Letters to the Editor
-
@ AKA Smith
Nice to see you back.
-
@aka smith
I'm not really sure what you are hoping to accomplish. If you have a point to make about affirmative action, about Ferraro's comments, and/or about why you think so many black voters are voting for Obama, why not make just make it?
No, Ferraro never mentioned the words "affirmative action." But many people believe that when she said that Obama was "lucky" she was implying that has not rightfully earned his current status as front runner. The implication and the inference is that because Obama is black, he has been given an unfair advantage. For many people, this reminds them of the arguments against affirmative action.
And before you demand "proof," please remember that I am speaking to beliefs and interpretations. You, of course, are free to disagree.
Here's the thing. For many people, myself included, being black in the era of affirmative action means having people assume that you did not earn what you have accomplished. I graduated from a New England prep school, my GPA and SAT scores were better than almost everyone in my graduating class, and when I was accepted to an Ivy League college I was told by my classmates in no uncertain terms that it was because I am black. I don't dispute that being black made me attractive to colleges, but I still resent the implication that the only reason why I was accepted over white students with lower grades and fewer achievements is because I am black. And I still resent the implication that being white ( and in the case of most of my classmates, white and wealthy) in America does not come with its own built in privileges that I will never know.
I realize that for you this may be an academic exercise or maybe your posts are a way to entertain yourself for a few hours. But for many people, myself included, Ferraro's comments are a reminder that many white Americans will never take our accomplishments seriously. And it a lot of ways it's genuinely disappointing and painful.
I hope you can understand that.
-
The Subject of The Discussion
...and we're still talking about BHO's race.
I don't see why most commentators in the press don't get this (save, of course, for the ones like AK who don't have "time" to cover "overblown" stories); this isn't about racism, in the sense that HRC or Bill or GF are racists; it's about keeping the subject of race in the news, thus allowing the folks who inclinations to view the world through racist lenses (many aren't even aware of it) to view BHO not as a candidate who happens to be black, but as the black candidate.
HRC would be very happy, I think, if BHO lost as the Democratic candidate. Late 60's is a little old for the first four years of a Presidency; mid-60's ain't.
-
It's not that hard, really.
"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she continued. "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." -G.F.
Obama's position is that he is currently winning. But according to Ferraro if we change his skin color, he's not winning. Which means losing. So he's getting a pass for his skin color. A lot of people think that's what Affirmative Action is all about: getting a pass. No need to be dense about it. It also means that all his other qualities and achievements don't mean diddly. They are not enough to win.
If you like the fact that Obama taught consitutional law for years and think it might have a bearing on the Imperial Presidency and the Unitary Executive posture of Bush 43, you might be disappointed in that comment, especially if Hillary's Foreign Policy remarks lead you to believe it's going to be more of the same under a Clinton II administration".
http://www.dailybreeze.com/lifeandculture/ci_8489268
-
@AKA - In answer to your question...
Dear AKA,
In one way, you are absolutely correct. Never did the words “Senator Obama got where he is today thanks to affirmative action” pass her lips. She did not say “affirmative action” and “Senator Obama” in the same sentence. So, kudos, you’ve scored.
Now, if you’re willing to stop playing coyly disingenuous for a nonce, please read these quotes and tell me what they have in common:
- "If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race.” - April 15, 1988, Washington Post.
- "I think what America feels about a woman becoming president takes a very secondary place to Obama's campaign - to a kind of campaign that it would be hard for anyone to run against. For one thing, you have the press, which has been uniquely hard on her. It's been a very sexist media. Some just don't like her. The others have gotten caught up in the Obama campaign.
"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." – March 7, 2008
- "I was talking about historic candidacies and what I started off by saying (was that) if you go back to 1984 and look at my historic candidacy, which I had just talked about all these things, in 1984 if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would have never been chosen as a vice presidential candidate. It had nothing to do with my qualification.” – March 12, 2008
And no, you may not answer by telling me they were all said by Congresswoman Ferraro. There’s something more.
It’s interesting to me that last week I was asking you for a substantive answer to a question, and you blithely ducked it. So, like your candidate, you seem to exist in a “do as I say, not as I do” reality. Good for you. Much easier when you hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourself.