13549: Mostly White Village People.

Adweek published a story titled, “At Havas, It Takes a Village to Win So Many Accounts in So Little Time.” It’s a little sad that “It takes a village…” is an African proverb once hijacked by Hillary Clinton and now being used to spotlight an exclusively White media agency.

12943: Multicultural Campaigning.

From NBC News…

Clinton Campaign Hires Black Owned Advertising Firm

By Lauren Victoria Burke

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has hired Burrell Communications, an African American advertising and media firm.

Based in Chicago and Los Angeles, the firm is owned by two African American women, McGhee Williams Osse and Faye Ferguson, both seasoned marketing and advertising professionals.

Burrell Communications, founded in 1971, will assist the campaign in focusing on African American voters, targeting their concerns and issues as Clinton moves forward towards the first primary and caucus tests.

In 2012, African American women showed up big at the polls and delivered the highest voter turnout of any voters, between the ages of ages 18 to 29, in the U.S. electorate.

Though many political observers wonder if that level of voter participation was only possible because President Obama’s name was on the ballot, Clinton is expected to fight hard to assemble Obama’s coalition of voters as the cornerstone of a winning strategy.

It’s likely Burrell Communications’ influence will be seen in South Carolina, where Black voters are a big key in a race primarily between Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders. (Ms. Williams Osse even completed her completed post-graduate advertising studies at the University of South Carolina.) The South Carolina primary is on February 27th and currently Clinton is polling ahead.

“We choose to be an agency that specializes in the African-American market. This is our DNA — our passion... and we believe that we are responsible to the community to whom we speak — the African-American community; our community,” the Burrell website reads regarding the company’s overall mission. The firm has designed campaigns for major corporations ranging from McDonald’s to Toyota to General Mills to American Airlines.

These new hires add to other African American hires who are currently working for Clinton.

The most prominent of those hires includes LaDavia Drane, who is Hillary Clinton’s Director of African American Outreach, Marlon Marshall, who is Clinton’s Director of Political Engagement, and Karen Finney, Clinton’s strategic communications adviser and spokesperson. Finney also worked for Clinton during her run for Senate in 2000.

The campaign also hired well known political veteran Ron Lester to focus on the campaign’s African American polling.

12422: Hillary Clinton’s Mad Politics.

Advertising Age reported that Hillary Clinton is likely tapping advertising executives—specifically, GSD&M Chairman Emeritus Roy Spence and Coca-Cola Marketing Executive and former GSD&M Director of Client Services Wendy Clark—to help craft messages for her potential presidential campaign.

Now, it’s not uncommon for politicians to employ adpeople to help persuade and woo voters. For example, Hal Riney hatched the iconic “Morning in America” commercial for Ronald Reagan in 1984. Ad Age opined the following:

Should Ms. Clinton run, her purpose would be to leverage her strengths as an experienced political pro with a large base of female support, while crafting a message that appeals to a wide swath of Americans tired of politics-as-usual. Ms. Clark, a political outsider who has worked on mass-marketed brands, might bring valuable experience to the table in that endeavor.

If Ad Age’s supposition is accurate, one has to wonder about Clinton’s initial choices from adland, especially in regards to the goal of concocting “a message that appeals to a wide swath of Americans…” Sorry, but the overwhelming majority of White advertising executives are culturally clueless, rendering them incapable of effectively and honestly addressing the true, diverse American public.

Consider the fact that Spence masterminded the inane “3 a.m.” commercial during Clinton’s 2008 bid for the Democratic nomination. The spot received lots of criticism and ridicule—and most importantly, it failed to move Clinton ahead of Barack Obama. Additionally, Spence is among those wonderful folks who gave you Annie the Chicken Queen for Popeyes. In short, GSD&M is hardly the home of inclusive, enlightened thinkers, which makes enlisting Spence and Clark a pretty risky and probably reckless decision.

This isn’t the first time MultiCultClassics has wondered about the use of advertising executives as political strategists and executioners. Indeed, do representatives of an industry that continues to make diversity a dream deferred and denied deserve to service a presidential candidate? If Clinton really wants to speak to “Americans tired of politics-as-usual,” she ought to reconsider business as usual with modern Mad Men and Mad Women.

6196: Making The Call.

Sales pitches in a MultiCultClassics Monologue…

• Barack Obama is poised to name Hillary Rodham Clinton as Secretary of State. Wonder if anyone will mention Rodham Clinton’s readiness to handle a 3am call.

• The Washington Post reported that Circuit City has a challenge to convince potential customers that the company is not completely going out of business. Seems the bigger challenge is convincing potential customers Circuit City doesn’t completely suck.

6066: Calling Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It’s 2 AM. Do you know where your Pedialyte® is?

Um, no. But call back in an hour and Hillary Clinton will be available to help find it.

5935: What Obama Teaches Madison Avenue.

The Franklin Blog noted two other blogs—FiveThirtyEight and Crooks And Liars—insisted Barack Obama must create better ads. Crooks And Liars wrote, “The Obama campaign needs to think a little more outside of the box. They should aim to produce ads that are either more creative/funny than a typical campaign ad, or more sincere.” MultiCultClassics posted initial comments at The Franklin Blog, and here they are again with elaboration.

Perhaps Obama realizes traditional ads don’t influence voters’ decisions. After all, has anyone ever cast a ballot because of a commercial?

It’s hard to recall positive and memorable TV spots for presidential candidates. The last one that comes to mind is Hal Riney’s “Morning in America” hyping Ronald Reagan. On the flip side, there are plenty of spots that result in ridicule and worse. How many parodies were inspired by Hillary Clinton’s 3 a.m. nonsense? John McCain has generated loads of problems for himself via broadcast bullshit. You’d think the Arizona senator would opt for direct mail and telemarketing versus continuing to set up people’s punchlines.

The truth—if such a thing exists in advertising and politics—is that Obama has been running great ads. But he’s using nontraditional ad techniques. His digital skills make McCain look downright analog. Plus, Obama lets influencers literally sing praises for him. Meanwhile, numerous recording artists have demanded McCain stop playing their tunes.

There’s been controversy with minority media feeling slighted by Obama. But why buy ad space when the publications put him on nearly every cover? That’s called free publicity.

Obama’s “Change” theme has been consistent and memorable. Could anyone recite McCain’s “Country First” tagline until maybe a week ago?

Obama has displayed an active dislike for the standard political games, and it appears his annoyance extends to the standard political ads. Like successful and breakthrough brands, Obama has established a leadership position without regular marketing schemes. TV spots are not the primary vehicles delivering his messages. And the “product” is ultimately selling itself.

There are lessons here for the ivory towers on Madison Avenue.

5898: Hallmark Moments.

Not sure how Hallmark gets away with using these images. Are politicians in the public domain? Anyway, guess we can expect McCain and Palin cards soon—for retirement and new baby, respectively.

5876: Assorted Train Wrecks.

Working on a railroad in a MultiCultClassics Monologue…

• The New York Times reported scholars believe it’s unlikely that Harriet Tubman ever uttered the words attributed to her in Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Democratic National Convention speech. Clinton’s quotes included, “If you hear the dogs, keep going. If you see the torches in the woods, keep going. If there’s shouting after you, keep going. Don’t ever stop. Keep going. If you want a taste of freedom, keep going.” The scholars believe Clinton was probably paraphrasing popular expressions associated with the Underground Railroad conductor. They probably also believe Clinton’s campaign ultimately derailed into a massive train wreck.

• Sears reported 2Q profits fell 62 percent. Tiffany reported 2Q profits doubled, due in part to strong sales in Asia and Europe. Which makes sense, as folks in the U.S. can’t even afford to shop at Sears.

5644: Affirmative Inaction.

The story below appeared via The Associated Press. Scan it quickly to read the MultiCultClassics perspective immediately following…

Is Obama the end of affirmative action?
Some say his success makes controversial policy obsolete

By The Associated Press

Washington—Barack Obama’s political success might claim an unintended victim: affirmative action, a much-debated policy he supports.

Already weakened by several court rulings and state referendums, affirmative action now confronts a challenge to its very reason for existing. If Americans make a black person the leading contender for president, as nationwide polls suggest, how can racial prejudice be so prevalent and potent that it justifies special efforts to place minorities in coveted jobs and schools?

“The primary rationale for affirmative action is that America is institutionally racist and institutionally sexist,” said Ward Connerly, the leader of state-by-state efforts to end what he and others consider policies of reverse discrimination. “That rationale is undercut in a major way when you look at the success of Senator Clinton and Senator Obama.”

Other critics of affirmative action agree. “Obama is further evidence that the great majority of Americans reject discrimination, reject prejudice,” said Todd F. Gaziano, a scholar at the conservative Heritage Foundation and a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Not so fast, say supporters of affirmative action. Just because Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey and other minorities have reached the top of their professions does not mean that ordinary blacks, Latinos or women are free from day-to-day biases that deny them equal access to top schools or jobs, they say.

As affirmative action’s power has diminished, minority enrollment has fallen at many prominent colleges, said Gary Orfield, an authority on the subject at the University of California, Los Angeles.

“If people get the impression from Obama’s success that the racial problems of this country have been solved, that would be very sad,” Orfield said. “In some ways we have moved backwards” in recent years, he said.

Wade Henderson, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, said, “Exceptions don’t make the rule.”

“By any measure, Obama and Clinton are clearly exceptional individuals,” he said. “When you really examine the masses of Americans, especially women and people of color, you still find incredible disparities,” which justify the continuation of affirmative action programs.

Obama, who asks voters neither to support nor oppose him on the basis of his race, has dealt gently with affirmative action. He says his two young daughters have enjoyed great advantages and therefore should not receive special consideration because of their race.

OK, this topic was technically discussed a few weeks ago, but the new story inspired additional thoughts.

First, it should be noted Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton might question eliminating affirmative action measures, as she indicated throughout her failed campaign that the ladies still have glass ceilings to shatter—despite the fact that White women have benefited the greatest from affirmative action.

Of course, things are clearly worse in the advertising industry, as we consistently drag behind the general population on such matters by a couple decades at least. It wasn’t too long ago that Neil French exposed the ugliness. A recent Advergirl post seems to confirm gender-based inequities persist. Why, it’s so messed up, even the admen are crying sexual harassment and discrimination.

The problems are significantly compounded when considering the other groups affected by our industry’s tradition of exclusivity. More importantly, few are disputing the issues on Madison Avenue. Instead, the majority of adpeople openly admit there’s a humongous quagmire.

4As President-CEO Nancy Hill acknowledged “the dearth of African-American executives in our ranks” and said, “Yes, increasing the number of ethnically and racially diverse employees in agencies—particularly African-Americans in the senior ranks—is a critical business imperative for us all.”

Recognizing the need to step it up is a common sentiment, whether delivering positive hype or not. For example, when addressing the diversity progress at IPG, Executive Vice President Philippe Krakowsky stated, “While last year’s [hiring] results are encouraging, we still have lots of work ahead of us.” Mike Hughes of The Martin Agency told a contributor at The Big Tent, “We’ve done a pretty poor job on diversity as an industry and we’ve got to do better.” The legendary Dan Wieden once blurted, “I will not stand here and try to make excuses for the number of African-Americans we’ve hired. It’s pathetic. There’s a lot more we can do.” Hey, you know it’s bad when the White folks in charge are griping about the slowness of change.

The general public can debate if affirmative action should end. But on Madison Avenue, the honest professionals are wondering when the hell such initiatives will begin.

5507: Clinton Shoots Herself In Foot. Again.

From The New York Daily News…

Hillary Clinton’s colossal blunder simply the last straw

By Michael Goodwin

SICK. Disgusting. And yet revealing. Hillary Clinton is staying in the race in the event some nut kills Barack Obama.

It could happen, but what definitely has happened is that Clinton has killed her own chances of being vice president. She doesn’t deserve to be elected dog catcher anywhere now.

Her shocking comment to a South Dakota newspaper might qualify as the dumbest thing ever said in American politics.

Her lame explanation that she brought up the 1968 assassination of Robert Kennedy because his brother Ted’s illness was on her mind doesn’t cut it. Not even close.

We have seen an X-ray of a very dark soul. One consumed by raw ambition to where the possible assassination of an opponent is something to ponder in a strategic way. Otherwise, why is murder on her mind?

It’s like Tonya Harding’s kneecapping has come to politics. Only the senator from New York has more lethal fantasies than that nutty skater.

We could have seen it coming, if only we had realized Clinton’s thinking could be so cold. She has grown increasingly wild in her imagery lately, invoking everything from slavery to the political killings in Zimbabwe in making her argument for the Florida and Michigan delegations. She claimed to be the victim of sexism, despite winning the votes of white men.

But none of it was moving the nomination needle, with Obama, despite recent dents, still on course to be the victor.

So she kept digging deeper, looking for the magic button. Instead, she pushed the eject button, lifting herself right out of consideration.

Giving voice to such a vile thought is all the more horrible because fears Obama would be killed have been an undercurrent to his astonishing rise. Republican Mike Huckabee made a stupid joke about it recently. Many black Americans have talked of it, reflecting their assumption that racists would never tolerate a black President and that Obama would be taken from them.

Clinton has now fed that fear. She needs a very long vacation. And we need one from her.

Say good night, Hillary. And go away.

5493: Shades Of Whiteness.

From The Chicago Tribune…

The white vs. off-white election

By Meghan Daum

If you’re white and you like stuff, maybe you’ve bookmarked the Internet blog Stuff White People Like. The creation of Christian Lander, a 29-year-old Culver City, Calif., copywriter, it’s an ever-growing list of the kind of privileged preoccupations that traditionally are coded “white.”

Examples include not having a TV (“The No.1 reason why white people like not having a TV is so that they can tell you that they don’t have a TV.”), indie music (“To a white person, being a fan of a band before they get popular is one of the most important things they [sic] can do with their life.”) and, a bit abstrusely, awareness (“White people … firmly believe that all of the world’s problems can be solved through ‘awareness.’”).

To date, there are 99 items on Stuff White People Like.

Barack Obama, at No. 8, was among the first entries. Guess who is not on the list?

Somehow, Hillary Clinton, whose campaign now coasts on the fumes of a particular variety of white voter (the fuming kind), has failed to meet the rigorous standards of Stuff White People Like.

The reason, of course, is the same reason clichés such as mayonnaise and square dancing don’t make the cut either. The one thing Clinton has over Obama, which she has clumsily described as “hardworking Americans, white Americans,” is that certain white people like her more. But, to borrow a phrase from Lander and company, they are “the wrong kind of white people.” Could that mean they’re barely “white” at all?

Clinton’s white voters lack the salient feature of the white experience—privilege. As Stuff White People Like suggests, privilege now functions as a rarefied club that excludes people based not on their skin color but on their economic status, personal tastes and aesthetic sensibilities. The Web site tips toward progressive emblems of privilege (public radio), but because plenty of Republicans like iPods and farmers markets, it’s safe to say the actual cohort is bigger than that (or at least could support a sister site about white love for McMansions, mega-churches and golf). Yes, this club is still called “white,” but as time goes on, that whiteness becomes more conceptual than literal. You don’t have to be white to be white. You just need enough disposable income and the desire to buy the lifestyle accessories and adopt the points of view that were once exclusively associated with it.

So where does that leave Clinton’s last-ditch voting bloc? Barred from this new whiteness (and apparently unwilling or unable to make common cause with others who are also outside the pale), the people who handed Clinton a decisive victory in West Virginia have been stripped of so much social currency over the last few decades that you wonder if a new racial category—called “off-white” perhaps?—is about to emerge.

How else to explain the air of irrelevance that swirled around the primary? Granted, no one expected a nailbiter, but watching the media coverage, most notably the news clips in which one voter admitted to being “sort of scared of the other race” and another cavalierly insisted Obama was a Muslim, was to feel like the whole state had been written off as one big trailer park through which Clinton would take a final joy ride.

Some of that dismissiveness may be the result of the near-impossibility of Clinton getting the nomination. But it also may be a reflection of the way that, in the last 50 years, white people without college educations have gone from being the most dominant segment of American society to the most ignored.

A recent Brookings Institution paper on the decline of the white working class points out that in 1940, whites without a four-year college degree represented 86 percent of the over-25 population. Last year, they accounted for less than half. Moreover, in 1947, 86 percent of American families were white and earning (in 2005 dollars) less than $60,000 a year. By 2005, such families comprised only 33 percent.

But in addition to their dwindling demographic presence and their diminished status, these people constantly battle another head wind: culturally sanctioned mockery. Unprotected by the political correctness that makes deriding other minorities unacceptable or at least uncool, poor whites are often regarded not as people but as mullet-sporting, mobile-home-dwelling vessels of kitsch.

West Virginia had too few delegates at stake to matter much. Still, it’s been easy to get the feeling that some people, particularly those in the Stuff White People Like demographic, have concluded that the place is so backward it doesn’t matter at all.

The problem is, voters like those in West Virginia don’t see it that way. They may represent a shrinking demographic, but, as all the campaigns know, there are still enough of them that they can’t be ignored. The catch is that in an election in which race plays such a prominent role, the greatest tension may not be between black and white but white and off-white.

Meghan Daum is an essayist and novelist in Los Angeles.

5450: Feel Like Hurling.

Throwing tantrums and assorted objects in a MultiCultClassics Monologue…

• R. Kelly hurled a basketball at a reporter who wanted to watch the star play hoops at a gym. His lawyers will probably request a delay of game or timeout.

• Foxy Brown took a plea deal for hurling a BlackBerry at a neighbor last year. She also offered a lame written apology, which she’ll probably wad up and throw at someone.

• Hillary Clinton hurled the race card, claiming Barack Obama will struggle to win the support of “White Americans.” Clinton referred to an Associated Press story on recent exit polls “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hardworking Americans, White Americans, is weakening again, and how Whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me. … There’s a pattern emerging here.” The pattern being Clinton’s inability to admit defeat.

5283: Facing Rejection.

State of Affairs in a MultiCultClassics Monologue…

• Hillary Clinton said she would have rejected Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. as her pastor based on the comments she’s seen from him. But she’s totally cool with her philandering hubby. Plus, she would have repelled the bullets if a sniper had fired at her in Bosnia.

• Now reports indicate New York Governor David Paterson traveled with one of his mistresses to campaign for Clinton in Iowa last November. Hillary and Bill Clinton see no reason to reject Paterson over the matter. In fact, Bill probably supports the entire affair.

• A federal judge approved a $24 million settlement plan from Walgreens to cover a lawsuit charging racial bias at the drugstore chain. Thousands of Black employees argued the company discriminated against them in hiring and assignment decisions. And a few have probably had an affair with New York Governor David Paterson.

• Ford Motor Company sold Jaguar and Land Rover to India’s Tata Motors. Ta ta!

5225: Political—And Politically Incorrect—Talk.

From The Chicago Tribune…

Race, Obama and Clinton

The controversial, race-based comments of former vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro and of retired South Side pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. are of genuine importance to the selection of a Democratic presidential nominee. Although not for the reasons that have unduly exercised many U.S. voters in recent days.

Ferraro, who until her resignation Wednesday was a member of Sen. Hillary Clinton's finance committee, has been on a griddle for asserting that Sen. Barack Obama benefits from de facto affirmative action. “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position,” Ferraro told a California newspaper. “And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

Wright, whom Obama has embraced as a spiritual mentor, in February delivered his final sermon as pastor of Obama’s congregation at Trinity United Church of Christ. “How many children of biracial parents can make it in a world controlled by racist ideology?” he asked. “Children born to parents who are of two different races do not have a snowball’s chance in hell of making it in America, especially if the momma was white and the daddy was black. A child born to that union is an unfortunate statistic in a racially polarized society. But, if you use your mind, instead of a lost statistic in a hate-filled universe, you just may end up a law student at Harvard University. …”

Ferraro was a newcomer to discussions of race in the 2008 campaign; Wright’s remarks have peppered this cycle, his strong words inducing cringes in some listeners and Afrocentric pride in others. Columnists and talking heads have parsed Ferraro’s and Wright’s comments, variously defending their candor or demanding that the candidates they support prostrate themselves in apology for their racially oriented words.

Which strikes us as somewhere along the continuum from peculiar to bizarre.

Yes, we’re electing a president, and what he or she thinks about race is both important and fair game to opponents. But neither Gerry Ferraro nor Rev. Wright will be on any ballot. They’re a couple of talkers enjoying their 1st Amendment rights.

No one with more than a springer spaniel’s political awareness thinks that Ferraro speaks for Clinton, or that Wright speaks for Obama. Demands from one candidate’s supporters that the other repudiate what was said on his or her behalf ring disingenuous.

Ferraro and Wright are useful distractions. They create crucible moments. We should be grateful for their provocations.

Americans like to complain about the length of presidential campaigns. But by one measure long campaigns are a godsend. We have time to see how the candidates react when the crucible overheats -- to judge how they handle moments of crises large and small.

For his part, No-Drama Obama has been playing the Ferraro comment with appropriate cool. “If you pulled out a handbook of how to weigh your assets and liabilities in a presidential race,” he said Wednesday in Chicago, “I don’t think my name or my skin color would be in the asset column.”

That said, Obama surely realizes that if his bouillabaisse ethnicity troubles some voters, it also attracts others -- of all races. It’s telling that Obama got his first January boost in the mostly white state of Iowa, a win with the ironic effect of making him palatable to some African-Americans elsewhere who had doubted that a black man could have transracial appeal.

Clinton, by contrast, has been clumsier. A wry synthesis of her nervous reaction comes from Politico pundit Roger Simon: “Asked for her reaction to Ferraro’s comment, Clinton at first said: ‘Well, I don’t agree with that, and I think it’s important that we try to stay focused on issues that matter to the American people.’ … Later, as the furor built, Clinton added: ‘I obviously disagree and reject the comments.’ (Which is just shy of Clinton’s gold standard of ‘reject and denounce,’ which is what she demanded of Obama regarding Louis Farrakhan’s support.)”

Wednesday night, addressing a group of black newspaper publishers, Clinton finally achieved that gold standard in apologizing -- and apologizing -- for Ferraro’s far-from-racist remark: “I certainly do repudiate it, and I regret deeply that it was said. Obviously [Ferraro] doesn’t speak for the campaign, she doesn’t speak for any of my positions, and she has resigned from being a member of my very large finance committee.”

OK, everybody clear on that? Clinton opposes whatever anyone, anywhere, might find offensive.

The unexpectedly long tussle for the Democratic nomination is draining for the participants. In that spirit, yes, let’s study how the candidates respond to difficult moments. In the Ferraro case, the candidate who could have taken offense didn’t. And the candidate whose supporter started it all found herself buffeted rather than taking charge.

Going forward: Yes, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are responsible for every word they utter. But let’s not use every controversial comment from either candidate’s supporters to take personal offense. Instead we can listen, watch -- and learn.

5219: Monster’s Ball.

The hooker behind the fall of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer declared, “I just don’t want to be thought of as a monster.” An ex-advisor for Barack Obama said of Hillary Clinton, “She is a monster…”

Um, sounds about right in both cases.

5027: Sleeping Beauties.

Bedtime stories in a MultiCultClassics Monologue…

• The sleeping 8-year-old in the goofy Hillary Clinton 3:00 am commercial is actually about 18 now, and she’s supporting Barack Obama. “What I don’t like about the ad is its fear-mongering,” said the actress. “I think it’s a cheap hit to take. I really prefer Obama’s message of looking forward to a bright future.” Looks like another case of a Clinton sleeping with the wrong woman.

• New York Governor Eliot Spitzer is going down for his $4,300 romp with a prostitute. “I have acted in a way that violates my obligations to my family and violates my, or any, sense of right and wrong,” declared Spitzer. “I apologize first and most importantly to my family. I apologize to the public, whom I promised better.” No kidding. $4,300 for a hooker demonstrates a real lack of fiscal responsibility. Plus, the press managed to publish the photo below, which is sure to inspire plenty of creative captions.

5178: Cash, Credit Or Livestock?

From The New York Post…

MOO-LAH!
KENYANS TELL HILL: PAY US IN COWS FOR OBAMA INSULT

By GEOFF EARLE, Post Correspondent

WASHINGTON - Furious Kenyan tribal elders said yesterday that they may slap Hillary Rodham Clinton with a fine for her campaign’s alleged role in publicizing photos of Barack Obama wearing a turban - and it must be paid in cows, goats or camels.

The elders, steaming over the Obama photo smear on the other side of the world, announced plans to convene a traditional tribal court to deal with the matter.

The court could require Clinton to pay a fine in livestock, which is of great value in the far-flung Wazir region of Kenya. The photos were taken there during a visit by Obama, whose father was born in the area.

“We will go ahead with this case whether Sen. Clinton or Democratic Party leaders turn up or not,” Mohamed Ibrahim, a member of the clan that hosted Obama during his 2006 trip to the country, told Reuters.

“This whole thing can be avoided only if an apology is made,” he added.

But Clinton knows her cows - she recently suggested in Texas that Obama was “all hat and no cattle,” and has made a mint investing in cattle futures in Arkansas.

The elders earlier this week called on Clinton to “clear her name” in the controversy.

The photos of Obama - wearing a turban and white tribal robes that are traditional in northern Kenya and Somalia - got worldwide attention after the Drudge Report posted them on the Web, along with a report that said the pics came from Clinton staffers.

Obama has battled a whisper campaign by those who wrongly say he is Muslim, and his aides accused Clinton's campaign of “the most shameful, offensive fearmongering” after the photographs were published.

Hussein Ali, a 32-year-old unemployed man outside Jamia Mosque in the capital Nairobi, told Reuters: “Obama’s enemies are trying to portray him as a terrorist, saying all Muslims, and especially Somalis, are dangerous men.”

Clinton has said she has no idea who is responsible, but would fire anyone on her staff if they were involved.

Kefa Otiso, a Kenya expert at Bowling Green State University in Ohio, said the use of the photos for political purposes is a sensitive subject because it mocks the generosity of the tribal leaders, who were honoring Obama by dressing him in the clothing of a clan elder.

Although a fine paid in goats or cattle seems unusual here, “this is actually for them very, very significant,” Otiso said. “It is a serious penalty.”

He said the matter, if unresolved, could undermine US efforts to build good will in the region - which is key to the war on terror.

The elders also plan to file a formal complaint with the US Embassy in Nairobi.

The Clinton campaign didn’t respond to questions.

5105: Teeth, Dentures And Biting Remarks.

Digesting the news in a MultiCultClassics Monologue…

• An ancient tooth found in Greece has paleontologists believing Neanderthals were much more mobile than once thought. “Our findings prove that … their settlement networks were broader and more organized than we believed,” said one researcher. Following the final analysis, Chuck Norris will probably request that the tooth be returned to John McCain.

• Nobel Prize author Doris Lessing believes Barack Obama would be assassinated if he were elected as president. During an interview, the writer remarked, “He would probably not last long, a Black man in the position of president. They would kill him.” Lessing did not elaborate on who might do the deed. Despite the fact that the writer is 88 years old, Chuck Norris probably wholeheartedly agrees with her.

• PETA is protesting KFC again, this time because State Rep. Charles Siler is seeking to make fried chicken Kentucky’s official picnic chow. “If the state legislature moves forward with this one, then they should change Kentucky’s state bird from the cardinal to the debeaked, crippled, scalded, diseased, dead chicken,” said a PETA vice president. Sorry, KFC probably already has the copyright to that image.

• Polaroid announced plans to completely drop instant film products. The company already quit making instant film cameras for consumers a year ago. Wonder how long before Polaroid instantly vanishes altogether.

• Hillary Clinton officially responded to MSNBC anchor David Shuster’s remarks that the senator’s campaign “pimped out” Chelsea Clinton. “I am a mom first and a candidate second,” said Clinton. “I found the remarks incredibly offensive.” Clinton also write a letter to MSNBC honchos that stated, “Nothing justifies the kind of debasing language that David Shuster used and no temporary suspension or halfhearted apology is sufficient.” Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton has no problem pimping out hubby Bill for campaign efforts.

• The mother of Michael Jackson’s kids is upset over photos of the children without their signature veils. “The veils were my idea, not Michael’s,” said Jacko’s ex-wife in an interview. “I had kidnap threats when they were babies. I did not want them to be recognized. I’m not happy they’ve been photographed without the veils.” Um, wish the woman would don a veil herself.

5099: It’s Hardball Out Here For A Pimp.

What is it with White men in the media making references about prostitutes? MSNBC’s David Shuster has been suspended for his on-air comments directed at Chelsea Clinton. Wonder if he’ll blame rappers for inspiring the remark.

Essay 4974

From The Politico via CBS News…

-------------------------------

Racial Tensions Roil Democratic Race
Comments From Clintons On Obama, MLK Jr., Have Infuriated Some African Americans

By Ben Smith

A series of comments from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, her husband, and her supporters are spurring a racial backlash and adding a divisive edge to the presidential primary as the candidates head south to heavily African-American South Carolina.

The comments, which ranged from the New York senator appearing to diminish the role of Martin Luther King Jr. in the civil rights movement - an aide later said she misspoke - to Bill Clinton dismissing Sen. Barack Obama’s image in the media as a “fairy tale” - generated outrage on black radio, black blogs and cable television. And now they've drawn the attention of prominent African-American politicians.

“A cross-section of voters are alarmed at the tenor of some of these statements,” said Obama spokeswoman Candice Tolliver, who said that Clinton would have to decide whether she owed anyone an apology.

“There’s a groundswell of reaction to these comments - and not just these latest comments but really a pattern, or a series of comments that we’ve heard for several months,” she said. “Folks are beginning to wonder: Is this really an isolated situation or is there something bigger behind all of this?”

Clinton supporters responded to that suggestion with their own outrage.

“To say that there is a pattern of racist comments coming out of the Hillary campaign is ridiculous,” said Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones. “All of the world knows the commitment of President Clinton and Sen. Clinton to civil rights issues - and not only the commitment in terms of words but in terms of deeds.”

Referring to the King quote, Sheila Jackson Lee, another Clinton supporter, said Clinton was trying to contrast King and Obama, not to diminish King: “It really is a question of focusing on the suggestion that you can inspire without deeds - what is well known to the child who studies Dr. King in school is that yes, he spoke, but he also moved people to action.”

But other black Clinton supporters found themselves wincing at the Clintons’ words, if not questioning their intent.

[Read the full story here.]