Hillary's Blatant Race Baiting...

[Yes We Did]

Why is Obama's skin blacker than normal in Hillary's new attack ad?

http://www.americablog.com/
From Americablog

DailyKos has the original scoop. I went and got the original footage from the Clinton ad, and then compared it to 3 different video clips of the same debate from 3 different sources. I did this so as to take into account any editing, or quality issues, that might have accounted for Obama having darker skin in any particular video. None of the 3 video sources I found showed Obama nearly as black as the Hillary ad does. Click the image above to see a larger version. Look at his lips. Look at his eyebrows. Look at how the red MSNBC background has turned more purple. Clearly the image was darkened. The question is "why."

It just keeps happening again and again and again. The Clintons keeps doing things, saying things, that sound awfully racist. And we're to believe that this, the - what? 8th, 10th time? - this has happened is again just a coincidence. The first half a dozen times you launch seemingly racist attacks on your black opponent, maybe - maybe - we can write it off as "boy you're really dumb not to get it." But having a seemingly-racist attack from the Clinton folks on Obama every single week, after a while, you don't get to play the "I had no idea!" card anymore. After that many times, you're race-baiting. You're using racism to win. And you're destroying your legacy and your husband's. Enough already.

Now, please. Tell me that there is nothing to this. You don't have to "squint" to see anything here. Anyone who isn't blind can see there is a HUGE difference here.

Ignorance is not an excuse; don't use it.

(I screwed up the link... i edited to to fix it.)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

1. BAHHHHHHH ROARRRRRRR SNARFFFFF GARBLE GARBLE ROARRRRRR!!!!!!

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Yes We Did]

11. Troll? Huh? Are we playing Lord of the Rings?

Sorry, never really got into that stuff.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. What Was Deleted

I always miss the fun...

[Yes We Did]

21. oh... whoever it was called me a troll. What's that mean?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. No... That Person Called OMC A Troll I Thought

I respectfully disagree with you...

I don't think Team Clinton tried to make him blacker but I am under no illusion I could convince you of that and that's frustrating...

[Yes We Did]

38. Well, I edit video for a living...

And having seen the debate footage, and having seen the ad, I can tell you that the only way you get that big of a difference is if someone does it on purpose.

Did hillary "physically" do it herself, no.. obviously. But whoever put that together did. And if she "approved this message" then she has to bare the blame.

This whole race has just gotten rotten. I'm sick of it. I just want it to end.

[LostinVA]

49. And, I'm really the Queen of England

Bow down before me.

[Debi]

53. Liz....is that you?

[LostinVA]

54. Why that's my favorite parasol!

[Debi]

56. All the better to

:spank: you with my dear!

Shame on you for picking on nice sweet little new posters.

Naughty naughty.

[LostinVA]

58. Monday and Tuesday spankings?

Woohoo!

Can I keep the cute little feller? I promise to get him defleaed.

[Debi]

60. Okay, but you're gonna have to buy him some clothes!

[Debi]

61. aacckkk dupe!

[LostinVA]

37. Hold up a mirror and there ya go

[Yes We Did]

39. wtf are you talking about? I'm a big ugly looking monster?

[LostinVA]

40. Nah, you're a cute little one

*pinches your round little cheeks*

I will pray for you.

:hug:

[LostinVA]

41. Dupe

[Yes We Did]

42. Huh? I'm a cute little monster? What are you talking about?

[LostinVA]

43. Oh man -- you are just too funny

*pinches cheeks*

[Yes We Did]

44. You said I'm a cute "one" What are you talking about?

[LostinVA]

46. So young, so innocent

*smooch*

[Yes We Did]

47. alright... whatever.

[LostinVA]

48. Can I take you home? You are just too cute!

[Debi]

55. Welcome to DU demdog78

How'd you find your way here?

Oh, and here's UD's definition of 'troll'

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll

troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.

:hi: enjoy your time here!

[Occam Bandage]

2. Attack ads frequently darken images of their subjects. It makes them look shadowy and untrustworthy.

Black candidates are not immune to this. Move along.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. Case in point...

[Occam Bandage]

9. You bring up a very good point.

Darkening a black man when attacking him is always extraordinarily risky, because you might the perception of race-baiting. From a tactical perspective, I'd like to see this ad backfire on Clinton, of course--but at the same time I don't think it was made with any particular racial intent (and I say this as someone who does believe that she race-baiting in South Carolina).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. I would argue, Occam...

That darkening anybody's appearance to make them look "shadowy and untrustworthy" is racist in and of itself.

The only question is whether or not they did it on purpose, or if it's some artifact of photo-reproduction.

I'd like to think it's the latter, but given the Clinton campaign's reputation of race baiting over the last two months, they're stretching the benefit of the doubt.

[JAbuchan08]

23. photo editing anyone's face to make them appear more "ominous" is playing with the facts

racist intent or not

[Occam Bandage]

34. Well, I remain unconvinced that

all darkness is necessarily racial; shadows and darkness are universal markers for the fearsome and untrustworthy. It's indisputable that many have used it for racial ends, and I'd certainly agree that darkening a person can evoke racist "swarthy" connotations. At the same time, it can also evoke many other connotations that are not at all racist. Putting an image in dull colors is unappealing to the eye; the eye likes contrast. Shadows can also evoke uncertainty and danger; you can see that from the aesthetics of film noir to Psalm 23's fear of walking through the "valley of the shadow of death." Changing colors and filmspeed is dissociative; if it's visually distinct enough from the source (and all the positive mental connotations it carries for the audience) it allows you to create new connotations, and a new anti-Obama frame.

I agree there's a racial aspect in darkening images of people to sow doubt. But I don't think it's always done with that particular intent. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one, but, as you say, they are making it very, very difficult to continually do so.

[NightWatcher]

7. for the white candidate to make the black candidate look 'blacker' is shameful

[Yes We Did]

25. Yes, because americans associate black with bad.

Sad but true; which means hillary knew exactly what they were doing with this ad. They got to hide behind that b.s. logic and knew that her followers would go along with it. Pathetic.

[LostinVA]

45. Americans already know Obama is black

[cottonseed]

31. Actually, it makes whites look tanned and healthy.

Darkening black candidates, not so much.

[NightWatcher]

3. pic doesnt work, but I've seen it already and it is shamefull and beyond Rovian

[styersc]

5. Ridiculous accusation with no merit.

[Yes We Did]

8. I added link. Pic didn't work, but there's the merit.

[LostinVA]

10. Oh for fucks sake, she didn't make him look blacker

How many times has this been debunked today?

[Occam Bandage]

13. Personally, I think it was a racist anti-MSNBC slur. She clearly made the backdrop darker.

[Yes We Did]

14. He looks "blacker" to me. Did you click the link?

You should click the link. They got 3 shots from the debate and the much darker shot from her ad.

It is so much darker, it almost looks cartoonish.

[LostinVA]

18. Actually -- he doesn't look orange like he did in the other video

This has been posted about a brazillion times today, so yes, I've seen the pics.

[UALRBSofL]

22. This is just another article Obama leaked to the MSM

Accusing the Clinton's of being racists. Another reason Clinton supporters are being turned off from possibly voting for Obama when Obama accuses Clinton's of being racists.

[Yes We Did]

28. Um, no. Actually this isn't being covered by MSM. This is on

the Daily Kos and Americablog.

Now, if you have some proof... to either of your allegations, please please please back it up with a credible link.

[Oleladylib]

12. OMG is Obama Black..?.

[Yes We Did]

16. NO, actually he's not.

He's 1/2 african american.

[Oleladylib]

that's what I thought but for a minute here..I thought I might have joined the delusional.

[Dogmudgeon]

17. The letters "NIG" are also part of a little girl's pajamas.

:eyes:

Yes. It has gotten Just. That. Silly.

Soon, Team Obama will be hunting for subliminal images like the words "sex" and "death" airbrushed into images.

--p!
Good night nurse!

[Yes We Did]

19. When it's that BLATANT! How can you deny that?

I mean seriously. All you gotta do is look at the pictures. We're not talking a half shade or a little airbrushing. Click the link and look at the comparison.

[Oleladylib]

29. i am concerned about those purple lips..lack of oxygen?

[Dogmudgeon]

52. As blatant as the Grassy Knoll or the Face on Mars.

You see what you want to see. It's called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia">Pareidolia.

Giraffes and elephants in clouds, the Face on Mars, phone calls from dead people, crystal-gazing, and images of Jesus burned into tacos and waffles. And now making Obama look like (*gasp*) a Black man!

One week of good news for Hillary, ONE DAY of bad news for Obama, and you hallucinate.

¡Sí Somos Locos!

--p!

[HeraldSquare212]

24. I looked at it and it definitely was done. Amazing.

[Lucinda]

26. So is Obama trying to make himself look different than he normally does, in this mailer?

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/080121_Obama_Mailer.pdf

The whole thing is beyond stupid. :eyes:

[Yes We Did]

33. What are you talking about?

Those pictures look natural. The hillary ad... that is anything but natural. It is so obvious. I don't see how you can be so... so... indifferent.

It is impossible not to notice. It was done with a negative intent. How can you deny that?

[jgraz]

27. Once again, we're left to choose between evil or stupid

If her campaign did this on purpose, then they're simply beneath contempt and deserve to be run out of the Democratic party on a rail.

On the other hand, if Hillary Clinton "approved this message" without noticing the racial overtones it contained, then she's simply too stupid or out-of-touch to be handed the nomination of this party.

Is there another choice I'm missing here?

[Oleladylib]

30. YES...POLITICAL PARANOIA HAS TAKEN OVER DU-P

[Yes We Did]

35. Add americablog & kos to that

Yes, we're all paranoid. I wonder, if he started using the same dirty tactics would you all give him the benefit of doubt?

[BigDDem]

32. Free tinfoil today!

Kos has jumped the shark.

[bigbrother05]

50. Hillary will say and do anything

so I'm not surprised. She talks about unity, I tried to find her campaign slogan, couldn't find one.
But one thing I have her her say is that, she will work for the middle class, well what about the rest of the country.
She is not working for anyone, but herself.
Thanks for posting this, and welcome to DU:hi:

[flordehinojos]

51. documented rebuttal, here:

http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

The racial innuendo seemed to fade when Obama won his remarkable victory in the Iowa caucuses. With the polling data on the upcoming New Hampshire primary auguring a large Obama triumph, it looked as if the candidate's own appeal might sweep away everything before it. But at the last minute (as sometimes happens in statewide primaries), there was a sudden movement among the voters, this time toward Clinton. Many ascribed it to an appearance by Clinton in a Portsmouth coffee shop on the eve of the vote, where, with emotion, she spoke from the heart about why she is running for president. Others said that misogyny directed at Clinton on the campaign trail as well as on cable television and the Internet turned off women voters. The uprising was certainly sudden: As late as 6 p.m. on primary day, Clinton staff members with whom I spoke were saying that they would consider a loss by ten percentage points or less as a kind of moral victory. But instead, Clinton won outright, amazing her own delighted supporters and galling the Obama campaign.

That evening, the Democratic campaign became truly tangled up in racial politics--directly and forcefully introduced by the pro-Obama forces. In order to explain away the shocking loss, Obama backers vigorously spread the claim that the so-called Bradley Effect had kicked in. First used to account for the surprising defeat of Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley in the California gubernatorial race in 1982, the Bradley Effect supposedly takes hold when white voters tell opinion pollsters that they plan to vote for a black candidate but instead, driven by racial fears, pull the lever for a white candidate. Senior Clinton campaign officials later told me that reporters contacted them saying that the Obama camp was pushing them very hard to spin Clinton's victory as the latest Bradley Effect result. Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, a cheerleading advocate for Obama, went on television to suggest the Bradley Effect explained the New Hampshire outcome, then backed off--only then to write a column, "Echoes of Tom Bradley," in which he claimed he could not be sure but that, nevertheless, "embarrassed pollsters and pundits had better be vigilant for signs that the Bradley effect, unseen in recent years, has crept back."

In fact, the Bradley Effect claims were utterly bogus, as anyone with an elementary command of voting results could tell. If the "effect" has actually occurred, Obama's final voting figures would have been substantially lower than his figures in the pre-election polls, as racially motivated voters turned away. Later, Bill Schneider, the respected analyst on CNN, several times went through the data on air to demonstrate conclusively that there was no such Bradley Effect in New Hampshire. But even on primary night, it was clear that Obama's total--36.4%--was virtually identical to what the polls over the previous three weeks had predicted he would receive. Clinton won because late-deciding voters--and especially college-educated women in their twenties--broke for her by a huge majority. Yet the echoes of charges about the Bradley Effect--which blamed Obama's loss on white racism and mendacity--lingered among Obama's supporters.

The very next morning, Obama's national co-chair, Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr., a congressional supporter from Chicago, played the race card more directly by appearing on MSNBC to claim in a well-prepared statement that Clinton's emotional moment on the campaign trail was actually a measure of her deeply ingrained racism and callousness about the suffering poor. "But those tears also have to be analyzed," Jackson said, "they have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs. Clinton did not cry for, particularly as we head to South Carolina where 45 percent of African-Americans will participate in the Democratic contest ... we saw tears in response to her appearance, so that her appearance brought her to tears, but not Hurricane Katrina, not other issues." And so the Obama campaign headed south with race and racism very much on its mind--and on its lips.




III.

[IowaGirl]

57. Maybe I'm color blind, but....

I didn't notice the difference. I just think he has a very appealing face.

[DemGa]

59. Here we go with another round of supposition based hysteria

And Daily Kos? Please know that place is completely infected with Hillary hate and therefore worthless as a source for anything.

[Tresalisa]

62. For cripes sake, this has been the silliest campaign ever!

A candidate can't even clear their throat without somebody searching for the subliminal message in it. I'll admit, it's been a bit entertaining, but I'll be glad when we finally have our nominee.

:crazy: :freak: :eyes:

Are we at Defcon 1 or 2? I've noticed sig lines have been turned off.

[suston96]

63. Racism? Here? On this board? Never. I know there is blatant sexism - but never racism....nt

[HooptieWagon]

64. What?! Clinton playing the race card?

Color me surprised... not!

[Nedsdag]

65. Of course the Clintons play the race card.

Remember the "Sista Souljah" speech? Rickey Ray Rector?

[complain jane]

66. Obviously the pic was treated somehow.

Whether or not it was done with malicious intent, I wouldn't venture a guess, because I wouldn't think dark skin offensive in the first place. I notice most photos of politicians are altered in the media often, especially on tv, to be desaturated and darker all-around to look ominous in general.

If the Clinton campaign altered a photo maliciously, then I agree, that's pathetic.

But if it weren't for the big deal being made over it here, I never would have noticed. I just don't give a shit about somebody's skin color and don't see being African American as something bad.