My mother, a 60 year old black woman, who didn't like what Ferraro said proved her point.

[xultar]

We were talking on the phone and she was all like.

I don't like what she said, what she said was racist.

I was like yeah but let's just flip it on it's ear...let's say if Hillary wasn't a Clinton and was a regular old white dude, she'd be out already. She's lucky she's a Clinton and a woman (a white woman).

We went on and on... and THEN SHE SAID...

I DON'T KNOW, I JUST THINK PEOPLE ARE SICK OF WHITE MEN RUNNING THIS COUNTRY...

I replied

AHHHHH HA! YOU JUST PROVED HER POINT. IF OBAMA WAS JUST SOME REGULAR OLD WHITE DUDE.... named Oscar Brennen with the same experience he'd be out too.

(SHE BUSTED A GUT LAUGHING!!!!)

Then I said
Just think, Biden, who I supported over Hillary and Obama has DECADES of experience, he's nice, Putin and other leaders call HIM for advice, he's cool and gives good speeches and his ass was out after the first caucus!

Think, Dodd, DECADES of experience, he's nice, speaks fluent spanish, he's cool, gives good speeches, and his ass was out also.

So, if people are sick of white male dominated government and Obama was just some regular old white dude, he'd be out on his ass with the rest of them.

Then she laughed and said, I always knew you should have been a lawyer. :rofl:

I guess there is still time...maybe I'll give it a try.

Oh and Hillary would be out too if she was a man and her last name wasn't Clinton. LET'S BE HONEST.

Oh and I forgot Edwards. I love the fact that he's been in the trenches. His Poverty Initiative is right on the money for me. He should still be in the race as well. Edwards has more experience in my eyes than OBama.

[Booster]

1. It's good to hear that somebody got it. To me it was clear what

she was saying and that was exactly as you explained it to your mother. Everything people say isn't racist or sexist; just a fact. Thanks for posting this. You and your mother are cool.

[xultar]

2. She's an Obama supporter and so are all her lady friends. They have Obama parties

and such.

But it's funny, cuz when I talk to my mom and we discuss politics I usually get some A HA moments.

[SoonerPride]

3. The FACT is that Obama is a great, smart, and effective candidate

REGARDLESS of his skin color, not BECAUSE of it.

He can speak and inspire people who are BLIND.

Only people who still see skin color think it is an issue.

You act as if he was editor of the Harvard Law Review BECAUSE he was black. No, it was because he was SMART and TALENTED.

You act as if he got elected in Illinois because he was black. No, it is because he is smart, talented, and an inspiring speaker.

[xultar]

5. But basically a white man who gives good speeches with experience are a dime a dozen.

Luckily for Obama supporters he's the only thing standing between us and Hillary Clinton presidency.

If he weren't ya'll wouldn't be giving a rats ass.

[SoonerPride]

7. Show me someone as good.

Edwards was good, but he was not Obama.

Biden, Dodds, Kucinich? You must be joking.

Show me someone who is a great Democratic leader, who is a white dude who can speak like Obama.

The point is that he is channelling the mood of the country, which is CHANGE.

Not experience.

And he's very effectively communicating that message to a whole generation of people who are sick and tired of the same old crap from our politicians.

So, no, I wholeheartedly disagree with your premise.

It's about CHANGE not skin color.

[xultar]

14. Edwards was good, but he was not Obama.---WTF does that mean?

ROFL.

[SoonerPride]

19. It means that Edwards is a good speaker, but not as good as Obama, who is a GREAT speaker

You said "white men who give good speeches are a dime a dozen"

I reject that argument on its face.

[xultar]

23. Is that all it takes. Giving good speeches. Let's hope not.

[KittyWampus]

27. Edwards record doesn't even begin to compare to Obama. Your ignorance of Obama's record

and how politicians are groomed is pathetic.

[xultar]

politicians are groomed--exactly groomed. He and Hillary are 2 peas in a fucking pod.

He gives great speeches, he's groomed to do so.

[SoonerPride]

28. Hardly, but it starts there.

You have to have a message and then be able to sell it.

Then you have to be able to do something when given the chance.

Obama has the whole package.

THAT'S WHY THE COUNTRY IS EXCITED ABOUT HIS CANDIDACY. Not because he's a black man. But because of the message he is delivering.

He could be GREEN or stiped or white or a woman, but if the message and personal history was the same, that person would be in his shoes leading the Democratic nomination process.

It is the message, not the sex or skin color that matters most.

[BeyondGeography]

33. It means Edwards spent much of his life running up the score for himself

while Obama was focused on public life. It means Edwards has half his $55 million fortune in a hedge fund with a Cayman Islands address while Obama writes books and draws a government salary for a living. It means Edwards has no legislative achievements in his career compared with Obama. That's why Edwards is hanging out in a 28,000-square-foot house watching Obama now.

Two completely different people, get it?

[krkaufman]

120. I was an Edwards supporter, and would add a few more issues

Edwards' failure in the campaign owed to many things, aside from the *partial* effects of racial/gender affinity voting.

JE was viewed to have already had a chance in 2004, and lost. And his message, although populist, came on too strong for many, feeling it would continue warring in Washington.

[Blue_In_AK]

99. Not everyone is affected this way by Obama...

His speeches don't do much for me personally. I'm not a Clinton fan either. I would have much, much preferred Biden, Dodd or Edwards to either of these two candidates.

[dansolo]

137. Edwards, Dodd, and Biden all voted for the Iraq War

People haven't forgotten.

[RaleighNCDUer]

84. Name three.

Much as I like Kuch, he is NOT an inspiring speaker. Edwards has some skills, but paled (so to speak) compared to Obama. Biden? Richardson? Gravel? Gore is an inspiring leader, but anything but an inspiring speaker.

Public speaking is a very particular skill, and Obama has it. Few people do. That's why we reach back to find comparable speakers -- Bobby Kennedy, JFK, FDR. And it's more than just having good speech writers. Reagan had some of the best, and he was good at reading his lines, but the trained ear knew that was all he was doing.

I think you are refusing to give credit where it is due.

[Carrieyazel]

59. He is having major problems closing out a flawed, mediocre politician and her campaign.

And the earliest he could do it would be the convention; which is way too late. And his chances of taking down McCain would be slim to none in that scenario.

[RaleighNCDUer]

90. A flawed, mediocre politicisn backed by the extremely powerful

and well funded DLC, which became the de-facto Democratic establishment during the Clinton years. And he has been shattering that power structure in state after state.

Which candidate had the 20+ point lead in every single state, 3 months before Iowa? Which candidate was certain the campaign would be over by 2/5?

He's run an extraordinary campaign against incredible odds. And he's winning, because of it.

[krkaufman]

122. Exactly. n/t

[krkaufman]

You vastly underestimate, obviously, the hard-core support for Clinton

... putting aside the various reasons for their support.

[MethuenProgressive]

4. Thanks for the post!

k&r!

[tabasco]

6. If blacks were the only ones voting for Obama, he would not be where he is.

People of all colors can recognize good leadership when they see it.

Your attempts to justify a racist comment about Obama are disgusting.

[jackson_dem]

158. He is losing every racial group except his own

So I guess whites, Latinos, and Asians can't recognize "good leadership"? The "transcends race" thing is BS. If any candidate is doing that it is Hillary who wins groups other than her own.

[zabet]

8. xultar

again I have to say..
:yourock:
as does your Mom.
:headbang:

[xultar]

11. Oh, she wasn't happy that she proved the point but she did crack up.

[zabet]

The fact that she can laugh at it

says volumes.

[xultar]

47. She loves her martinis. Saturday we're going for Shrimp and Cheese grits with Blue Cheese Martinis!!

We are gonna get tipsy and then go shopping in a mall near the bar.

I hope my dad doesn't come and kill the fun.

He's a fun killer extrodinare.

[lumberjack_jeff]

9. This campaign was an historic event.

US politics will be forever different. The novelty will wear off. I think that candidates in the future will be judged to a greater degree on their policy and their ability to articulate it, than they are on race/gender.

This is new territory for americans. We should be unsurprised that it's a messy process.

In the meantime, we should step back a little. I know that many people chose their candidate because he/she is the most like them, but that doesn't mean that it's appropriate to take every criticism of our candidate personally.

Thanks for the good post.

[AndyA]

10. What your Mother said could very well be true.

We'll only get a good President when we take corporate money out of the factor. We need public financing of ALL political campaigns. The best candidates aren't running because they don't have the high $$$ contacts to run!

I don't care if a person is black, white, male, female, gay, straight, Christian, atheist, or whatever. I just want them to be the best person for the job. So, if a gay black female atheist was the best person for the Presidency, then she should be the President. But many would have a problem with that.

I'm not thrilled with either Hillary or Barack. I can't stand John McCain. I can see myself voting for Hillary at this point, but I won't like it. I'm not sure I can force myself to vote for Barack for any reason other than to keep the GOP out of the White House.

An important reason to vote, yes, but it falls far short of my desire for everyone to have an equal shot in this country.

And part of my frustration right now is because I find myself being accused of being a racist because I don't support Barack, or sexist because I don't support Hillary. And the fact is, it has nothing to do with their skin color or gender. It's because I don't think either is progressive enough to drag this country back from the Dark Ages where Bush has taken us.

A mere lane change to the left isn't going to help us that much at this point. We need to make a hard left just to get back to center. And we need to move off center to the left just to restore a little of the balance we once had.

I'm sure Hillary and Barack are both very nice people, and I have no doubt that either will do a better job than Bush has done, but I just don't believe that's enough at this point, and I fear we're running out of time to undo all the damage.

Your Mother is a smart woman. Most are, they've learned a lot over the years. ;)

[xultar]

20. I won't tell my mom you called her that. She'd take you on and get in a couple of good licks!

:rofl:

[AndyA]

54. Shit. I confused your post with an E-mail I read earlier.

I fixed my post.

My apologies to you and your Mother, who I'm certain doesn't look old enough to have a daughter your age, no matter how old you are.

There. That should cover it all.

[Not the Only One]

12. A white guy with Obama's gifts would be JFK, and he did okay as a candidate.

Obama isn't helped by his race, other than Hillary using racism to make sure she isn't the person getting the support of AAs, so he gets it by default.

I liked Biden, too, BTW.

[ellacott]

32. That's the point that people are forgetting

You can't compare his to the other white male candidates. People wanted change and he tapped into that first. Biden, Dodd and even Edwards are part of the status quo.

If anyone came with a similar message they would also be just as popular.

[Not the Only One]

58. Yep. And that's also part of why the media has been favorable, too.

It's not because the media is desirous (to use Rush's words about McNabb, quoted in another thread) to have a black man be our nominee, but because they like that he's fresh and new and interesting and inspiring. JFK was all those things in 1960, too. Obama has also earned the respect of the media by conducting himself honorably.

It's the message and the messenger, but it's not about his race. Gary Hart almost pulled it off in 1984, but his dick got in the way, and he couldn't raise money like Obama has from over a million people hungry for change.

[ellacott]

68. Very true

If Al Gore were in this race Obama would not be as popular as he is now.

[saracat]

69. Obama is NO JFK. Period.

[ProSense]

106. There you go, adding to the racist bullshit! n/t

[saracat]

109. How is it racist to say he isn't JFK? He isn't MLK either. Sheesh. Get a grip.

[calico1]

115. No, not exactly.

JFK was charming too but he was also a decorated war hero and had 16 years of Congressional experience under his belt.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

13. Thanks for sharing that story ... unfortunately,

it will fall on deaf ears because it doesn't feed the beast that has become DU-P


BTW, xultar ... I've been meaning to tell you for the longest time ... :yourock:

[xultar]

17. rightbackatcha

:yourock:

[Tyler Durden]

15. TESTIFY!

This I can agree with you on 100%, completely and totally.

[Johnny__Motown]

16. Then any black man should have been able to do what he did.. sorry this isn't true

He is where he is because he is brilliant and qualified and ran a better campaign than any other candidate, not because of the color of his skin

[xultar]

42. Are you on the right thread?

[KittyWampus]

18. You have issues. If Obama, w/his resume & oratorical skills were white, he'd not only be where he

is, he'd have gotten there on a faster track (not been forced to run in IL state legislature).

You just embarrassed yourself, but lots of Clinton supporters will be happy to tell you differently.

[JVS]

21. That's why it's called baiting!

Because it seeks to create the problem it claims.

[crispini]

22. Well, I thought what Ferraro said implied he wasn't qualified enough.

That's the way I took it.

[xultar]

24. And if he was a regular old white guy with those qualifications, he'd be just another

regular old white guy with no qualifications who we are sick of running this country.

White guys with Obama's qualifications are a dime a dozen. There are tons more...with more experience...yet, they didn't make it. Why? Cuz Obama gives good speeches?

Is that all it takes? A black guy who gives good speeches? If he was a white guy who gave good speeches he'd be out.

Just as Clinton would be out if she was a man and not a Clinton.

[crispini]

36. No, I do think he's different. It's the way he uses language to appeal to us.

We're all so busy looking at our qualifications and "experience" that we neglect the way Senator Obama has appealed to the better angels of our nature with his language. Maybe that can't be separated from his background, who knows. But the fact is that he is a VERY talented campaigner and politician, above and beyond his legislative record. IMO, a young, (young is important, you know, he's being seen as "the next generation" as opposed to Dodd and Biden), good-looking white guy with similar talents would be doing just as well, if not better.

[ronnykmarshall]

113. Madam,

please turn in your skin color and ovaries!!!

:silly:

[brindis_desala]

125. Stop embarrassing yourself.

How many people become editor of Harvard law review and then go and work "in the hood". Barack could be a frigging multi-millionaire then BUY his way into office just like all the other jive talking millionaires taking your money and then screwing you in Washington. Buy a clue.
Yes he's ambitious, yes he's flawed, but he aint just about giving pretty speeches.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

25. On the flip side, he wouldn't have had the madrassa thing, too white, too black, muslim smears

thrown against him.

[goclark]

26. Exactly

[question everything]

29. That Biden was out after Iowa was a shame

That Biden was considered by many as a joke was a shame.

I admit, I, too, thought he was a joke until I started listening to him in the debates. Same for Clinton. I did not like the "inevitability" aura of her campaign; I still think that she would have been better without the men who are hurting more than helping her. However, once I saw her in the campaign, with precise, concise and to the point replies, while the men were hemming and hewing, I gladly switched to her once Biden and Edwards were out.

[NorthernSpy]

30. I feel for her.

Poor woman.

[NOLALady]

But,

Ferraro said the same thing in 1988 about Jackson.

Maybe she is right, but it seems like the Southern strategy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5028671

[grantcart]

31. what you don't get is that Gerldine is also saying the same thing about Hillary

and her self.

Here is a clip that you may not have heard where she admits that she is a 'lunatic' and goes on to strongly imply that John Lewis is a coward.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqL_sm0J8jc

[xultar]

34. Did you read my post . I said if Hillary was a man, and not a Clinton she'd be out too.

Fer FUCK SAKE. I said I supported Biden anyway and his ass is out. I don't have a candidate now.

I just call bullshit when I see it.

[Apollo11]

35. CLINTON FERRARO 2008

:kick:

[libbygurl]

134. LOL.

Heh.

[BigDDem]

148. Obama McClurkin 2008

[1776Forever]

37. With all due respect to you and your Mother -

Sen. Obama has an exciting and fresh attitude and intellect that excites a lot of his supporters in a way not seen since the days of JFK. I am 61 and a woman and I lived through those days. Sen. Obama is bringing in thousands of new excited Democratic Party members. We will lose this vision if he is cut short by a negative campaign run by the Clinton machine. Make no mistake they know what they are doing and what they are saying. I know I won't change your mind but I think you should at least consider that race or sexism or any other negative campaigning should be stopped and stopped now! I don't care who does it. It should not have a place in the Democratic Party!

[xultar]

41. Blah blah blah, exciting and fresh. If another white dude was exciting and fresh...he'd be out too.

[Bucky]

38. Let's be honest. If you weren't black, you couldn't even have written this post.

I'm sick of young white men running DU

[xultar]

44. That may be true. I've had white liberals on DU call me racist...AND

Tell me that I don't know racism when I see it.

This place is nutz

[tishaLA]

39. If Obama were a white guy...

He would have had a whole different resume, a whole different set of experiences, a whole different path to wherever he went. He probably would have taken a clerkship after the Harvard Law review, worked for a high-power law firm instead of doing community organizing, and he would have had a different relationship, most likely, to bottom-up vs. top-down organizing. In other words, he would have been a different person than he is now: he wouldn't have the same positives (message, organizing, etc.) or the same negatives (name, "church problem," etc.)

[Occam Bandage]

40. If Obama was some regular white dude, he'd be a smarter, more competent version of John Edwards.

[xultar]

49. And out of the fucking race.

[Occam Bandage]

51. Only because he'd have already won it. Edwards came damn close in '04. Obama is way

way way better than he is (and more experienced, more charismatic, and less damaged by a hypocritical record), and Hillary's run a clusterfuck. The only thing keeping her alive at this point is racial politics.

[PerpetuallyDazed]

57. Good point...

But I don't think it's a lack of competency, but the fact that he IS a black guy and has to literally reach out to everyone ("embracing bipartisanship" :puke:) to not come off as too "revolutionary" to mainstream America.

Edwards was not an original (Kucinich is a better version) but he was the most LIKELY to get the nomination at the earliest point in the primary.

Anyways, a conspiracy theory of mine is that had Edwards NOT suspended his campaign, Clinton (for the longest time perceived as THE nominee) would not have been able to get as far as she has if not for Obama being black. She had no chance against a populist, "anti-status-quo" white dude, so basically used Obama as her stepping stone to get there.

[PerpetuallyDazed]

43. I'm such a weeny!

I was thinking the same thing but I hadn't yet shared my thoughts with anyone for fear of being labeled a racist. Thanks ;)

[xultar]

50. I've been called a racist too. If a black woman on DU can be called racist...

then it means nothing.

[NashVegas]

45. We Should All Be Pretty Pissed Off At the Press Right Now

I'm so tired of these Heathers, and the people who pay them, picking our candidates. Edwards was the only candidate in range of them and the press completely ignored he came in #2 in Iowa. They torpedoed him via no coverage.

Barack and Hillary are both fine people. Politically, they're nearly identical; if they have similar strengths, they also have similar baggage. I'll hold my nose either way come November, but the Obama campaign must realize that Republicans aren't going to back down everytime they get accused of racism.

[Milo_Bloom]

46. You are missing a huge point.

Obama was the only mainstream candidate in the group who didn't vote for the war.

Obama is doing well because the anti-war vote went to him by default. (I like Kucinich and Gravel, but they weren't mainstream).

Biden, Edwards, Clinton, Dodd ALL war voters and to many of us, apologies meant nothing.

In short, I think if Obama's name was Oscar Brennen, giving the same speeches, with the same stances, he would be doing quite well.. He may not be getting the 90% support from the African American community and thus, not doing AS well, but he would be a contender.

Clinton had the name and Obama had the positions... THAT is a large part of why they are doing well.

[xultar]

48. He's a politician that told you he wouldn't have. Didn't vote for is different from promise I

wouldn't have.

[Milo_Bloom]

60. They did. He didn't.

It may be because of circumstance and MAYBE he would have if he was in the Senate... maybe he wouldn't have. However, the people who did vote for the war are essentially disqualified from becomming president, which is why Edwards campaign never caught fire, Bidens', Dodds', etc... The people who were voting AGAINST the war vote had a choice between Obama, Kucinich and Gravel.

[xultar]

61. So, you believe everything tha comes out of his mouth?

rofl.

[Milo_Bloom]

64. No, not at all.

In fact, I have a lot of problems with a lot of the things he says.

I think his health care plan sucks as bad as Clinton's.

I don't like his use of religion and his inability to support gay marriage.

I haven't seen a real detailed plan out of him on how he is going to clean up our current outsourcing problem.

However, he is the only viable candidate who didn't vote for the war, so I am willing to give him a chance to live up to his promises.

Clinton, I know will betray us... with Obama, there is a chance things might turn out well.

[libbygurl]

56. Oh, that 'didn't vote for the war' canard again.

He didn't vote for it because he WASN'T EVEN IN THE SENATE to be given the opportunity to vote for or against it! Afterwards, he voted like everyone else to continue to fund the war. He gave a speech from outside Washington DC.

Wow, that takes real courage, doesn't it? When you're not actually in the Senate faced with those choices?

For the record, I was also against the war from my warm and cosy, outside-the-Beltway seat at home.

[Milo_Bloom]

62. The Majority of Democratic Senators voted against the war.

and even one republican had enough sense.

Those who voted FOR the war have been ruled out as possible contenders by millions of people.


I am not currently to vote for Obama because he is black or because I am sick of white guys. If Al Gore were running I would be supporting him over Obama.

The reason I voted for Obama and will vote for him in the GE is because he didn't vote for the war.

The reason I am not voting for Clinton and won't vote for her in the GE is because she voted for the war.

[BigDDem]

66. "he didn't vote for the war"

Can you tell us where he voted against the war?

[Milo_Bloom]

67. I didn't say he did.

I said, he didn't vote FOR the war.

I also pointed out that a majority of Democratic Senators had the basic horse sense to vote against it, which shows that the sell-outs who voted for it had a real choice to make and made it wrong.

[BigDDem]

71. Using your logic...

I didn't vote for the war either and I was against it from nano-second one. I guess I should be president because I have great judgment.

[Milo_Bloom]

72. You didn't understand the logic...

If you didn't vote for the war, you haven't been DISQUALIFIED from being president.

Thompson, Huckabee, Ghouliani all didn't vote for the war either, but they shouldn't be president.

[BigDDem]

80. Along with not voting for the war, I didn't win the gold medal in archery

in the 2004 Olympics.

[Milo_Bloom]

81. So?

Clinton did vote for the war, thus, she is not qualified to be president.

It really is that simple.

[BigDDem]

85. Is it really that hard to understand?

Your words: he didn't vote for the war

Right, and neither did I.
He had NO OPTION to vote for or against the war.

He didn't captain the Titanic - GREAT, good job!

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[libbygurl]

98. Ahh- name-calling - that works everytime!

So, if you didn't have the opportunity to vote for or against the war, you're qualified. And why shouldn't Giuiani, Huckabee and others who weren't there to vote for or against the resolution not be qualified for the presidency?

Great litmus test you got there, especially since BO voted along with everyone else to vote for continued funding of the war.

By his own admission on Meet the Press, he said he wouldn't know how he would have voted were he in the US Senate at the time of the war vote resolution! He himself doubts he would've voted against it - or for it! How, then, does that make him more or less anti-war resolution than anyone else who wasn't there to make that decision? That's a very shaky conclusion you're drawing about his true anti-war stance.

BigDDem's points are totally spot-on. Your pretzel, circular logic makes no sense.

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[libbygurl]

117. Yes, just call us 'morons'.

Stick to your pretzel logic, if that's what makes you happy.

[Milo_Bloom]

121. Yes, when you are being intentionally stupid

I will call you on it.

The logic is quite straight and sound... you just need to be honest about what was said.


Voting for the war is a disqualification.


Not voting for the war doesn't automatically make you qualified.

[libbygurl]

135. Ah, well, keep changing and twisting the meanings of what you said. 'bye...

[Milo_Bloom]

138. Make stuff up much?

The only twisting is yours, trying to create your own meaning into very clear words.

[BigDDem]

75. Hey libbygurl

I didn't vote for the war either.
Please confirm that you did not vote for the war.
If you didn't, I'd like you to be my VP, cuz we have great judgment

:rofl:

[libbygurl]

96. LOL! Thanks! Hey, all of us who didn't vote for the war since we weren't in the Senate then...

...are all qualified to run for president! Or VP! Yup! Great idea! Just wonderful logic there!

:hi:

[BigDDem]

73. "Obama was the only mainstream candidate in the group

who didn't vote for the war"

I didnt vote for the war either...now, watch me walk on water.

:rofl:

[Milo_Bloom]

82. You aren't a mainstream candidate.

[BigDDem]

88. So, since Kerry/Edwards both voted for the war

that made them "not qualified to be president."

Did you skip the 2004 election or vote for Bush?

[Milo_Bloom]

89. Yes, he is not qualified to be president.

[BigDDem]

91. Why avoid such an easy question? Ill try again....

Did you skip the 2004 election or vote for Bush?

[Milo_Bloom]

101. Neither.

[BigDDem]

149. Nader 2004!

[Milo_Bloom]

156. Nope.

[BigDDem]

157. You're that ashamed to say who you voted for?

Must be pretty ugly.
Thanks for the lectures though!

:rofl:

P.S. I voted for Kerry.

[Milo_Bloom]

160. Nope.

Green Party Candidate.

IT was between that and skipping the vote for President and only voting for other positions, but I decided to give it to the greens.


So you voted for the war candidate... good to know.

[BigDDem]

163. "So you voted for the war candidate... good to know"

As did most people here.
How did that Green Party Candidate work out for ya?

[Milo_Bloom]

165. Worked out quite well.

I didn't vote for a war candidate.

[SeaLyons]

52. Great Post

:kick:

[TahitiNut]

53. The moral corruption wasn't in whatever narrowly viewed 'truth' exists in her observation.

The moral corruption was in the narrow and one-sided EXPLOITATION of the noxious dynamics of racism for political power in the status quo. (IMHO)

I am only slightly more favorably disposed toward Obama than Clinton - based on their stated ideological stances and track records in that regard. I remain fully supportive of the values and positions espoused by and promulgated by Kucinich.

But it was clearly from the ethically corrupt perspective of "the ends justifies the means" that Ferraro expressed an observation of that kind and the resulting shit-storm is predictably divisive and damaging.

[BigDDem]

55. I was like talking to my mother and she was like

do people really care about this stuff and I was like yeah, I guess so.

[saracat]

70. More than they do about nasty comments like this!

[BigDDem]

63. Woops, I like did a double post

[Tellurian]

65. I don't get what Obama is allin a huff about calling Ferraro's comment racist..

Obama said it himself in one of the debates when answering a question.

Obama said: "You've got a woman running for president, a black man, and well..(pause) John Edwards.."

All Ferraro did was point out why Obama is still in the race. This is a "Boutique" (election) selection limited to two specifically unique candidates.

[NOLALady]

118. Dear Ferraro also found it necessary to point out

why Jesse Jackson was in the race in 1988. This seems to be a pattern for her.

Her mind set hasn't changed. She hasn't grown.

[GoldieAZ49]

74. Excellent post - thank you for posting it! n/t

[Hutzpa]

76. Your analogy is

poor and condescending, maybe you should take your mother's instinct and find the best
school to read Law, there are lawyers and there are LAWYERS, Lawyers with poor judgment
and others with excellent judgment, so far you haven't shown that sharp judgment needed
in making a decision, but you can always learn from the best schools.

Most people with sharp minds would have decided long ago which one of our remaining candidates
has the most and prudent credential, don't need to be a brain surgeon to know that.

Your mother should be given credit for being wise, if Obama was a white man, this nomination
process would have been over since February, but because we have a former First Lady who feels
she is the Lady in waiting and deserved the WHITE HOUSE, the Democratic party has now created an unavoidable train wreck.

Make no mistake, Geraldine Ferraro's comment was a calculated ploy by the Clinton's camp, it was not a mistake for her to make those comment in spite of what she has said, she is the second surrogate from Hillary's camp that have made derogatory comment on Obama.

What should we learn from all of this.....the Democrats are on the verge of loosing the 2008 election
all because of one persons alter-ego, ah well!

[Blu Dahlia]

77. sorry. you have lost touch with reality just like stephanie tubb jones

Stephanie Jones should be calling for Clinton to condemn ferraro's comments. Does ferraro also think that Stephanie was only elected because she's black too?

[Blu Dahlia]

78. and shame on you for excusing bigotry away. as a black woman you

should be ashamed of yourself for excusing this. You are giving comfort to bigots who want to trash Obama based on his race! See? She's black and she agrees so it must be ok! Once again, shame on you!

[Hutzpa]

92. You see the problem with

some black folks to wards Obama is jealousy, most would like to be in the position he is, since they
can't, the next best thing is to side with bigots, but the most important thing that strikes me about
this post is money, this poster has willingly sold her birth right for money......what a shame.

[ProSense]

107. Exactly, everyone is overlooking the belittling, affirmative action implication of

what she said.

[Milo_Bloom]

79. How about a different hypothetical?

What if Al Gore had jumped into the race in October of 2007?

Do you honestly think this would still be a race between Clinton and Obama?

Gore is a regular old white dude; However, the reality is that Obama probably would have been pushed out for Gore, who would now be involved in a Gore v Clinton race or would have completely wrapped it up already (more likely).

If you can remove Obama from the equation and substitute a white dude, that undermines the claim that Obama is ONLY doing well b/c he is black.

[xultar]

105. Gore isn't just a regular old white dude. He is a former VP. That right there makes a story.

AND he was the former VP to the current candidate's husband who was President.

That's a huge story. The media would love that, then they could play all that history shit between the two.

I don't think you can't use Gore as the regular old white dude in this scenario.

the others that ran yes,

but Gore nope.

[Milo_Bloom]

108. I disagree, but for the sake of it... replace Gore with Wes Clark

As far I am concerned if you can take ANY white dude and stir up the race, then it shows race is not the deciding factor, but for the sake of argument... use Wes Clark. (Obviously he wouldn't have ran b/c he is in CLinton's pocket, but put that aside.)

Take the anti-war mainstream white dude of your choice and substitute him for Obama.

How does the race turn out? Russ Fiengold? Jim Webb?


At the end of the day this race is and always has been war voters vs non-war voter

The war voters split votes between Clinton, Edwards, Biden and Dodd, the non war voters split their vote between Obama, Richardson, Kucinich, Gravel. Each side chose the one they best felt would otherwise serve them... Clinton had name recognition and a campaign machine... Obama is extremely elloquent and also assembled a campaign machine.

The reality is if there had been a mainstream name recognized individual on that anti-war side (Gore, Clark, Whoever) they probably would have beaten out Obama on name recongition alone.

[xultar]

116. I believe Wes Clark would be out. In this wacky world...experience don't mean shit.

[Milo_Bloom]

123. So you really don't believe the war is a major factor?

You think if Clinton had voted against the war, like the majority of democratic senators, she would still be losing the nomination?

[xultar]

126. Nope not in the who voted for it who didn't. I think they want someone who gets us out.

Remember most Americans, and I'll admit myself in this thought that o.k. Uncle Saddy's got shit. But let's not use force unless we have too. So, force was a card in my back pocket just like force is in Obama's pocket for Pakistan.

I'll admit, I was a democrat who didn't pay attention. I didn't think their votes on the IWR authorised his dumb as just to go to war without coming back to the senate first.

So no, I don't think being anti-war from the start will win anyone any significant extra points. And it shouldn't for Obama cuz we only have his word that he wouldn't have voted for it. I don't believe any fucking politician. I don't give a fuck how well they speak and shit. He's funding the war now and if he was anti-war he wouldn't be cuz the shit would pass without his ass. He's funding because if he didn't he knows he wouldn't win the GE if he got the nom.

[Milo_Bloom]

141. I hate to tell you, it really is ALL about the war.

First, Most Americans were not for the Iraq war. The polls taken in the days leading up to it were 50/50 and the majority didn't trust the government that saddam had WMD's (Check the NYT poll conducted the week befor ethe IWR vote)

Second, Voting against funding doesn't get us out. Bush, as commander in chief, has the option to keep them in and draw money from other parts of the defense budget for as long as he wants. The idea that you can "vote against funding" and suddenly get out is false and misleading.

The only way we get out is if either A) the president agrees to pull out or B) 2/3 of the Senate and House are willing to vote on a bill demanding we get out. Cutting funding accomplishes NOTHING, except pulling money away from other sources.

Finally, and this I can promise you... if Clinton had voted against the war, this election would be over and she would have won... the reason DailyKos, Moveon and the rest of the base fights CLinton tooth and nail is because of her IWR vote.

It is the reason I would never vote for her... The reason my wife would never vote for her... The reason my mother and father would never vote for her... The reason most of the people I became friends with during the Dean movment in 2003 won't vote for her...

[Egnever]

150. It certainly does for me

I agree 100% if she hadnt voted for the war this wouldnt have been a race. That one vote characterizes her entire career for me. Politics before principles or a level of hawkishness I am uncomfortable with. Either way its a non starter for me.

Her clusterbomb vote, flag burning amendment, kyle/lieberman, and skipping the FISA amendment cloture vote are examples of her hawkishness that make her a non starter for me.

[eShirl]

83. if Obama were a white guy he'd be Bill Clinton in '92

who went on to become the "first black president," I might add

[rucky]

86. This is the only convincing arguement I've heard.

and yes, it matters who makes it. Ferraro is in no position to say what she did - nor is anybody who doesn't make your two additional points: Hillary would be out too, and voters are sick of picking white guys.

What may be true for Obama is also true for Hillary, so to have someone from Hillary's camp point out one side of the truth while her campaign is trying to puff up her own credentials rings hollow. In context of Ferraro's comment, she made a disparaging remark based on race. That, by definition is racist.

I don't think the fact that Obama's black and Clinton's a woman is anything but a good thing. Trying to turn those positives into negatives is what's offensive, and pretty lame as a political tactic.

[TahitiNut]

93. Sadly, the two-pronged 'argument' only serves McCain.

Whether or not one can even partly agree, to the dregree it's applicable to either Democratic candidate it demeans the conscientious left and throws more reactive folks to McCain.

This seems to be the scorched-earth attitude of the entrenched Clinton support among the 'establishment.' Burn the house down when threatened with eviction. Sad.

[BenDavid]

94. I take no solace in saying I was right about this campaign coming

down to race and race issues. Just who would benefit the most by having democrats go after other democrats? Obama
Who was the one person that could play the race card and step back and allow Hillary Clinton to be blamed for it? Obama.
We had this presidential election won until obama decided he wanted to "unite us".The solution is pretty damn simple: We are going to be needing each other in November whomever wins the nomination.It is simple as that.

[BumRushDaShow]

95. I would agree with your mother and disagree with you

considering history. The issue is more societal as this country continues to go through a long and painful transition from a rather ugly yet uniquely positive and idealistic past (in terms of using the Constitution to argue, debate, and try to remedy injustices).

Your argument:

let's say if Hillary wasn't a Clinton and was a regular old white dude, she'd be out already. She's lucky she's a Clinton and a woman (a white woman).

is actually nonsense considering that "regular old white dude(s)" have been the "norm" for candidates throughout the history of this country running for president and have been elected to that office. I.e., as "regular old white dude(s)", they ALL didn't end up "out already". ONE of them eventually REMAINED and went on to govern this country. Of course, there were some who were exceptional and others not so much. In addition, she is not the first female to run but could probably be considered the "first" to be able to avail herself to the new media (discussed later).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_United_States_presidential_and_vice-presidential_candidates

What has a very prominent impact on what is going on relates to 50 - 60 years of the explosive phenomena of mass communications - in particular, television and the internet. Previously "locally known" entities have been able to reach the nation spotlight via these media and those who have taken advantage of this have been able to propel themselves to almost all parts of the country without having to physically set foot there. In essence, the modern visual communications have become a great equalizer in terms of allowing a broad swath of this society to "meet" and even interact with (in terms of the 'net) people who they may never have been exposed to and this helps to lessen the myths and stereotypes that are often prevalent when people are more isolated and insulated.

So as time marches on and new generations of citizens have the opportunity to interact - in many cases "anonymously" - this tends to lessen the impact of "race" and "sex" and helps to allow their thoughts and feelings - "their message" - to trump superficiality. And given the availability of such access, when one comes out with statements that reflect insularity, then such tends to stand out as strident and off-base.

Geraldine Ferraro is from a different generation (not that others in her generation haven't availed themselves of the new media because many have), and she of course has a right to defend her point of view. But this does not negate anyone else's right to debate her words from their own perspectives as they are merely voicing their interpretation based on their own perceptions and life experiences (and one's "life experience" is the KEY).

And BTW, I'm surprised at all the Biden-worshippers. Being in a neighboring state (Philly basically supports Delaware in many things particularly media), he is, IMHO, a silver tongue. He will come out loudly in outrage against the republican party... But then when all is said and done and the voting happens, he has gone right along with them on too many occassions (the most recent, the flawed bankruptcy law). He is also a BIG war hawk and supported Bushler like a mofo regarding the Iraq nightmare and even supported Reagan's nonsensical Grenada and Panama invasions. But I guess his supporters agree with these positions. I certainly don't.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

97. But Ferraro made the comments on RW media outlets

She made them to John Gibson on FOX and Bill O'Reilly on his radio show. What audience do you suppose she intended them for?

Context is important, xultar, not just what was said.

[xultar]

102. Who else has given the old bitty an audience? You think she turned down

MSNBC and CNN?

Fuck no. I bet Fox was the first to call her ass.

I'm sure others are contacting her now.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

103. She made the comments on FOX back on 2/27

Well before the controversy exploded. She was using a racebaiting tactic on the kind of people (and there are a lot of conservative white working class DEMS in that audience) who get their news from outlets like FOX. Watch for her to be on the granddaddy of all bigoted pundits, if she hasn't already, Lou Dobbs. Old Lou will be beside himself to praise her for standing up to those PC liberals.

[ProSense]

104. This is such bullshit. Whatever your mother said, doesn't change Ferraro's racist comment!

There is nothing fucking funny about racist comments!

[Swamp Rat]

110. Maybe you and your mom are both right?

I believe the 'Southern Strategy' has been implemented.

[ronnykmarshall]

111. You racist, sexist hog!

:sarcasm:

I knew your ass would be all over this shit. AND correct !

[xultar]

131. That's racist, sexist, heffa.

:rofl:

[kiva]

112. K&R n/t

[calico1]

114. Your mom is right...

I bet you'd make an awesome lawyer!

[VotesForWomen]

119. ferraro aside, what she said is true. a black *woman* with similar credentials would have been laug

laughed out of the race. a white woman or man with similar credentials probably would have just been politely dismissed. i don't agree exactly that it is analogous to say that the only reason hillary is where she is is because of the name clinton. the fact that her name is clinton does (or at least could) imply certain qualifications. as hillary herself said, she hasn't been home baking cookies all this time. she has been in the trenches with bill; *she helped him* get where he got, and she gained valuable experience being there with him. on the other hand, i think we can agree that being of a certain race or gender does not impart any qualifications whatsoever.

[xultar]

127. Carole Mosley Braun...that's all I have to say. Senator, from IL. Ignored in 2k4

[Chovexani]

153. Funny how no one seems to recall her.

[ContinentalOp]

124. There may be a kernel of truth to Ferarro's statement

but that doesn't make it right for her to say it in the way she did.

There's a chance that Obama's race helped him stand out of the crowd in the early debates. If you looked at that stage full of white men you might remember Edwards from '04, Clinton who you already knew, and hey, who's the black guy? It's not surprising that they were the three left standing at the end. The same could be said though for Obama's height and his voice. You could argue that if he were much shorter he wouldn't still be in the race.

But that doesn't excuse what Ferarro said. Her implication was that he is ONLY still in the race because he's black. That he is otherwise unqualified and the media gives him a free ride due to some sort of affirmative action. That is insulting, racist and just plainly absurd.

It's like saying that Marlon Brando was only famous because of his good looks. Sure, in a parallel universe, "ugly Brando" might not have risen to the same iconic status. But it would be ridiculous to say that Brando was only famous because he had a pretty face. He was also a brilliant actor and there were millions of other pretty faces that didn't make it.

[bling bling]

128. I don't know why so many want to be cynical. Good for you for being so "realistic" about things.

I don't plan to let the cynics get in the way of the party we've got going on. Record voters coming out of the woodwork, have you ever seen how many people want to hear him speak? What reality do you live in that so many people would put out this kind of an effort for someone if they weren't genuinely inspired in a way that NO OTHER WHITE/BLACK PERSON HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO FOR THIS PARTY IN DECADES! Sure, write it off if it makes you feel better. But you said LET'S BE HONEST. OK...you're in denial and unless you work for Clinton campaign or benefit personally for the spin, I have no idea why you are being so disrespectful towards Obama.

You think I'm inspired and hopeful of Obama but wouldn't feel the same way if he wasn't black? Seriously??? You seriously think that people would be supporting Obama the way they are if he didn't transcend race?

If his race has anything to do with it, it's because the challenges and obstacles black people have to overcome means they have to literally be like the cream that rises to the top. The best of the best. We are witnessing the best that America has to offer in Obama right now! I've never seen anyone like him. And there's more people who agree with me than with you. And YOU'RE missin out on this amazing time in history and trying to bring Obama and his supporters down a notch by bringing race into the equation and then acting all innocent like it's just being honest. Tell you what, YOU be honest with YOURSELF, how about that? Nobody brings race into the equation like Ferraro did just to keep it real. It was a calculated statement. It's sad you are eatin' it up. SAD.

And don't insult me just because you're willfuly blind. I know what it takes for a black person or even a white woman to get ahead in this world. To suggest race gives him any sort of an advantage is so foolish. If you have any sense of perspective outside of your Clinton vision you'd realize how freaking ignorant that excuse sounds. I can't believe you have fallen for it and are regurgitating it here. Well, yes I can. Clinton supporters will stand by anything that comes out of her camp. It's so disappointing to see.

[anonymous171]

129. Let's admit it guys,

None of our candidates would have been in this race if they weren't who they were.

[xultar]

130. TRUE. Brilliant and TRUE.

[NYDem Observer]

132. If obama was some regular old black dude

He'd be out too. Remember, he is not the first African-American to run for office and many had much more experience in Washington than him.

[Two Americas]

133. Clarence Thomas

Who here believes that Clarence Thomas, with his skills and background, would be on the Supreme Court if he were white?

His personal advancement represents a cynical political use of a Black individual for the purpose of advancing an agenda that is in direct opposition to the interests of Black people as a group, and so does more harm than good. It is not racist to say that Thomas would not be on the court were he white.

"You cannot judge the individual by the group, and you cannot judge the group by the individual."

You also are not necessarily advancing the interests of the group by advancing the personal fortunes or ambitions of the individual. Tokenism is racist, it is not a blow against racism.

"I don't care if someone doesn't like me, so long as they do not have the power to harm me."

Racism is about power and economics, it is not about personal likes and dislikes.

[BootinUp]

136. Thanks for sharing that xultar. nt

[Tennessee Gal]

139. Excellent demonstration of the facts.

Ferraro is right.

[sueragingroz]

140. Well played

yay for critical thinking!

[ginchinchili]

142. Wow, an intelligent, free-thinker.

Are you married?

Seriously, I deeply respect your courage and your intelligence. Race has nothing to do with anything except when we make it so, which is most of the time. I think your mother is right, you probably should have been a lawyer, but my guess is that you're good at whatever you do. Keep up the good work. You make a good roll model for the human race, and lord knows we need them. I also believe that God watches out for people like you, but that's just my opinion. It's not like It told me so.

[murbley40]

166. Hey Ginchinchilli?

Where you been? Stop by the Biden group and say Hi,now and then. :hi:

[annie1]

143. i think there is a difference btwn wanting a black president and ....

obama doing well just b/c he's black. he would be doing quite well EVEN BETTER than hillary if both were white men.

[morningglory]

144. Back when Bill Richardson got into the race, people said "Cool! A Hispanic!"

Great. He is very qualified, but if he was the front runner, people would say the only reason he is up there is because he is hispanic. Same with all the Southern choices we have had. The white men in charge said "get a southerner on the ticket!"

[mzmolly]

145. "I always knew you should have been a lawyer." I have to agree with your Mother

Xultar. If not a lawyer, you do need to work for the Clinton campaign. You are the only person I've seen advocate for the Clinton camp on this - that was able to calm me down. ;)

:hi:

[xultar]

151. not advocating for the camp just sayin what I think and relaying a conversation

I had with my mom.

I am a-candidate a in a-sexual.

[LulaMay]

146. PERFECT!

[JAbuchan08]

147. You are absolutely right, but the same could be said of Hillary Clinton

To me, of what we have left, Obama is the best choice. That isn't to say he was the best choice of the whole field, but he is the best choice left.

[xultar]

152. I think I did say that in my post didn't I. I said that if she were a man and not a Clinton she'd

be out also.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

154. I couldn't disagree more

Biden is not young, charismatic, and inspiring. He's a Washington insider, a "REGULAR" old white dude that you describe. He has a lot of baggage in his past, including his very shady shenanigans during the Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas affair. A lot of us cannot forgive Biden for his capitulation and his refusal to allow Angela Wright to appear to testify, whose testimony would have been even more damaging to Thomas than Ms. Hill's.

Anyone who thinks that the main thing Obama has going for him is his race just doesn't live in the same universe as I do. There have been several potential black candidates in the past who have gotten NOWHERE. Do I have to name the potential black candidates for President in years gone by who have had ABSOLUTELY NO, NADA traction mainly because of their race? Were they not lucky, too? Obama is not doing well because he's black. He's doing well because he's brilliant, extremely well-spoken, charismatic, youthful, offers hope, and does not have the taint of years of insider politics on him.

Obama is not a "regular old white dude". But it's the "regular" (i.e. established Washington insider bureaucrat) and the "old" (i.e. old ideas, old solutions, old partisan ways, old back room beltway wheeling-dealing) which Obama is not, that distinguish him much more than his color.

[Maven]

155. BRENNEN/DOOBYDOO '08

GOBRENNEN!

:woohoo: :bounce:

[Raffi Ella]

159. You know,I was wrong about you.

I took offense at something you said months back and went off the deep end telling you exactly what I thought of your "bias".

After reading this post and several others of yours over the last couple of weeks,well,let me just apologize for how wrong I was and leave it at that.

[reflection]

161. Your mom sounds awesome

And I liked the way you walked her into the trap. :)

[ElsewheresDaughter]

162. nice post

[Sock Puppet]

164. Xultar, I would sure love to vote for you.

Thanks for your very cool point of view. :patriot: