Huck Says Bookcase, Staffer Says Window

Update: I want to make my own position clear because I think some readers don't understand it. If he had filmed that ad without the turning camera and had the Christmas tree on one side and a wall mounted cross, including with Jesus, on his other side? I wouldn't object, personally. Though I realize he might take heat for that. But, if he's going to do it, be a man, do it straight up. It's the connivance and now his denials I take exception to - not the cross.

What a crock. They can't even get their story straight. Screen caps here and here. Worst of all, we're supposed to believe a professional videographer for a campaign films a key ad for Huckabee in Iowa and just happens to miss this large white floating object in the background? Or Huckabee, a former minister wouldn't pick it up and want to re-shoot? And all while discussing the birth of Christ??? Yeah, right. Either Huckabee is too stupid to be POTUS, or more likely, he thinks you're stupid. And either one disqualifies him for the presidency.

(Update at 6:20 p.m. ET: Further from Bob Wickers, Huckabee's media consultant, who made the ad. Wickers tells Jill that Huckabee was sitting in front of a built-in cabinet and the media team was unaware of "this whole cross imagery." He called it "absolutely accidental.")

"It's the window frame in the background," Woolson said. "Once you've got it in your head that it's a cross, it's a cross." He said he didn't know if it was deliberate or not. "People are free to view the ad anyway that they'd like to view the ad."

Comments

[Sara]

I did not notice the "cross" until I read about it on a blog and viewed the video a second time. I just don't see what all the fuss is about anyway. It looks as much like a traditional elongated star that is often depicted in nativity scenes and millions of Christmas card pictures as it does a cross. This was a video about Christmas and the birth of Christ, so even if it was the window pane grid with a perfect lighting effect, why does anyone care? Is the complaint that the Huckster just didn't own up and instead denied the effect? Or is it that lighting turned an ordinary window pane grid into a special effect that added to the overall message of a religious Christmas ad and somehow made it too Christian? I mean do you really need or not need a cross/star-like effect to make a Christmas ad about the birth of Christ too Christian? The whole brouhaha seems like a whole lot of noise about nothing. I thought it was a nice video Christmas card, however, I resented that at the end, there was the standard blurb, "I'm Mike Huckabee and I approved this message." He should have put up a personal video Christmas card and not put out a political Christmas card paid for by his campaign.

[Fred Beloit]

Bookcase? Bookcase?

[Jane]

I can't stand Huck, and I'm not religious. But hey if he wants to have a cross in his ad, who cares?

And yes, we should care that he's as big a spinner as Clinton, but if he wants to be the religious candidate, let him.

[Fred Beloit]

Excuse me. I had to go into the other room for a few minutes of silent prayer before my crowded bookcase. Jane, that's fine and dandy, But why is he and his campaign vehemently denying their intentions with the cross of case? As Dan pointed out, it is not their doing it but their lying denials that are hurting them.

[seekeronos]

Much ado about nothing, I say.

In an age where the soundbite is the "ne plus ultra" of our way sensing a candidate's credibility, an accident of lighting and set design along with the candidate's much over-hyped Christianity has set the world aflame with (as Andy Sullivan might say) visions of Christofascists subverting the Constitution.

[docweasel]

Your spam filter blocked my lengthier response, so I'll just say my response to this entire story is 'so fucking what?'

Now the point seems to be, yes, the story is retarded, trivial and a waste of time, but now they'd LIED ABOUT IT!.

Sorry, I know you hate Huck, but this is just pointless. This is why people say blogs are obsessive, unserious and unhinged. To run with a story like this is really pathetic if that's all anyone has on Huck, or are we just throwing the kitchen sink at him now, anything to stop him.

I also saw an image of Satan in the cloud of smoke at 9/11 and now Satan is trying to say its a bookcase, but a lesser demon says its a hatrack. Right.

[Fred Beloit]

Sorry, seek, got to part company with you on this: "an accident of lighting and set design". This was no accident. You also must have noted the slow pan of the camera from left to right as the cross slowly fades from sight. Ever see a left to right pan like that in a political ad with no seeming purpose? There may be such. If there are examples I'm sure our friends/foes will point them out. I agree this means little to nothing; their adamant denials are what mean something, something unattractive.

[Fred Beloit]

doc, what are you on lately? You have become an excitable boy. Why don't you sit back and put a little Zevon on and relax a bit?

[rwilymz]

This is an issue?

[seekeronos]

"--- This is an issue? ---"

No more sagacious words have been said than these, for this bit of silliness.

As for camera pans, I've thought that while unusual, it was more to slowly blend in the Christmas tree that was to Huckabee's right.

All things being equal, I think this advert might have had better effect had there been no panning and just had the shot of Mike, the tree, and the subliminal bookshelf. With decorative Christmas bulbs nestled on the top right niche formed by the shelf.

[Al in St. Lou]

Anyone who can't see it's a bookcase should be quiet about it because otherwise, they make themselves look like lunatics. REALLY!

[docweasel]

uh Fred, you must not read much of my writing. That's some of my calm styles.

[Wahoo Willie sez:]

Why have a cross at Christmas anyway? Some sort of a "both ends of the spectrum" thing?