A Christian Liberal is NOT an oxymoron.

Posted by XT on March 12th, 2008 in Campaign News

In the “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished” Department, I’ll be retracting my statement made earlier today about Geraldine Ferraro not being racist. Compare her statement concerning Barack Obama:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, 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.”

with one made about Jesse Jackson:

“If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn’t be in the race.”

The first thought to my mind was, “Is there a black man anywhere that Geraldine Ferraro thinks is there for a reason other than his pigmentation?” Translation: What a stupid, racist statement. In her defense, I’ll say that a racist thought or racist statement doesn’t make a person a racist. Read on – that weak defense gets shot down pretty quickly.

The second thought is that it is true – to a point. Jesse Jackson got to where he was in 1988 because of his record as a leader in the civil rights movement – and being a strong black leader had something to do with it. I don’t think it had much to do with it, but if we were to put a number on it, we’d start somewhere around 5% and work our way down. To the extent that might possibly be true and of any redemptive value, the statement is even less applicable to Barack Obama.

I am, in fact, more than a little surprised to see Obama with the lead. I mean, let’s just say his name doesn’t scream “baseball and mom’s apple pie”. Racism, if anyone looks for it, isn’t hard to find. His name recognition was practically zero a year ago. But he has two things going for him that have nothing to do with his race. First, he is an incredible public speaker. Second, he isn’t named “Hillary Clinton”.

Once Hillary declared her intention to re-take the White House, the question was, “Can anyone stop her?” She started out with a substantial lead – 39% support among Democrats compared to 17% for Obama, 12% for John Edwards, and 10% for Al Gore. But here’s something to consider – if you’re a math whiz, you’ll notice that exactly the same percentage of Democrats want someone else as want Mrs. Clinton. That left about 20% open for convincing.

Clinton ran a bad campaign. As the competition fell by the wayside, and Barack Obama’s campaign proved that it was one step ahead of the learning curve at every turn, it quickly became a two-person race. With only one legitimate choice, the anti-Hillary vote solidified into a coalition for Obama with the ardent anti-war crowd that jeered at Hillary’s triangulated approach to Iraq. Yeah, healthcare is a big deal, but I bet there aren’t a hundred people in the country that could explain off the top of their head what the difference between Obama’s position and Clinton’s.

It isn’t his blackness that makes him appealing. It’s the fact that he isn’t Hillary, he’s articulate and charismatic, he’s run a strong campaign focused on the future and on hope. Whatever benefit his pigmentation has given him with black voters, it has worked against him in equal measure with Hispanics.

The idea that he wouldn’t be where he is if he were a white woman is laughable. What, pray tell, is Hillary Clinton? What is the core of her support?

The next thing that came to mind (I think we’re at three) was that Ferraro was saying outloud what many may privately fear – that any criticism of Obama can be turned back upon the critic with a charge of racism. There are surely some people that will do that. Just as there are people who will tell you that the only reason he has done so well in life is that he’s black (Ferraro, for example). To my memory, Mr. Obama has consistently tried to steer away from that issue. I’ve never seen him try to use his pigmentation to advance a single policy nor to attack a single opponent. You can’t help what some people will say, but we can say with some degree of certainty that Mr. Obama is not cut from the same cloth as Louis Farakhan or Rev. Al Sharpton.

The final thought was “She really has sunken to the stupidest common denominator.” Really? People are outraged that you said Barack Obama is lucky to be black simply because you’re white? This is like David Duke saying, “They hate me because I’m white!” Well – that and the fact that you are spouting offensive nonsense.

Even Ferraro’s explanation does nothing but make her look stupid:

“I said in large measure, because he is black. I said, Let me also say in 1984 — and if I have said it once, I have said it 20, 60, 100 times — in 1984, if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would never have been the nominee for vice president,” she said.

Yeah, well, it’s one thing to say that you yourself have no qualifications other than your sex organs. It’s another for someone else to run around spouting it. I’m kind of at a loss with this. I remember all the Republicans claiming that Ferraro had only been picked because she was a woman and how Democrats screamed up and down that it was offensive. Turns out, it’s what Mrs. Ferraro herself was saying. No wonder she was completely ineffective in the campaign.

That leaves me with no more thoughts, but one question: Why the hell would anyone want this person to work for them in any capacity?

Technorati Tags: Geraldine Ferraro, racist

Sphere: Related Content