The Media is a Race Card Dealer

[Tom Rinaldo]

They seize on any potential story line that radiates controversy like a rabid Fox. That's how they "sell papers". Race tensions are an ideal story line for them. This is how it works:

If Candidate A says "We can be proud of the Democratic Party, we represent America with an African American, a Woman and a Son of the South running for President":

The media notes an incident of race being injected into this contest. The media calls it "the race card". The media then discusses how "the race card" is starting to dominate the election. Every day media coverage is dominated by how "the race card" is dominating the election. The media expresses outrage and sorrow that a discussion of race is overshadowing valid issues in this election. Every day the media expresses outrage and sorrow that the candidates keep referring to race (often in response to direct media questions). The media attacks Democrats for shamelessly making race an issue in this election. Every day the media attacks Democrats shamelessly for making race an issue in this election.

Race becomes a significant issue in this election. The media endlessly congratulates itself for having keen political insights that allowed them to determin so quickly that race would be such a significant issue in this election. Finally, when that has been milked dry, the media moves on to "noticing" another controversy that will hurt Democrats.

[wndycty]

1. Don't blame the media for the shit that the Clintons have pulled. . .

. . .they are the ones who have interjected race, they are the ones who fanned the flames. Here is a good read for you:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/26/opinion/26herbert.html?_r=3&ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. And don't blame the Clintons for the shit the media pulls. That's for starters

Point A is that you just attempted a perhaps relevent but classic none the less deflection. Perhaps you haven't noticed but there have been a few threads on DU over the last couple of months that chose as a focus accusations of Clinton race baiting. This isn't one of them. Are you claiming that media coverage of race in the Democratic primaries has only been "reporting the real news?" If so let us have that discussion. You brought Clinton into this thread and chose not to comment on media coverage. Does that mean you approve of the focus of media coverage?

I think I will make a different point in another post so I can keep the focus of this one clean.

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. Then there are opinions like this one.

"Civil Rights Icon Rev. Joseph Lowery Says Blacks Who Vote Against Obama Have Slave Mentality"

I really respected and admired Rev. Joseph Lowery for his fight in the civil rights movement, but I am very insulted his recent comments. In an address to the Hungry Club at Butler Street YMCA in downtown Atlanta, he re-stoked the fires when he told the largely African-American audience that “a slave mentality” was fueling black doubts about Obama’s chances of capturing the White House.
http://blackpoliticalthought.blogspot.com/2008/01/civil-rights-icon-rev-joseph-lowery.html

There are incidents like this also:

Atlanta mayor takes jab at Bill Clinton during MLK address... email to a friend
Jan 21 2008 6:34PM
Associated Press
Atlanta mayor takes jab at Bill CLinton during MLK address

"ATLANTA (AP) Atlanta mayor and Barack Obama supporter Shirley Franklin says the U.S. is on the cusp of turning the impossible into reality, and it's "not a fantasy or a fairy tale." She was speaking to more than 2,000 people at the Atlanta church Martin Luther King once led. Among the crowd was former President Bill Clinton.

He has been criticized for describing Obama's Iraq war stance as "a fairy tale." Clinton sat with his hands clasped in front of him while the largely black crowd erupted in applause at Franklin's comments.

Clinton had his own turn at the pulpit, saying King "freed us all to fight the civil rights battle" together. He said the diverse group of presidential candidates including a black man, a Mormon, a woman and a Baptist preacher was made possible because of King's vision."
http://www.kxma.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=200501

And this:

(Translation from Spanish)
"Hillary Clinton does not respect our people. Hillary Clinton supporters went to court to prevent working people to vote this Saturday — that is an embarrassment.

Hillary Clinton supporters want to prevent people from voting in their workplace on Saturday. This is unforgivable. Hillary Clinton is shameless. Hillary Clinton should not allow her friends to attack our people’s right to vote this Saturday. This is unforgivable; there’s no respect

Sen. Obama is defending our right to vote. Sen. Obama wants our votes. He respects our votes, our community, and our people.

Sen. Obama’s campaign slogan is “Si Se Puede” (“Yes We Can”). Vote for a president that respects us, and that respects our right to vote. Obama for president, “Si Se Puede” (“Yes We Can”)."
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14456

[niceypoo]

29. The Clinton's haven't pulled anything

The media keeps fanning non existent controversies and Obamites fall for it because they are so thin skinned that they implode at the slightest criticism and bite on every idiotic conspiracy theory that pops up.

The media did the same thing to Al Gore in 2000. They went through everything he ever said, or did, with a fine tooth comb then the republicans took it all out of context and attacked Gore with it, accusing him of being a serial liar. The Media, too lazy to do its job, repeated all of it ad nauseum. This time the republicans are joined by Obama 'supporters.'

It is time for Obama and his 'supporters' to grow a spine. It is completely obvious that he cannot take it on the chin, instead whining and crying. For all of Hillary's faults, at least she can take it on the chin. Obama would get eaten alive in a general election given his inability to handle even slight criticism and his (and his 'supporters') penchant for blowing everything wildly out of proportion.

[Honeycombe8]

34. Yes, they have. Bill is a southern politician. He knows what he'd doing.

He has created problems, now, for the Dem. Party in the general election, and for HRC votes from the Af. American community.

If she wins the nomination, you'll see. It was unlikely before that she would win the gen. election. Now, it's all but certain that she won't.

Most of the Dem. Party will vote for her, but a lot of Af. Americans won't, now. And most Independents will not. And a fair number of Obama supporters will not. These voters will either not vote at all, or they will vote for the opponent. You'll see.

[Tom Rinaldo]

36. I feel the following point needs to be made

Members of DU have not let a single possibly racially tinged reference made by a Clinton supporter ever get forgotten. If the accusation is that calling attention to Obama being Black is meant to hurt Obama, and that Clinton camp comments were made for that purpose, why on earth does a political bulletin board such as this (let alone the media) insist on keeping each and every one of those comments alive for weeks or months in sharp political focus, well beyond their natural shelf life?

I don't think the reason is to hurt Obama. I think the reason is to hurt Clinton. So it is just a different angle on playing the race card as they say. It is using whatever material is at hand to score political points against an opponent in the primaries - even if that means race must remain at the center of the political debate, which is what Clinton is damned by many for supposedly wanting to make happen.

[global1]

2. It Was This Guy That Interjected Race Into The Primaries........

[Tom Rinaldo]

4. The media won't make a big deal of that though because

That won't hurt Democrats.

[global1]

5. It's A Joke - Rudy Is At A NASCAR Race Track....

get it. Race not Race.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. LOL Ummm, now I do! It's hard to see the humor around here lately but...

...in my limited defense I think I just read something recently about Rep. Clyburn in SC just saying that it is Huckabee who actually injected race into this campaign - and I think I was half thinking of that when I saw your post.

[robbedvoter]

16. Missed the target. Truth is GOP-ers run on race biting - immigration is the code for it

[Jai4WKC08]

45. Good point

When have we ever heard a Republican call for a fence between the US and Canada? Or even a tightening of travel restrictions? Even tho the only known border crossings by terrorists have come from the north.

As long as the Eskimos stay put, we won't hear a peep.

[Tom Rinaldo]

46. You are right. They will target the anti-Eskimo vote if given a chance

All kidding aside Republicans target the anti-Indian vote in South Dakota. It would be nothing new for them.

[robbedvoter]

15. Him and the other GOP-ers loony bins and their immigration obsession. Well put.

[sufrommich]

6. Good post.You are quickly becoming one of

my favorite reads here. Congrats on attempting to stay above the fray.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. Thank you. At the very least we need to keep in mind how doubtful it is

that the MSM media has any real intention of remaining above the fray.

[pdxmom]

7. I was just going to post on this. I don't see them as playing the race card. I see them as racist.

The analysis they are now giving is pure racism. Here is how I came to that conclusion:

Obama wins Iowa. The media analyst go "Wow! We never saw that coming! How nice."

Clinton wins New Hampshire. The media barely touches the race or gender issue on this one, though gender is played up somewhat.

Clinton wins Nevada, but Obama wins the delegates. The media pushes the win, not the delegate count. They don't address the Latino vote, instead preferring to push the union angle.

South Carolina. It's nothing but about race. About the black vote. They are banging that drum over and over and over. Everything that has happened up to this point had nothing to do with race. No one is pointing out how well Obama has done up to now. And they are discounting his presumed win today, because it's just blacks voting for one of their own. How insulting!

And what is this about Obama becoming the "black candidate" if the internals are split along racial lines? Again, they are discounting everything up to this point. And they are marginalizing him by equating him to previous "black candidates".

The entire analysis by the media is racist.

[Tom Rinaldo]

9. Nice analysis. They certainly are doing Obama no favors here n/t

[tishaLA]

21. Post NH there was a HUGE race and gender narrative

Remember: Sen Clinton won because she evoked sympathy from women for her "crying"? Sen Obama lost because voters lied to pollsters and fell victim to the "Bradley effect"? Even though the second part of this, at least, has been debunked to my satisfaction, the fact that it became a talking point in the immediate aftermath of the election, and therefore part of the narrative of the race from that point forward, has produced an echo effect for voters and the media alike.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

12. and it seems that many here are playing right into that hand.....sadly

[Tom Rinaldo]

18. We tend to be worse than the candidates we criticize

We get upset if a candidate says something that could be insulting about another candidate while we throw neutron bombs at each other. We get upset when a candidate seems to be distorting the intent of the words that another candidate says while we feel free to condemn candidates for having the vilest motives and for taking despicable actions (like stealing elections for one example) without any actual evidence because those crimes fit our expectations of how those candidates would act and why.

Regarding the race card we play black jack every day here, hour after hour, because playing the race game either seems helpful to our candidate or hurtful to an opponent of our candidate. Doesn't anyone see our own role in this? How can someone get so upset because Clinton supposedly made race an issue in this election - which it is claimed works to Obama's disadvantage simply by having it become a focus of this election, while constantly rehashing day in and day out things that someone in the Clinton camp said two months ago that were blasted for making people look at race rather than the real issues? THAT keeps the discussion focused on race.

I really dislike hypocrisy. If one is willing to suppose that it is no accident that the "Clinton camp" slipped references that could be construed as racially charged into the campaign discussion, than it is no accident that the constant charges that Clinton wants race to be a focus of this election are part of an effort to make racial charges against the Clinton's a focus of this election - even if THAT keeps race a focus of this election.

Why? Because it galvanizes opposition against Hillary Clinton to do so. It may be a different race card but it comes from the same political deck.

No one's hand's are clean here, nor is any candidate's. Politics is a dirty business. So is home construction. Something positive may come from both but that doesn't mean getting down in the ditches isn't dirty.

[robbedvoter]

13. Excellent put - as usual. They throw the trash then fake outrage "it's dirty out there"

Win-Win for them.

[Barack_America]

14. If so, the Clintons at least cut the deck....n/t

[Armstead]

17. You put me in a real dilemma here Mr. Rinaldo

I absolutely, totally agree with your post. It is an exactly correct analysis.

However, I also have to say that, despite your good intentions, I really do believe that the Clintons have used race as one of the weapons in their arsenal of dirty tricks and ever-so-subtle mudslinging.

I always hate to draw these parallels, but one of the core tenants of the GOP/Rove/DLC playbook is to sneakily inject little memes that turn a candidate's strengths into a weakness without getting caught at it.

I won't go into detail here about how I see the Clintons applying this to Obama, but I will say that I believe the Ckintons know exacty what they are doing, and are feeding the Media beast you so excellently describe, when they could have denied the MSM this morsel.

[Tom Rinaldo]

20. Please see my post #18

I think we are worse than our candidates, and I think whatever any of our candidates have done along these lines is nothing compared to what will come in the General Election against the Republicans. And the media is in favor of anything they can do to make our primaries more divisive. Our candidates can't magically be protected against the effects of race in America and the public will be subjected to any and all political uses of it. Both Clinton and Obama have played some games throughout this campaigns - looking to point out this or that facet of political racial implications in this election that are already present in our society and thus the electorate. In Iowa overt attention to Obama's race was not helpful to his winning that critical Democratic contest. In SC overt attention to Obama's race is helpful to his winning that critical contest. Neither Clinton nor Obama created those race realities themselves.

But whatever ill advised comments or focus any Democrat's campaign (supporters hereby included) stumbles into - the media will pull up with a gasoline truck to pour fuel onto the flames. That is after they throw matches in the first place.

[Armstead]

33. I would have rather seen the GOP fuel the "race card"

Again I agree with much of your basic premise.

However, I do believe the Clintons and their surrogates have been destructive to the campaign by adding fuel.

Speaking strictly for myself, I would much rather that the racial and gender identity of the nominee candidates speak for themselves. I believe what a candidate would actually DO in office is much more important than their genetic package. Rathetr than personalized "identity politics" I would prefer to see the candidates argue about how their policies would benefit ethnic minorities and women....I believe, for example, that Edwards progressive populist stance is much more helpful to women in a real sense.

Beyond that, however...

Sure when it gets to the General, the GOP would be using all kinds of code words and sneaky bigoted memes against Obama.

But IMO that would at least have drawn the real lines, by casting the GOP as the party of racial divisiveness and bogotry, against the inclusive Democrats. Maybe I'm naive, but I think that would backfire on the GOP, because at least a slim majority is really sick of that shit.

However, when Demnocrats use the same twctics, no matter how subtly, it weakens the ability to build a coalition of minorities and enlightened (or at least tolerant) whites against that.

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. I agree with much of your general premise here also. Nicely put n/t

[annabanana]

41. from post#18: "could be construed as racially charged"

I would have to add... "if the media chose to do so".

Of course they always DO..they are THEprimary abuser in this relationship.

[tishaLA]

19. With all due respect, POLITICS is a "race card dealer"

First, I have to say that I just don't use that term "race card" because I think it's a dismissive way of dealing with an unfortunate fact of American cultural life--that race matters. The first time I heard the phrase was during the OJ Simpson trial, when Johnny Cochran was accused of "playing the race card" to effect the jury. While I certainly agree with most people that Simpson deserved to be convicted of his crime, I read this phraseology--"playing the race card"--as a way of dismissing the truth about how race works within the American justice system.

And "the race card" works much the same way in American political life, too, because race and politics have been inseparable since the nation's inception. There has never been a campaign that didn't appeal to voters based on one of several narratives about the way race fits into American life. The media, in this instance, is only making explicit, and sometimes parodic, something that has always been implicit in the way we look at our country.

[BootinUp]

40. I don't have to read all of this to agree.

I said something similar recently.

As soon as the race for the nom became close, this was all inevitable despite any actions taken by the campaigns.

[Skidmore]

22. Wow! Clinton camp talking points must have been received early

today. I've heard this spin advanced by Clinton spokespeople on cable newsmagazines all morning. Bill tossed that bone in the air and everyone is trying to chew on it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. Why not talk about substance instead of spin?

Is there validity in what I wrote in my OP or not? This isn't the first time I have raised this issue on DU. Let me know if you need me to point you to earlier posts where I have discussed it.

[pampango]

24. It's always somebody else's fault. Never our own. n/t

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. Too often we put the DU in Drudge's Report n/t

[Freida5]

26. Good post

It is the media. They are pushing the race issue to sell advertisements. The Obama campaign is using the media obsession to attack Clinton.

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. Welcome to DU. It will be friendlier around here when the primaries are over

And thank you for your compliment.

[rodeodance]

28. Big Dog hit back at the Media this week for doing that--What did DU do--dissed

him royally (for the most part).

[The River]

30. For Once I Can Agree With You

Yes, the race card is in play. It's in play because Barack Obama chose to run.

But guess what? If Mrs. Clinton is the nominee the media will play the gender card
instead; right through to her defeat in November.

The Republicans have NOTHING to run on in 08 so we provide them
an opportunity to play either the race or gender card.

Real smart.

[Tom Rinaldo]

31. Republicans specialize in divide and conquer, so yes

They will play any divisive card potentially available to them. They run a real risk with a gender card though because women are a MAJORITY group. And I think they would run a risk with a race card also, because Americans like to think well of ourselves. The Republican attack machine in not good at being nuanced. I think they would create a strong backlash against them trying too hard to bring down Obama over race.

[The River]

39. They Don't Need Nuance

Since when have RW hate mongers ever done nuance?
Their candidate will remain above the fray but all the
Rush Limbaugh types on the extreme right will whip their listeners into a frenzy
of hatred. The "regular" media will report on the RW talking points and follow up
with coverage of the outraged reaction on the left.
Election news coverage will ignore the issues (as usual)
and be all about race, gender and "hardball" politics.
The frame is set, the actors have their lines and Diebold stands ready.

[Tom Rinaldo]

43. That's my point. I think they would be so heavy handed

...that combined with the current low public tolerance of the National Republican Party, it will cause a sympathy vote swing toward our Candidate. I COUNT on them being repulsively ugly.

[gulliver]

32. They like to stir up trouble.

When decent people let things slide or give their opponent the benefit of the doubt, the media steps in stirs the pot. You can't get to a big picture because they keep nit-picking and fight mongering. They have no judgement any more.

[Steely_Dan]

37. Excellent Post...

I would add that I believe that both of these candidates should have seen this coming. They were blinded by their presidential aspirations and not the potential danger that race and gender could mean to our party. With some creative collaboration, they could have stopped the media in their tracks. Instead they missed their opportunity and now we are on this slippery slope.

-P

[Tom Rinaldo]

38. I don't disagree with anything you wrote. Excellent observation n/t

[robbedvoter]

42. Not so sure they could have stopped the MSM - it's not like it workes for us

We know who owns it and what its purpose is - and it ain't having a dem - any dem - in power. But you're right, there was some needless feeding.

[MzShellG]

44. The media played tag team with the Clintons. nt