"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."
As a white male Obama supporter who has been quite willing to support Hillary in the event of her victorious attainment of the nomination, I find the above statements to be horrifyingly divisive, offensive, and frankly indefensible. And I am utterly perplexed how any good Democrat could feel otherwise. I am willing to consider an opposing perspective--but first let me clarify why I feel the way I do.
The first sentence is presumptious, and in my personal case utterly false. My family and I all share a tremendous affection for Barack Obama that may not make sense to all of you, but it isn't based on his race. It's on something palpably attractive and reassuring, in that he's youthful, somewhat dorky, but confident in his skin. And tremendously eloquent, able to address what are to me core issues of concern regarding the political process.
I understand perfectly well that others may not feel the same way, but to denigrate it by assigning it strictly to his race is the height of presumption. For every vote that Obama may gain by being black, he might as well be losing from others BECAUSE he is black. Who the hell is to say otherwise?
The second sentence is equally indefensible. FWIW, Carol Moseley-Braun was my favorite candidate in 2004, because of her calm, dignified persona and her stands on the issues. For numerous months Hillary led in the public polls, despite the alleged liability that she is a woman, and that most Democratic voters are women. There is an equally valid but similarly unproven contention that Hillary's popularity is based largely on the fact that she is a woman, and certainly I know some Democrats whose first reason for voting for Hillary is because they want a woman to be in the White House, "for my daughter's sake", etc. As a white male I'm the first to admit I've already had enough confirmation of my demographic self-worth, so identity politics isn't a driving force for me. But I don't discount these concerns when discussing politics with my friends, and given the fact that Ferraro's ONLY singular qualification for her historic placement was her gender, she seems particularly ill-suited to make the case against this sort of affirmative action.
As for being lucky to be where he is, well I'd have to say that Hillary is as well. As brilliant as she is, there are many other similarly qualified woman that haven't had the calling card of having an ex-POTUS for a husband, and fundraiser. And if she doesn't get to be President, Hillary is still a lucky human being, no matter how you slice it. So why is it worth mentioning, except to obviously demean the cagey political skills of Barack Obama and his campaign organization?
Finally, there's the question of "the concept". Look, there's plenty of "concept" to Obama's pitch, but it's not that he's black. And if Ferraro or anyone else is too thick to get it by now (God knows Hillary supporters mock Obama's campaign enough because of the "concept"), I doubt I can clarify it any further.
Regarding Ferraro's pathetic defense of the above remarks, calling critics like me (???) "racist", well, she couldn't have sounded more like some tone-deaf upper-class racist Republican biddy if she had tried. IMO, she's an embarrassment to herself and to the Clinton campaign.
But hey, I'm all ears as to how you fellow Democrats can enlighten me regarding the above.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 65 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
