No, Geri, they're attacking you 'coz you're a bloody idiot.

Her conduct is unbelievable. If the Clinton campaign doesn't make her resign after demanding it of Samantha Power, it's incredibly hypocritical.

Ferraro's premise is idiotic. The suggestion that Obama benefits from being black is baldly racist. Clinton had more support among the black community than he did at the start of the campaign. He earned those votes with political, oratorical and organizational skills.

Clinton and her merry band of victims.

Geraldine "the Greek" Ferraro.

Here we can see what kind of nation hillary will provide simply by those who she surrounds herself with as advisors.

Racial tensions to the max, and clearly shows hillary's character in the racial divide, it will be no different in the economic divide either.

Ferraro isn't white. She's Italian.

And a loser as well.

No, they are attacking you because you have a big mouth and no idea how to control it!

"No, Geri, they're attacking you 'coz you're a bloody idiot."

Has she been an idiot all along or just since she said something against Obama? I remember when she was the second most qualified person in the United States to be president. What happened?

What happened?

She quit because the pressure of her past made such a poor reflection upon the people.

I for one was glad, who wants a loser who gives up and can't seem to learn from her past character flaws.

hillary likes her though, and that should say something as to her character.

Here we can see what kind of nation hillary will provide simply by those who she surrounds herself with as advisors.
Posted by moneywar

Very true. And I think most of the is orchestrated by Hillary.

What Really Happened is that her husband didn't want to disclose any financial information. Ha! Sound familiar? And her parents ran a bookie joint. LMAO

Time to rip the Bitch up.

"What Really Happened is that her husband didn't want to disclose any financial information. Ha! Sound familiar? And her parents ran a bookie joint. LMAO"

Yeah...but at what point did she become an idiot? Was she an idiot when she was nominated or did she just become one recently?

The suggestion that Obama benefits from being black is baldly racist. Clinton had more support among the black community than he did at the start of the campaign. He earned those votes with political, oratorical and organizational skills.

Posted by rcade

why is it "baldly" racists? Prove your assertion she has higher support now than at the beginning of the campaign.

Everything I have read states clearly blacks are voting in primaries for obama because he is black and in overwhelming numbers.

This is becoming like the "nazi" tag when someone says something people dislike or doesn't agree with a political affiliation..

Scream racist and hopefully they will go away.

Moneywar,

You've said it. This business of divide and conquer is coming home to roost. The Dems are turning on themselves.

Once you identify special groups, there is no end the the accusations. This is the end-product of affirmative action and the thinking that went behind it....a banana republic broken into ineffectual little minorities who spend all their time being victims...

Obama has this part right...that must end. Then again, his campaign doesn't seem to understand that.

Posted by Legio at 2008-03-12 08:51 AM


Perfectly stated, Leggo.

Just the Clinton group showing more of their true colors. Pathetic!

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit there legio. rCade said that she had more support at the beginning of the campaign from blacks and it eroded.

What get me laughing is that Clinton and Ferraro portray themselves as STRONG women, but in each case they seem to have problems with the hubby and releasing financial information.

Just another pair of Coattail Cunts.

They both bow to the power and that means a third term for Bubba.

Ferraro's premise is idiotic. The suggestion that Obama benefits from being black is baldly racist.


What about her follow-up comment where she said that if she were a man, there is no way she would have been the Dem Veep in '84?

Is she a misogynist for saying that?

Welcome back, Ride.

Yeah, yeah..........LOL.

And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race." -April 15, 1988 Washington Post

I see her logic. Some of the campaign is focused around getting the first black man elected, and some people will vote for him for that very reason. However, it is also important to note that there is a large portion of the population that won't vote for him anyways because he is black. But, a majority of those people would vote Republican anyways. There are far fewer people in the middle and on the left that would refuse to vote for a black person, so perhaps it is helping him.

The suggestion that Obama benefits from being black is baldly racist.

No, not really... wait... no, not at all.

Because he does. Its not the sole reason he is where he is, but to say that he hasn't benefited in this campaign because of it is silly.

One, he gets practically an entire voting block coming out for him.

Two, harsh criticism of Obama or his campaign can be brushed off as racist.

Its not the reason for his success, but it is a reason for it.

I just found out that Geralding has been sick and going through chemotherapy so I am going to give her the benefit of the doubt on her first comment, but to come back and refer to this as reverse racism, well, that logic is as bad as the movie "White Man's Burden".

Clinton had more support among the black community than he did at the start of the campaign

after the campaigns of Black politicians like Jackson, Sharpton and Keyes can you blame them? Once they realized he wasn't like them they all practically went to his camp.

Well, wasn't Bill Clinton made to be an honorary black man?

What a cunt.

Look, the thing that set people off is the fact that she said Obama is "lucky" to be a black man. There is truth to the fact that he is heavily supported by the African-American community and no one is denying that. But for Ferarro to say he is lucky and infer that money and the political offices just falls in the laps of black people everyday is absurd. To make it seem like blacks have it on easy street is absurd. She let her misandrist attitude get in the way of her rational thinking. And what tops it off is she screams reverse racism. Had she just stopped and with the statement that had she been a man in '84 she wouldn't have been on the ticket, she would have been fine. But, no, she had to charge the Obama camp with reverse racism...simply absurd.

I really think the democratic party is coming apart at the seems. What this whole incident shows us is that crazy old dried up white chicks aren't going to come out to vote for Obama, and 9 out of 10 African-Americans aren't going to vote for Hillary when it comes to the general election. The democrats should be so proud.

Edit time, no coffee yet:

fall instead of "falls"

and

seams instead of "seems"

This is just blatant slimy dem politics led by the chief bitch attack dog ferarro. They are trying to define Obama as the one-dimensional black canidate.

This could hopefully split the democrat party in a worse way than when the dems gave up the South after surrendering the Vietnam war.

Thom the conservative

I think it was reverse racism. Had a black man said it nobody would have given it a second thought. I'm not saying she's right, but perhaps had he been white he would have just been another John Edwards, who knows. His being black gained him a lot of media attention, and I think Obama did very well with that attention. Maybe if he wasn't given this extra attention we would only be talking about Clinton right now.

To me it seems that everyone who critcizes makes observations about Obama is in danger of being called a racist. It's ridiculous, but it is absolutely normal for American politics.

I am a white male Obama supporter who happens to think the following two things:

Ferraro's intial comment about Obama getting somewhat of a "boost" by the novelty factor of being black, while poorly delivered and certainly poorly worded, is essentially correct. She also said that had she been a man, she would not have been selected for the VP spot at the time. These are points worth considering, and the worst they can be is incorrect, not "racist".

As far as Obama's race being an advantage right now ... is it racist to say that his race will be a disadvantage in November? Is THAT racist to say? Of course not ... it's true and we all know it. The reason it's an advantage now is because Obama is getting 90+% of the black vote, a large portion of which would certainly go to HIllary if she were running against, say, John Edwards.

All the screaming of "racism" just shows that we still cannot discuss issues outside of extreme rhetoric and PC bullshit.

Agreed 100% Midiman

Ferraro's intial comment about Obama getting somewhat of a "boost" by the novelty factor of being black, while poorly delivered and certainly poorly worded, is essentially correct.

This is crazy. Carolyn Moseley-Braun, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were black too, and they started with support not far from what Obama had at the start of this campaign. He did not get an automatic black vote that would suggest an advantage to his race. He earned his support over the course of the campaign.

I'm amazed that people are buying into Ferraro's idiocy. It's Bizarro logic.

I'm amazed that people are buying into Ferraro's idiocy. It's Bizarro logic.

Posted by rcade at 2008-03-12 09:39 AM | Reply


I'm amazed that you expect us to believe that Braun, Sharpton, and Jackson and their ebonics can be compared to Obama's articulate delivery.

The point is he's a clean and articulate black man (and a light skinned one at that). Every one knows a light skinned black man that talks like a white man doesn't scare whitey quite like a Wesley Snipes colored black man that talks like Flavor Flav.

Ironically, Ferraro is a Hillary supporter. Same thinking can be applied to Hillary in that she's getting some of her votes from women because she is a woman.

I haven't heard this much conversation about race since Republicans are called the racist party. The Democrats are showing their true colors of being all about race and politics all the time. Their quest for power is an entertaining event.

All the Clinton haters need to realize that the Clintons have not changed. They have always been this way. They were this way when they were blindly loved. Rest assured they will not give up their power without a real fight.

And I have nothing against Obama. He seems intelligent. His wife, I believe is more intelligent. She will be a firecracker in the White House if he is elected. She had a huge chip on her shoulder looking for someone to knock it off. Is the U.S. ready for another 2-for-1 president?

I'm amazed that people are buying into Ferraro's idiocy. It's Bizarro logic.

Posted by rcade


Rcade I teach and talk to young people EVERY day. MOST of them are very excited by the fact that Obama is black, and are EAGER to do their part to cnage history by voting for him - for THAT REASON. Many of them know NOTHING about issues, and will tell you that they are republicans. Are you REALLY suggestion that race has nothing to do with it?

The advantage I mentioned was NOW, not at the beginning - Obama's other skills are certainly the main reason for his growing acceptance among mainstream democrats (as it should be), but facts are facts.

Not all facts have to be pleasant, and not all unpleasant facts are racist.

I haven't heard this much conversation about race since Republicans are called the racist party. The Democrats are showing their true colors of being all about race and politics all the time. Their quest for power is an entertaining event.


You see, for every snippet of reasonable discussion, there are these moments, as well.

"Carolyn Moseley-Braun, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were black too" -RCade

These guys didn't have the support of white voters the way Obama does, and are a bit more radical. The black community loved Bill Clinton, and so it was easy for them to throw their support behind Hillary. Black people are just like white people. They want to vote for somebody who has a chance of winning. But now it is known that Obama can grab the support of white voters. As a result many blacks who would have voted for Hillary are voting Obama.

Same thinking can be applied to Hillary in that she's getting some of her votes from women because she is a woman.

Posted by Pirate



And that thinking would of course be correct. Not ALL, as PC critics would hear, but SOME, as was actually said.

Agreed, Pirate. It's a little different (some women can be highly skeptical about other women in a way that they are not for men for some reason), but the same idea.

Lest there be any doubt that the Clinton's will do ANYTHING to win...

"Andrew Sullivan - 10 Mar 2008 10:34 am

You may have missed it - almost everyone missed it - but Bill Clinton was on Rush Limbaugh's show the day of the Texas primary. You can hear the radio here. Limbaugh himself was sick that day, apparently, but he had already urged Republicans to cross over to keep Hillary Clinton in the race. Bill saw an opening - and went there.

Now just wrap your mind around this: the Clintons were happy to support a cynical, partisan Republican campaign to wound the Democratic front-runner, and they were brazen enough to go on the Limbaugh show to do so."

I teach and talk to young people EVERY day. MOST of them are very excited by the fact that Obama is black, and are EAGER to do their part to cnage history by voting for him - for THAT REASON. Many of them know NOTHING about issues, and will tell you that they are republicans. Are you REALLY suggestion that race has nothing to do with it?

I don't think your personal experience represents the bigger picture. The fact that you know some young people voting on the basis of race does not mean the electorate as a whole is doing it.

If that's all that mattered, Mosley-Braun and Sharpton in 2004 would have been credible candidates in Southern states with large black populations. Sharpton was still in the race in South Carolina and got only 10 percent of the vote.

Is the U.S. ready for another 2-for-1 president?


You must be talking about the Clintons...and then again there's McCain and his nurse. We really need more specificity when making these claims.

It is also apparent that Michelle Obama ony works part time on the campaign and places her children number one on her priority list. So I don't think the 2-4-1 really applies to her.

"Geraldine Ferraro says her comments on Barack Obama's race being the primary reason for his success in the presidential campaign are being "spun" as racist, and she says he should be thanking her for the comments."

Give that woman a bigger shovel.

Came across this comment on CNN and thought I would share:

Clinton is using Ferraro as an expendable surrogate to appeal to the Archie Bunker voters in PA who will be turned off Obama's candidacy by the whiff of "affirmative action." It's patently untrue, of course, and completely shameful; Obama's qualifications are impeccable and actually outstrip those of Clinton.

But this is what the primary has come to, and if the DNC does not step in to end Clinton's quest to steal this contest through the use of superdelegates and poached pledged delegates, with a dollop of media-created "momentum" on her sideher only avenues to victorythe Democractic Party will lose in November.

I am starting to think that Ferraro is doing Clinton's dirty work. Yes, I know Hillary has come out against her statements, but does anyone think that if Hillary went to her and told her to cease and desist that she wouldn't stop talking?

Nail on the head, Gal.

Clinton is using Ferraro as an expendable surrogate to appeal to the Archie Bunker voters in PA who will be turned off Obama's candidacy by the whiff of "affirmative action."

Agreed, and just another sign that Clinton doesn't give a damn about the Democratic party or this country. Her only concern is that she get the nomination; she will do and say anything, through her surrogates if need be, to win.

Geraldine:

If you were not white you would not have said what you did in the first place.

If you were not white nobody would have asked you.

If you were not white nobody would have taken any notice of what you said.

If you were not white, you would not have been a Vice-Presidential candidate.

If you were not white, this post would not exist.

Haven't you been lucky?

How about that?

Apparently this is a pattern for Gerri:

And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."

If that's all that mattered, Mosley-Braun and Sharpton in 2004 would have been credible candidates in Southern states with large black populations. Sharpton was still in the race in South Carolina and got only 10 percent of the vote.



Posted by rcade



PLEASE DON'T DO THIS. I never said it was ALL THAT MATTERED, and that's the problem with this discussion, and all discussions like it. Why do we need to retreat into opposite extreme corners?

Ultimately, the story will be written, and we will hear more discussion of this and other side-issues.

Race is a factor here or why is it being discussed? By definition, that makes it a factor, right? Maybe we should start talking about how big a factor (perhaps very small, perhaps larger than we know at this point), without the whole "racist" label hanging over our heads.

"Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"

It's stupid, that's how it is. I'm not attacking you, Ger, because you are white or a woman. I'm white and a woman myself. I'm attacking your comments because you are playing the race card in order to garner votes for Hillary Clinton, your candidate of choice. I expected better of you. I expect better of the Democratic party. Where the hell is Howard Dean? He ought to step in and tell people to stick to the issues instead of stooping to racebaiting tactics.

Geraldine:

If you were not white you would not have said what you did in the first place.

If you were not white nobody would have asked you.

If you were not white nobody would have taken any notice of what you said.

If you were not white, you would not have been a Vice-Presidential candidate.

If you were not white, this post would not exist.

Haven't you been lucky?

How about that?

Posted by sitdown at 2008-03-12 10:16 AM | Reply

What you say is true, the difference being the news channels, political blogs, and newspapers aren't going to have their periods over it.
You thin skinned race baiters need to get your faux outrage in check.

All of the pant-pissing and mock outrage you Obama-ites have shown is making it difficult for the other Dems to deny that the Dem party is filled with your kind. Own it Dems.

This is just blatant slimy dem politics led by the chief bitch attack dog ferarro. They are trying to define Obama as the one-dimensional black canidate.

This could hopefully split the democrat party in a worse way than when the dems gave up the South after surrendering the Vietnam war.

I'm going to take a contrarian view about Ferraro's comments. I agree with Thom's first paragraph above, but not his second.

I think Clinton and her supporters are doing a tremendous faovr to the Democratic Party and Obama supporters by saying the things they've been saying since the primaries began and here's why.

Obama isn't just running for a singular office, he's running to redefine politics and the Party for the new millenium. By exposing the latent racism and bias from even the more celebrated of Democratic fossils, the stage has been set, showing moderates and rational Republicans that the party Obama wants to lead isn't the Party still beholden to the Clintons and their corruption.

No one but an idiot would ever think that Democrats can't be racist or sexist or just plain bigotted. Of course they can. But Obama wants nothing to do with those types of people and has always appealed to the "better angels" of humanity, not its lowest common denominator. Never once has Obama mentioned his candidacy as being "history-making", yet Hillary does this everyday to highlight that she's a woman breaking new ground. He never calls himself anything but an American leader wanting to change the way Washington does business. The media has pretty much made the use of racial dynamics the third rail in their coverage of Obama. Obama didn't start with the overwhelming support of the black community, he had to earn it by winning the support of WHITES first! Everyone seems to forget what was so intensely talked about just 2 months ago. The notion of instant monolithic black support just wasn't how it happened. The reality is posted quite honestly in other posts above.

Ferraro brought race into the fray now, because it fits in the continuing narrative that somehow Hillary isn't being defeated fairly and squarely, so it has to be because Hillary is victimized by something or someone. These Hillary supporters cannot see past her gender to recognize that Obama has been the superior candidate with the superior message that resonates with the American electorate in a way the Clinton Restoration Project doesn't.

It was all there for Hillary, but her dysfunctional staff couldn't put the pieces together in time, fell behind and never recovered. Bringing Americans together has always been a powerful message, one that resonates with the young idealists more than with old status quo-tarians. I've been having this discussion with many righties on the Retort who swore up and down that NO WAY would Americans elect a man named Barack Hussein Obama as their President. Now I see these same individuals making the case that his race HELPS him? Hello? I guess thats why we've had so many black Presidents before in America. Even mentioning the topic itself is merely another way of bringing to everyone's attention that Obama is different than white America. Thats right, he's half-white and half-African. I guess his mother's blood doesn't count for many.

Where the hell is Howard Dean? He ought to step in and tell people to stick to the issues instead of stooping to racebaiting tactics.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2008-03-12 10:19 AM | Reply


Yeah, he's the perfect guy for that you tool. Maybe he can calm things down by telling a joke about blacks working at hotels or something like that?

Face it, the Dems are equally as dirty in the "race" arena, and you clowns are now getting it shoved back in your faces.

You puds bought your own hype. What a bunch of stooges.

Face it, the Dems are equally as dirty in the "race" arena, and you clowns are now getting it shoved back in your faces.

I can agree with that, especially among southern and uneducated voters.

All of the pant-pissing and mock outrage you Obama-ites have shown is making it difficult for the other Dems to deny that the Dem party is filled with your kind. Own it Dems.

I think I just did above. Though I don't believe I've ever made the case that Democrats couldn't be racist or sexist like any person breathing God's air. Political affiliation has nothing to do with being bigotted in my book.

It has to do with being a bigot and viewing the world through the prism of race or sex instead of judging individuals for who and what they are based upon what they're made of and what they show to the world on a daily basis.

Race is a factor here or why is it being discussed? By definition, that makes it a factor, right? Maybe we should start talking about how big a factor (perhaps very small, perhaps larger than we know at this point), without the whole "racist" label hanging over our heads.

Fair enough, but we also need to be able to discuss the role gender is playing in the race without being labelled sexist. FYI for Hill and Ger: there are women who are voting for Clinton because they want to see a woman president. Then, there are folks voting for her because they want to see another Clinton, so we also need to discuss the role legacy and entitlement based on it are playing in the race.

Gal,
I didn't mean to attack you with my typical name calling. It was simply habit, and I actually feel bad. My apologies.

I listened to Herman Cain last night. He defended her comment. Just because someone is black should not preclude an honest assessment .
She was going for the point that with his lack of experience he would not be considered for such a high office. I feel the same about Hil's experience...she wouldn't be where she is if she wasn't a woman and wife of the former prez.

I would have liked to hear Obama answer straight out . Yes, Geraldine I am black and I have just as much experience as the woman you support.
Instead the racial non sense plays on.
And I think it is too his benefit more than Hils.

Race is a factor here or why is it being discussed? By definition, that makes it a factor, right? Maybe we should start talking about how big a factor (perhaps very small, perhaps larger than we know at this point), without the whole "racist" label hanging over our heads.

If Ferraro had said that race was a factor in his success, as opposed to being *the most important factor*, we wouldn't be having this discussion. She's put forward a divisive, simplistic argument that divides the Democratic Party. I'm glad I wasn't of voting age in 1984 so I didn't cast a vote for that idiot.

It has to do with being a bigot and viewing the world through the prism of race or sex instead of judging individuals for who and what they are based upon what they're made of and what they show to the world on a daily basis.

Posted by tonyroma at 2008-03-12 10:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

CORRECT!

Face it, the Dems are equally as dirty in the "race" arena, and you clowns are now getting it shoved back in your faces.

I don't think Ferraro is playing the race card because she is racist. No, I think she is playing it purely for cold-hearted, calculated, political gain, which is far worse in my book. Racism like sexism is the result of prejudice and ignorance; what Ferraro is doing is the result of knowledge and greediness for power. When people call her on her s--t, she plays the reverse discrimination card and plays victim. Lovely.

I can agree with that, especially among southern and uneducated voters.

Posted by taxman at 2008-03-12 10:24 AM | Reply


I'd have to say it's across the board. There are some pretty educated North Easterners on Hil's team that have said some things you Obama-mamma's have cried racism over.

Since the day I signed up here the people left of center have always tried to play the "It's the Rep's that are racist, we're the all inclusive party".
I imagine that's one more arrow taken out of your quivers. How many are you guys going to have left after this dust-up?

Spitzer isn't helping either...

The premise that blacks are just voting for the black candidate is disproved by those 2007 polls.

Posted by rcade


Is it possible that being Black was the deciding factor though? Not voting for him just because he's Black, but maybe gives him a leg up on Hillary. Its not like the two are at polar opposites on issue after issue that would cause such a vast majority to swing to Obama. Is there any other voter group voting so heavily in favor of him?

I forgot to add that now would be a good time for Geraldine Ferarro to come back on TV and tell us Obama is HALF-WHITE! And she is white. So he is half as white as she is. So how can she be being racist? How about that?

Gal,
I didn't mean to attack you with my typical name calling. It was simply habit, and I actually feel bad. My apologies.

Thanks, Chair. Not a problem. No offense was taken.

What you say is true, the difference being the news channels, political blogs, and newspapers aren't going to have their periods over it.
You thin skinned race baiters need to get your faux outrage in check.

All of the pant-pissing and mock outrage you Obama-ites have shown is making it difficult for the other Dems to deny that the Dem party is filled with your kind. Own it Dems.

Posted by 101Chairborne


you say it so much more "colorfully".. oh shit is that racist?

Chair,

And you are right about racism existing within the Democratic party. Of course it does to some extent and to a larger extent than many of us would like or like to admit.

I think she is playing it purely for cold-hearted, calculated, political gain, which is far worse in my book. Racism like sexism is the result of prejudice and ignorance; what Ferraro is doing is the result of knowledge and greediness for power. When people call her on her s--t, she plays the reverse discrimination card and plays victim. Lovely.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2008-03-12 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

Correct and insightful.

I have never cared for Senator Ferraro, but I truely admire her for standing up for herself and not backing down. BRAVO.......

Spitzer isn't helping either...

Posted by 101Chairborne

Reportedly, he's spent $80,000 on hookers. Who knows, it might have been worth it.

The Dems adopted this "status" thing and dividing women from men, and blacks from white, so they could talk about "their" issues.

Clinton used the blacks, but he always was a cynical bastard, and the Bitch is no different. They've been playing the race card, and I laugh at how people are so shocked.

The Clintons are among the most evil and vile people in politics. This really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

And you are right about racism existing within the Democratic party. Of course it does to some extent and to a larger extent than many of us would like or like to admit.

If this wasn't the case, then Ferraro wouldn't be saying what she is saying. In light of her comments, the question to ask is: what audience in Hillary's base is she playing too? She must think someone is going to buy into her argument, or she wouldn't be making it. My hope is that she is wrong about the number who will respond. My hope is that she is fighting the previous war and will therefore lose the battle. We'll see.

racism exists everywhere and in everyone

and this whole argument that if barack was white he wouldn't be here

well if barack was white, his life would have been much different growing up

he would have made different choices
and then he probably wouldn't be here
and there are an infinite number of possibilies that exist, so its a moot point to say he's here because he's black...

shit if barack was black but born of a different father he wouldn't be here

he is where he is because of who he is, and thus because he's black, but that doesn't limit his capabilities.

but that is no reason to say that he isn't a great inspiration to 10's of millions of americans.

and thats really what the president should do, inspire the country, and inspire his cabinet to do great things.

"It's the Rep's that are racist, we're the all inclusive party".

I don't think the Dems can claim racial impartiality but the Republicans, since Nixon, have based their election strategy on his "Southern Strategy" which was specifically designed to take advantage of white resentment about forced integration in the south, which was a direct result of racism. Therefore the Republicans do rightly have to admit that racism has played a significant part of their party's success in presidential politics. Individual Republicans may not be racists but if they take advantage of a strategy which benefits from racism then their denials of racism seem sort of phony.

I guess Ferraro is against Affirmative Action as well? After all racisim works both ways.

Hillary needs to drop this bitch quick.

Since the day I signed up here the people left of center have always tried to play the "It's the Rep's that are racist, we're the all inclusive party".
I imagine that's one more arrow taken out of your quivers. How many are you guys going to have left after this dust-up?

Chair, I have lived in the South all of my life (Texas and Louisiana) and I can tell you that racism/misogyny extends to both parties and across various demographics. Now, the question isn't whether there are racist/misogynist in the dem or republican party, the question is whether it is prudent to harbor those attitudes. I would say that both parties have taken major steps to distance themselves from those with such backwards attitudes.

Klifferd - I like you more and more everyday.

he is where he is because of who he is, and thus because he's black, but that doesn't limit his capabilities.

but that is no reason to say that he isn't a great inspiration to 10's of millions of americans.

and thats really what the president should do, inspire the country, and inspire his cabinet to do great things.

Beautiful Klifferd! Thanks for the sentiments.

I don't think Ferraro is playing the race card because she is racist. No, I think she is playing it purely for cold-hearted, calculated, political gain, which is far worse in my book. Racism like sexism is the result of prejudice and ignorance; what Ferraro is doing is the result of knowledge and greediness for power. When people call her on her s--t, she plays the reverse discrimination card and plays victim. Lovely.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday


If that is indeed what she is doing, then I agree with this 100% - I just think that sometimes we allow simple observations to explode in our faces through our own PC heat. Remember how Hillary was criticized for saying that it took Pres Johnson to get laws enacted, and that MLK's words were not enough. She was absolutely rgiht about that (in a literal, factual sense), but the hysteria overwhelmed a legitmate point.


I'm just wary of PC arguments and rash conclusions, and I don't find my way clear to reject Ferraro's points completely, especially in light of recent voting patterns.

I also agree with the poster who suggests that getting all of this out there now will eventually prove to be a good thing, especially once the media change their story line, which they will inevitably do.

I guess the closet racist Ferraro type are the same sort of Dems that claim Justice Thomas is only in his position because he is black.

Is this not the same argument Thomas has made against AA that pissed off all the Dems and had blacks label him a "Uncle Tom." If your black and in a lofty position many assume you are not in the position due to merit, rather it must be a token due to race. This thought diminishes the accomplishment of the person in the minds of many, even when its undeserved.

I have never cared for Senator Ferraro, but I truely admire her for standing up for herself and not backing down. BRAVO.......

Posted by 08r4ever


I was thinking the same thing... what she said may be wrong or stupid or whatever, but I love that she is not backing down after people are calling her racist... not only is she not backing it down but she's calling them racists right back at them.

An issue I have with Obama outside his ideas and policies is that I truly think that people who criticize his administration or legislators who stand in the way of his policies are going to be decried as racists until they stay quiet or step aside. I hope more people like Ferraro stand up to that crutch now and in the future so they can't use it.

She was absolutely rgiht about that (in a literal, factual sense), but the hysteria overwhelmed a legitmate point.

I can't believe people still do not understand why her comments were offensive.

How many people in Congress DIED because they championed civil rights?

How many people DIED, were beaten, jailed, and treated worse than rabid dogs, fighting for civil rights on the streets of the South?

How could anyone say that political machinations were of equal importance to the sacrifices of hundreds of thousands of American citizens who said they wouldn't take it anymore?

There is no comparison whatsoever to the importance of creating a situation that American households could no longer tolerate on their tv screens every night of fellow citizens being abused by a racist institution nurtured and praised by far too many people. Until the blood was spilled and the heads busted, there wasn't going to be political pressure to pass legislation, or it would have been done long before.

She has been down this road before though:

Okay, she may only be partially right about Obama and is completely wrong if she's using it as his only reason to be where he is...

But about Jackson she is without question right... the only reason Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton are where they are is because they are Black. Anyone disputing that is just being silly.

Similar argument to you, Tony ... why can't we just look at objective reality without the need to make grand comparisons and relative judgments? Or even better, why does the mere discussion of these things require us to search for value judgments about the people engaged in the discussions?

And BTW ... people who "get offended" might want to take a moment and examine the power it gives to others. I can "take offense", but I try not to give anyone else the power to offend me. I can see the POINT of what Hillary said in that case (and why she was tryng to make it) and SIMULATANEOUSLY recognize all of the other legitimate observations you made.

I hope more people like Ferraro stand up to that crutch now

Someone should give that Bitch a history lesson. Prior to Moorish Invasion the Italians were blonde.

You mean Jesse Jackson being a black civil rights leader? I'd say his being black plays a role in that, but I'm not sure about his running for office is a black thing or a black civil rights thing. It depends on the transitive power of blackness I suppose.

But about Jackson she is without question right... the only reason Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton are where they are is because they are Black. Anyone disputing that is just being silly.

Some might say the only reason Pat Robertson or Mike Huckabee are where they are is because they are evangelicals.

Gender, age, race, income, education and religion--those are the lines along which campaigns view their constituencies. Oh, and let's not forget: location, location, location.

As far as Obama's race being an advantage right now ... is it racist to say that his race will be a disadvantage in November? Is THAT racist to say? Of course not ... it's true and we all know it. Posted by Midiman

Interesting match up for November...
a Black Man(gasp) versus Bush III.

Yes there are racists and there are a few (?) of us that loath the agenda of the war party.

"Some might say the only reason Pat Robertson or Mike Huckabee are where they are is because they are evangelicals."

The same thing could definitely be said about George W. Bush.

Someone should give that Bitch a history lesson. Prior to Moorish Invasion the Italians were blonde.

*****
What Im Black! No wonder I like Sam Cooke music so much. Oh and I have a massive schlong!

Midiman...

Then if you do as you say, how can you ignore the underlying dynamics which started the entire controversy in the first place?

Hillary makes comments that "speeches" don't bring about change. Obama replies by invoking MLK and his rhetorical gifts that led the civil rights movement in altering America for the better.

Then Hillary goes to the LBJ/legislation card in a blatant attempt to follow up on her first remark. To me this downplays the significance of the sacrifices of those inspired by King and his words enough to leave their comfortable existences in the North to go to the South to try and bring about change.

Just what dynamic did LBJ's efforts mobilize in comparison? Politics does not equal life, its a small part of life. Giving one's life for political change cannot be compared to passing legislation. I'm sorry. Life is too precious and politics too fickle for any such comparison to be honestly made on its face.

The same thing could definitely be said about George W. Bush.

Posted by danni


George W. Bush is where is today because of George H.W. Bush, not because of his religion.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are where they are today because they are Black... and because they enflame racial tensions so that they can organize marches and keep their names in the news...

is a black thing or a black civil rights thing.

Can you really seperate one from the other?

Tony - Anyone with a pen and a position of power (something Blacks didn't have then) could do what LBJ did. Only a special "one in a million" person could be Dr King. I cant believe people don't see that difference.

"Some might say the only reason Pat Robertson or Mike Huckabee are where they are is because they are evangelicals."

The same thing could definitely be said about George W. Bush.

Posted by danni at 2008-03-12 11:21 AM


I guess had the dems not nominated two fucking morons in Gore and Kerry there may not have been a Bush 43. Looking at the current majority party leaders of both houses shouldn't surprise anyone why they lost to Bush.

"George W. Bush is where is today because of George H.W. Bush, not because of his religion."

He had strong backing from the right wing Christians who were not necessarily fans of his Daddy.

"The suggestion that Obama benefits from being black is baldly racist"

That is just crap. If I said that McCain didn't get as many votes because he's so old, is that ageist? Why do you feel the need to get offended and throw around terms like "racist" when people tell the truth?

"I guess had the dems not nominated two fucking morons in Gore and Kerry there may not have been a Bush 43."

It would be impossible to prove but I think most reasonable peoople would agree that we would be far, far better off today if either Gore or Kerry had defeated Bush. Crispee, after you voted for Bush twice it becomes a bit ridiculous for you to call anyone else a moron.

Oh and I have a massive schlong! Posted by captainOfac

There's an upside to everything.

The same thing could definitely be said about George W. Bush.

Good point. He is a Bush, but because he was a born again Christian, the evangelicals decided he'd be different than his father and voted for him. Without out their vote, he wouldn't be president today.

Tony - Anyone with a pen and a position of power (something Blacks didn't have then) could do what LBJ did. Only a special "one in a million" person could be Dr King. I cant believe people don't see that difference.

Thank you Captain, and welcome to la familia! You have Hannibal and the boys to thank for your...hmmmm...endowment.

Bet you like chicken too!

The same thing could definitely be said about George W. Bush.

Good point. He is a Bush, but because he was a born again Christian, the evangelicals decided he'd be different than his father and voted for him. Without out their vote, he wouldn't be president today.

Danni - That is true but the Dems could not even beat Bush? That doesn't say much for Kerry and Gore as contenders, the Dems should have nominated someone better. Who knows if they would have done better. Its easy to assume they would have with hindsight. Unfortunately, they were not competent enough to "sell" the American people the vision.

Luckily Obama is....as long as Hildebeast and her racist, feminist, goon squad doesn't ruin it.

Crispee, after you voted for Bush twice it becomes a bit ridiculous for you to call anyone else a moron.

Posted by danni at 2008-03-12 11:30 AM

Only a moron would blame the victor instead of the opponents. Even after 8 years. Keep throwing stones danni and by all means blame the right when they win again. Your party leader claims these are the best candidates the dems ever had running for POTUS. Is he speaking to sheep like yourself? Is it the repubs fault for his and the parties ongoing gaffs?

The media love the "black man" story in regards to Obama. If they didn't, then why is it reported so fucking often?

Don't tell me being black hasn't helped him. Ever since he gave the speech at the Dem convention people in his own party singing his praises couldn't help but mention he was black (and in a good way). I'd bet if we had somebody as fanatical about crusing posts as Hans is, they could find most of you Clinton supporters commenting on his blacknees favorably as well...






I wonder if he'll paint the shudders on the White House pink? Will he leave the doors and windoes open while cranking the heat? How many episodes of Cops will he and Michele be featured in?
Sincerely,
Geraldine Ferraro

"That doesn't say much for Kerry and Gore as contenders, the Dems should have nominated someone better."

I'll go along with that but still calling them "morons" while supporting Bush....doesn't work for me. They may not have been the best politicians but both are intelligent and would have been far better presidents than Bush has been. Should be a warning to us all.....don't elect McBush.

Geraldine,
They're "windows".

Walter Mondale thought this dolt deserved to be second in line to the presidency.

"Is it the repubs fault for his and the parties ongoing gaffs?"

Of course they are but let me ask you, is it the fault of the Republicans for the state of the nation right now??? Could we afford eight more years of this??? McBush says that is exactly what he will bring, is that something you could support??? Do you want more of the same or "change"?