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

Comments

[PioneerKing]

Will those same people be for Sen. Clinton if they knew what her voting record was?
Sen. Clinton (and former president Clinton) voted for changes in the banking/lending laws that have led to the current crisis.
Sen. Clinton voted to allow credit card companies to charge 30% interest rates.
Sen. Clinton voted for changes in bankruptcy laws that will make it nearly impossible for families to ever see their way out of finanical difficulties without loosing everything.
Sen. Clinton voted for George Bush's No Child Left Behind.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00371
Sen. Clinton has done nothing but exhibit faulty judgement in her senate voting record. Sen. Clinton's voting record shows she does not have the experience that America wants.

[rachaelisacancer]

Sen. Obama voted to allow credit card companies to charge more than 30% interest.

Did you know that?

[greejambri]

that's actually an inaccurate statement, but a clinton talking point for sure. the only way clinton can hope to win is to slander, distort, lie, and play on the worst fears and suspicions in the voters' minds. my god, help us all if these rovian, machiavellian tactics work for her.

[Pammy1151]

That is not true. Get "all" your facts right about that entire bill before you start crap.

[rachaelisacancer]

Pammy1151 See Profile I'm a Fan of Pammy1151

"That is not true. Get "all" your facts right about that entire bill before you start crap."

What's good for the goose...

[moodyring]

Wow, that woman is getting brighter and brighter.

Of course this is a political ploy. It wasn't an idle comment. If Hillary really didn't want Ferraro to comment anymore on the topic, she would've told her yesterday to shut the f-ck up. She didn't.

I think Geraldine should stay on the Clinton campaign. As Hillary carries the sh-t of a former affirmative action beneficiary who now cries foul needlessly (think Clarence Thomas), the stench will stay with her and hopefully voters will realize that as this Democratic campaign continues.

[RexTC]

Has it occurred to Geraldine Ferrarro that Hillary Clinton could not have gotten where she is if she hadn't been married to Bill Clinton?

[rachaelisacancer]

Oooo - a full-fledged and unashamed sexist - right here! On this very Web site! Shocking!

[realistxxx]

OK let's leave gender out of it:

Marrying someone that happened to become a 2-term POTUS provides a significant advantage to one's future as a politician.

There is nothing sexist in this fact.

You're delusional.

[AnninCA]

Of course....­......her entire statement was about the fortunes of fate.

[greejambri]

you're way too generous to someone who has an obvious racial bias, and has no qualms about making those views public for political purposes. of course, I'm sure that it's all just coincidence that the clintons are campaigning in the new "must win" state of PA, which happens to have a populace similar in consciousness to white alabama when one ventures outside the relative oases of philadelphia and pittsburgh. nothing like stirring up those racial resentments to win a few more votes from working class whites.

[kingfishstew]

So, she was acting out a greek tragedy, only no one realized it?


Chorus: "Had only Oedipus had skin of black, cruel fate would have spared him touching his mamma's rack!"

[patriotscholar]

I think they are bringing in the racism card so they can try and use the gender card more. If that is the case, then I expect Hillary to make some statement or issue bringing up the gender issue.

[rachaelisacancer]

Because any argument about the sexism in America is null and void? Oh I forgot, according to your kind, sexism doesn't exist. "Iron my shirt"? Nah, that's just a woman's place. "Period'ically" the "claws come out"? Yeah, that's just the truth about women.

Idiots abound.

Obama SUPPORTERS play the race card better than anybody out there.

[patriotscholar]

Oops! She already did it.

"Do you agree with General McPeak that you are more qualified to be commander in chief because you don't "go on television and have crying fits?" Are you prepared to remove General McPeak from your campaign for what is viewed by many as a sexist comment?"

There you have it. Sums up a strategy quite well. Very interesting. Would she be willing then, to ask Ms. Ferraro to leave her campaign for her racist statements as well? I doubt it.

[LAJonathan]

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/12/104959/636/963/474987
Read.

[Pammy1151]

And you act like one of the extreme NOW fanatics.

[PioneerKing]

Geraldine Ferraro's comments were not a mistake, she made similar comments about Rev. Jackson's run for president in 1988.
"If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race," she said.

The cite is an April 15, 1988 Washington Post story (byline: Howard Kurtz),

[JamesinPG]

Let's see here... If one of Obama's people said that Hillary Clinton, (a one time senator with some of the highest negative approval ratings in politics) would never be in her current position without having been the wife of a former President would that be sexism? And if the Clinton campaign complained about such statements would they then be playing the "gender card"?

The logic of calling Obama to task for injecting race into the campaign for remarks that were made by Clinton surrogates is so twisted that it makes me dizzy. I am rapidly losing what was once a great deal of respect for Hillary Clinton. Her campaign is threatening to turn what should be a no-brainer win for the Democrats in November into another crushing self-inflicted defeat.

[kingfishstew]

I think Geraldine Fararro is becoming the white Al Sharpton.

[pbitondo]

Geraldine Ferraro wants to be Ambassador to Italy, so she will do anything to see that Hillary wins. That's it in a nut shell. Besides, Mrs. Clinton's motto has always been, "I don't care what you say or do, but keep my fingerprints off it."

[DRHoen]

Thanks for you accurate article. In with the new, I say. To answer your closing question, I heard Ferraro herself say during a recent Diane Rehm show that she is NOT a superdelegate.

[CarmenCameron]

Ferraro and Clinton are willing to poison the well for any other Democrat and should be ashamed of themselves. I don't believe that they are racists, just coldly calculating professional politicians of the worst sort. And the fact that they (and their supporters) are NOT ashamed of what they're doing is precisely the reason why I am supporting Senator Obama. I will vote for a person of integrity or not at all.

[deb123]

I agree 100 percent. I would think that HC, above anyone, would understand the sense of betrayal felt when someone in whom we placed our trust totally disregarded acceptable behavior. I doubted her husband's character, but thought she maintained some semblance of dignity. I was wrong. The clue is how many times the word "fight" peppers her speeches. She's like the junior high girl-bully who bites, pulls hair and name calls for the purpose of gaining popularity. The problem is that once the show is over, the "admirers" move on.

In the meantime, those of us who would like to see something positive happen in our childrens' futures are, once again, losing the possibility.

[presto]

I think you completely misinterpreted this whole situation and some of you conclusions are just silly. You also said:

"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.)"

That is a very convoluted and ludicrous path to take. It barely even makes sense except perhaps to conspiracy theorists. Stop assuming Clinton supporters are idiots and take a more reasoned approach to the facts. Listen to what is said, not to the cacaphony around you.

[Duffs]

Clinton's core voters are older white females with no degrees. No one is saying they're idiots, but how many of her core voters have internet access? How many of them know that this is a demonstrably recurring pattern in the Clinton campaign that pushes the line further each time?

Even if you or Geraldine don't find those kinds of comments offensive, believe me, black voters do. It's as if Hillary thinks she can win a general election without the black vote. Say hello to 4+ more years of republican atrocities.

[AnninCA]

You're absurd and highly disrespectul characterization of the coalition she has built will also be the reason you, if awarded the nominee, will lose profoundly in the Fall.

And you'll whine forever that "you wuz robbed."

Never once taking responsibility for the nasty attitudes.

[HeadScratcher]

It's obvious that they think they can win without the black vote. McCain sure isn't going to attract the black vote, is he? The Clintons are counting on Democrats, including the black vote, to fall in line this fall if she is the nominee.

As Bill Clinton has been quoted as saying in the past: "In the primaries, you fall in love...in the general, you fall in line"

When are we, as Americans, begin to reject such callous political thinking?

[repearwo]

"Stop assuming Clinton supporters are idiots and take a more reasoned approach to the facts."

The facts seem to be that Hillary got caught unprepared and is pursueing a selfish slash and burn campaign ti either get the nomination this year or clear the way to try again in 2010. I do not think that Geraldine Ferraro is an idiot, but she is making idiotic statements. So are Hillary and her supporters.

Once again Democrats seem perfectly willing to give the Presidency to Republican because of infighting.

IF this is the best Hillary can do, she does not need to be President ever. Of course I came to that conclusion after her vote on Iraq and of late Iran. I would like to have a woman President, but not jsut any woman and cerrtainly not Hillary.

[nk007]

presto:
Some Clinton supporters like you try to be so clever. May be Ms Ferraro really believes that Black men have an advantage over white men and women in America. If she does, I think she needs serious help. My hunch is that she knows better. But you see this kind of talk is what appeals to opponents of affirmative action, even though affirmative action has been more beneficial to white women than blacks. How ironic: now that the real victims of race discrimination are people like Ms. Ferraro, a former congresswoman, vice-presidential nominee, and as she threatened Obama, some one with powerful financial connections.

[presto]

nk007 - I am certainly not trying to be clever. I don't know why you even said that. Ms Ferraro did not say black men have an advantage over white men and women in America. Twisting the words of others to advance a pre-conceived notion of your own is really sloppy thinking. That this has become an argument about affirmative action is proof that the whole discourse has gone down a rabbit hole.

[Farfennugen]

This is not assuming all Clinton supporters are idiots. Just her largest uneducated voting bloc that can be influenced by racial comments. The fact that she is still involved in the campaign is a very clear answer that Sen Huckebee Clinton is targeting her biggest voting bloc with racially devisive language. She is destroying her own party so she can run again in 2012.

[presto]

You are calling Clinton's largest uneducated voting bloc idiots? Seriously? And this is your logic:

Clinton is still involved in the campaign therefore Clinton is targeting her biggest voting bloc (the idiots) with racially divisive language. That doesn't even make sense.

[Manx]

Your analysis is excellent. Clinton and Ferraro are giving the Democratic party a bad name. There should be no room in the party for those who would exploit racism for political advantage. Clinton's acceptance of Ferraro's shameful remarks is another manifestation of her scorched-earth campaign.

[jazzman]

As we watch the Clinton gutter tactics being played out we are getting a glimpse of how Clinton would conduct business as the President. What we are seeing is that her tactics don't differ very much from the White House of GWB. Her secrecy and her use of surrogates to smear her opponents while sequestering herself with a cadre of like thinking advisors is reminiscent of Bush's approach to governing. Her tepid denials and half hearted rejections of such tactics sounds as she unleashes attack dogs like Ferraro, remind one of Bush. Her generalized condemnation of both sides could have been written by Rove himself. Even her dressing down and removal of jewelry seems like a copy of Bush's aw shucks, I'm just a rancher from Texas, type persona. Do we really want another leader like Bush?

Clinton represents the politics that we must change. It's time to restore our Constitutional freedoms, bring a transparent window into government, restore civil behavior in our foreign policy, reinvest in our country rather than just our corporations and Wall Street. Watching Clinton's campaign descend into the gutter over and over again I'm reminded that Obama is the only one who offers to lead us in that new direction we're waiting for.

[rachaelisacancer]

"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."

Well, I guess it's lucky that Obama doesn't have to open his mouth to get racism to work in his favor on the campaign trail.

Tell me, honestly - do you think that fear of - and revenge on - the white man hasn't gained Obama any supporters? Check out the millions of blacks who voted for him just for that reason, and he didn't even have to say a word.

[kingfishstew]

So, in you're mind, Obama's campaign is about revenge on the white man. Exactly how is Obama going to reap his revenge on the white man, when it office? What do you think his first anti-white policy is going to be?

[rachaelisacancer]

Well I guess you didn't understand the context of what I said.

You see, this blog suggested that Ferraro's comments were somehow meant to psychologically trigger the unabashed racism of the "poor white folks" who support Hillary. As though poor white folks are the only ones supporting her (a common myth among Obama supporters).

So let's say that's true. Let's say the Clinton camp is using racially-motivated psychological warfare against Obama.

My argument is that it goes both ways.

Again, it's convenient that Obama doesn't have to say a word to psychologically trigger the racism of many of the minorities who voted for him - he just has to stand there and be black (which he halfway is).

It's the sentiment of those voting for Obama because THEY are racist that I was referring to, not Obama's sentiments personally. I didn't suggest that Obama was out to take revenge on the white man, I suggested that the racially-motivated psychological make-up of many voters was at play - just as was suggested in this blog.

Blacks have been persecuted for centuries. Psychologically, many blacks are lead to believe that a black man will fight harder for black people. Psychologically, many blacks believe that getting a black man in the white house is the only way to turn away from the unabashed racism imposed upon them over the years and still today. It isn't, because you actually have to cross racial lines to get past them.

What do you think (fill in the blank)'s first anti-(fill in the blank) policy is going to be? See what a dumb question that is?

[audacitytocope]

If funny to me that you think millions of black people are casting their vote because of anti-white sentiment. A more positive spin on that might be that millions of black people are voting for barack obama because they actually like what he stands for and not some reactive bullshit about white men. I know its hard for your eurocentric mind to conceive but not everything racial minorities do is about white people. if you can have your own agency to pick a candidate, a neighborhood, or spouse or anything else that shares your same racial make up without being accuse of being a racist, why can't black people choose a black candidate without being anger-blinded idiots.

[rachaelisacancer]

Everyone is so ready to be the victim I guess I just didn't get my point across.

There are racists out there voting for Obama simply because they are racist. Just as the "low-income whites" (which we are led to believe are all secretly racist) are supposedly going to be led to make a racist vote as well.

These are the ONLY people I am referring to - not in fact, as you took it, all blacks who voted for Obama.

There are plenty of people of plenty of colors who voted for Obama. But that doesn't negate the many, many others who are black, are racist and voted for him just because of that reason.

[MyNameIsJames]

Dear Rachelisacancer

Your comments sound so ignorant. It is clear that you know very little about what racism is or how it has affected both Blacks and Whites in this nation. Were you aware that most African Americans favored Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama until a few months ago? Did you know that African Americans voted for her husband in record numbers. What changed? A series of comments by the Clinton campaign that were designed to create racial ill feelings between black and white Democrats. These statements created bad feelings within the African American community Only after these comments did African Americans desert HRC for Obama.

Black have been voting for white candidates for years -- Never been a problem right? Now that they are voting for Obama -- some whites seem to resent it. Very interesting. By the way a whole lot of whites are voting for Obama especially in those all white states like Utah, Wyoming, Iowa etc. How do you explain that -- Genius

[nk007]

MyNameIsJames;

You are absolutely correct. By the way African Americans have voted overwhelmingly for all the Democratic Candidates beginning with John F. Kennedy. They Voted in high 80% for Mondale-Ferraro. I doubt that Bill Clinton would have been president without the massive support from blacks.He did not win a majority of the white vote in 1992. But you see, some what white politicians, like Ferraro, want Blacks to be seen and not heard.

[rachaelisacancer]

It's funny that you would say I know very little about racism. Very funny indeed. Do you know the color of my skin? Do you know that I've never faced a slur? No, you're just another idiot ready to jump on the "I know more about race than you do," the "I've suffered more than you do," the "wah, wah, wah" sinking ship.

I guess everyone failed to notice that I didn't accuse every black voting for Obama of being a racist. I just pointed out the racists who voted for Obama as such. Just as this blog suggested that it was just racist white people voting against him.

Blacks have been voting for white candidates for years because they didn't have anyone else to vote for, duh.

I don't have a problem with anyone of any color voting for any Democrat. What I have a problem with is the suggestion that Clinton is secretly manipulating racists to vote for her because Obama's black. These people are racist and not anything Clinton or her surrogates say will make them do any different than what they were going to do in the first place - not vote for the black man.

If the suggestion being made in this blog were to be true, my argument would stand regardless.

Obama and his surrogates don't have to say ANYTHING to get racist blacks to vote for him. Just as Clinton and her surrogates really don't have to say ANYTHING to get racist whites to not vote for him.

This blog suggests that the comments coming from the Clinton camp are psychologically manipulating the racist "low-income whites" to be racists. They're already racist, dumbasses. That's stupid, just like some other people around here. Genius, indeed!

[DRHoen]

And do you not think that racism has played a role in non-blacks (whites, latinos, asians) voting _against_ Obama?

And do you not think that non-black (white, latino, asian) women, especially older ones are voting for Clinton because she is a woman?

[rachaelisacancer]

You didn't catch it but I addressed that. See below.

[GromytTheDog]

Progressive political mombloggers are calling for Ferraro to step down as finance chair of Clinton's campaign, and for Clinton to fire her:

http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/03/geraldine-ferra.html

[olderdem]

Hillary's voting block. Feminists and racists. Who would have thought that feminists were so desparate to elect a women as president that they would team up with the racist voting block to try to win? Is that the key to winning Pennsylvannia?

[Illy]

Why is Michael Nutter (African American mayor of Philadelphia) still supporting her? His constituents need to let him know in no uncertain terms that it is not OK for him to throw his weight behind the now overtly racist Clinton campaign in the hopes of future political favors. If any of you out there are in Philly, bombard your mayor with calls, emails and letters to the editor.

[presto]

Or maybe Michael Nutter knows something you don't. Or maybe Michael Nutter can think for himself. Clinton is not racist.

[presto]

Can't anybody here think logically?

[rachaelisacancer]

No, silly. Racism is only whites hating blacks and anyone who believes in the myth of "sexism" is just a silly little girl who should be in the kitchen or ironing a shirt - not running her mouth on the message boards.

[audacitytocope]

Actually white feminists have a long history of reflecting the problematic racial history that has worked to further oppress racial minorities. We can see it in the fight for the vote when black women were forced to march at the back of the line or not participate at all. Also, though second wave white feminists taut shirley chisholms historic run as a great day for women (and it is), bella abzug, gloria steinem and others chose to back the white male candidate over their browner sister.

[AnninCA]

Oh please....­...Hillary­'s coalition is not racist.

It is anyone who bucks Obama who is innnudated with your Hate messages.

Give that up.

This is the Third Party Coalition against the Democrats.

That is a fact.