/ March 13, 2008 12:46 PM
Geraldine Ferraro recently made a comment that Barack Obama would not be where he is today if he wasn't black. Is that a racist comment? I think not. Once again the race card is played anytime anybody points out any piece of reality in a situation that may venture on race as being some sort of fact. The point is that it cannot be denied that part of the fascination with Obama that some have is because he is black and actually has a shot at being elected.
Here is her exact comment
“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.”
I see nothing racist about the comments, but pointing out a simple fact in the current race. It should be noted that Ferraro also pointed out that she wouldn't have been chosen as the running mate of Mondale in 1984 if she weren't a woman. Is that a sexist comment or just a true reality? I think the latter.
Check out this idiotic Washington Post editorial "You're Wrong, Ms. Ferraro" where Ferraro is demonized and said to be sinful for pointing out the obvious.
I think of all the ways this comment is offensive and I’m having a hard time choosing between “staggering ignorance of U.S. history and current culture” and the insightful Catholic theological category for human sin, “willful ignorance.” I lean toward the sin concept, because I believe this is a sinful statement on a number of key levels. But I’m not going to ignore historical and cultural ignorance either, as I believe it is the way forward for the country beyond the Ferraros and their monovision.
The New York Times has reported the Justice Department statistic that “an estimated 12 percent of African-American men ages 20-34 are in jail or prison…The proportion of young black men who are incarcerated has been rising in recent years, and this is the highest rate every measured.” Just for comparison, note that 1.6 percent of white men in the same age group are incarcerated.
So, let’s see, to follow Ms.Ferraro’s logic, the other 88% of African American men are being promoted to high public office? Facts dictate otherwise. There are more African American men now in prison than in college and the employment rate for African American men has dropped to just over 50%. It’s nigh on to impossible to get a job in this economy anyway, let alone when you have a prison record. Incarceration rates, unemployment and poverty are linked.
Funny how that works huh? Because statistics point out that black men are in prison, race could have absolutely no bearing on this race. There could be no supporters out there who find a black president an attractive option enough to choose him over Clinton?
The fact is if you lay out Clinton and Obama on a sheet of paper you have a far left Obama and a closer to center (but not much) Clinton. You have an inexperienced Senator from Illinois and an inexperienced Senator from New York who claims 35 years experience (of what, sitting next to your husband?). The only difference is one is male and one is female. One is black and one is white. And if you for a minute think that there aren't idiotic voters out there jumping on either of their bandwagons simply because they or black or a woman then you simply haven't been watching the news night after night where they point out the "Black Voters" and "Women Voters" and "Hispanic Voters" and every other category of voter they can dream up.
Yet now, when someone points out that some of the fascination with Obama could be because he is black...Oh My Gosh... it's the end of the world!
Ferraro, whom I disagree with on almost everything else, hit the nail on the head stating part of the fascination with Obama is that he is black and yet now she says she is receiving nasty hate filled phone calls from Democrats across the nation. The party of tolerance my ass.
Watch below as Ferraro puts her comments in context on Good Morning America.
This entry is in the following archive(s):
Next and Previous Entries:
Posted by Digger on March 13, 2008 12:46 PM (Permalink)
Go Digger! I don't agree with her much but she is stating the obvious. If he were white he wouldn't even be in the Senate. And black people certainly wouldn't be inspired or deceived and voting for him. And another fact is it has become quite popular among us white folks to talk about just what a fine young man Obama is. The only reason people say that is to prove that they are not racist.
Posted by: Emery Woodall on March 13, 2008 07:27 PM
Obama's success owes absolutely nothing to his race, it owes to the fact that he connects with common people regardless of race and is an amazing speaker. He cuts to the heart of the issues and speaks to the American people in a clear, unspun way, and that is why he is popular today. It's racists like you who perpetuate the idea that the Black Politicians out there are somehow inferior and only popular because they are black, and that ridiculous sentiment is only laughed at by enlightened people like myself.
(By the way, I'm white and an Obama supporter. It actually has nothing to do with the fact that he's black.)
Posted by: Rick on March 13, 2008 07:54 PM
There was nothing racist about her comment. She told the truth, which is unusual for a liberal, and she gets busted for it. What a shame. Political correctness is such BS.
Posted by: Bob Schrameyer on March 14, 2008 05:55 AM
Rick you are speaking for yourself only. I agree he is a great speaker and there are many who could care less about race (myself included despite your attempts to dub me a racist). The fact is there are many out there who are supporting him solely based on race. Go watch this video and tell me the "Obama supporters" in that video are voting for him based off of his issue stances and what he will do for America and not his race.
Posted by: Digger on March 15, 2008 03:57 AM
A year ago, Hillary Clinton held a double-digit lead over Obama in polls of African Americans. Those voters knew Obama was black. But they didn't know much else about him. They knew Hillary and Bill Clinton. So in a matchup between the two senators, African Americans went with Clinton by wide margins.
It was only after learning more about him that more people were inclined to vote for him.
Posted by: Ralph on March 15, 2008 05:58 AM
I am getting tired of the term "racist" being loosely thrown around. A racist is one who says "segregation today, tomorrow, and forever." A racist is one who supports "whites only" under law.
I know the left starts this inflamatory rhetoric and others develop a reactionary "right back at you, pal" mentality.
The funny thing is, the only legal institutionalized racism that I know of comes from the left; affirmative action, which discriminates against male whites, under law.
There are really few racists (those who judge on appearance, regardless of behavior; such as the behavior of illegal aliens streaming our border, uninvited).
Most accused of racism are actually culturists, a merit behavior form of conduct; in other words, based on one's actions, which is perfectly legitimate.
Posted by: ken pope on March 15, 2008 05:27 PM
Why has no one caught on to Obama's church precept of "disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness?
This issue is bigger than any Afrocentric issue.
Posted by: ken pope on March 15, 2008 05:29 PM
Geraldine Ferraro nailed it with her comments. I agree that Obama would not be where he is if he weren't black. Why? Well, he has very little experience, yet so many people have clammored around him -- the inspirational speeches (he is a great speaker, but he's not running for the debate team; he's running for commander in chief of the US!), the schooling (Columbia, Harvard) and his campaign slogans: hope, change we can believe in, yes we can, blah, blah, blah -- all empty rhetoric because he has no real record to rely on or refer to. I truly believe if he were a white guy he'd have been run off long ago. For some reason people think he should get a pass (liberal white guilt is what it is in my opinion). I wish people would stop making race an issue, but it appears that will never happen. Blacks are often the most guilty of this: when it fits their agenda, they use it, but when somebody like Ferraro makes a valid point they scream racism. You can't have it both ways! And, Ferraro also said she would not have been the VP candidate in 1984 if she weren't a FEMALE and I agree with that. The "powers that be" decided that it's time for a "woman" in higher power, or a "black" in higher power. I'm all for both, but neither Clinton or Obama. Condi Rice or Colin Powell, absolutely. Obama is a far, far left liberal with questionable feelings towards whites (I'm convinced he and his wife secretly HATE whites based on comments they've made and their affiliation with a "church" that apparently outwardly hates whitey's, Jews, etc., you know, anyone NOT like them! And don't forget Oprah belongs this church, too -- I think she also loathes whites). Obama is dangerous and I hope people wake up and realize that this mild mannered smooth speaking presidential candidates isn't what he projects himself to be. His ties to his family in Kenya -- they are radical Muslims. Not buying into his being such a good Christian either as if he were, he would never stay with a church that preaches such nasty "sermons" and HATRED! I'm a Christian and I'm appalled at what the racist Rev. Wright has said in many speeches. Obama claims he never heard any of those inflammatory speeches (right) and if he didn't hear of them, then he's pretty stupid and should not be president! Either way, he can't wiggle out of this one no matter how much he tries to be all kumbaya, let's just all get along, blah, blah, blah. Beware of Obama! Clinton makes me sick, but she's far more qualified to be president than Obama. He's been a US senator for all of three years, two of which he's been running for pres! He's seldom present to vote on the senate floor...some experience.
Posted by: April on March 18, 2008 12:30 PM