(Cross-posted from Teenage Pundit)
The ad parodies several of [Democratic candidate] Ford’s political positions through mock interviews with people defending or agreeing with him. “Terrorists need their privacy,” a woman indignantly insists. “Ford’s right,” says a hunter , “I do have too many guns.” A Wilford Brimley look-alike declares, “Canada can take care of North Korea — they’re not busy.” And a bare-shouldered bimbo squeals, “I met Harold at the Playboy party” — a reference to Playboy’s 2005 Super Bowl bash in Florida, which Ford attended. The ditzy blonde returns at the end to whisper, with a wink, “Harold: call me!” [Source: Boston.com]
What’s the left-wing’s criticism of this ad? That the ad is inaccurate? No. That the ad misrepresents the candidate’s positions? Nope.
The Democrats’ colossal problem with the commercial: the actress playing the model is white, while Ford is black.
Who are the racists here?
It was a witty, entertaining ad — and it promptly had liberals and
Democrats and even the odd Republican screeching about how “racist” it
was. The NAACP issued a press release calling it “racially charged
political propaganda” akin to “The Birth of a Nation,” D. W. Griffith’s paean to the Ku Klux Klan. Salon
described it as an “attempt to inflame white bigotry about interracial
relationships and white fears of black male sexuality.” Vanderbilt
University professor John Geer breathlessly told AP: “I’ve not met any observer who didn’t immediately say, ‘Oh, my gosh!’ It was a race card.” [Source: Boston.com]
By now, I expect most are aware of the controversy surrounding this Tennessee political advertisement. Essentially, the fact that the actress portraying the ditzy Playboy model is white means the Republicans are playing on the (apparently widespread, according to the left?) Southern fears of interracial relationships.
This is complete hogwash. It is a fact that the candidate, in his romping and stomping about town like, well, a young man spoiled with power, attented a Playboy party. It’s a fact that white models were in attendance. What’s the big deal, really?
For Boston.com, Jeff Jacoby sees it my way:
The ad would be just as effective if Ford were white. The Playboy blonde isn’t a coded reference to interracial dating (which, according to the Pew Research Center, most Southern whites don’t oppose anyway). Her presence isn’t a subliminal reminder of Ford’s color. It is a cue that Ford, who campaigns as something of a goody-goody — one of his campaign spots was filmed in a church — may be a little less straitlaced than he lets on. [Source: Boston.com]
The racists in this debate aren’t those who produced the ad, they are those who saw it and immediately thought a white-black relationship is so scandalous and such a big deal that the Republicans HAD to mean something special by it.
If the “bunny” was dark-skinned, I’m sure we’d be hearing about either
- the ad’s implication that all black women are strippers and whores
- the ad’s implication that of course Ford, being a black man, could only have a relationship with another black woman, because the Republicans are racist and don’t believe in interracial relationships
According to Washington NAACP head Hilary Shelton, “It is a powerful innuendo that plays to pre-existing prejudices about
African-American men and white women” [Source: Yahoo].
He’s right, except for one thing – the prejudices belong to the critics, not the advertisers.
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.