Or: Geraldine Ferraro is apparently quite the moronContinuing our "A Slightly Educated View of Important Stuff" series, Nic Ouzo takes a careful look at one of the big political controversies of the day, Geraldine Ferraro's racist comments and their subsequent coverage
To be honest, I was hoping to hold out on any and all political talk until next week, when I was planning on a blitz of posts that would promote Our Candidate Of Choice. But then this story hit, and I felt I had no choice but to write about it when it was still fresh.
If you are still clueless as to what I'm referring, here's a quick refresher course: former Congresswoman (and VP candidate in the most lop-sided race in Presidential history) Geraldine Ferraro made the following comment about Obama's campaign:
"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."
Now, if your first reaction was "that's practically the definition of 'bongtarded'", you'd be on the right track (this would actually qualify under the definition of "kongtarded"). You would have deduced that Ferraro believes that the ascendancy of the Obama campaign was due only to his race--clearly another example of the Black Man Getting Ahead, as we have seen so often in our nation's history. I mean, look at all the African-Americans that have reached the Presiden...oh that's right, that's never happened. In fact, Obama is only the THIRD African-American to become a SENATOR, and the only one who is currently serving. But let's break it down some more.
1. Obama is ahead because of his race--I mean, all the black people are voting for him! Well, let's look at an electoral map of the United States. Cut it right down the middle, horizontally. Notice where Obama has a lot of support. That's right, Obama has almost the entire NORTH covered. Iowa, Maine, Wyoming, Alaska, Idaho...tons of black people over in these states!
I mean, with a country that has a black population of only 13%, is it any wonder that the man can be ahead in the popular vote, in states won, and in total delegates? He's got a built-in advantage! I mean, Hillary being a woman in a country that is mostly women, that's not an advantage at all!
And of course, black people ONLY vote for their own kind. I mean, Hillary wasn't leading the African-American vote 80-20 in South Carolina until a couple of weeks before the primary...oh wait she was. Sorry about that. Did they change their minds because they just found out that he was black, or maybe because they began to hear his message and ideas and believed in those? Nah, impossible.
2. Geraldine Ferraro may not be a racist But what she said was unquestionably racist, in and of itself. The implication is that Obama's campaign has nothing to do with merit, and everything to do with some sort of...I don't know exactly, but apparently massive white guilt amounting to Affirmative Action?
Of course, Ferraro attempts to protect herself by stating that she herself was not qualified to be the VP candidate, which leads to...
3. Geraldine Ferraro's situation was exactly like Obama's Except that it wasn't. You see, Ferraro was
appointed to her position. Obama has systematically won more contests, won more votes, won more delegates. Obama has had to prove himself to the ultimate judge: the people (void where prohibited, i.e. Florida 2000). While Obama may not play the "decades of experience card" (certainly overrated, and to be discussed much more in-depth next week), this isn't his first rodeo. I mean, he only has more experience in elected office than his opponent Hillar...oh sorry for that intrusion of fact.
Now let's take a quick look at the coverage of the story. Here is a statement that I actually heard today:
4. We shouldn't care what Ferraro said, because she said it to random local newspaper Because apparently it's okily-diddly-okily to be racist, as long as no one is there to hear it (corollary: How to find out if a person is racist--talk to them in private; man, it's depressing when the truth comes out). At least that is what this argument is DIRECTLY implying. But let's face facts--a lot of people get their daily news from these local sources, and what this argument is stating that we shouldn't care about the quality of news in these sources. The fact that it tends to be the older folk who read these only adds to the issue, considering that these folks are generally pro-Hillary. I mean, what's the point of a fair representation of the facts?
5. This is clearly an example of "Attack The Hildog" strategy that the Media has employed At least
according to Ferraro now. You may remember that Hillary was able to brilliantly orchestrate the media coverage in the week leading up to Ohio and Texas. She was able to play both the Bully AND the Victim, in a tightrope walk that would make The Great Blondin proud--claiming that all the media was proverbially licking the Obama's campaign lovepump with their entirely slanted coverage (another topic to be examined in-depth in the future), while at the same time employing her now-famed "Kitchen Sink" strategy, in which in the same week we saw Obama Is A Muslim, Obama Can't Answer a Phone, and Obama Makes A Deal With The Dirty Canucks Over NAFTA, all practically unchallenged by the media. Of course, if you were keeping score at home, the answer to the three-front Clinton campaign war: Bullshit, Bullshit, and Bullshit. And she wants him to be her Veep!
While it's true that there may be some political benefit at some point to pointing out the flaws of the other campaign's supporters (though that may prove to be blunted long-term), one must say turn-about is fair play--after all, Obama supporter Samantha Power immediately resigned for deeming Clinton a "monster" (though it must be pointed out, it should have been
off the record (Mr. Zhuang, we're going to have to get a ruling about this in the comments)).
6. Geraldine Ferraro has the right to free speech And she also has the right to be told that her speech was dumb. Nobody is saying that she should not have the right to speak; just that it may not have been the wisest thing to do. Especially considering that she has repeatedly not apologized for it, and in fact continues to compound the problem by claiming to be persecuted because she's white. But we have a responsibility to point out to others when they are in error, and persuade them in correcting their views. Apparently we have failed in that job to some degree, because Ferraro still seems to not get it.
****************
In the end, even though Obama may score some political points right now for pointing out some of the faults of the other side's supporters, this may be a hindrance in the long run. Part of the appeal of the Obama campaign is their effort to rise above the petty mudslinging politics that have turned off half of this country, and to be above the fray. But their reaction to this event may end up being used to prove some sort of hypocrisy on the part of the Obama campaign, and hypocrisy is something that American voters don't tolerate. Obama will have to continually walk the line between this positive strategy and having to deflect the occasional immoral broadside from the opposition, or else his fate may end up mirroring that of Dukakis.
In the end, I hope you realize at least this one point: it's no surprise that Ferraro was able to lose 49 states in 1984, considering evidence like this.
