Geraldine Ferraro's Ugly Words - Accidental, or Campaign Ploy?
(Read more HuffPost coverage and reaction to Geraldine Ferraro's comments)
Geraldine Ferraro, once a beacon of hope for the possibility of a new era in American politics, has now disgraced herself for a second time. Today's 'clarifying' comments regarding last week's racist remarks were, if anything, even more offensive. They, and now Ms. Ferraro herself, symbolize a dark and ugly political era that belongs firmly in the past. And by allowing her to remain with her campaign in an official capacity, Hillary Clinton has brought the shadow of Ms. Ferraro's disgrace upon herself.
I remember the pleasure my then-wife and I felt when Rep. Ferraro was nominated as the Democratic Party's Vice Presidential candidate. As parents of a small girl who was already showing leadership traits, we -- and many others -- saw her as the harbinger of a better and more inclusive politics, the politics of the future.
What a disappointment yesterday, then, to read of Ms. Ferraro's ugly and bigoted comment that Barack Obama is "lucky" to be black, and that he would not be where he is today "if he were a white man" or "a woman." Make that ugly, bigoted -- and incorrect. There are no serious political observers of any political orientation who doubt Sen. Obama's political skills, including Republicans or the Clintons themselves.
Ms. Ferraro's comment may be offensive and wrong, but that doesn't mean it's stupid. On the contrary: It looks pretty shrewd. Her words play very well into white resentment of affirmative action, by harping on the notion that less-qualified black people are getting jobs that should go to hard-working and experienced white people.
Ferraro's words suggest a coded play for the bigot vote, with the "woman" reference thrown in to somehow link Obama with the oppression of women (a little something for the Erica Jong set.) It fits in nicely with the "accidental" darkening of Obama's skin in a Clinton campaign photo, or Sen. Clinton's recent statement that Sen. Obama isn't a Muslim - "as far as I know."
If that weren't bad enough, Geraldine Ferraro went back to the well today: "I really think they're attacking me because I'm white," she said. "How's that?"
How "that" is, Ms. Ferraro, is offensive and shameful. You have dishonored the country that has given you so much.
Still, are her statements the uncensored ravings of a bigot - or yet another example of the Clinton campaign playing the race card and then saying "who, me"? Comments like Ms. Ferraro's play into the fears and resentments of some lower-income white voters - the same voters who just so happen to be Sen. Clinton's strongest voting bloc.
Before Hillary's devoted followers weigh in, they should consider this: Geraldine Ferraro still has a position with the Clinton campaign. (See update, below.) Clinton's waffling rejection of Ferraro's comments stands in sharp contrast to Samantha Power's immediate resignation. (And the Powers comment was personal in nature, not a play to bigotry.)
Here's what Senator Clinton had to say today: "It is regrettable that any of our supporters on both sides, because we've both had that experience, say things that kind of veer off into the personal," she said. "We ought to keep this on the issues." Apparently she can't resist exploiting the victim role, even when an official in her campaign has transgressed the bounds of political decency.
And Ferraro isn't just some "supporter." She has an official role with the campaign as finance chair. She speaks as a Clinton surrogate. By allowing Ferraro to keep her role in the campaign, Sen. Clinton is giving Ferraro's remarks her tacit approval. She's confirming the worst fears of those who believe she will stoop at nothing to become President.
Do I believe that Sen. Clinton has a secret command center dedicated exclusively to transmitting coded messages of racial bigotry? Of course not - er, I mean, not as far as I know. Do I think she and her staff use coded appeals to bigotry when it's convenient? Put it this way: A pattern of "accidental" racial slurs has persisted throughout the campaign, despite all the controversy, and has yet to be explained. (And, as a commenter noted, Ferraro used the same line in 1988.)
It's still possible, given enough public pressure, that Ferraro will resign from the Clinton campaign. That would be appropriate. But given the waffling today, even that would now leave the suspicion that this was an example of a time-worn and dirty political tradition: Have a surrogate inject hateful ideas in the campaign, then let them take the fall for it once the ugly message has been set loose.
Either way, it's time for Geraldine Ferraro to retire from the public stage. At this point she's no longer just an embarrassment to the Clinton campaign. Her continued presence as a Democratic figure tarnishes the entire party. At a time when American politics needs to lift its sights toward higher purpose, she is a reminder of its ugly past - one that, sadly, is apparently still alive and well in some quarters.
Oh, and one last question: Is Geraldine Ferraro by any chance a superdelegate?
UPDATE: Geraldine's latest gem - "I will not be discriminated against because I'm white." And, as of this writing, she is still an official representative of the Clinton campaign.
UPDATE II: As I thought likely, the continued public pressure has finally led to Ferraro's resignation from the Clinton campaign (see third-to-last graf). They tried to weather it out, but thankfully the negative reaction was too great. That says good things about the party and the general public, if not the campaign itself. Ferraro's self-pitying resignation letter, and her promise to keep speaking out, cries out for repudiation from every single one of Clinton's supporters.
Read more HuffPost coverage and reaction to Geraldine Ferraro's comments
Follow RJ Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow
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
Ferraro is on the mark. Her statement is correct. But, alas......
Up to now, the democrat party was the paragon of all that is good and right, color blind, and championing women's causes everywhere. This Geraldine Ferraro incident shows them to be the sexist scum they accuse others of. What hypocrites!
Race baiting is different from racism. Ferraro/Clinton was/are clearly race baiting in the ideal Rovian sense.
Identifying those who actually call her on this as "ruthless" is another classic Rove tactic after being caught... saying... "Who innocent little old me?"
This was/is clearly an attempt to get the economically insecure white vote to view BHO's campaign as affirmative action.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
By the way, affirmative action has helped more women than blacks...
'just sayin'
Yes, we can always count on any controversy among our party to bring out the braindead Repig whackjobs with their moronic and baseless litany of accusations. But unlike theirs, our party has not systematically attempted to destroy Constitutional government, individual rights, or the nation's financial system. However badly some Democrats may sometimes behave, they and we have the consolation that at least they are not Repigs.
Another ridiculous post on a non-story. To say Geraldine Ferraro is racist is beyond stupid. Earl Ofari Hutchinson is the only one at HuffPost who has had the courage to speak the truth about this whole dust up. Hutchinson's common sense piece was posted today,
As this video confirms, the Clinton Campaign's hands are clean. Frankly I don't see what the objection to Geraldine's comments could be other than that she's white. So as Hill would say, "let's all take a breath," watch the video, and then tell me I'm wrong.
http://www
(By the way, I've never linked a video before, mostly because we've all been spammed by so many fatuous videos that I assume other people have grown as suspicious and cynical as I have about such recommendations. But I promise this one's only 2 minutes, and I think you'll agree it's worth it.)
Anyone there?? Nochnoi? Kev? Chi? AdLib? Kalima? Nelly?
You know what, I am getting tired of hearing that white voters are all afraid of black people and just the sight of one will make them stop listening and change votes. I am also sick of hearing that poor white people are racists and rich white people are not. Get a grip people! Maybe I am wrong but among the white people I am related to and know the rich ones and poor ones adopt people of color and marry them too. That makes them all family. The children choose whatever title on forms they want and most don't fit. All of them love their family of all colors.
I am sad to see a person from a mixed race family giving coded speeches about the fear of voters to vote for him using terms that are coded to mean the fear of whites to vote for a black candidate. I don't see anyone in the press or on this list calling him on it. Both of these candidates have merits and demerits. Those of you in the Obama camp need to stop trying to use his race to save his behind when the issues and votes start to fall away from him. This is a losing and cynical strategy for Obama and the party.
WTF is wrong with you, are you delusional? Ferraro brought up the topic of race not Obama or his people. I am multiracial (white mother, cuban/african american father) and what I saw was Obama responding to comments that were directed at him. What code words are you talking about? How is Obama losing? WTH are you talking about?
"I am sad to see a person from a mixed race family giving coded speeches about the fear of voters to vote for him using terms that are coded to mean the fear of whites to vote for a black candidate. I don't see anyone in the press or on this list calling him on it."
what the heck are you talking about??? what coded speeches are you talking about?
This post is a great example of why I love reading HuffPost. When I hear comments like Geraldine Ferraro's, my brain boils and I instinctively know they are way over the line. Your column helped me to understand exactly WHY they are over the top, out of bounds, and totally underhanded. I have never been so ashamed of a Democrat as I am of Hillary for the way she is running her campaign. It makes me laugh when people complain about the msm being against her. The msm always pays the most attention to whoever is slinging the most mud and/or being the most outrageous. Have they been spending hours and hours on Obama's Mississippi triumph last night? No, it's been Spitzer and Ferraro all day today.
I agree! I am sick of all of this complaining of msm bias. The msm is biased, but not toward any political candidate or philosophy. It has a money bias. The majority of stories have to do with sex, violence, or scandal because the vast majority of the American public are not interested in anything else. The media's main focus has been on the bottom line, ratings and the advertizing revenue that comes with it.
People need to understand - Ferraro wasn't insulting black people or Barack; she was insulting all of his supporters. She's saying, "If you vote for him, you're doing it because he's black. If you're inspired by his words and his ideas, it's because he's black. If you believe in his candidacy, it's because he's black." It's cynical, catagorical politics designed for one purpose - to make people question whether they want to vote for this guy "just because he's black." It diminishes millions of people, who see in him, and hear in his words, a vision of a better America.
Don't fall for it. He's better. He's different. And he's black in the same way that he's left-handed. His skin pigmentation has about as much to do with his candidacy as the size of his ears does.
Hillary Clinton goes around every day trying to find just the right combination of gutter political tactics will be the key to winning the nomination. Maybe she should try doing what he does. Maybe she should speak her heart and find ways to inspire people. Maybe then SHE'D be the one who speaks and 20,000 people show up, instead of speaking at the same place and having 1500 people show up.
Face it, Hillary just isn't any kind of leader. If she wasn't a woman, she wouldn't even be here.
I can't say that Clinton told Ferraro to say those things, but the campaign's actions since then have followed point by point the Rove playbook as to how to get the maximum mileage from an attack issued from a surrogate.
You wait until the press comes to you. You then act like you heard it for the first time. You then say something mild like that is not the official campaign position or you disagree or that it was regrettable that such things were said. but you do not say anything against the attacker or seriously repudiate the statement. Then if it lasts another news cycle you step up your repudiation slightly or you accept the resignation of the person, who acts like they are being made a victim of the press or the opposite side. Then if the press is still listening the attacker either stands by their statement or 'clarifies' it in a way that essentially repeats and expands on the attack.
It's the Hillary campaign 100%. It's all about finding a way to win, without inspiring anyone, showing any traits of leadership, or having any ideas about how the country can work better. It's all about winning by political leverage, triangulation and lying.
Again posted before i finished writing. "Obama's pastor's words from the pulpit" dissing the Clintons is a political statemnet. They should lose their tax deferrments.
Then all the Christian churches across the country that have been supporting George Bush over the past seven years should lose their tax breaks, too.
This is really irrelevant to the primaries.
Obama's words from the pulpit dissing the Clintons - ugly words or ploy?
Should he lose tax deferrments? he is now political!!!
Hillary's people paid pastors in East Texas to tell their people to vote for Hillary.
i don't believe that. It is always a double standard with you Obama supporters
Your side is pushing the race issue not Hillary.
What pulpit? What are you talking about?
words posted before message completed - see post above it. Obama's Chicago pastor making political statements from the pulpit.
This latest stunt by the Rove/Clinton team shows that Samantha Powers was correct in describing Rove/Clinton as a "monster, who will do anything to get elected!". Ferraro was right in one regard, if Obama was a white man with his current success in popular vote and delegates things would have been different. Because this would have been over by now. Rove/Clinton would have been shown the door by the powers that be. Only because its Rove/Clinton running against a black man is this process still carrying on.
Ferraro's words worked just as intended. Ferraro and Clinton come off looking like victims.
So much for the strong feminist that they are supposed to be.
Sorry, Obama, they bested you this time because white folks won't stand for black men picking on their women.
I disagree that they look like victims. I think they're TRYING to look like victims. But I've heard and read a lot of backlash over this. And with his response, Obama looks like the class act that he is, refusing to retaliate, refusing to show any rancor or resentment.
The only thing this flap succeeded in doing was showing a certain segment of the population that Clinton is as sympathetic to them as Reagan was.
I disagree. She resigned due to an overwhelming negative reaction to her comments. When it was widely publicized that she'd made almost identical comments about Jesse Jackson twenty years ago it became obvious to all except those who embrace denial like Spitzer embraces prostitutes that this woman has issues surrounding black men and their pursuit of the presidency.
I wanted to believe in the Clintons because I supported them from day one, every time that their was a scandal I defended them. I thought at the time that they got a very raw deal. In hindsight I truly believe that they brought a lot of this on themselves.
They have allowed so much negativity in this campaign. In addition they have disparaged Obama without end. She has failed once to congratulate him on a single victory, Bill denigrated him in South Carolina, Geri makes her huge gaffe, and then they wonder why people are turned off by them?
They will never get my vote, if she is the nominee I will sit home for the general election and pray Obama will run again in four years. Hillary please do the country a favor, drop out of the race and run for govenor of NY...they like you up there I hear, the rest of the country is tired of you.
I agree that the Clinton campaign has a shrewd purpose with these kinds of calculated attacks. Just before the South Carolina primary, Bill Clinton made a few comments that got us all to remember, in case we forgot, that Barack Obama is at least partly black. But were his comments really about race? I think they were more about tampering with Obama's momentum and diverting it. I doubt the disruption really meant if you are black and vote for Obama your vote lacks thoughtfulness or doesn't carry as much value in the broader picture. At least as far as I can tell. A similar tactical diversion happened and successfully in Texas and Ohio for a different effect. Oh, well, diversion politics has always been popular. Take yesterday, Ferarro came out and tried to stomp out the victory of Obama in Mississippi and stomp out the joy of those celebrating it. The tactic is getting a little worn. Obama should take these assaults to the next level. He should say, I'm glad you brought that up. Let's talk about foreign policy, or let's talk about diversity in America, or let's talk about NAFTA. These are all issues worthy in themselves.
Wait, before I go to my own higher ground:
How's this: Geraldine Ferraro is a white female politician who is still around in Washington only because she follows the status quo. She is without a vision or voice of her own and is satisfied with that position out of self interest. Not that I would ever say that.
Or how about this: Hillary Clinton is still in this race only because she has survived a long history of unfortunate compromises and shady deals in which her very earliest ideals were immobilzed by her own self interest to remain an insider. Not that I would ever say this either.
Bill Clinton's remarks were aimed at OH, not NC. Farraro's remarks were aimed at PA.
T
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
