The Ferraro Fallacy
At first I was willing to give Geraldine Ferraro the benefit of the doubt. Maybe she was clumsily trying to say that a lot of Barack Obama's appeal is because he's a spectacular candidate and he's black and people are hungering for someone who can bridge racial divides and so they turn to him. If she was trying to say that, it would surely make sense. But she kept digging herself in, famously saying that Obama's "lucky" to be black and that that accounts for his leading in the popular vote and delegates. Absurd, I thought, but again I thought maybe she meant something else, something wrong but not malicious. something like if Barack Obama was a white, freshman senator from Illinois, it's unlikely he'd be running for president. Yes, that's possible, I suppose, but it's an absurd conjecture. If Barack Obama was someone else he wouldn't be...Barack Obama. If Ronald Reagan lactated, he wouldn't be Ronald Reagan. If I wasn't Jewish, I might be a Buddhist. So what? If you start stripping away parts of people's biographies and substitute what ifs like it was some science experiment where you graft a human ear on to a mouse, it's just idle banter. As for the "luck" part, please. Let's leave aside centuries of racism, being black is not enough to elevate one to the presidency or President Sharpton would be finishing his second term.
Ferraro seems so unwilling to concede the obvious, that Obama is an exceptionally intelligent, charismatic and winning senator and is leading because he's a great politician and that, while race is surely part of his appeal, it is just one part and hardly sufficient in and of itself to propel him to this exalted place. As Obama keeps saying, if you were to write a handbook on how to become president you wouldn't start by being African-American and having a funny name. Her asinine comments keep getting layered by ugly remarks. Ferraro says she's getting attacked because she's white. No, she's getting attacked because she's stupid.
For more go to http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capital/2008/03/13/the-ferraro-fallacy
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
Thank you for an illuminating and on point piece.
However, with all due respect to your domestic situation and the need for harmony in the Cooper/Grunwald household, I have to take issue with the notion that this is Ferraro going off on her own. Everything I've seen indicates that the Clinton campaign is exploiting this for their own gain, because they recognize that, like the Jesse Helms job rejection ad, this will inflame white resentment among certain key groups of voters. In addition, Ferraro has dominated the news cycle for several days, preventing Obama from getting the media coverage he should have gotten for the endorsement of him by leading former military officers, bolstering his commander-in-chief credentials. It dovetails with the timing of the apparent Clinton-inspired leak of Rev. Wright's sermon. And the use of Fox News. And the fact that the Clinton campaign can try to claim "plausible deniability," to quote Ron Ziegler, now that Ferraro has officially "resigned" from her position as a top fundraiser.
Look, I don't know whether this was hatched by the Clinton campaign or whether it was exploited and maximized by the campaign after Ferraro's initial comments. What I do know is this has the fingerprints of the slimy Mark Penn all over it. (Believe me, I don't necessarily fault your wife for this; from news reports leaking from the campaign, it seems apparent she and Penn have been at loggerheads for some time. I do, however, blame Hillary, who is ultimately responsible for all of this.)
Maybe Gerry Ferraro is stupid, although I have difficulty with that take. Arrogant? "Don't antagonize people like me." But, when I checked the letter from David Duke to Keith Olbermann thanks to the tip from Joe Garofoli of the SF Chronicle
(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=24921)
expressing his strong agreement with Ms. Ferraro's remarks, my belief that the Ferraro affair would enflame the ugly sentiments of white racists was confirmed. If Mr. Duke is not a good barometer of white racism, I don't know what is. In this regards, Mr. Olbermann's sermon is clearly vindicated. To see Mr. Duke's letter and check it out for yourself.
http://www.davidduke.com/general/keith-olbermann-says-ferraro-sounds-like-david-duke_3576.html
Obama is an empty suit. His campaign is built on empty phrases, phrases so vague that everybody has lots of room to speculate what he really means. Out of the notion of political correctness, nobody dared to question his credentials, because every attempt at criticism is met with "that's racist" or "that's old politics".
If he were white, he would be similar to John Edwards. if he were white, black voters would not vote for him. If he were white, Ophra would not endorse him.
This is only possible in the Democratic party, because the Republicans would have laughed him out of the race, before it even began.
Obama is there at the right time and at the right place and he brings the right credentials. These credentials are the color of his skin, his "funny name" and his upbringing, because there is no record he can run on nationwide.
Thanks for the Clinton talking points.
If he were white he wouldn't be Barack Obama. Did you read the post? Please do the research on who Senator Obama is, what he has done and what his record is. Obviously, you have done none of this. I sincerely suggest you do this and then tell us what part of his thick 20 year record you do not like. Maybe you might find you do like it -- I couldn't possibly say. However, telling me he has "no record" is tantamount to telling me (since I have done the research) that you don't really know about what you are writing.
Do you ever get tired of repeating the phrase "empty suit?" What is your definition of an "empty suit?" What credentials do you have that qualify you to judge Sen. Obama as an "empty suit?" Or is this just a mindless phrase you enjoy repeating? It doesn't say much about your ability to think for yourself if all you can do is repeat meaningless phrases and talking points. Since he is not "white" (and by the way, what's your definition of white? Is it a genetic category? A sociological category? The label on a crayon in your Crayola box?) how can we conclude anything at all by speculating on that whimsical topic? Why not post something that shows original thought or has some connection to reality and make a substantive contribution to a stimulating exchange of ideas. Of course, it's a free country and you are free to demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge much less understanding. And be sure to have a nice day! PS Am I understanding it correctly that you belong to the GOP? If you don't, you might want to check them out. You would fit right in.
thank you mr. cooper for. a succint and common wisdom take on the comments from the former congresswoman from howard beach.
Ferraro's refusal to admit that anyone could be slighted by her remarks is like the husband who can't believe saying, "Yes, you do look fat in that dress" makes him the bad guy. This is all the more ironic given her own history of taking umbrage at ethnic innuendos by others.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DF153AF936A3575AC0A964958260
She is an old feminist from the days when feminists were bitter and angry and never progressed further than that, in spite of the meme that age brings wisdom. She thought she could rally the cause again in this day and age like she did way back then. She only proved that in her old age, she is a racist, and totally out of touch with the way women think today, She has made a fool of herself and has done nothing to support the cause of feminism today, which btw, no one seems to know what that is.
Ding!!! Nail on the head.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
