The Red Phone in Black and White

Today’s New York Times contained an Op Ed article by Orlando Patterson, a professor of sociology at Harvard and author of several books on race in America. The article was about the 3 a.m. ad and the Clinton Campaign. I was stunned by this article. It literally took my breath away. I was especially stunned because I remember liking the ad and being pleased that Hillary was reminding us of her strength in crisis. The ad gave me a feeling that someone I trust would be there for us.

If you haven’t read this piece, here is the link: The Red Phone in Black and White

Remember, the 3 a.m. ad came out after the Texas debate where Hillary Clinton received a standing ovation for her strength of character in handling any number of crises. After the debate, journalists freely recommended that Hillary would be better running on her strength of character than on her experience.

When the 3 a.m. ad came out, it ran in Texas. That’s where the debate was. That’s where Hillary needed the most support because the race was the closest. I liked seeing Hillary answer that phone at 3 a.m. . . . still at work . . . still in the oval office. Very much like Hillary.

I saw the ad as being about Hillary and her strength for the American family. After all, she has supported families all through her career. I didn’t see it as being about Barack Obama. I was, in fact, surprised when he jumped on it with an attack ad. It was about Hillary responding to the call to capitalize on her strength of character.

And now this article. Is it possible that as an expert on sociology and race that Mr. Patterson is reading far more into this ad than was ever meant to be there? I think so. And perhaps Barack Obama is as well. It seems that the Obama campaign plays the race card when it suits them . . .like when they accused Bill Clinton of racism when he reminded the media that Jessie Jackson won in South Carolina. Huh?

I’m so tired of Hillary Clinton being accused of every form of hatred imaginable. This is a woman who people hug when they meet her! She generates love, not fear. It’s the media’s image of her that generates the fear. As for the twelve point swing of white votes in Texas that Mr. Patterson attributes to this ad, could part of that vote be because volunteers from all over the country rushed to help Hillary win Texas and not because of a single well-intended ad?

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to The Red Phone in Black and White

  1. Joanne

    I fixed the link for you. Thanks for posting about this here because I have been too disgusted to even write about it. I’ve moved beyond being appalled by this primary cycle to god(dess) knows what state I am in now. Sick. Sick at heart, is what I am.

  2. Joann: I’m not sure what you get paid for this, but you’re worth every penny. You can turn a phrase and parse an argument with the best of them. It’s a pleasure seeing a professional at work.

  3. Darrell

    Who gets paid around here?

  4. bjerryberg says:

    I have never been paid by any one associated with this blog or with any 2008 campaign. Look it up.

    I can tell the truth about recent events.

    The fascistic billionaire Mussolini-wannabe mayor of NYC, Michael Bloomberg, has a great deal of money involved in promoting the candidacy of the junior Senator from Illinois–Mr Obama.

    Mr Bloomberg’s lavishly financed ambitions for the presidency depend on the Dems nominating a sure-loser. Hence their pronounced preference for the, ahem, Chicago-compromised Sen. Obama.

    Should Dems be so stupid as to nominate the compromised Obama, I do not doubt the Bloomberg folks, will offer the McCain folks a very large bribe for the second spot on the terminal McCain’s ticket.

  5. bjerryberg

    LOL! We need to get you some new talking points Jerry. Bloomberg is so yesterday.

  6. bjerryberg says:

    Pamela, you cling, foolishly, to the conventional wisdom about this election.

    If the conventional wisdom were right, Sen Clinton would have clinched the nomination long ago.

    Why has that not happened?

    Who, with what financial resources intervened, with another outcome in mind.

    How did Obama-mania become the corporate media story-line?

    Bloomberg, personally, is a pathetic Momma’s boy of a fascist–but lesser specimens have reached the oval office–through the stupidity or complicity of most of the Dem Party hierarchy . (See Bush, GW)

  7. bjerryberg

    Better to cling foolishly than to be a sheepeople for the unity candidate. 😉

    Also good to ignore the news once in a while – it’s ugly out there.

  8. bjerryberg says:

    Bloomberg is only yesterday when his doomed shill Obama is.

    Otherwise, the billionaire can buy unprincipled superdelegates all night long–and wreck the Dem party.

  9. bjerryberg says:

    Yo’ Miss Pamela!

    You told me:

    ‘Better to cling foolishly than to be a sheepeople for the unity candidate. ‘

    Por Favor, what does this mean in English?

  10. bjerryberg says:

    I agree, however, that it is ugly out there.

  11. bjerryberg

    I meant “sheeple“.

  12. bjerryberg says:

    The ‘conventional wisdom’ approach to campaigning for Sen Clinton has always been ‘ready to lose from Day One.’

    Good thing thing LaRouche had lots of youth organizers active for Hillary in Texas that pulled the nuts out of the fire.

    Otherwise this blog would have ceased operation–and its’ sheeple’ would be unemployed.

  13. bjerryberg

    Oh that someone paid me… and all the rest of the writers here. Alas we submit ourselves to this torture for the love (or often disgust) of politics. I’d be happy to go about my business however… my real business that does pay my bills. 🙂

  14. kcowley says:

    Actually I’ve found that the writers of this blog are far from sheeple, they can be counted on to question, think for themselves in the face of a bombardment of twisted information and popular sentiment in the media. I for one am very thankful for their efforts and sacrifice of their time and would indeed do what I could to support this valuable source of commentary and information. I also find your tone very offensive bjerryberg. Thank you Pamela, Stuart et al!

  15. Pamela: I’m thinking that Joanne gets paid by the Clinton Campaign for doing this. And more power to her.

  16. No, Darrell, I’m just another volunteer for Hillary . . . blogging, phoning, sending money . . . more than I should . . . because I believe Hillary is the best candidate for President. I want to see her taking that oath of office! JoAnne

  17. Darrell

    Contrary to the meme circulated by Obama supporters, the Clinton campaign doesn’t pay bloggers to blog on other blogs. Likewise, I highly doubt the Obama campaign does either.

    Bloggers who do work for campaigns and PAC’s have learned the hard way (from the ’04 election cycle) that they have to disclose if they are getting paid, because it shows up in the candidate’s FEC reports.

  18. Joanne: My main point is that you’re damn good. Thanks.

  19. Thanks, Darrell. It’s nice to know that the posts are appreciated. I do spend a lot of time thinking about them before I write. And a little applause is a good thing. This is a lovely site and I’m pleased to have found it. JoAnne

  20. bjerryberg says:

    Time to get used to posting about the collapse of the economy, folks, or risk irrelevance.