Much of the political news over the past few days has centered on John McCain’s ads, “Celeb” and “The One,” that mock Barack Obama by portraying him as an empty suit, and on Obama’s claim that Republicans are trying to scare voters because he “doesn’t look like all those other Presidents on those dollar bills.’’ The New York Times editorial board predictably weighed in on Obama’s behalf, calling the Celeb ad a “racially tinged attack.”

How can this be, since the ad never mentions race, and has nothing to do with race? Because, the Times instructs us, it begins with image of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. The Times recalls an ad that “Republican operatives” ran against Harold Ford when he ran for the Senate in 2006:

That assault, too, began with videos juxtaposing Mr. Ford with young, white women.

The Ford ad is here; you can judge for yourself whether it was racist. (I think that in this context, “racist” can fairly be translated as “effective.”) But does the Times seriously believe that any ad that contains images of both a white woman and a black candidate is racist? (Don’t white women often appear in Obama’s own ads?) That strikes me as a very weird position, which perhaps reveals more about the Times editorialists than about campaign advertising.

In this case, the images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton were chosen because they are instantly-recognizable as “celebs” who are, as the Times puts it, notoriously “bubble-headed” and “publicity-seeking.” So, what if the McCain ad had used exclusively images of African-Americans who are notoriously bubble-headed and publicity-seeking with whom to compare Obama? Nicole Richie, say? In that case, a far more plausible claim could have been made that the ad was racist.

Needless to say, the Times defends Obama’s “dollar bills” line, which was the first injection of race into the campaign, on the risible ground that he was merely “the victim” of a “racial attack.” In the Times’ world, you simply cannot criticize an African-American candidate, or you are a racist. Unless, of course, the African-American is a Republican.

It doesn’t seem, though, that this sort of media instruction has had much effect. Today’s Rasmussen Reports contains these interesting findings:

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of the nation’s voters say they’ve seen news coverage of the McCain campaign commercial that includes images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and suggests that Barack Obama is a celebrity just like them. Of those, just 22% say the ad was racist while 63% say it was not.

I assume those 22% are people who have not actually seen the ad, but are loyal Democrats trying to parrot the party line. More:

However, Obama’s comment that his Republican opponent will try to scare people because Obama does not look like all the other presidents on dollar bills was seen as racist by 53%.

This strikes me as pretty good evidence that Obama will have to campaign on the issues, and that his efforts to distract voters by crying “wolf” on race won’t succeed. (powerline)

Almost all other commenters who aren’t pro Obama are having their comments deleted as well. It’s either spin, like Brazile, or whitewash, like the moderator on Jake’s blog.

Buford Gooch on August 3, 2008 at 2:21 PM

Likewise. Use the word “black” to describe the color of your kettle, and you get deleted there. They seem a little squeamish to me.

Why? Isn’t that why the majority of blacks are supporting him?

Connie on August 3, 2008 at 5:34 PM

Well, the racism of the black community got past the gauntlet of the primary, so now it has gone underground. Against Hillary, a white liberal whose policy positions were virtually identical to Obama’s, he was drawing something like 90% of black votes toward the end.

But in the general election, blacks vote 90% + for any Democrat against any Republican, black, white or blue. So race is off the table for black voters now.

I would have thought that Obama would go to great effort to avoid any discussion of race now, when it cannot possibly help him. He couldn’t get less than 95% of the black vote now if he spit on Jesse Jackson.

Gee ninga, surprised you didn’t call for a permaband on Michael for having the audacity to speak from his heart; for having the audacity to throw political correctness under the bus, and tell it like it is.

Very well stated Michael… For me, it’s obvious that Obama injected the “race card” into his campaign with Hillary, and is doing the same with McCain. The race card is Obama’s number 1 weapon. This man will use every weapon in the Liberal tool chest; lying, cheating, inventing, fabricating, anything to cover up the fact that he is simply not qualified for the job of potus. Running 8-12 years ahead of his time was a serious roll of the dice for Obama and the DNC. When this things over with, he is either President of the United States, or he will be damaged goods for years to come; maybe for the rest of his political years.

I must say this; I was not raised to see black Americans as anything other than Americans with a different skin color than me. For the first time in my life, my vision of black Americans is some what tainted due to the Rev. Wright hatred of the whitey, and the exposure of deep resentment and entitlement held by many black Americans, including Obama.

This is getting hilarious. I’ve been leaving comments over on Jake Tappers ABC blog, and they have been removed within about two minutes of being posted. They are respectful, just not pro Obama. Almost all other commenters who aren’t pro Obama are having their comments deleted as well. It’s either spin, like Brazile, or whitewash, like the moderator on Jake’s blog.

Buford Gooch on August 3, 2008 at 2:21 PM

We have always been at war with Eastasia ~MiniTrue

I wonder how they will spin the VP choice when it comes? Anyone they choose will be eminently more qualified to be POTUS than obama since they will select the person based on actual qualifications, and not skin color, for the job.

pathetic leftists.

wow that was fun I was censord atleast 6 times another poster ‘Joyce’ was censored atleast twice.

Every post was straight and clean, every one. The worst was about censorship, one other (my third) was “Obama will be the best president since since Clinton”

I had a lot of fun discovering the biased and propagandic nature of that site. If you are looking for comedy go have some fun yourself.

VOTE FOR OBAMA OR YOUR’RE A RACIST..

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA THEN YOU ARE A RACIST..

thats it and thats all..

VOTE FOR OBAMA OR YOUR’RE A RACIST..

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA THEN YOU ARE A RACIST..

thats it and thats all..

This is getting hilarious. I’ve been leaving comments over on Jake Tappers ABC blog, and they have been removed within about two minutes of being posted. They are respectful, just not pro Obama. Almost all other commenters who aren’t pro Obama are having their comments deleted as well. It’s either spin, like Brazile, or whitewash, like the moderator on Jake’s blog.

Buford Gooch on August 3, 2008 at 2:21 PM

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/08/pariss-mom-thin.html#comments

Buford Gooch on August 3, 2008 at 2:24 PM

I posted 3 comments at 2:44pm all 3 have been censored (I cannot find them at least).

1) dm I do not remember this one- but it was straight.

2)I heard you censor quickly.

3) Obama will be the best president since Clinton.

It is only natural then that people start wondering if they are just playing politics and lying or if they are telling the truth and the Black community is really as radical and angry and racist as the Rev Wrights and the TUCC community.

Michael in MI on August 3, 2008 at 7:07 PM

Sadly, The wrong Rev. Wright exposed all of those worts!

Listening to John Fund who just said there is nothing wrong with those who will vote for Obama because of ethnic pride.

Connie on August 3, 2008 at 5:28 PM

Fund seems to miss the bigger point. This is not just about “ethnic pride”. This is about racist pride. The Left and Blacks call Condoleeza Rice and Clarence Thomas and any Black conservative/Republican an “Uncle Tom”, based on their politics. The reason people are voting for Obama is because he is Black AND racist. So if John Fund sees nothing wrong with that… well…

This whole Obama campaign has provided an expose’ on the black community, their churches, and their so called leaders. None of it has been pretty.

You’re taking it way too far…

ninjapirate on August 3, 2008 at 6:51 PM

Actually, no, this is exactly what I was talking about in my comments. This is the reaction that Obama’s campaign is causing in many Americans. By having Black leaders and entertainers and average Blacks interviewed for news stories come out and defend Obama with regards to the TUCC stuff and the Farrakhan stuff, it causes people to believe that maybe Rev Wright and TUCC are not fringe, but actually are mainstream, as all Obama’s apologists have been saying.

This is why I stated initially that his campaign has done more damage than good. Because instead of people thinking that kind of nonsense was fringe, we now have a Presidential candidate state that Rev Wright represents the Black community and Obama’s apologists then come out and say the same things. It is only natural then that people start wondering if they are just playing politics and lying or if they are telling the truth and the Black community is really as radical and angry and racist as the Rev Wrights and the TUCC community.

Listening to John Fund who just said there is nothing wrong with those who will vote for Obama because of ethnic pride.

Connie on August 3, 2008 at 5:28 PM

And yet, no one among the Left can offer any credible reason why they think “White” ethnic pride is wrong, not as long as the Left continues to promote this “ethnic pride” issue from among their polarity as being supportable.

I never got invovled in any “ethnic pride” (nor racial thing related to that) in my entire lifetime — even younger, during our nation’s earlier fomentions on these issues), but this whole recent push by the Left to make the Presidency (and everything else, apparently) “about” “race” and/or “ethnicity” is offensive to me.

Thus, I now conclude the entire Sixties and Seventies were a waste of our nation’s time and that racism and ethnic supremacy remain alive among “other than White.”

The Left can’t have it one way — it’s either them continuing to rally on this hypnotic race-ethnicity trance stuff or it’s everyone retreats to their respective “race” or ethnicity and just resumes throwing stones at one another.

I mean by that, well, maybe the “White” race has moved farther along. We mostly stopped all of that a while ago. Unfortunately, it’s still there among other races and ethnicities.

Someone here wrote about comments they hear from Hispanics and Blacks about White people — I agree, after hearing many of those unabashed hate-speech terms, too.

This whole Obama campaign has provided an expose’ on the black community, their churches, and their so called leaders. None of it has been pretty.

You’re taking it way too far…

Lady, if he ain’t readin’ it, that’s all he does.

He would also help the black commnunity by actually being black.

TexasJew on August 3, 2008 at 3:24 PM

Word, my bruthah.

Is this sarcasm or do you really believe that Obama’s campaign has helped the Black community?

I think it’s stupid that you would even bring it up.

ninjapirate on August 3, 2008 at 2:29 PM

Why? Isn’t that why the majority of blacks are supporting him?

… 95% of the black community already seems to want to vote for him strictly because he’s black.

rockbend on August 3, 2008 at 3:57 PM

I’m sure you researched these numbers and didn’t pull them out you rear.

should have previewed it first