The subtext of that (in my opinion) is an acknowlegement that this Ford fellow ran a great campaign, and only calling him a @#@#@% outright will get people to vote against him.

We have to wait and see how far Tennesee has advanced, this election is now about them; it is no longer about Ford and Corker.

Posted by: Kam | October 25, 2006 2:07 PM | Report abuse

Two points my sanctemonious friends, First the add is an independent expeniture which means Corker and the RNC have know authority to have the add pulled. 2nd, I saw the add before all the commentary started and i didn;t realize it rascist. So maybe the racist are the ones protesting to much, I don't have a problem with white women being with black men, Do You? That's why I did not pick up on it supposely being racist because to me its no big deal who dates who. People who see everything in color and are quickto yell racist are normally the ones who are racist. I am voting for Blackwell, who thelast time I checked was black. How come you don't support black candidates like Blackwell and Steele, Because deep down you libs feel superior to african-americans, admit it bigots and homphobes.

Posted by: bhoomes | October 25, 2006 2:04 PM | Report abuse

My impressions:

1. It's clever and entertaining, from a completely amoral (ie, Republican values) perspective.

2. It's race-baiting, of course. Hopefully it will only bring out the white women vote. He is a handsome guy after all. And it will turn out the moderates who are just sick of that outdated backwater Jim Crow crap. Yes, even in Tennessee. Many people really don't want to be seen as rednecks. They will anti-identify (if that's not a term it should be) with the message.

3. The most heinous part about it is actually the continued LIE that the GOP is selling its flock: that the inheritance tax will ever affect them in any way shape or form (well, 99.9% of them I mean).

4. It just telegraphs loud and clear to voters how desperate and off-issues the Republican party has to get these days. People aren't stupid.

Conclusion: It's a big ad buy that will backfire, slightly.

Posted by: B2O | October 25, 2006 2:03 PM | Report abuse

I like funny, clever political ads that smart people with tons of integrity produce and put on the air!

(Does this qualify as satire? Because if the ad is "satire" we've apparently moved that bar pretty low.)

Posted by: adam | October 25, 2006 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Youtube is great, especially during election time. We can see all the foolishness that's going on across the country. There's an ad in Illinois that ran morphing an opponent from a normal size person to his current size, then commenting on his fatness. I still haven't found it online, but so far that takes the cake.

What's been the dirtiest ad race in America this year?

Posted by: Mike T | October 25, 2006 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Richard b. Simon -

what you're referring to is 'semiotics' which is the tenet that nothing in an advertisemnt is unitentional. Basically if you get that feeling from an ad, they meant it to be there. Your point about the choice is right. There were at least 5 people sitting in an office debating what color she should be. They probably talked about hitting core demographics and being proactive with the mnessage and chose white to make that contrast.

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 1:55 PM | Report abuse

Why is teh white woman wearing a leash?

Posted by: Bob | October 25, 2006 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I hate to say it, but I think Ford is done. He has run a near-perfect campaign, and we could not have asked for a better candidate. Unfortunately, 51% of Tennesse just won't bite. The only thing that Ford may have going for him on Election Day is that if anyone could turn out the base, it's the Ford family.

Posted by: JD | October 25, 2006 1:51 PM | Report abuse

What is being lost in all this is that Bob Corker is a tax-raising, abortion-loving, illegal-immigrant employer. Bob Corker is a liberal Republican. Or better yet, a Republican liberal. I hope conservatives across the great state of Tennessee recognize the true liberal in this race.

Posted by: Mhi | October 25, 2006 1:50 PM | Report abuse

It's funny as hell. Even my sanctimonious liberal friends laughed their asses off.

Posted by: jimb | October 25, 2006 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Dear God. November 7 can't get here fast enough, can it? How did the state of Congress get this bad? It's embarrassing.

Posted by: dc voter | October 25, 2006 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Bhoomes -it was a simple question, is this ad race-baiting? What in God's name are you talking about - in your opinion, just answer the question. Not once do you even reference the question. Do you ever get sick of yourself?

Posted by: mynamedoesntmatternordoesurs | October 25, 2006 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who has ever met a black person knows this is intentional and racist.

Using the argument that it is "satire" only attempts to gloss over the facts.

My fingers are getting tired retyping factual information to beat back troll spin, but here goes...

Stabenow has an average lead of +11.75% in October and +8.5% over the past two weeks (one poll doesn't make it so bhoomes-wait to look for trends).

Cardin is +5% for the month and +5.67% over past two weeks.

Menendez is +5.71% for the month and +6.5% over past two weeks +5.33% over past week.

Posted by: RMill | October 25, 2006 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Well, if the RNC wants to run an ad about Ford attending a "Playboy party" (or as it was, a Superbowl party sponsored BY Playboy, hardly a party at Hef's mansion), then I propose that the DNC runs ads about how Ken Mehlman visits gay bars throughout the metro area.

That would show Tennessee voters how connected the Republicans are to their "values."

Posted by: Demsin06 | October 25, 2006 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Somewhere in the making of this commercial, the actress was cast to play the part of the "bunny." And the decision had to be made, do we go with a black actress or a white actress?

Typically, black men are cast alongside black women. That's not so much the case anymore.

But the decision had to be made. If the people who made the ad wanted to clearly convey the message that this is about Ford partying with women -- and clearly NOT convey a racist message -- they would have chosen a black actress.

They did not.

They decided to go with the white actress.

Why?

Everything, every image in an ad is there for a reason.

The Republicans took the south by engaging in race-baiting. It's called the "southern strategy." It is no secret.

It's also not much different from the Vice President last week warning that if the Dems were elected, Rangel, Frank, Waxman, and Pelosi -- a black man, a gay man, a Jewish man and an Italian woman (I don't have to tell you the epithets that are meant to come to mind) -- would be in control of key Congressional committees.

Tennessee, after all, was a slave state, a proud member of the Confederacy.

You'd only have to believe that any desperate political entity resorts to desperate measures to see this one coming.

Posted by: Richard B. Simon | October 25, 2006 1:42 PM | Report abuse

'I don't know who will the biggest losers,the dems or Chris and the rest of the liberal MSM who tried to suppress the republican vote with bogus stories.'

You see what I mean? They swallow the propaganda whole. Stupid, stupid people.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 25, 2006 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Bhoomes, that has what to do with this race-baiting ad? Whether Ford wins or loses doesn't change the fundamental un-americanness of this ad, and you know it. What do you feel about the ad? Appropriate? Good for America?

Oh wait, never mind, you think the press is out to get you. You're an out-of-touch barking dog. Amazing how you've been in power for 6 years and yet, we're still to blame for ewverything. People are getting wise to that. They want someone who will do something, instead of pin the excuses on the donkey.

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Tasteless doesn't even begin to cover this ad. My favorite part is Corker condemning it, but saying there is nothing he can do. Uh huh, Mr. Corker, how about you tell Ken Mehlman to pull the ad then explain why you were cited by the government for hiring illegal immigrants.

Posted by: Zach | October 25, 2006 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Ford lost the race when he followed Corker and ambushed him with an interview. Corker got the better of him. You dems have a lot more to worry about than Tenn, like holding onto Michigan where Stabenow has only a 5% lead and losing ground everyday, Kean is ahead in NJ and Steele is even in Maryland. So it really doens't even matter if you should winn Tenn and lose these races. Contrary from the nonsense you may read in Washington Post and NY Times, our base is highly motivated and will turn out in even bigger numbers than 04. I don't know who will the biggest losers,the dems or Chris and the rest of the liberal MSM who tried to suppress the republican vote with bogus stories.

Posted by: bhoomes | October 25, 2006 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Why do you even assk the question, cilizza? Is it race-baiting... in a state where they used to lynch black men for looking at white women? How ugly is this? It really gives me the creeps.

Posted by: drindl | October 25, 2006 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, the intentions are pretty clear here. This is race-baiting. Pretty tasteless.

Posted by: Will | October 25, 2006 1:23 PM | Report abuse

Of course it's racist. The Republican party has invested a great deal of political capital in making voters comfortable with their predjudices in order to vote Republican.
Why else would they make gay marriage the centerpiece of their GOTV in '04 and immigration the center in '06? Fear and divisiveness are all they have.

Posted by: Bobster | October 25, 2006 1:14 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company