SNL at 3 am. That's Entertainment?

The SNL intro from last night is unbelievable.  Apart from SNL becoming a branch office of the HRC campaign, they are now doing their best -- intended or not -- to further the stereotype of the inexperienced, ignorant black man who needs a white person to do even the most basic task.  My jaw dropped when I saw the SNL skit.  Compare it to what was considered acceptable 'entertainment' not long ago, and within the lifetime of the older voters that still have trouble with Obama, and are not shy about telling pollsters that race is an issue for them.  

SNL Last night:

http://www.nbc.com/...

Another late night phone call:

The fact that the SNL skit was done by a white actor in blackface makes it only worse.  In case you don't know what that means:

The HRC campaign itself has coyly relied on reinforcing racist stereotypes with its references to Obama possibly being a drug dealer, voting 'present' on sex-shop and sex-abuse legislation, wearing native African garb, and 'protecting' your children as they sleep at 3 am.  Tell me with a straight face the HRC campaign and its allies aren't propagating the image of the uppity drug abusing black man who's a sexual threat to your children, who should know his place.  Too many people know that telling someone they lack 'experience' is just another way of saying not now, not ever -- wait your turn, which will never come.   Before I thought she didn't mean it.  Now, it's too much, too many times.  It's beyond the point where it is enough for HRC to reject and denounce.  The American people need to reject and denounce.  It needs to stop.  Yes maam.  

•  Holy Shit!

  by jamesparenti on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:48:16 PM PDT

  •  That's so funny!

    And the Obama people accuse Hillary of racism!! There was nothing racist in that skit - it just outlined his incompetence and inexperience for the job. And the part about the red button - considering his incorrect votes and the chance of his hand on the nuclear button was funny and very scary.

    by CanadaWest on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:25:46 PM PDT

•  :(

  by michlawa2 on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:49:59 PM PDT

•  I got to the 2 min mark of the SNL skit

  ..and turned that shit off.

  by Scarce on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:54:05 PM PDT

  •  turning off

    I understand why you turned it off.  I was disgusted.  But the only way crimes don't happen in the dark is to shed a bright light on them.  Especially with racist stereotypes, which thrive on good people not standing up to shame its practitioners.

    by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:57:17 PM PDT

  •  Lorne Michaels has contributed...

    ...the max to McCain's campaign. It's in his best interest to trash Obama. And the worse crime of all... it's not funny. Satire works when it's smart and funny.  this is neither. This is ham handed,sledge hammer unfunny propaganda.

    by AndyZ on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:31:02 PM PDT

    •  It's an ANTI-HRC skit!

      Geez, Louise!!!   I agree, it's dull and boring, but it's aim is directed at HRC!

      The skit is, essentially, telling the viewer this:

      HRC made an ad last week that got a lot of play.  The  3:00 a.m. ad.  Well, we're gonna riff on that, and take her themes to their logical conclusion.

      THIS (the skit) is how they (HRC's team) would really like to construct an ad.  

      [fake ad follows, presenting HRC as totally in-control; Obama as clueless]

      It's a skit that makes fun of HRC by presenting her ad team's fantasy image of Obama.

      Please pay closer attention to how comedy works.  (Note: again, this skit was in fact lame, and not clever.  But it just is NOT HRC propaganda.  Precisely the opposite.)

      by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:03:36 PM PDT

      •  "irony"

        as I said in one of your other multiple responses on this same point, people in whiteface and blackface, with an articulate african american portrayed as an ignorant buffoon who is incapable of the most simple tasks; don't lose the forest while dissecting the branches of the trees; any intellectual coding was overwhelmed by the sledgehammer of its treatment of Obama as an unworthy idiot, and not for the first time on SN

        by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:10:05 PM PDT

        •  no no no

          it's not an "intellectual" coding.  It's just a simple and basic framing of the skit.

          The "treatment of Obama as an unworthy idiot" (your words) is the joke at the expense of HRC.

          The joke is this:

          Folks, here's HRC's fantasy image of Obama.  This is what her ad "said" if pushed to its logical conclusions.

          Truly, do you just not get this???  I'm bewildered.

          by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:22:36 PM PDT

          •  'getting it'

            I know full well that one can use irony while portraying an african american as a step-n-fetchit.  That doesn't make its portrayal any less offensive, when the insult, and not any irony, is the thrust of the skit.  Especially when there is no punch line at the end skewering the HRC fantasy image.  SNL has bent over backwards to give HRC a platform.  To the extent there is any benefit of the doubt, they forfeited it weeks ago.

            by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:34:46 PM PDT

            •  but there WAS a punchline.

              By returning to HRC at her smug desk--with her sign off--viewers received the punchline.  Did viewers need a billboard and spotlights??

              And irony used while portraying an African American as a Step'n Fetchit does not engage the offensiveness, because the irony is dependent upon that depiction being seen as unacceptable and laughable.

              I'm done--I do not see progress here--but I continue to think that you are wrong in your interpretations of this matter.

              But I'm glad that you now accept that the skit was not about Obama, but about Obama-in-HRC's-fantasy image.  That's a start.

              by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:55:45 PM PDT

              •  objects

                Obama, not HRC, was the object of this skit; the fact that it was clothed in deniability as HRC's fantasy doesn't make it any less offensive

                by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 09:01:24 PM PDT

•  I like The Daily Show and SNL

  but all the HRC promotion has got my feathers ruffled.

  by Kevwrex on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:54:59 PM PDT

•  Yes

  I am curious about this SNL thing.

  The first thing is that I don't think the skits are funny. I don't really know that anyone would find them funny, so I don't think it's just that I am an Obama supporter.

  But the other thing it just seems really aggressive and tone-deaf. I watched the skit and I am genuinely confused as to what exactly the writer's are going for. Obama is eloquent and smart, so they play him as not eloquent and dumb. It's weird. I am starting to think that they just want to generate chatter, even if it's about how dumb the show is, in an attempt to be relevant.

  by jenontheshore on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:55:46 PM PDT

  •  Also

    they seem to try to give him an enlarged forehead like a neanderthal.  When SNL writers see Obama speaking, is that really what they see? Is racism really so alive in 21st century America?

    by Jonathanonymous on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:03:50 PM PDT

  •  it's called IRONY

    Remember when they portrayed Reagan as publically doddering but privately as the only man in the White House with his shit together?   They comedically turned the "Reagan is just a figurehead operated by his handlers" meme on its head.

    Re-fucking-LAX.

    I'm offended that you think I'm too dumb to GET IT.

    by SFOrange on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:00:49 PM PDT

    •  Amazing

      It only syncs up with 500 years of racist stereotypes and revives them for a new era.

      Nothing to see here. Move only.

      Only another lazy inexperience negro riding affirmative action to steal a job from qualified white folk.

      It is so funny.

      Re-fucking-LAX indeed.

      And just in case anybody might miss the minstrel show quality both actors wore painted faces. The Senator Clinton actor in the traditional blackface style, but with white paint.

      It is hard to think of a more racist moment of the teevee since the 1970s.

      Cheers

      by dengre on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:20:25 PM PDT

      •  whiteface

        I didn't notice Hillary's white face in the skit; that's really bad, and really inexcusable; someone else tell me this doesn't matter

        by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:25:05 PM PDT

        •  Why so? If anything, it's an inversion...

          ...showing that HRC's attacks are akin to her performing Whiteness for segments of her base.

          Why is it inexcusable to present a white person performing whiteness?

          Here are some elements of the coding going on in this skit, as I see it (I teach cultural history):

          1.  the skit is framed by an HRC introducing it in a way that signals it should be read as a false attack ad

          2.  an HRC in white face (a white person in white face) plays mentor to an "inexperienced" Prez. (thus registering in a clearly over-the-top way the logical extension of many of HRC's real themes. (The comic line is as follows: "In their dreams, this is the ad they'd like to run!")

          3.  The use of white masking inverts an old racialist use of masking by whites to "perform" blackness (stereotypically).  Here, since the masking is white, the stereotype being invoked is the paternalist white attitude towards inexperienced (childlike) blacks.

          4.  To drive the point home, the junk about the heating system.  HRC knows all.  And Obama knows nothing.

          It's not an ad that presents HRC as the top candidate.  It's a skit that tries to skewer HRC's theme of experience-vs-naiveté, but does so in such a ham-handed way that it's just a bit boring, and not especially clever.

          But racist?  Not at all.  In fact, I think you're reading it about 180-degrees differently from what any sensible reading would suggest.  

          by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:46:08 PM PDT

          •  appearances

            people in whiteface and blackface, with an articulate african american portrayed as an ignorant buffoon who is incapable of the most simple tasks; don't lose the forest while dissecting the branches of the trees; any intellectual coding was overwhelmed by the sledgehammer of its treatment of Obama as an unworthy idiot, and not for the first time on SNL  

            by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:59:23 PM PDT

            •  He's not being "portrayed"

              He's being shown "as portrayed" by HRC's recent ad.  Their ridiculing the ad by raising its basic themes "up" several notches and presenting the over-the-top result.

              Good lord.

              by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:26:04 PM PDT

      •  I didnt SAY it was funny

        and you're in for a lot of heartache if you're going to insist on an off-limits policy regarding Obama and comedy.

        by SFOrange on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:36:22 PM PDT

        •  limits?

          there are plenty of jokes left without tacit appeals to racism; if electing Obama means it's OK to have reruns of Amos and Andy, that's not a step forward, and not how I read things; last time I looked some things are considered beyond the pale (i.e., Imus and Rutgers); whatever heartache we have, it will be a lot less than if we said nothing

          by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:45:15 PM PDT

          •  I seriously doubt

            there's any joke involving Obama you would shut up and sit  still for.

            Again, I don't think it was that funny, but the crux of the joke is that that's PRECISELY the opposite of how people imagine Obama handling the "3am phone call"

            Somebody stop me before I start lecturing on the nature of humor.

            by SFOrange on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:51:05 PM PDT

            •  I with you SFOrange. My goodness...

              ...where I come from, we used to have this thing called irony.  But...oh, nevermind...

              I mean, the skit is about as sharp as a pound of raw hamburger, but it just is not doing the race work that some are seeing.  It's coded as anti-HRC.

              by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:55:27 PM PDT

      •  oh jesus...

        ...you are so missing the obvious framing of this skit.

        The skit begins with "HRC" looking smugly into the camera.  We the viewers are "invited" into the fake ad through that framing.

        And that framing goes something like this:

        "If you take HRC's attacks to their logical conclusion, then THIS is the ad they'd really like to run."

        And then they ramp it up by presenting HRC as utterly composed (the idea behind her actual and real 3:00 a.m. ad), and Obama as without experience to handle even the Whitehouse heating.

        Man, I find it really troubling that anyone could see this (quite boring and not-clever) skit, and see race embedded in it in any but the most ironic way.

        by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:52:42 PM PDT

        •  deniability

          I'll quote another blogger (TheCSNews) over at the HuffPost thread on this:

          "SNL has done the unthinkable. They have stooped to fear tactics for their candidate Hillary Clinton. But they've done so in a way that leaves them with plausible deniability. After all, this was a sketch parodying Senator Clinton's "3 a.m." ad, right? It had nothing to do with portraying Obama as a Bush-like imbecile so their candidate can further reap the rewards of the less-informed adopting that image of Obama. No, not at all. After all, it's only comedy.
          I was honestly sickened by this sketch. SNL will eventually face the consequences of their departure from fair, honest, real-world-based satire. It's a shame, I once held their political content in such high regards."

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

          by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:25:27 PM PDT

          •  please make your own arguments, okay?

            You've invested a lot in this discussion, so keep with it, and don't pull in quotes and crutches by copying blogger posts.

            Explain to me (and readers) what is it that is racist about SNL's satirization HRC's ad?  It depicts the ridiculousness of her position vis-a-vis Obama.

            I need your help to show why I'm wrong here.

            by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:33:23 PM PDT

            •  bottom line

              there is nothing wrong quoting someone else's well-reasoned words in support of your position; as to getting this point, I think you are over-analyzing it; read the comment above by dengre; the SNL skit debased Obama and african americans; I am far from the only person who saw that any lame attempt at humor was overwhelmed by the racist heritage used in the depiction of Obama; if it wasn't intentioned, SNL can't be trusted to play with matches; I tend to think they knew full well what they were doing, especially when they put Hillary in white face; just think of the direction -- OK, make Barak look like a complete imbecil, but our audience will get that we mean the exact opposite; it doesn't fly, especially given that the other SNL skits of Obama by this actor in black face have portrayed him as someone who can barely handle softball questions; it is really getting to the bottom of the barrel; I grew up in a blue collar environment in Pennsylvania (many of whom avidly watched SNL); trust me, they will not focus on any irony, but on the foolish portrayal of Obama; the real evilness of this skit is the SNL folks know this (or ought to) and they are enabling the HRC effort here to repeatedly appeal to racist tendencies; as one HRC staffer was quoted on background (on either CNN or MSNC I believe) just before Ohio:  it ain't pretty, but it's necessary; that's no excuse, and it needs to be stopped before people think this kind of behavior gets rewarded; that's why segregation had so many enablers; we need to punish this kind of behavior in its incipiency, before it festers and gets even worse; even presidential ambition needs to have limits

              by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:52:05 PM PDT

              •  uncle...

                ...I give up mate.  Go your own way with this.  Perhaps time will tell who's over-analyzing.

                by genespleen on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 09:00:13 PM PDT

                •  dialogue

                  at least we're having a conversation about it; I just hope we have fewer and fewer reasons to debate the issue; every time I thought it was over, it got worse (drug dealer references to voting present on sex shop references to all the SC stuff to Obama dressed in African garb to 3 am ads about protecting sleeping babies); the racial coding here is way out of hand, and I think being oversensitive is the least of our problems

                  by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 09:07:51 PM PDT

•  It's not like Tina Fey would benefit from

  Hillary being president.  I mean it's not like that would give her a substantial role in the cast (since she would play the president).  It's not like she has a dog in the hunt.

  by Shhs on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:57:08 PM PDT

  •  Tina Fey is no longer on SNL

    /

    by SFOrange on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:02:25 PM PDT

•  well

  Normally I would say they are trying to make a joke out of the whole thing. But after the debate skits, and her appearance but Super Tuesday III I don't know (or was it Super Tues. IV, I can't keep track).

  The "mask" she is wearing is about as subtle as a Mike Tyson upper cut (when he was a good boxer).

  Unless it is actually a subtle way of saying Hillary, you are bordering on racism. By putting her in the mask. Maybe they are saying the basis of the commercial, that somehow anyone but her will freak out when that call comes is silly.

  All I know for sure is that show hasn't been funny since Will Farrel left.

  by Grant Caesar Peters on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:57:40 PM PDT

•  I took it the other way...

  it came across to me as mocking sarcasm -- of Hillary.

  They played on Hillary's message that Obama is unqualified, inexperienced, and incompetent, and took it over the top.

  Maybe it's just me.

  by Executive Odor on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 12:58:42 PM PDT

  •  reality

    you are one of the few

    the laughter when the Obama character was acting ignorant was not criticism of Hillary, it was the sickening sound of people enjoying someone being made to look stupid, regardless of reality

    by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:02:07 PM PDT

    •  I hope not.

      They also made HRC look pretty silly in that whiteface, with the hair in curlers, and the "motherly" advice.

      And, with the obviously intelligent Obama having to write down her every instruction... it was irony. A bit of nervous irony, but I think the target was Hillary.

      Just my .002 Euros.

      by Executive Odor on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:07:09 PM PDT

    •  This is my fear.

      There's another diary about this skit posted now--and that was my response to that diary, too.  My concern is that although on one level we're supposed to see this as Hillary's crazy view of things--the part that people will remember is "Obama" crying, dithering and acting like an idiot. People laughed at that.

      A poster on the other diary mentioned that Hillary supporters at Taylor Marsh had the video on the front page and that pro-Clinton posters at TalkLeft thought it slammed Obama.

      by Zulia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:31:30 PM PDT

    •  Are you going to cry like a baby

      everytime Obama is lampooned as president?

      by SFOrange on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:05:29 PM PDT

  •  And taken alone I might have thought that

    But in the previous two weeks of new episodes they have portrayed Sen Obama as unqualified to be president and not articulate and more importantly not wrapped in the fig leaf of it being Hilary's idea of who Barak Obama is.  It's one thing for SNL to hammer home how stiff and wooden Al Gore is (there's a kernel of truth in that....) and how "patrician" John Kerry is (again he does come off that way...) but quite another to portray Obama in a way that seems so far off the mark to reality.

    I don't think it's racism.  I think it's incompetent hack SNL writers and producers who are too wrapped up in their own circles to notice the real world outside NYC.

    by akeitz on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:09:37 PM PDT

  •  It appeared that

    it was supposed to be mocking Hillary's fear ads by taking it to its extreme, like Colbert.  That kind of satire is difficult, Colbert is a master at it and the writers for SNL are obviously not.  

    The piece is far too long, it just drags. The humor is supposed to be in the mocking of the underlying premise, not necessarily the presentation.  In this case the funny part was supposed to be that Hillary is going way over the top, but the writing and delivery are what killed the piece.  The intent was not racist but rather to tear apart Hillary's not so subtle usage of fear and bigotry, but the piece just fails at that.  Satire is about layers and subtly and this didn't have much of either.

    by pgm 01 on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 03:34:50 PM PDT

    •  Yep, you got all the flaws.

      It wasn't great satire; but I think Hillary was the intended target.

      Or, maybe they wanted a "fair and balanced" skit that made both of them look ridiculous.

      by Executive Odor on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:29:50 PM PDT

•  SNL = NBC = MSNBC = Extended Primary = $$$$$$$$$$

  One wonders if SNL is simply being used as a tool to help keep the primary race going...as millions and millions and millions of dollars are at stake for NBC.  Also, it wouldn't hurt NBC to have a NYer in the WH.  Just sayin'...

  by Public Servant on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:01:47 PM PDT

  •  Look just bc NBC is a division of GE

    and just bc GE makes money off of war, doesn't mean they have an alternative motive.

    I mean just because stations that were owned by tobacco companies had to disclose that (when they covered the tobacco issues) doesn't mean that the MCM should have to disclose stuff when they are reporting on the war or issues that affect the war.

    by Shhs on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:03:36 PM PDT

•  Problems seeing past race?

  SNL does not have a black cast member suitable to play Barack Obama.  They just don't.  They use the cast member who can portray him best.

  Second, people like you are inserting your own "black vs. white" context into this sketch, which says more about your mindset than it does the SNL writers.

  by brouski on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:03:40 PM PDT

  •  context

    it's not just that; it's the portrayal of Obama as a complete ignoramus who needs the help of HRC to do the most simple thing, which is as far from the truth as possible; this is not the first time; these are serial offenders

    by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:21:20 PM PDT

    •  Given...

      and if that had been the thrust of your diary that would be fine.

      But you're trying to make a racial point of it, which I think is unfair.  It comes too close to the old "You can't criticize Candidate X without being X-ist" canard.

      by brouski on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:32:04 PM PDT

      •  choices

        there are plenty of ways to criticize Obama, including many that could be very cutting (Rezko, Michelle saying he is 'too good' to be in politics running for president and she won't let him run again, the 'monster' comment by his adviser, etc.); portraying him as a step-n-fetchit is too much, especially since the reality isn't anywhere near that

        by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:41:42 PM PDT

  •  Racism is alive and well

    OK, people, I am a NYC Latina and wish I had a dollar for every time one of my friends, acquaintances or co-workers has told me that Obama cannot be president because he is black.  Or even before this election, has stated that co-workers were stupid just because they were black, i.e. that Negro...(fill in the blank) Negro is black in Spanish, in case there is a person who does not know.

    In fact, in 2000 my landlady told me that the neighbors were concerned that real estate values would go down because I kept bringing black people over.  I am an attorney and this is one of the few times I have been speechless. 2000 NYC!!!

    Yes, there is bigotry, A LOT, in NYC.  

    by cachola on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:44:41 PM PDT

    •  reality vs. the media

      it's what people say when they think they can get away with it; as to others who say SNL was just being funny, and we shouldn't overreact, let's not be naive; the media repeatedly trashed Gore in 2008, and no one spoke up against the non-reality based entertainment that was foisted on us; look at what we got; if we don't speak up against the implicitly racist and other crap that is going on now on SNL and elsewhere, before the theme is fully absorbed in the MSM, and Obama is 'packaged' as an inexperienced incompetent who isn't up to be CinC, the fight will be lost; don't forget the SNL piece will get replayed by other media as being 'funny'; and notice how the media jumped on the Obama campaign's 'missteps' before Ohio as an indication that the campaign is in over its head and is about to 'implode' (the words of Sam Donaldson this morning); we need to frame the debate

      by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:02:39 PM PDT

•  Three weeks in a row

  There have now been pro-Hillary stuff on SNL three weeks in a row. This is getting ridiculous.

  Here's a link to contact SNL with complaints.

  http://www.nbc.com/...

  At the very least they should be neutral.

  by mnguy66 on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:17:50 PM PDT

•  Actually..

  I thought it was pretty funny and shows SNL understands their imbalance of the past several weeks.  It's satirizing the Clinton campaigns smears over the past week.  I'm a huge Obama supporter and I didn't think it was too bad; grain of salt people...
  Let's not turn in to the Clinton camp crying wolf at every little thing.  

  Know Hope.

  by kdrtoona on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:35:45 PM PDT

•  The only way to counter SNL

  Is to promote viral videos on You Tube spoofing Hillary and Bill.

  by griz4u on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:41:00 PM PDT

•  Your Overreaction

  It was a typically bad, not funny SNL skit. Saying something meanspirited couched as a "joke" only because someone actually saying that would provoke the response "are you joking?" But it wasn't nearly the attack on Obama from a Clinton proxy that you describe it as.

  The skit introduces itself as an unfair Clinton ad, in those terms. Through the main part of the fake ad it says outright that it's making false claims about Obama. And then in the outro it's got the Clinton character again saying the ad isn't true, it's "specious talking points".

  They botched the job of either making it funny, or of really biting back at Clinton for her original attack ad. It's not a good joke at Clinton's expense the way it's clearly designed to be. But it isn't anything like the attack on Obama that you say it is.

  Where's the stereotype? That a Black man needs help from a White person? How about the reverse (against stereotype) scene it presents: a man who can't make a decision without a woman. What other stereotypes are in there? Black people smoke but don't admit it?

  The two other clips you inserted aren't anything like what SNL put on. They're real racist artifacts from a time we're trying to put behind us. There was no excuse to put them out there again, in this diary. The only racism put out there that offended me in your diary was those two old clips, that you put there. The SNL clip only offended me because it was another 2 minutes of lame SNL "humor" that I thought I wouldn't have to waste ever again, since the show's not funny.

  Racism is alive and working against Obama in America. Crying wolf like this diary makes it harder to fight the real thing.

  by DocGonzo on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:51:38 PM PDT

  •  context

    the second clip was from Spike Lee, from Bamboozled; I think he showed the clips in his movie because the only way to fight racism is to display its ugly side; I'd love to think this country is beyond its past, and we're in a better spot than we were, but I was raised in Pennsylvania and know some of the rough spots of the older generation; this is going to get worse, not better, unless we confront it directly and make people embarrassed  and shameful when they become enablers  

    by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:09:12 PM PDT

    •  Real Context

      I saw Bamboozled, and was very upset by it. Because that movie showed that racism from the history of entertainment in a very real and relevant context.

      This diary uses it as context for something that isn't consistent with it.

      I'm not saying that there's no racism - I explicity said that there is in my post. I'm not saying racism can be dealt with by ignoring it. I'm saying that if you're going to present racist images, you've got to do a good job and not just overblow the case with it. I explained in detail how this diary doesn't do that, and how the SNL skit isn't that kind of racist content.

      Spike Lee grew up here in my neighborhood, I've talked with Spike Lee, and this diary is no Spike Lee Joint.

      by DocGonzo on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:52:00 PM PDT

      •  spike

        didn't claim to be spike; one of the reasons I posted the earlier racist clips is that I think most people don't know the painful history, and let slide things they shouldn't, which lets people do things that need to be called out; remember the debate earlier in the Times about Reagan just being a nice guy giving a speech in Philadelphia Mississippi on states rights; also, note the comment earlier on this diary pointing out that Hillary's facial in the skit is an obvious reference to blackface make-up (something I didn't notice); whatever thought I had that this might be innocent slipped away with that; makes me think these folks know full well that they're making references to racist antecedents, but think they're so smart they are immune from criticism; SNL is playing with fire, and they know it

        by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 03:01:42 PM PDT

        •  Oversensitive

          The other stories you cite as context are valid stories of racism.

          The SNL skit you're offering as another example is not, for the reasons I detailed.

          It's true that the longer racism abuses people, the less far reasonable people have to be pushed before they scream. But if you scream over something like that skit, when it's not there, you make people numb to the screams. Which perpetuates the racism.

          I'm also thinking of earlier in the campaign when Clinton complained of "the boys piling on the one girl", which was a sexist comment because the "piling" was on the frontrunner, not "the girl". The backlash against that unjustified complaint cost her, and also made it hard for her campaign to also campaign against real sexism, which was one of its advantages.

          Look, I'm voting for Obama. Towards the bottom of the list of his advantages is the positive effect he'll have on transcending America's racist past. A little higher is the effect he's already having forcing America to talk about racism. But going to far is counterproductive.

          by DocGonzo on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 03:07:00 PM PDT

          •  how far before you say enough

            agree with what you say, but if SNL keeps this up it will not be good; this skit made me shudder; others may be more tolerant; I expect crap from the crazies, but if a blackface skit portraying Obama as an ignorant fool is mainstream, we will be in a lot of trouble

            by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 03:15:04 PM PDT

            •  How About "Li'l Bush"?

              Again, I already explained that the SNL skit isn't really racist. FWIW, the woman playing Hillary is a White woman in whiteface.

              You want to get mad about some real racism dressed up in "satire"? Comedy Central is running a promo for its lame "Li'l Bush" adult cartoon mocking Bush. This time around, it's got the jerky Bush character saying about Obama "the last thing we need is a Black dude in the White House begging for change." Now that is racist stereotype that's not funny, and not OK just because it's framed as "satire".

              There is a difference between the two examples. The SNL skit doesn't actually play on racist references, as I explained. The Comedy Central snipe does do so, regardless of how it's framed as "something Bush would say".

              Try fighting something that's not blown out of proportion. There's plenty of it.

              by DocGonzo on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 03:47:27 PM PDT

              •  choices

                The 'lil' Bush' piece sounds bad, but SNL is front and center, and may have pulled a decent number of voters before Ohio.  We don't agree on how bad the SNL skit was.  I'm far from alone on this, as shown by other comments, but people can disagree.  The real question will be where SNL and the rest of the media take this.  The MSM wants this battle to continue.  It's great drama, and tearing Obama down as being in over his head is an obvious story line. Haven't heard a word from the MSM (except NPR, which is not viewed by everyone within that frame) that Obama may have won Texas, with the delegate count, because that doesn't fit their neat Hillary comeback narrative.  The media views all of this as entertainment.  

                My worry is the HRC campaign, and its allies, have engaged in a conscious campaign of sending signals about Obama that appeal to the worst hatreds in people, "as far as I know."  This is not about blatant stuff.  It's about reinforcing racist tendencies without getting caught.  That's why it's so horrific, and needs to be fought.  Like it or not, a target population still exists for that marketing.  The question will be how far it can go before they get called on it.  This is SNL, not the HRC campaign itself, but they seem to be declared allies.  Expect more of the same, and expect Obama to be criticized as in over his head if he can't take it.  Not a pretty picture.

                by dge on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 04:06:23 PM PDT

                •  Over His Head != Racism

                  OK. But now you're shifting to criticizing the SNL skit for portraying Obama as "in over his head", not racism. If the roles were reversed, it would be just as much a statement that Clinton is in over her head "because she's a woman". That is, not such a statement.

                  Because, as I said, there's nothing in that skit that says Obama is in over his head because he's Black. He's portrayed that way because Clinton actually says he is. There's nothing racist about it. None of the other fictional Obama problems have anything to do with his race.

                  If this skit were performed without Obama even appearing, it would have made exactly the same points (with Obama making puffing sounds when he's denying he's smoking again), but even better. It would have actually been funny if the 3AM call were to Hillary as senator from an unseen President Obama. It would have been a clearer joke about Clinton's claims about Obama's readiness if the action were framed more clearly as Clinton's obnoxious message than its intro/outro featuring "Clinton" delivered. But SNL's crime is that it's not funny. Its crime isn't that it's racist.

                  There is plenty of real appeals to racism, even to ageism (somehow "a lifetime of experience" is accumulated by your 60th year, not by your 45th year). Pushing the Somalia garb picture was exactly that kind of dog whistle. But that's not inherent in this SNL skit. That's why it's more important to not see racism where it isn't, but where it is. Sure, there are plenty of people who will back up your claim SNL is racist.

                  There's plenty of people who will tag Clinton with any unfairness anyone claims, however fair the claim is, and plenty of people who will agree with claims of "covert racism", even when it's not there - "better to err on the side of caution" and "we're making up for the real racism that's not called out by calling out some that's not necessarily there". But of course there's conversely even more people who will deny real racism, either because they like the racist, or they want to make up for all the perceived false claims of racism.

                  Again, if we complain about racism that isn't there, we discredit ourselves for when we're needed to call it out for real.

                  by DocGonzo on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 05:33:28 PM PDT

•  Crappy skit

  from a crappy show.  The "bitch is the new black" skit has already ensured that I'll never watch SNL again.  I too find the skit offensive, but doubt I'm the target audience for that POS show anyway.

  by GN1927 on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 01:56:36 PM PDT

•  SNL RIPPED ME OFF

  http://www.dailykos.com/...

  # * [new] Cold Cream, Pink Plastic Rollers, Quilted Robe (4+ / 0-)

  Recommended by:
     PerfectStormer, blueyedace2, ek hornbeck, Jacob Bartle

  Unfiltered Camel pasted to her lower lip

  by bernardpliers on Mon Mar 03, 2008 at 08:22:00 PM PDT

  [ Parent | Reply to This ]

  by bernardpliers on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 02:02:57 PM PDT

•  I just find it weird that in 2008....

  SNL has such a limited supply of brown people.

  by Anthony W on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:35:20 PM PDT