Geraldine Ferraro and Samantha Power -- Ugghh!!

Samantha, thanks for stepping back. Gerry, thanks for nothing.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been having some fights lately. But mostly fair fights. She is questioning his credentials to be commander-in-chief; He is questioning her on tax returns. Not pleasant discussions in either case. But they are clearly real issues and most importantly, they are between the candidates themselves.

That is what we want in this race -- for Clinton and Obama to make their own case.

When folks try, on their behalf, to make a case through personal attacks, they aren't just hurting their own candidates, they are hurting all of us.

Samantha Power made a big mistake. She said something mean and personal and hurtful. And then she had the grace to apologize and step back.

Unfortunately Gerry Ferraro said something mean and personal and hurtful and she has been graceless and offensive in her own persistent defense. Not to mention tarring Hillary Clinton with a comment that the senator doesn't and shouldn't ascribe to reality.

Yet, Ferraro is bewilderingly insistent on staying in this fight. Even resigning from her support for Hillary so she can keep making a mess that Hillary is blamed for. As they say, with friends like these...

Have I said yet how heartbreaking it is for me to write this about Gerry Ferraro? I was 24-years-old at my first Democratic Convention serving with honor as a podium assistant when she stood up to receive the nomination to be vice president. I couldn't have been more proud.

Her formulation that Barack Obama wouldn't have the success he's experiencing if he were a white man is frightening. That somehow, his accomplishments in life and his standing before us as a presidential contender is a form of affirmative action isn't just offensive, it is bizarre. Fatherless at two, and dragged around the world. He made his own life. He is in this race because he is a touchstone politician. And I said that with admiration. In Obama we have a candidate who doesn't just understand that politics is about each of us, he actually has the talent and natural gifts to make us believe it, too. Hillary Clinton offers us a commitment to new policies we've been hungry for these last eight years. Her forward thinking on solutions, her determination on our behalf and her endurance as a leader get my support. Both offerings are worthy. Both of their offerings are also shaped by their experiences as a black man and a white woman only in the best way, NOT the easy way.

Dr. Imani Perry, a professor at Rutgers University wrote yesterday:

"...we can look at this another way: If Barack Obama were a white man, these gifts he possesses might not have developed in the way they did. Each person comes into the world with a unique spirit. The interface of that spirit with the body into which he or she is born and the society and family in which he or she lives and grows, creates the human personality. Perhaps Obama's encounters with bigotry and the diversity of his experiences shaped many of the qualities we admire in him. Perhaps being born on American soil as Barack Hussein Obama, a biracial second generation American in a body that is always perceived as a 'Black man', gifted him with a second sight that voters are looking to in troubled times."

Robin Morgan, the accomplished feminist writer said of Hillary's Clinton's value as a female president:

"...Women have endured hatred, rape and battery, being the majority of the poor, of refugees, of caregivers, and the powerless. We know that at this historical moment women experience the world differently from men -- though not all the same as one another -- and can govern differently..."

If either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama is in this race because of their race or their gender, then it is only because it is an inexorable part of them pushing internally to succeed. They weren't given any extra breaks.

Follow Hilary Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hilaryr

Comments

[rebeccaj]

Sorry, Hillary. Ms. Power just expressed a bit of anger that many of us out here are feeling toward your candidate. We think it, we say it to our close friends -- and then we feel guilty and bad because we are good Democrats. But, darn it, Hillary -- HRC is acting in a monstrous way!

Ms. Ferraro showed an ugly side of human nature concerning something that Obama has absolutely no choice over -- his race. What is Obama supposed to do? Tell black people to stop voting for him? I don't see Hillary telling the 70% white voters in Mississippi NOT to vote for HER!

Nope, Hillary. The HRC campaign technique of always saying -- "THEY are doing the same thing WE are doing! So we are not so bad after all!" doesn't work -- AGAIN.

[davidly]

Ferraro is just one head of the monstor.

[davidly]

How dare me! I misspelled monster.

[PADDYWHACK]

All of the tricks have been sanctioned by Hill and Bill and Bill has added a little racial gasoline.T­hey have offloaded a few from the bus but they will be repaid if she succeeds.S­amantha Power is a woman of incredible achievements who who didn't ghostwrite children's books for her literary legacy.Fer­raro's goading was policy and to equate the loss of Power to hers is an insult.You only did this to pretend they are of the same caliber.Po­wer's remark was a slip,Ferraro's racist redneck rhetoric.I­f the polls show it works expect more of the same.

[ariadne1]

"Yet, Ferraro is bewilderingly insistent on staying in this fight. Even resigning from her support for Hillary so she can keep making a mess that Hillary is blamed for. As they say, with friends like these..."

she is a shill... this is no accident, she had hillary's full approval. hence, the implied, no strike that, the plain old THREAT she made in her resignation letter to keep on keeping on.

[jmundstuk]

More likely, the Clinton campaign is just pleased that she has sounded off like this. It will help them in PA among lower income white voters who continue to resent affirmative action, etc, and have no love for The Blacks. Plus, she has the scrappy street quality that goes down well in eastern big cities. I don't think Clinton approved it -- I hope she/they didn't, but I'm sure they are happy with it, despite the tut-tutting from HRC.

[December7]

Thanks Hilary Rosen for this, when we remember Obama and Hilary are democrats putting up a fight for their lives against the greatest of odds, we need to disagree without being disagreeable.
Keep us posted amidst all the mud

[drmavis]

Excellent, balanced post. I agree.

[gallstones]

"If either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama is in this race because of their race or their gender, then it is only because it is an inexorable part of them pushing internally to succeed. They weren't given any extra breaks."


Fabulous insight Hillary.

[siri2k]

I have to say I always WONDERED about Ferraro. She was an oddity, and I wanted to admire her, but never felt I had enough info to really conclude one way or the other.
Now I do. I feel good about withholding my judgement of her. She's like Hillary. And I NEVER wondered about Hillary, I always totally understood HER motives!
THEY both NEED TO GO AWAY,
give it to Obi, the Rightful Owner of this campaign.

[CBS]

"They weren't given any extra breaks." Hillary was! She was handpicked by Daniel Moynihan to be his successor as the Senator from NY when she had never lived in NY. I would say this was a substantial break. However I must give her credit for finally throwing Ferraro under the bus.

[CenterLeftLawyer]

Great point!
In this she is somewhat like Ferraro-picked by aging white male democrats in smoke filled room. Then they have the gall to say that Hillary earned her own way. The Clinton message machine is amazing.

[Erdgeist]

I think we can sum up your observations by saying that Ferraro, presently, thinks more of herself than Hillary, Obama or the Democratic Party.

[mix2007]

A very intelligent article.

Thank you!

[StillAmused]

"Her formulation that Barack Obama wouldn't have the success he's experiencing if he were a white man is frightenin­g."

No more frightening than the herd-like, "please don't give us three-dimensional thoughts to decode" response.

What's been completely missed in the rush to pillory Ferraro are those last few words in her original comment: "And the country is caught up in the concept."

No thoughtful person would suggest that Ferraro was claiming an African-American had an "advantage" ACHIEVING the status of candidate for the nomination.

However, only a fool would deny that, once having ARRIVED at that plateau, Obama's heritage and profile have captured the imagination of much of the electorate­... an opportunity to take a giant step away from a murky cultural past and, for some, a chance to shed their own subconscious discomfort with that past.

That, in itself, is a good thing, but it doesn't necessarily make him the more QUALIFIED candidate.­.. even if it IS therapeutic for some of the electorate.

Keeping those two distinct issues simultaneously in focus appears to be just too much for many to manage.

[knixphan]

so, is the message:

'The attractive chance to atone for our cultural sins of the past is overshadowing the 'fact' that the candidate of color happens to be underqualified?"

I suppose it still comes down to who you think is better. I can see Clinton supporters believing the above statement, while Obama supporters believe he's more qualified AND you can bring some cultural balance to history as well.

A lot of voters seem to believe Barack's black AND white halves are both qualified.

[StillAmused]

The message is that some people heard, in Ferraro's inelegant comment, what they NEEDED to hear.

[kramskoi]

you know...the­re are a myriad of reasons to vote for or vote against...­and in the eyes of each voter it is a rational reason, or at least they deem it to be...you are using the same cop out that Ferraro is using to rationalize his support, which seems irrational and incomprehensible to you...to label it with a generalization is dismissive and allows suspension of thought and reason in regard...i­t is a denigrating and arrogant position in which to attempt to present truth...on­ly a fool of similar thinking processes would embrace your opinion and peddle it as fact...

to pretend to reconcile the internal machinations and motives of Obama supporters is an exercise in futility..­.unless, of course, you're prone to sweeping generaliza­tions...th­e same can be said of those who support Clinton...

[StillAmused]

"you are using the same cop out that Ferraro is using to rationalize his support, which seems irrational and incomprehensible to you...to label it with a generalization is dismissive and allows suspension of thought and reason"

Support for Obama is neither irrational nor incomprehensible to me... unless your REASONS are irrational and incomprehensible. If he's ultimately the nominee, I'll enthusiastically support and vote for him.

What Ferraro was identifying was ONE factor that accounts, in part, for his unprecedented support... ironically, BECAUSE ours is a culture that clearly -- and ordinarily -- DOESN'T give a Black man a fair shake. The fact that this is the first incidence of such widespread acceptance in our political history SHOULD get your attention, and at least cause you to contemplate some of the reasons.

"unless, of course, you're prone to sweeping generaliza­tions"...?

Y'mean, like: "only a fool of similar thinking processes would embrace your opinion and peddle it as fact"?

Funny how that works, ain't it...?

[northquirk]

While I agree that race and gender both play a role here, it doesn't make sense to me that we should reduce EITHER candidate to the color of their skin or their sex. Can anyone seriously argue that black men have an advantage in this country? (other than sports) Obama is only the 3rd black person to be elected to the US Senate post-recon­struction. Black men are more likely to be in prison, have a shorter life expectancy, earn less money...wh­ere is the luck here? The argument that people use this vote as some sort of therapy only works when Obama's other qualities are stripped away and we focus on his success ONLY as a black man. The same logic could be used to explain why women support Clinton.

Obama has made it to where he his not simply because he is black, but also through his intelligence, hard work, and yes, his eloquence. While there are probably a number of people who have voted for him based solely on his race, I suspect many more have not vote for him simply because he is black.

[StillAmused]

"Can anyone seriously argue that black men have an advantage in this country?"

No... and, if you'd actually read my comment, you'd notice that I DIDN'T.

Neither, in my opinion, did Ferraro.

As I said, just too much for many to manage.

[mslindab]

Bravo and thank you Ms. Rosen

[RallyRound]

"Unfortunately Gerry Ferraro said something mean and personal and hurtful and she has been graceless and offensive in her own persistent defense."

This really tells the story !

[Diana]

It was mean, but it surely wasn't 'personal.­' Stop reducing these attacks to somehow sound equal in intent--they are nothing less than rovian strategy!!!

Ferraro's remarks, whether or not she personally believed them, were intended to pander and excite both blatant and latent white racism. To imply anything else--like Farraro was misguided or was overzealous in her support of hillary--is bullshit!

Her remarks were calculated and INTENDED to divide. Except for the propagandists like limbaugh and o'reilly, there is hardly anything more reprehensible!

[KPinSEA]

Was anything more ridiculous than Ferraro trying to claim at one point that her comments weren't meant in any way to be derogatory, but to *celebrate* the achievements in civil rights represented by Obama being a successful candidate? Weakest attempt to backtrack I've heard in a long time, and at least she's had the wisdom not to repeat it. I imagine her closest friends told her how lame and disingenuous it sounded.

Once again Obama took a major gaffe by someone else as an opportunity to look cooler than the competition when he said "Well if what she's saying is that being an African American with the name Barack Obama is a major *advantage* in getting the nomination for President, I don't think most people share that opinion."

No ... freaking ... kidding.

[jerseywolf]

Wonderful post. Thank you.

[KimberlyKay]

I found it interesting that you used personal biographical data to show how Senator Obama's mix-raced origins may have helped make him who he is, but used data about women in general to explain Senator Clinton. Women certainly have endured (and continue to endure) horrible things all over this Country and around the world, but has Senator Clinton?

Is there anything to show that Senator Clinton has endured "hatred, rape [or] battery" or been "poor, [a] refugee, . . . [or the] powerless"? Is this anything we have heard from Senator Clinton to show that she would "govern differentl­y..." I do believe Senator Clinton, as a mother, has been a caregiver, but I think former President Bill Clinton had a significant role in the caring for Chelsea Clinton, as well. I am not attempting to suggest that Senator Clinton has not experienced things differently because she is a woman. I am stating that Senator Clinton has not differentiated herself from male candidates in the past either by biography (as your post also failed to do), attitude or policies. Senator Clinton does insist that we need to "join the sisterhood," but I did need something more than just that. It is probably too late to win me over, but perhaps instead of giving Senator McCain talking points (and probably negative ads.) against Senator Obama by suggesting he isn't qualified to be Commander in Chief, Senator Clinton should be telling us how she is different than the male candidates who came before. She has never done this.

As for it being o.k. to comment on Senator Obama's qualifications, I disagree. No-one has any claim to experience of being Commander in Chief except a former Commander in Chief. Our Constitution prevents former Commanders in Chief from taking the job for more than 8 terms. Senator Clinton should not make this argument because it makes it look (to me at least) like she is telling us she will rely on former President Bill Clinton's expertise. As a woman, this does not thrill me. I do not want the first serious female candidate for President making part of her "elect me" argument her marriage to a highly qualified man. Call me silly, but I find this upseting. I would prefer the first serious female candidate for President to stand stolidly and solidly on her own two feet as I know a truly qualified female candidate would have no difficulty doing.

[mcfried]

Thank-you you said this far more eloquently and calmly than I could. This is my feeling exactly. I am beyond angry with Sen Clinton at this point for two things 1) Smearing one of the most promising leaders I have ever seen and setting back women 20 years. She has no real qualifications for this job and she has a terrible voting record, since she can't win on her record she is throwing a fit and calling anyone who questions her sexist. As a woman I find this disgusting equating the experience of mixed race/AA to her experience is laughable and I fear she has made it all but impossible to question real sexism in society.