Geraldine Ferraro

<p>Did something go wrong with this weekend's time change? When/where did I just wake up?</p>

<p>Have you heard Geraldine Ferraro (Clinton campaign official) stating that Obama is "where he is" only because he is Black. And that her being criticized for such a statement would only be because she is white.</p>

<p>Apparently she feels he is simply an affirmative action candidate with no qualification or that African American males in this country are a "privileged few". EIther way, this is mind boggling.</p>

<p>Is this woman just completely insane? The ultimate irony being she was the ultimate "affirmative action hire" in 1984 when with essentially no experience she became the VP nominee and instead of continuing to blaze any trail thereafter, went on to lose two Senate runs.</p>

<p>Worse yet not only has the Clinton camp done NOTHING to reprimand her or otherwise reject this, they've issued a statement that Obama is wrong in crying foul on this.</p>

<p>This is a new low, even for the Clintons. Apparently any means justifies the end for them.</p>

<p>Her comments were pretty ignorant, IMHO. The fact that we have only had three black senators since Reconstruction speaks for itself as to the "ease" of being elected to statewide (much less national) office.</p>

<p>Middle-class white feminists have often been accused -- rightly -- of overlooking the challenges other groups face due to our preoccupation with our own experience. This is a pretty blatant example of that kind of myopia. It doesn't do the feminist cause any good, that's for sure.</p>

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. 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."


That is what Ferraro said. </p>

<p>Regardless of whether it is racist or not, she is simply wrong. If Obama was a white man, he would be where he is based on his charism and political skills.</p>

<p>Well it did remind me of our first "black" president comparing Obama's candidacy to Jesse Jackson's .Completely dismissing Obamas broader based appeal.</p>

<p>"she is simply wrong"</p>

<p>I think the fate of the theoretical white Obama is unknowable, so Ferraro is as entitled to speculate as anyone else. I have a bigger problem with her implication that Obama being "who he is" is primarily a matter of luck, not intelligence or skill or hard work. I guess that would explain all the lucky black sons of single mothers who are in charge of Wall Street, the Fortune 500, academia, and government right now. ::eyeroll::</p>

<p>I will point out to Rep. Ferraro that Obama made law review at Harvard; she went to Fordham and didn't. I'm sure she was just unlucky.</p>

<p>Ferraro is often nasty.</p>

<p>But Hillary didn't make the comment (she in fact has stated she does not agree) and Hillary shouldn't fire her for voicing her opinion; it may be an unpopular opinion but it is not racist to suggest that a particular public figure only got where he is because he is black.</p>

<p>I found Ferraro's comments disappointing. I also wonder why the voters of Ohio and Pennsylvannia are so convinced that HRC can deliver on the campaign promises she is making. Her husband failed to deliver on some of his most important promises and there is little evidence that she could build the legislative consensus that would be necessary to advance her agenda. I'm so tired of deadlock that I'm open to seeing what someone without so much "experience" could do! On 60 Minutes several weeks ago, there was an elderly lady saying she supported HRC because she did well under the WJC presidency and just felt that the return of the Clintons would benefit her economically. Maybe I'm the ignorant one, but that just seems so naive.</p>

<p>I was listening to a talk radio show earlier today, another view on her statement was, if he were a white man, he would have never have garnered the huge minority turn out at the polls,he did take 90% of minority vote in the last one, it would just be a man versus a woman running, Hillary would have taken the female vote, and that would be it and it would have been historic. His turnout is historic for other reasons. As a young adult, and maybe a bit too idealistic, not everything that comes out of a white persons mouth is always racist. These were her words, "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. 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."

<p>"Ferraro is often nasty....Hillary shouldn't fire her for voicing her opinion; it may be an unpopular opinion but it is not racist"</p>

<p>Hillary should fire her for voicing her opinion if the opinion runs counter to the message the campaign wants to send. She can voice all the opinions she wants as a private citizen not associated with any campaign.</p>

<p>Nastiness alone is a good enough reason to fire someone if you don't want your campaign to be nasty (remember "monster"?). Apparently Hillary is OK with her campaign being nasty. Saying "I disagree with the nasty comments," while allowing the nasty person to continue to speak on your behalf, is nasty and sneaky at the same time.</p>

<p>We all have opinions I guess. I listened to her original comment and then explain herself. I think she is correct. sorry. She said that based on his experience in government and the civilian world, he would have been overlooked by many who support him now. That people aren't totally "Color Blind". I agree with her.</p>

<p>She also "ADMITTED" that the fact that she is a woman is what helped propel her as the vice-president nominee. She admits that had she not been a woman, she probably wouldn't have been selected as the VP nominee. Again, I agree with here.</p>

<p>None of this is racist or ignorant. It is the way things are. There are plenty of people who support Obama because he is black. Just like there are plenty who support Hillary because she is a woman. This is normal in life. Sorry if it sounds racist or sexist. It isn't; it's just the facts. I know that there are plenty who support Obama for reasons other than his race. Good for him. But the facts are facts. Matter of fact; if you look at the results from the Mississippi vote yesterday, they even make a big issue of how Obama got the vast MAJORITY of Black Voters and that Hillary got the vast MAJORITY of White Women voters. </p>

<p>Sorry if you don't agree. But I am sure that Obama probably wouldn't have been as successful in the primaries and caucuses in the last few months if he was a white man. Geraldine is not ignorant or a racist. If you look at her past, you will find that she has fought more against racism, sexism, handicap, and just about every other cause that people discriminate against. Politically, I don't support her at all. But the truth is truth, and she has done more to fight bigotry, discrimination, prejudice, and hate crimes than most people you will find who have been in public office.</p>

<p>I am so annoyed with this whole debate. Of course Obama is where he is because of a fairly unique collection of attributes, among which are certainly his charm, his public oratorical ability, his very high intelligence, his establishment credentials (not just Harvard Law Review, PRESIDENT of the Harvard Law Review, which if you know anything about the process is something like winning American Gladiators), his track record, his physical attractiveness, and, yes, his race. </p>

<p>Is race important to his story? Of course it is! If he were white, he would be, at best, John Edwards minus millions of dollars. He certainly wouldn't have had a safe seat in the Illinois Senate from Chicago's South Side. He might or might not have angled his way into the U.S. Senate. He would still be smart, attractive, inspiring, and skilled, but he wouldn't be UNIQUE! enough to capature national attention. Obama was an instant national star when he got the Democratic nomination for the Senate seat from Illinois (and thus the presumptive winner given the Republicans' effectively ceding that contest). Bobby Casey is a non-wealthy white man of about the same age who was in an equivalent position in Pennsylvania at the same time, except that he had held two statewide offices for over 10 years and had run a close second in the Democratic primary for governor. How much do you non-Pennsylvanians know about Casey? To ignore Obama's race is to pretend that the elephant in the room isn't there.</p>

<p>Of course, none of that means much at this point. The fact that Obama's race got him attention doesn't mean that he's not worthy of attention, and that he might not be the best candidate. Race remains a huge part of his appeal: Americans, including many racist Americans, like the image of themselves voting for a black man on the merits, especially a black man whose background and style is so non-threatening to whites. Race is a burden for him, too: obviously, there are racist Americans who simply will not vote for him, including some who might otherwise vote for a Democrat. Race is a constant distraction: He has to calibrate his presentation in a way that John McCain, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton never had to. (But Hillary has the same kind of issue.) </p>

<p>That's just part of his story, not the basis on which he will get elected or not. But it IS part of his story. Just as her marriage to Bill Clinton is part of Hillary's story (a much bigger part). She would not very likely be a serious Presidential candidate today without it, but no one who supports her is thinking "I'll support her because she's Bill Clinton's wife." Few, if any, people are thinking "I'll support Barack because he's black" (or "I'll never support Barack because he's black"). I do, however, think lots of people -- maybe even I -- are thinking, among other thoughts "Wow! Isn't it cool how he's transcended race? Isn't that the perfect face for America? Isn't it great that this day has arrived?" </p>

<p>Barack's race is pretty obvious. It doesn't take Geraldine Ferraro to point it out, and I'm sure the die-hard racists have noticed it. Sure, talking about it may be a way of trying to trivialize him, but I can't imagine anyone thinks that's going to work. Not talking about it at all is ridiculous. Talking about it the way the Obama camp does -- i.e., waiting to pounce on any Clinton supporter who mentions it, and to accuse Clinton of trying to play the race card -- is fundamentally dishonest, and pretty much the least attractive thing about his otherwise very attractive campaign.</p>

<p>samiamy, I'm pretty sure he took 90% of the black vote, not the total minority vote. I'm sure the Clintons are annoyed that he is grabbing the black vote, that would otherwise have been theirs. But I also think that for every black person who votes for him because he is black (and plenty of black people are voting for him for other reasons, of course), there are at least 2 who are voting against him because he is black.</p>

<p>I am really disappointed in Ferraro. I remember how happy I was to see her on the ticket years ago.</p>

<p>Charisma isn't a color. Obama's race, which is ambiguous politically -- when it's bad, he's black, when it's inclusive and good, he's "multicultural" or "biracial" -- has relatively little to do with his success as a candidate. Sure, some vote for him because he's black. So? Up until now, there was never a choice, but I'd wager that a lot of people vote for white male politicians because they're white males. </p>

<p>I think the majority of people vote for Obama because he's a genuine, charismatic and engaging candidate. </p>

<p>For the record, if you make Obama and make him white man, you get something close John F Kennedy, not John Edwards.</p>

<p>P.S. So what if Obama gets the black vote because of his color? Hillary was counting on the same vote because of her last name!</p>

<p>^ Not only her last name, but also trying to take advantage of her gender.</p>

<p>JHS: We've known the Caseys for generations. Way too honest and honorable ever to be nominated to the presidential ticket, to the great misfortune the DNC and the country. Too bad Bob Jr. is pro-life like his father--the Dems as they are now won't ever let him advance past, just as they didn't let his amazing father speak at their convention for that reason. </p>

<p>Geraldine Ferraro? Talk about the pot calling the kettle...</p>

<p>Well, first of all there is much more to what Ferraro said and the Clinton response.</p>

<p>The bottomline of it all is the statement, tacitly supported by the candidate that Senator Obama is where he is solely because of his race. If that is not a racist view, not sure what is.</p>

<p>And as an aside, the Clinton camp screamed for and got the resignation of an Obama aide who called Hilary a "monster". I guess there is more concern in the Clinton camp for the feelings of Godzilla and his brethren then they have for their apparent return to the Jim Crow South.</p>

<p>It is unprofessional to call an opposing candidate a monster unless one is running against Godzilla.</p>

<p>If Ferraro had said all successful black politicians are where they are because they are black, that would be ignorant and racist. Saying Obama is where he is because of his race is merely an opinion.</p>

<p>An opinion can be unprofessional, too. Are you saying Ferraro's comment was not unprofessional?</p>

<p>Actually I hope the relationship of Ferraro to the Clinton campaign is like one of those crazy old aunts you don't really want to hang out with but have to because they are family.</p>

<p>You can't censor everything your staff says, and I think it has been made obvious that Hillary C's views are not the same as Geraldine F's</p>

<p>"...We've known the Caseys for generations. Way too honest and honorable ever to be nominated to the presidential ticket, to the great misfortune the DNC and the country. Too bad Bob Jr. is pro-life like his father--the Dems as they are now won't ever let him advance past, just as they didn't let his amazing father speak at their convention for that reason..."</p>

<p>Bob Casey and his views on women's choice are why we fled PA years ago. We left when Casey (father) made PA the state with the strictest abortion laws in the nation, a decision that has, fortunately for Pennsylvania women, failed to withstand legal scrutiny.</p>