Sarah Jessica Parker: Is she helping or hurting President Obama?

Sarah Jessica Parker features in a new Obama campaign spot that ran numerous times during the MTV Movie Awards. The GOP says a dinner thrown by Sarah Jessica Parker for the president makes him look out of touch.

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/File
Actress Sarah Jessica Parker, seen here in a file photo, is taking an active role in the Obama reelection campaign.

Sarah Jessica Parker is a big supporter of President Obama. We know this because she said so during a 30-second Obama campaign spot that ran numerous times during the MTV Movie Awards on Sunday night.

Did you see it? The “Sex and the City” star was breezy and informal, referring to Obama as “the guy who ended the war in Iraq” and “the guy who says you should be able to marry anyone you want,” and so on. The fast-tempo, cheery music under her voice made the whole thing sound like a trailer for an upcoming production of some kind, which in a way it was. Ms. Parker touted an Obama fundraising raffle in which the winner gets to have a meal with her, the president and first lady, and Vogue editor Anna Wintour on June 14. (Entries closed Monday night. Please don’t sob into your herbal tea.)

Michelle Obama hearts Parker back, by the way. On Monday she released a statement thanking the Carrie-Bradshaw-portraying actress for hosting the dinner.

“Sarah Jessica Parker is a loving mom, an incredibly hard worker, and a great role model. She’s one of those people you can’t help but admire,” said Mrs. Obama.

Given the style, the star, and the placement, the Parker ad seems an attempt to reach the youth vote and the crucial shoe-loving segment of the female population. But will it work? We ask this because Parker, Wintour, et al., symbolize the glitzy celebrity side of the Obama White House that Republicans love to mock.

The GOP insists that all the Obama appearances on talk shows, during which he does stuff like “slow jam the news” (talking policy over an R&B beat) cheapens the presidency. As for the Hollywood stars that flock to Obama’s presence, they’re a flying band of nitwits that should stick to what they know best. Or something like that.

On Monday the Republican Party released its own ad mocking the upcoming Parker/Wintour festivities. Interestingly, it did not mention or feature Parker. Is she too nice to attack? Instead, it ran almost the whole length of Anna Wintour’s own ad announcing the contest. The famously tough Vogue editor (“The Devil Wears Prada” is loosely based on her exploits) talks in the sort of monied accent that says, “I live in Manhattan and you don’t.”

Under this, the GOP ad just runs numbers – the unemployment rate among women, the unemployment rate among African-Americans, and so forth.

Some conservative pundits say the Parker/Wintour dinner is so out of touch that Obama must be desperate for cash.

“The Obama campaign is very, very worried about money. Their latest effort to get the big bucks is being mocked mercilessly by the Republican National Committee,” wrote Jennifer Rubin on her “Right Turn” Washington Post blog.

But some other Romney supporters warn that celebrities have lots of appeal in the US, and to emphasize Obama’s relationship with them only raises the president’s glamour quotient. Take Donald Trump, who knows a thing or two about cameras.

Last month, The Donald told Newsmax that he’s thinking of starting his own "super political-action committee" because he thinks the quality of many pro-Romney ads is pretty low.

“There was a recent [anti-Obama] commercial done where they made him look like a superhero. I’m saying, who made this commercial? I thought it was one of the worst commercials I’ve ever seen,” Trump said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.