Ferraro's Race Argument Isn't Insulting to Obama; It's Insulting to Democrats
When Obama started doing well in the Presidential primaries, I was actually embarassed.
That feeling came because I remembered two middle-aged white guy friends of mine who had told me months ago they supported Obama, drawn by the promise of a young, smart leader with good ideas who seemed poised to implement them without resorting to the same old nonsense of our political past.
I liked his approach and ideas, but I had a much more cynical view of race politics. I never thought he'd have a chance because I assumed America would never really let him compete.
So to hear so-called progressive politicians such as Geraldine Ferraro complain that Obama is only ahead in the Democratic primary race because of his race, sounds to these ears like hearing news that cats have been found on the moon.
You mean, somebody thinks being a black man with the name Barack Hussein Obama is a bigger advantage than being the wife of the most successful Democratic president since John F. Kennedy?
Then Politico.com blogger Ben Smith on Tuesday highlighted a compelling nugget: Ferraro said the same thing back in 1988 about Jesse Jackson. And back then, her views were echoed by that great paragon of racial equality, Ronald Reagan.
Smith quotes Washington Post writer Howard Kurtz's 1988 story: "former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."
Asked about this at a campaign stop in Buffalo, Jackson at first seemed ready to pounce fiercely on his critics. But then he stopped, took a breath, and said quietly, "Millions of Americans have a point of view different from" Ferraro's.
Discussing the same point in Washington, Jackson said, "We campaigned across the South . . . without a single catcall or boo. It was not until we got North to New York that we began to hear this from Koch, President Reagan and then Mrs. Ferraro . . . . Some people are making hysteria while I'm making history."- Howard Kurtz (WaPo, April 15, 1988)"
Ferraro still seems amazed by the concept that there is a problem with attributing Obama's 13-million votes in this year's primary elections solely to his race. She says, instead, that people who criticize her are being racist and that she was complimenting the way black people have supported Obama.
This is the way Democrats will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in this election; allowing dunderheads like Ferraro -- whose biggest political claim to fame is being part of the team which got annihilated by the Republicans in 1984 -- to drive wedges between a coalition which was poised to unseat the Republicans in November.
Ferraro's words also raise another complaint I've heard recently; that Obama is winning because America is more sexist than racist. Leave aside the notion that comparing disadvantages in this way is absurd -- women and black folks suffer from different kinds of oppresion in different ways -- the thesis also ignores some powerful facts.
There are more females than black males serving as governors, Congresspeople, and cabinet members. I wonder how any of them would feel about people who said they got their jobs because they were female? (And does Ferraro agree that she got her spot on Mondale's ticket because she's female?)
If Clinton wins this way -- basically encouraging working class white people and women to turn on Obama through race-based attacks -- the young people and black folks who were so excited about this election will stay home in November and John McCain will be president. Because nobody plays wedge issues and the fear game like the Republicans.
This is why I wound up voting for Obama when the primary rolled around in Florida. I'm tired of fear mongering, wedge politics and Democratic ineptitude. And, though I'm sure Obama cannot pull off everything he thinks he can as president, I'm desperate enough for a change that I'm willing to give him a shot.
Frankly, Ferraro's assumption that people like me voted for Obama because he self-identifies as a black man is less insulting to Obama and more insulting to me.
She better hope we get over our anger before November, or the Democratic party is going to pay the price.
Follow Eric Deggans on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Deggans
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I am incredulous. I cannot believe the things I am reading in these comments. Especially troubling are the "through the lookingglass" viewpoints that somehow the Clinton attacks on Obama make HIM a "thug."
Another commenter decries Mrs. Obama for asserting that we are a "nation of broken souls" and how that "manages to insult everybody.
Gods help us
...and another thing...it seems to me that the astounding level of vitriol exhibited by the Clinton/Ferraro apologists regarding this issue is proof of the unfortunate number of latent racists there are in the non-Republican ranks.
I grew up in Cicero, IL, one of the most famously racists towns in America, and I KNOW I have these little, atavistic racists tics and clues embedded in me from my exposure to it all and STILL I was appalled at Ferraro's statements and the Clinton campaign's twisted logic.
SAVE IT FOR McCAIN GODDAMNIT!!! Jesus, people!
mingusman
Obama just initiated an attack against a well respected activist for all good causes in the Democratic party - Gerry Ferraro. She is well loved and she is not a racist and her remarks were not racist. Obama made this attack on this woman for political gain - for himself. Not for the good of the party or the good of the human race. He made this attack to get more black people to vote for him and further stir up division among the races.
This attack clearly benefitted Obama.
Gerry attacked back and said she will not take his attack quietly. He owes her an apology. He started the fight by picking on her words. Which were very complimentary of him.
Obama started the fight. People need to see it for what it was. Obama needs to apologize for starting the fight.
The press can document all the times Obama has picked on words that Hillary or Bill have said. It is nothing more than Obama picking on and trying to bully Hillary and her supporters. Bill has put up with the most. Bill is a real man. He is the spouse I trust. He is the one doing the right thing. He is not fighting back even when Obama keeps trying to stir up racial divide.
Obama is getting a free pass every time he calls someone a racist. Then people sympathize with him and do not recognize the fact that Obama has started the fight.
Someone really needs to stop Obama. Bullies need to be stopped.
First let me identify myself as a black woman since identity politics is at issue here and Geraldine Ferraro’s “inconvenient truth”. Here is a person I feel is just flat out jealous of Mr. Obama and is afraid of being a loser again. To this date I have yet to hear a stream of comments or allusions from the Obama campaign (with the exception of Mrs. Clinton being called a monster by a surrogate) directed at her or Mrs Clinton about their identity as privileged white women living in America. Everything I’ve heard has targeted Mrs. Clinton’s behavior, which I feel is fair game. I cannot say the same about her campaign. Since both these accomplished ladies find that Mrs. Clinton is not winning as well as they’d like by only attacking Mr. Obama on legitimate issues, history has taught them that racial and cultural identity is still a powerful and effective strategy. Ask George Herbert Walker Bush or the newly elected Senator from Tennesee or even John McCain! How could Mrs. Ferraro, representing Mrs. Clinton, make the exact misstatement three times, as pointed out by Keith Olberman last evening? If she felt that Mr. Obama’s candidacy lacks substance – why doesn’t she focus our attention on the issues she feels makes it so. Instead she whines about being unjustifiably labeled as a racist and the emotional inconvenience of having to “walk on eggs” because Mr. Obama is black. He and I could tell her a lot about “walking on eggs” as a black people living in America and having to keep our damn mouths shut.
The truth is, as Olberman pointed out, there have been numerous Presidents who have did not meet Mrs. Clinton’s qualification “threshold”. And we know how bogus that argument is based on her contradictory offers of partnership with Mr. Obama. The truth is, Mrs Clinton, Mrs. Ferraro and others are not comfortable with blacks being any more than “symbolic” candidates. That’s what caused most black folks to walk away from her. In the black community today, we know Mr. Obama has a real shot because of his broad appeal (not based on white guilt) and his “threshold” qualifications. There has been a campaign to “disassociate” him from the African-American community with terms like “Halfrican” and statements like “his father just arrived her 40 years ago”. For us and for Barak, it is still tough getting a cab in New York City. Nobody asks you for your passport when they pull their purse away from you or cross the street from fear. Yes, one of the major reasons I support him is because he is black – and that he is a member of our community that has produced so many great leaders and public servants, well known and nameless. I for one will rejoice when he takes the oath office. I will shed tears of joy for a fitting culmination of all the suffering my parents, my ancestors have endured to truly live as equals in this country – and it will resound all over the world – and yes, it may even help us fight the war on terrorism as millions of young minds on this planet see someone like themselves ascend to the most powerful seat based on the highest ideals, inspite of the unwarranted and truly racist rantings of a Representative King of Iowa who sees this as a nightmare.
In my opinion, the manner in which Mrs. Clinton has conducted her campaign is disappointing. Should she be the one taking the oath,I will be more resigned than proud because of her unprincipled and hypocritical conduct. Black women have always been there for them. I was delighted when Mrs. Ferraro was tapped for V.P. But where were my sisters Hillary and Geraldine when Senator Carol Moseley Braun made her presidential bid? Where were all the moneyed white women when Representative Shirley Chisolm tried to make her shot. The struggle for women’s rights has been replete with racism, classism and cynicism. If Mr. Clinton get’s the nomination I will be resigned because I do not and cannot believe that they represent the best of what America’s women have to offer.
Beautifully expressed. You have a new fan.
There are as many examples from Obama's campaign. They simply haven't received the same press.
That is patently false. There are NOT "as many examples from Obama's campaign". Get your facts straight!!
Care to provide an answer as to where was Ms. Clinton when Carolyn Mosley Braun was running for office?
get down on your knees and pray to the lord almighty that SHE isnt the one taking the oath....th
she is a disaster/tax increase waiting to happen....
Thank you for your absolutely brilliant post!
If you have to ask whether Ferraro's counterfactual speculation is "right" or not, or whether it is "true" or not, you either are a logical moron or a shameless propagandist: counerfactual statements that require one to suspend or change an unchangeable constant in order to reach a different outcome are by their nature neither true nor false - they are speculative statements of opinion. Ferraro's statement is no more true or right than "If Hillary had divorced her husband after Lewinsky, she would be the nominee right now" or "If John Edwards were black, he would have beaten Barack Obama by now" or "If John McCain had not been a POW for 5 years, he would not be the Republican nominee right now." Irrelevant, empty statements on their face.
But what is incredible evil about what Ferraro has done is the following: statements like these are forms of social action, "speech acts" the philosopher John Searle calls them. as with many speech acts, the content of these statements by Ferraro was quite different from the intent of these statements, a classic "perlocutionary act" (as Searle's mentor, J.L. Austin might say). The content was a counterfactual hypothetical speculation that was otherwise meaningless. The intent was much more insidious, an appeal to divide democrats by how they perceive the relative position of black men vs. white women in this society, to get people to discuss and debate who has an easier ride, who faces less discrimination. It was a comment rooted in bigotry and designed to motivate people to take action, to choose sides, based on their own perceptions of the relative status of competing forms of bigotry in our society.
For this sort of divisive politics, I want to cry out "Shame on you Geraldine Ferraro!" The fact that you have spent a lifetime fighting against one kind of bigotry - gender - does not give you a free pass to indulge in another kind, racial. Geraldine Ferraro has now written herself into the history books - she will no longer be remembered just as a femenist political pioneer - she is now an established racial bigot as well. There is no other way to describe her "perlocutionary acts" over the last 3 weeks.
Eat that, Geraldine.
I usually don't resort to name calling, but I will make an exeption. You are a sesquipedalian. I think I understand what you are saying in spite of it. Simplify! I only have two post-graduate degrees, and had to resort to Dictionary
I would not call Ferraro "evil" because I think "ignorant" is more appropriate. We white folks think that the world revolves around us, and Ferraro needs to hush up and listen.
http://dic
http://dic
(that's a good one to learn)
http://dic
(it is a real word, and a useful one too!)
I admit it, I am didactic.
Wow, never knew thinking would be such a liability. I am ashamed to have used words you had to look up in a dictionary. My apologies for your ignorance.
On your one substantive point - no way Ferraro, a woman who has been a politician for the better half of her life, can be called "ignorant.
Yours truly,
Sequipedalian Salt
I think it's sad when we can't discuss the obvious. It IS a great year to be an AA guy running for president. But then, I'm a huge believer, as I'm sure Ferarro is and Clinton, too, that "luck" is 99% preparation and 1% good fortune.
Ferarro said repeatedly and often that, in no way, was she discounting his obvious campaign talent. Nobody would at this point.
But it's ridiculous to call everyone a racist if they point out anything that might actually poke a hole in his holiness.
And if people are going to wipe out lifetimes of actual record and call others names and worse, then there's something very wrong with THOSE people.
They are anger balls waiting to find out which new target Obama would like them to attack.
Obama may be ahead now. But the primary is not over. 5 million Democratic voters still need to vote. He cannot win on his own. It is tied. It will remain tied. He has to convince the Independent Delegates to vote for him.
So he is using the race card yet again. It is so obvious.
Obama simply says - if you criticize me, you are a racist.
Obama simply says - if you don't vote for me, you are a racist.
Obama simply says - I'll give permisssion to all my supporters to bully you into changing your vote, your criticism of me. I'll encourage them to hate anyone who speaks out.
"There is not a liberal america. There is not a conservative america. There is a United States Of America". THINK about those words. What is there after Obama becomes president? There is a Dictatorship of America
It has been obvious since New Hampshire that Obama and his campaign have promoted race baiting. White liberals get intimidated easily.
Women and older democratic voters - not so much.
We react like Gerry Ferraro does. "You want some advantage from me and you do it by making threats."" That is it. "You make threats and now I know who you are".
Obama - you are a thug.
You are really good at both whining and encouraging your supporters to be bullies for you.
Please provide any evidence that shows that Obama 'simply says you are racist'.
Both Obama and Clinton have flaws but what you are saying is dishonest.
It was dishonest to suggest that by stating a fact in South Carolina, Bill Clinton was playing on race.
Logical dishonesty abounds on obama side too I guess.
Sorry.....
Says it all.
He called her a racist.
The woman has 40 years of actual accomplishments. She makes a comment in So. Cal. in front of a small group of people about the obvious race dynamics..
He played the race card.
He played against someone who has been absolutely stauch on behalf of minorities.
Now you try to explain to me how this is good judgment.
I agree. Playing the race card is thuggish, and he's done it again. However, I sort of agree with Ferarro. She ended her interview last night by saying, "My guess is that this is the last time he pulls this."
Today, he was out saying she wasn't racist. *haha
Methinks Ferarro managed to win by being willing to be completely skewered by the press.
No, being black isn't an advantage to any American, as being latino, asian, or female isn't either. The problem I have, being hispanic male, with Obama's campaign and it's supporters, is it is very clear, that only blacks need apply.
Obama isn't fighting for "everyman" his campaign optimistically jerked violently toward courting the "black" vote in SC at the expense of Bill, Hillary and every other non-black democratic voter.
The media, Obama's campaign and all those "new" voters who don't even know Bill and Hillary Clinton or who Geraldine Ferraro is, had the "momentum" they had beaten the horrible (AND VERY DEMOCRATIC CLINTONS.) Yipppee! (Why are we cheering? 'Oh, he's cool too, Olberman likes him.)'
All Obama's campaign had to do was pretend to be being "raced" by the Clintons. It was bold, big news, and solidified the "base." The black base.
Obama's campaign has had a blast at the expense of race relations in this country since. He was just about to close the deal for this democrat, before Barrack Obama's campaign began daring anybody to support anybody else for fear of being labeled a racist - Just like he did to the Clintons in SC and now to Geraldine Ferraro.
Call me a racist all you want. I'm a life-long democrat and support a white woman camdidate. I have Barrack Obama to thank for looking at the candidates like this.
I am a 59 year old, white male and I support Senator Obama with my money, my time and my vote. I think that your sad characterization that 'only blacks need apply' is pure bullshit and is taken straight out of the clinton hate book. You should be ashamed.
I voted for bill clinton in the past. At the time that I supported the clintons I didn't realize what horrible, people they are and how willing they are to destroy everything in order to satiate their greed and power lust. The clintons belong in deferal prison, not in federal office.
As far as "gerry" goes, she is obviously a bitter, hate filled has been feminist. Sadly, I voted for her at one time as well.
"I'm a life-long democrat and support a white woman camdidate. I have Barrack Obama to thank for looking at the candidates like this."
So you are going to pick the next POTUS based on gender and sex.
UNBELIEVABLE!!! WOW!!!
Explain again how Obama *increased the number of votes* he receives by saying that Ferraro's comment was "ridiculou
Obama does not need to solidify the Black base. The Clinton team has done that. They also ran off a lot of white women who are appalled by the Clintons' dog whistling. Look at the number of comments here by women over age 50 (that includes me) who know what a dog whistle sounds like and that an attempt to manipulate us is being made.
Stop, look, and listen. Think.
BS........
And why shouldn't they be?
That admission is also why the exit polls show that they appreciate Bill and Hillary's admission on this.
Hillary Clinton cut her teeth in Arkansas, a state where these issues are very real. She gets it.
She could not possibly criticize them for being excited.
And she has not.
And they get that she gets it.
End of story.
Look at the exit polls.
REal people get this.
I'm an over thirty, married, white male living in Wisconsin and I voted for, gave money to and support Senator Obama. I voted for him for Senate when I live for a few years in Chicago as well.
There are plenty of states where the African American population is negligible and Senator Obama won handidly - Iowa, Wyoming, Maine, Utah to name a few - so he's definitively NOT winning on the Black Vote alone. Were that true he'd have lost over half the states he's won.
I personally do not understand the attraction Senator Clinton, or the negative affect Senator Obama, has for latinos. I don't understand it at all - the "she's a friend to the latino community" sure sounds like pandering from a women who's whole Senatorial career consists of voting for wars and sponsoring bills to rename museums and bring pork to New York.
I "know" President Clinton, I voted for him twice. I know Geraldine Ferraro - not only is this clearly the age where information is at your fingertips and I can type a search into google or wikipedia, but I remember my parents supporting Mondale and Ferraro passionately (for all the good it did anyone.)
Ferraro made the same statements in the past about Jesse Jackson, playing the victim as the white woman being squeezed out by the Affirmative Action candidate, as she is making now in favor of Hillary against Barack.
This isn't Obama's campaign telling us these comments are disgusting - this is EVERYONE but die-hard Hillary supporters saying they are disgusting. Hillary distanced herself (weakly) from Ferraro's comments, and many of Hillary's pundatry supporters agree the statement was bad (even vacillating Carville.)
You may not be racist, but you are definitely ignorant. None of what you put forth is supported by the facts, although you appear not to be bothered by that at all. Obama has never pushed the issue of race, has never called anyone making what I would characterize as racist invective a racist. Never. I might find them racist and call them out for what I see, but Obama has not. If you think he has, well, provide a reputable link or a sourced quote. You won't find them because they don't exist in the real world. They exist only in the minds of Clinton campaign apologists who need to find some reason to excuse the vast ugliness that has come out of Hillary's campaign.
If you find yourself blaming Obama for the racist tripe that has been thrown at HIM by Clinton campaign surrogates such as Ferraro and Bill (to name a few), then you've got much to examine about yourself, in the end.
If Ferraro's comments insults the Democrats, what about Obama surrogates (Ms. Obama) asserting that we are a nation of broken souls? That manages to insult everybody. It also carries the implication that Mr. Obama can mend souls. I'll take care of my own soul, thank you very much. And Mr. Obama should think about the issues, which he doesn't seem to want to talk about, he just refers you to his website.
---snip from Wall Street Journal (mar 13):
It is a vision striking for its consistent hostility to any notion that Americans have cause for optimism and pride in their country.
Doubtless we shall hear more about Mrs. Obama's views as the campaign goes on. In the meantime, we can only imagine how this will all play out in the event of an Obama presidency. First Lady Michelle Obama would certainly encounter foreign reporters who have attentively covered the campaign and who have questions to ask. One of them may well be, "Madame First Lady, would you care to tell us more about your oft-stated view of America as a nation whose soul is broken? And a word, if you would about the desperate lives lived by most Americans?" --snip
Did you see her latest? She repeated her "proud" statement and added that we're a "sick" country.
Yes, I found her remarks highly offensive.
Anyone who can't see the veracity of Michelle Obama's assessment has blinders on. George Bush and his gang have squashed the soul of this country.
Democrats, shut the fuck up and get it together!!!
Um, what about our country isn't broken?
Hehe, please tell me how her statement is incorrect. We're not a nation at war with itself? Repubs vs. Democrat, Black vs. White, Man vs. Woman. Hispanics vs. Blacks.
How is this not a broken society? The dollar hits an all time low while oil hits an all time high. One in four girls carries an STD and ditto for two out of four black women? The environment is being raped regularly while our planet becomes a pressure cooker. Our jobs have gone overseas and 4000 + soldiers have died as well as hundreds of thousands of innocents. The list goes on and on.
So please, AnninCA and JTSHP, tell me how we are not a broken nation. Tell me how this is the goodship lollipop and everything is so great that our nation doesn't need mending.
If you think are country isn't broken, then I wanna move to wherever the hell it is that your living, because it sure as shit aint' America.
I haven't read her comments but I will look for them.
If you don't see any reason to lament the condition of this country, you aren't very perceptive.
Our country's soul IS broken. How else do you explain that we now officially (govt) condone torture, have obliterated our constitution and habeaus corpus, spy on private citizens, launch immoral wars of opportunity that sentence our young men and women to die abroad, and on and on and on? Those are signs of a nation whose soul is broken, at BEST. And $4/gallon gas, rising food prices, folks losing their homes, no health care---that is pretty desperate, no? That is precisely why we need a president who can help restore our credibility at home and abroad. That will go a long way to healing the country that we love.
You do hurt your position by not recognizing the Ferraro did say she was only on the ticket because of her gender. It makes you look ill informed, and therefore your outrage less the genuine.
But this belief by Ferraro doesn't actually make her comments any less wrong. Her personal life doesn't change facts about Obama and his race.
Ron Paul is the only candidate who got it right about race...ide
As long as you group people by gender, by race, by religion, by education level, you are making false assumptions about them, and in dangerous ways.
So you come to this absurdity that sexism is more accepted than racism because Obama is ahead in votes, and presumably if he goes behind in votes after PA, then America suddently shifted to a more racist, but less sexist position.
Uhm, sorry no. But I disagree only with the logic, not necessarily with the conclusion.
America is more accepting of sexism, because feminists are so overwhelmingly sexist. The double standards are mind boggling. You can say I'm voting for a 'strong woman'...b
The fact is, feminists don't want to examine the issue of sexism all too closely...
It doesn't have to be that way, naturally.
Amen Brother, Preach it.
I bet you guys wish that the Republics were rolling around in the mud fighting about racism and feminism. That would fit into your political mindset. However, It looks like you liberals are exactly what you claim the conservatives to be. You should try giving Carl Rove a call. He may be able to get you out of this mess.
Sad but true. Since their platforms are so similar, it's hard to attack one another's agenda without attacking ones own. Consequently, the campaign has come down to personality, identity etc. They're better off going back to idealism vs experience. Unfortunately those two concepts have become a kind of ying-yang argument that splits 50/50 so the "deadlock" remains.
Bingo. The only hope of breaking the tie is wishing the other person would step off into oblivion with some reaction.
Since American politics has become a never-ending campaign season, each election seamlessly merging with the next, when do Democrats have time to discuss such divisive issues without putting an election on the line? These issues wouldn't bubble up out of the swamp if they didn't exist already, they need to be addressed and worked out but the election cycle never allows it. The Democratic Party needs to bite the bullet and have the candidates REALLY address the issues in a 'yes but we need to work our way beyond that issue so that we can rebuild the nation from the trainwreck that the last administration created' way. As hard as this is on the candidates it was inevitable when it emerged that TWO historic chances were going at each other head-to-head. Copping out and letting it fester will only doom one or the other issues for a generation and possibly split the party. This is a time for political bravery and not the standard waffling. Unfortunately both candidates are too invested in the roles that they have chosen to play to actually allow that debate to interfere with their respective myths.
The Democratic Party needs to bite the bullet and have the candidates REALLY address the issues.
I agree but since their platforms are so similar, it's hard to attack or criticize one another's agenda without attacking ones own. The candidates are desperately seeking ways to differentiate. However, I think if they would engage in more talk on the issues differences would emerge. But it's almost too late. With so few delegates left and with the superdelegates most likely unwilling to intervene - neither candidate will be able to gain a satisfactory lead.
All of this reveals what an empty shell the Dem. party is, doesn't believe any anything, doesn't stand for anything. It's "leadership" stands silent while HRC takes the party over a cliff with Karl Rove wedge tactics. The McCain tag team with Hillary are doing there all. After all Mark Penn and Charles Black are business partners in the political propaganda business.
Specify what you think leaders can say and do without thwarting the will of the voters.
BTW, the author obviously didn't follow this story too closely. The question in bold, about Ferarro being on the ticket because she was a woman, was a large part of why Ferarro was so incensed. She said repeatedly that was why she was on the ticket....
Like Obama, gender/race wasn't her only gift. She just was lucky that year.
It surprises me when the authors obviously haven't followed the real story carefully.
Geraldine's Racist Statement - “If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she said. "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."
You miss the context.
Thanks for a great post.
Interesting how a speech that discussed identity politics in CA was picked up by the national news media. *hhmmm* Ferraro pointed out last night that it's obvious that Obama is the one who actually released this story. Makes sense.
So perhaps the Dems should be offended by him?
If the comments were truly taken out of context and twisted by the Obama campaign for personal gain, then Ferraro could have said so (politely) and apologized many times over to anyone who felt at all offended. Instead, she goes absolutely nuts, obsessing over her own reputation rather than how her comment could have insulted voters, boo-hooing about how difficult it is to be white, and telling all this to such giants of social progress as Bill O'Reilly and the rest of Fox News (where she is a news analyst). She had her chance to prove that the comment was misunderstood and that she really cares about those who could have offended. Instead, she fans the flames.
She did repeatedly explain. But then she also repeatedly said that he is the one swiftboating here.
Bill and Hillary apologize. Heck, Hillary is still apologizing.
Ferarro apparently decided that he had overstepped. She's worked for 40 years actively, and I guess she decided she wasn't going to be called a racist and take it without a fight.
That's the one aspect about this that really bugs me alot. If a comment taken out of context, then later explained satisfactorily, can trump 40 years of ACTUAL achievements and an indisputable record....
Isn't there something wrong with that?
I see it as almost encouraging people to do nothing real but just give lip service and be very PC.
I really did see her point in all of this.
BTW.......
I knew her record and knew that couldn't be what she meant at all. Ferarro is a long-time champion of all of us........
While I think a lot of this is quite overheated, I wonder what the reaction would be if the Obama camp had responded by saying that Hillary was lucky to be a woman or she'd be getting hammered a lot harder about this kind of thing. Does anybody this she's be agreeing with that? Anybody that takes a step back will realize this is all nonsense anyway. From both camps.
The truth is that it's all just campaign spinning and media blather that gives the talking heads a chance to extrude some more nonsense and takes everybody away from the issues. Ignore it or demand that your candidate get back to the real issues. Don't get lost in it.
"While I think a lot of this is quite overheated, I wonder what the reaction would be if the Obama camp had responded by saying that Hillary was lucky to be a woman"
I imagine the response would be the same. Then again, think about what the response would be if John McCain ran around screaming "I hate jews!" Or think about the response if George Bush stood up and said "Dang it, but I want to kill me some sand niggers!"
The point isn't "Well, think about what would happen if someone else said it". The point is Ferrarro said it - then she said it again. Then she said it again, and said if you didn't like it, *you* were the racist. Then she said it again, and said if you fought against her, *you* were to blame for playing the race card.
I can think about what would happen if Obama was revealed to really be a three legged dog with alien mind control powers to make people think he was simply a good politician - but it wouldn't change the reality any.
"So both Obama and Clinton are missing super opportunities to show us just why they should be president.
I agree. I blame the media as much as the candidates for a lot of this, though. I heard someone this morning talk about how Obama was making a mistake by commenting on this, but I suspect if he hadn't, then that would have been the story. Something like 'Obama refuses to deny that he's lucky to be black!'. I think the media drives this stuff because it makes their jobs easier. More people need to tell the talking heads to get to work and discuss the promises the candidates are making about the war in Iraq, or the economy or national security or whatever and stop dealing in this slop.
Ditto from me. I'm mostly tired of the sledgehammer approach by both camps. Jeesh* Where's the graceful touch? Where's the light touch of a secure man or woman who knows that they need not grab every opportunity to try to smear others?
I think they are both missing wonderful opportunities here to show us real leadership and to show us how mature adults can really smooth out difficult relations in the world with just a bit of light humor and an acknowledgement that people are people. Ferarro is over 70 and ill. He didn't really need to back her into a corner like that. Frankly, I think his staff clipped that small story out of the tiny newspaper in CA and he ran with it, thinking she'd be vulnerable. He miscalculated. Don't mess with old women.
And Hillary didn't need to get so huffy over what some nitwit 30 year old said about her. Who cares? That woman is bright, academic and so unsophisticated she made my teeth ache for her. Why not show a bit of grace and let the idiot off the hook? That's the Hillary I back.
So both Obama and Clinton are missing super opportunities to show us just why they should be president.
"So both Obama and Clinton are missing super opportunities to show us just why they should be president.
I agree. I blame the media as much as the candidates for a lot of this, though. I heard someone this morning talk about how Obama was making a mistake by commenting on this Ferraro thing, but I suspect if he hadn't, then that would have been the story. Something like 'Obama refuses to deny that he's lucky to be black!'. I think the media drives this stuff because it makes their jobs easier. More people need to tell the talking heads to get to work and discuss the promises the candidates are making about the war in Iraq, or the economy or national security or whatever and stop dealing in this slop.
Obama acted with grace. He said Ferraro's statement was "ridiculou
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
