Letters to the Editor
-
why is HRC where she is?
some one should have asked Gerry if her girl Hillary would be where she is today if she wasn't Bill's wife. We're not supposed to talk about that, but I think it's much more true that but for her marriage to Bill Clinton there's no way HRC would be anywhere near the presidential nomination. She also wouldn't have become Senator from NY (a place she never lived) but for her marriage to Bill.
-
Now Wait A Minute
A recent Atlantic monthly article made exactly the same point as Ferraro, if a bit more eruditely, that Obama benefits from who he is because of the impact of his being African-american because of so-called soft diplomacy. That means, as the Atlantic Monthly article points out, a young Pakastani seeing the image of a brown-faced American president named Barack Hussein Obama whose father is Kenyan, mother white American, raised in Hawaii and Indonesia, is going to think there has been a change in American politics simply because of his face. Image alone carries a wallop. What is wrong with The Atlantic making the point that Obama's face counts when Ferraro can't make the same argument, if less adroitly? Aren't both "racist" comments? Aren't both actually correct, even if not exactly PC?
-
Considering whats at stake...
I don't think it was overblown. That being said, there are two critical points to be made about it.
1. Regardless of whether you think Mrs. Ferraro's comment was right or wrong, the important factor is that the comment was devisive. and that is an important dynamic when you consider the premise the campaigns have been run on.
2. And for me this is the most curious part of it: What exact point, again regardless of whether you think she was right or wrong, do you think Mrs. Ferraro was trying to make with her comment? I'm assuming everything a person in her position says is designed to help the candidate. I mean, I think people know Obama is black. Try as I might I can't think of a politically sound reason for Mrs. Ferraro to have wanted to make that remark, and why the HRC campaign seemed happy to have her make it.
-
Excellent article.
I agree with some of the things you've said. and all in all, an excellent response to a pretty stupid fiasco.
A couple of points: Even a small local paper is connected to the internet. Anyone who makes on-the-record statements in this day and age has to know that 6 billion people are going to have access to it within the hour. And a skilled politician like Ferraro must have known this. Do I think her comments were insidiously designed to attract anti-AA white voters? No. But to suggest that simply because she was talking to a local paper that her comment was unfairly examined is a little thin.
It's true that the American public is too focused on superficial qualities. So it should be up to our leaders to rise above that quality and convince us to look deeper than the color of skin. Ferraro may have had a good point: we are at a point in the US where those opportunities are available for an African American. We're also at a point where they are obviously available to a woman. Her argument could have been flipped right around to the candidate she supports.
Sorry gets people a looooooong way in this day and age. I think she could have stemmed the "overblown" response by just saying, "Boy was I stupid. I'm sorry." a little humility gets respect. being defiant to the point of digging a hole for yourself doesn't. So yeah, KO was over the line, but because of her inflexibility, he looks like a staunch defender of equality. Say you're sorry, and KO's comment looks overblown. That's damage control 101.
I'm not African American, so I can't begin to understand what could be construed as a "racist" comment. But to me, suggesting that someone has doors open because they are black would have a profound effect on any African American who has struggled through institutional racism to be successful or who has had their success stymied through institutional racism. It just looks like she doesn't acknowledge the hard work many African Americans do to move beyond racial boundaries (and the work that those who are still stuck in poverty do just to stay afloat). Whether that's how she meant it or not, that's how it looks. and like it or not Ms. Ferraro, politics is perception.
-
Nice Try
Perhaps it's the primary season. Perhaps is the third change of captain in the war room in the last year, but it's really started to suck. The Obama campaign may have turned back the Clinton's forays into racist rhetoric as weapons, but that does not make Clinton campaigns actions excusable. My attacker tripped and fell on his own knife and that makes me guilty? I don't think so. Also- don't tell me what Gerry really meant to say. We all have access to YouTube and transcripts. We can figure it out for ourselves.
-
It's Clinton's reaction that's the problem
Geraldine Ferraro is not the main part of the story, in my opinion. It's how Senator Clinton handled this, and the many other gaffes made by staff and surrogates over the last 3 months, that is telling. Of course she had no control over Ferraro, but she sure had control over her own response. And in that, she failed miserably.
Last week, Clinton immediately called for Samantha Powers to be fired over the "monster" flap. Powers was gone in less than 24 hours with apologies to Clinton. Other staff have been let go without delay from the Obama campaign. Obama set his standard and he has stuck with it.
Clinton has also set a standard: reject and renounce. We all heard it. But she seems to only employ that standard when it's against Obama. She does not hold her people to the same accountability. And that is a problem, too. Her reaction to Ferraro was "regret" and nothing more.
I would agree that Olberman's special comment was a bit over the top. They usually are. But at their core, he is always spot on, and he was again last night. I hope Senator Clinton got the message.