Hey, Did You Hear Barack Obama Is Black?

Obama's own achievements have brought him to this moment. He fights a candidate whose vast name recognition - without which her 1st NY Senatorial race would have been unthinkable - came from marriage to a famous husband. Indeed, she still cites "First Lady" as a foreign policy credential. Is this a feminist achievement?
How ironic that Ferraro would suggest Obama was in a place he hadn't earned!

Geraldine is right, if Obama was a white man, the race would be over -- and he would be the nominee!! Instead, the Clintons are running on fumes by playing the race card and using scare tactics.

sage
Ferraro is engaging in dangerous counterfactuals... if Clinton were not the President's wife, where would she be? If Clinton were a man, who would be winning? What if Obama were a woman with all the same skills and credentials? If John Edwards had been black, how would things be different? What if John McCain had not been a POW for 5 years but a "mere veteran" like Kerry - would he have won the nomination? What if Powers had not called Clinton a "monster"? What if Clinton had not cried the day before the NH primary? What if there were less racists in this country? What if Limbaugh had not said "go vote for Hillary"? What if Clinton had pointed out that Edwards won South Carolina in 2004 rather than digging up an antiquated reference to Jackson's wins 24 years earlier? The speculation goes on and on.
What is Ferraro's point - other than to appeal to some sense of white victimhood? What is your point in defending her? So many people in the last 48 hours have said that what she said was "true" - there is no such thing as a true counterfactual ... by their very nature such counterfactuals are neither true nor false, but mere opinions. I bet if John McCain had not been a POW for 5 years, Obama had gone to Yale instead of Harvard, and Hillary had passed the DC bar, the 2008 race would have been totally different... but who cares except science fiction writers?

one of the reasons "millions" of people are saying it is because we can't seem to get beyond race in this country. somehow, ferraro feels the need to continue to push race as a dominant, if not the dominant, aspect of identity. obama's education, professional career, fund-raising, oratory skill, and all the rest of it are secondary to his race, huh? my goodness, and he's so well spoken for a black man! and that hillary, for a woman, she's really smart! better?

Calling Obama "lucky," well, that was ill-conceived, and mabye Ferraro had ulterior motives (love that video). Still, why is it so outlandish that Obama's race might have helped him get to where he is in this primary? I went to an Obama house party where a bunch of mostly white Berkeley liberals talked about how important it was for them that their kids be able to see a face in the White House that was more reflective of America, in other words, not another white man. Ferraro walked into a minefield by broaching this subject, but c'mon, is there no truth to it? I voted for Obama partly because he's smart and likeable, and a great speaker, but I also think having someone of color in power sends the right message for this country and the world, and that most certainly factored into my decision. I feel the same way about having a woman in charge, but I've got other issues with Hillary. I really don't know which one would be more effective as Prez. That we may never know. But would a white Obama, given his lack of experience, be the frontrunner now? It's conceivable, perhaps, but how can all these folks who are calling Ferraro a racist completely dismiss the possibility that Obama's race has helped generate public excitement for his campaign, among young people, blacks, and liberal whites who have been yearning for the right person to come along to fulfil that dream? Seems like denial to me.

And doesn't Senator Obama invoke it when he gives his speech about "bamboozle and hoodwink"? No attribution to Malcolm X included. Could there be a reason for that too?

Obama is not black! He is half black and half white. It is time you and all others get rid of this stupid way of labelling people. How can a white mother give birth to a 100% black child? It is rediculous and pathetic to reason that way. If he parades as being black and claims that he loves his mother and nonblack sister, how does he view his mother? Does he reject her and his grand parents. The terrible thing is that blacks who are not of mixed heritage prefer to have all other deny their genetic heritage and anglos are ony too happy to accommodate that because they give in to the 1% theory...if yu are not 100% white then you are otherwise. Obama will get my vote when he comes to term with his heritage and acknowledge that he is proud of being who he is, a man with an african father and a white mother.

I agree with G Farraro. I know lots of people who agree with her. Nobody wants to come out and say it though. See what happened to her.

Justin which stupid White person will you be voting for? Obama has been an elected official longer than Hillary, he was the president of the Harvard Law Review, and he has been a community activist. Tell me which of those things makes him either stupid or inexperienced?

For Ferraro to say that, is not only dangerous to Hilary's campaign, but is also dangeous to the Democrats as a whole. If blacks, hell all minorities don't feel like they own suppsoed party is backing them up, they may just not vote.

Please try to appreciate that it is this moment in history that has chosen Obama - he represents something people have longed for - a decent President who was once a "skinny kid with a funny name".

There is a point (one which Obama has demonstrated he is aware of), at which the monied air in Washington overwhelms an office-holder's better sense, and transforms them into a politician, who will adjust their moral stances to accommodate and (critically), to EXPLOIT what they perceive the voting public's sentiments to be. Such a politician then starts to play the public's sentiments like an instrument, in order to further their agenda. Once a politician decides that his/her priorities are more important that an honest fealty to the public, and that political expedience trumps mere moral standards, that politician can no longer be trusted, or even expected, to pursue the public's best interests.

Obama is still tracking the higher moral sentiments of the citizenry, because they are similar to his own personal standards. I think he'll get farther down the road to a truly moral presidency than Hillary Rodham Clinton can, because she's already far down the road to media-populism.

Clinton no longer (if she ever did) sticks with a moral position, if it battles with her pragmatic political sense. Her support of momentary-advantage ploys, such as the fictional RedPhone@3AM meme, shows that it's all about the vote margin, to her. If Ferraro gets her a rise in the polls, that's all that matters. She may think that such a small betrayal of the public trust is justifiable in a larger context, but the fact is, she will continue to operate this way, so long as she thinks it works. Which will be as long as she's in politics, because she now credits indicators that say she's "ahead," rather than those that would tell her that her credibility is taking major hits; that her moral standing is so shaky it's shot.

Don't expect Clinton to wake up; she's as much a victim of her chosen media, as Bush's "core" is.

------

Kill your TV.