Back at the beginning of March, blogger Ann Althouse caused a small disturbance in the sphere with her assertion that the infamous Clinton Red Phone video contained a stealth image of the word "NIG..." on a child's pajamas, and was injecting subliminal racism into the campaign.
Or as she so slyly put it at the time:
....
This notion was silly at the moment of birth, but quickly became more demented as Ann and several of her acolytes took up the cudgel of stealth racism against all comers in the comments section. The argument ultimately went on for more than 300 comments.
Unwilling to stand for such inane speculation from a person who is actually possessed of intelligence, I took Ann to task for filling people's heads with such simple-minded tripe in Ann Althouse's Reality Distortion Field.
Today, on YouTube comes this video which not only reveals that the little girl wearing the infamous "NIG..." pajamas was just acting in some old stock footage from Getty Images circa 2000. Not only that she is now old enough to vote and favors... Obama!
We await Ms. Althouse's reaction to this matter. The tin-foil tiara is packed and ready to be shipped.
Althouse Memorial Tiara
Well, you're awfully late with the information about the blonde girl in the commercial, which was widely discussed a week or so ago. But it's a different child, a dark-skinned child with curly hair, who has the letters "NIG" on his or her pajamas. In any case, even if the footage is old stock footage -- and this is an issue discussed at length in the comments to my post -- it was still selected and the campaign is responsible for choosing it. As I said all along, those letters on the pajamas were either deliberate or shockingly careless. So you've got nothing here. How about a correction and an apology? I think you owe to me.
Posted by: Ann Althouse at March 30, 2008 6:44 PMWell, you're awfully late with the information about the blonde girl in the commercial, which was widely discussed a week or so ago. But it's a different child, a dark-skinned child with curly hair, who has the letters "NIG" on his or her pajamas. In any case, even if the footage is old stock footage -- and this is an issue discussed at length in the comments to my post -- it was still selected and the campaign is responsible for choosing it. As I said all along, those letters on the pajamas were either deliberate or shockingly careless. So you've got nothing here. How about a correction and an apology? I think you owe it to me.
Posted by: Ann Althouse at March 30, 2008 6:44 PMWell, perhaps you do have to say it twice.
One of the foolproof signs one is about to be flim-flammed on the net is for someone to come strolling along claiming somebody else is "late" as if "first=best." It's a ham-handed technique that's been used for decades and is showing its age more and more with every passing iteration.
As I have said all along and which you have steadfastly refused to acknowledge, the concept that the campaign sees what your mind sees in the footage is extremely feeble and depends not on evidence but on your assertion.
In addition, no reasonable person not dead set on holding up their end of a bad judgment, would claim that a campaign either deliberately inserts such a vague image, or is indeed "responsible" for whatever fevered minds "see" in the images that it puts out. You cannot make any political ad foolproof because fools are so nuts... and in this case inventive.
In the strange "Case of the NIG Pajamas" starring Sherlock Althouse, the fundamental argument from our Sherlock has always been, "Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?"
As you will recall, many, many, many, many, many people went over and over the footage and did not see anything like what you claimed was in there.
As for which child has the infamous NIG that wasn't there on their pajamas, let us rehearse again: S T O C K footage. Are you asserting that the ad staff for the Clinton campaign poured over stock footage of sleeping children until they found the one less than 3 second clip that had letters that somebody, notably you and very few others, would see as "NIG?" If so, please do in order to thicken the nutter butter with large chunks.
I'm pleased to see that age can not stale nor custom wither your ability to stick to a personal hallucination.
As I said at the beginning of the whole thing,
"[Althouse is] simply wrong.
And she'll be the last person to admit that."
I'm proud, DAMNED PROUD, you are proving me correct.
Posted by: vanderleun at March 30, 2008 7:04 PM.daed si luaP
Posted by: Gagdad Bob at March 30, 2008 8:08 PMDirectly from the liberal playbook "There Is No Playbook, Honestly", chapter 3, verse 9:
"Thou shalt see racism where none exists, to confuse thy enemies and allow thyself to be exalted."
Posted by: Cynyr at March 31, 2008 3:50 AM"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated to combat spam and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.