Joan,

I agreed with much of what you wrote, but am confused on one key point: you state that you find Jill Zuckerman's analysis of the "Obama is the Britney/Paris of politics" ad as "ridiculous. However, if you're asserting that there is no subtext of miscentegation in the ad (and I concur with that assessment), then it seems to me that you would obviously have to conclude that the ad is trying to paint Obama as vapid. Clearly, while there are people who dont agree with George Clooney's politics, he is generally not seen as "vapid", while Britney and Paris are. I don't think that this view of vapidity is gender-based; it wouldn't have made sense for the ad to use Angelina Jolie or Meryl Streep, either. I'd be curious to hear more on why you object to Zuckerman's reading.

...was Donna Brazile when Bill Clinton used the term "fairy tale" and Brazile said she was offended "as an African American" Huh? Why is this woman on my T.V. set every Sunday morning?

Joan, I totally disagree with your whole article. I have been a follower of yours from the beginning, but lately it seems that you are one of the Obama "paraders".

It is certainly obvious that the Obama campaign has used the race card throughout this whole campaign...twice to Bill Clinton, and now McCain. I am not a Republican, but I don't think McCain used the race card..Obama did and has been doing it (with humor) since the beginning.

Let's be fair and balanced Joan. Obama can do no wrong.

This is the first election I don't know what to do vote wise, since Hillary isn't in the mix. But just because I am a Democrat, I am not falling into the Obama mix. He is scary, and it has nothing to do with color. Pegster

Nevermind that blithering redundant pundit debate. Maureen 'O Donnell cleverly invokes Harry Potter into the discussion. So who has the most mojo? Harry with his wand, or Obama with his enchanting orartory? And uh-oh, which one might practice voodoo?

Can the shit get any sillier?

Joan, I think you have it about right. When I first saw this ad, what struck me was how amateurish it was. It is also risky, putting a very presidential looking opponent on screen for most of the ad in front of adoring crowds followed by a wan-looking McCain looking more like some old uncle at his surprise birthday party, rather than a vigorous candidate for president. The ad simply does not work. Obama understands implicitly the power of images, but is not relying upon them. He has a coherent message that is reinforced by very effective TV. McCain has yet to find his voice or even make a strong case for why HE should be president. Not being Obama is not going to carry enough electoral votes in my view.

HOWEVER--i would NEVER discount the willingness of the party of Rove to TRY smearing a la the Harold Ford campaign and Obama HAS to respond quickly and decisively. The extent to which Obama can keep this election on the high road is entirely dependent upon the Republicans. In a few weeks, after the convention, when head-to-head match-ups in polls will have some grounding, look for movement toward Obama in places like Pennsylvania and Florida and look for the hints of Rovian messaging (POSSIBLY in evidence in this ad, but, as you say, probably not) to turn into explicit meanness that will leave very little question about what they are trying to do.

It's disingenuous to suggest that black people didn't vote for Obama because they wanted a black candidate to win. Is it racist? If 90% of white people had voted for Clinton, I think that the suggestion would be made that they had voted in a racist way.i>

Actually, you made my case. Correlation is not causation. You assume race is the cause, when it is simply correlated with the causes. That you saw race and did not look deeper, and your refusal to see well know stereotypes of blacks as dumb (the Sambo- which by linking him to Britney and Paris is involked) makes you disingenuous.

Black people are diverse by class and culture. 11% of all blacks who voted voted REPUBLICAN, so by definition, 90% could NOT have voted for Obama.tually, around 80% or less of ALL blacks who voted in the primary About 10% of black Democrats voted for Clinton, and others voted for Edwards, etc.. So actually, somewhere around 80% of blacks voted for Obama, just like young college educated whites and certain other groups. Before South Carolina, it was equally split. the The overall percentage was not 90%, just like half of all marriages DO NOT end in divorce. That's the media repeating bad stats.

I can not vote for a black man without being accused of race, but whites can vote for a white without the assumption unless there's a marker to for racist attitudes. About 22% of blacks AND whites say race was important. I will note that over 80% of young white women voted for Obama, too. Is that race? Over 80% of older than 65 white women voted for Clinton, should I think it was all race for them? Not unless I'm an idiot. You have been LOUD about how your rationales for voting for Clinton and opposing Obama are logical and not race based. Kindly extend to other people the same courtesy. Because you keep grouping us, impunging intelligence, and claiming that "90% of all blacks did and this means something". YOU do that. Different blacks had different reasons. I did not vote for him. I had my reasons. Some of us voted for Edwards. Some voted for Richardson. Those stats get ignored.

Oh, by the way, over 90% of the Irish voted for Kennedy. So it is not unprecedested. When Strom Thurmond ran for preseident, more than 90% of segregationists voted for him. WHen Pat Robinson ran, the vast majority of evangelicals voted for him.

WHen you claim that people are using race to deflect attention to issues, when it is OBVIOUS that the action refered to is bigoted, YOU lose credibility.