« Obama Picks Up Four More Delegates From California
Eliot Spitzer: Is he a sex addict? Just human »



Ferraro’s ‘Power Play’

March 11th, 2008
By PETE ABEL, Managing Editor

Print Print

It’s definitely not a good week for NY Democrats. In case you missed this non-Spitzer story, see here for the basics. And, for the Obama campaign response, see here. Will HRC respond in kind?



This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 11th, 2008 at 10:35 am and is filed under As Yet Unassigned. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 8 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Ferraro wasn't able to get elected Vice President. (Strike one: Nobody had heard of her before. Someone like Dianne Feinstein, whom everyone knows, should have been the choice.)
    • ^
    • v
    Ferraro's comments were unfortunate but understandably supportive of her candidate. Unfortunately it opens up the argument that Hillary's experience is as first lady of Arkansas and the US and seven years in the Senate. Hardly more substantial than Obama. Neither with significant executive experience nor major policy triumphs to their credit.
    • ^
    • v
    Understandably supportive? "Blatantly racist" was my first reaction. Don't mean to over-react, but I do think what Ferraro said was far worse than what Samantha Power said.
    • ^
    • v
    Pete:

    I give Ferraro some benefit of the doubt because I believe she is a decent person who happened to get stuck with the worst Democratic presidential running mate since forever, but she should have known better than to play into the race game as a political minority herself.

    That said, i don't find her comment to be blatantly racist, just blatantly stupid and incredibly ill timed. The self immolation of the Clinton campaign is indeed something to behold.
    • ^
    • v
    We all know that we are still far from neutralizing the effect of race and gender in in politics and in society, in general. What I see happening now is that referring to this circumstance is portrayed as being as bad, if not worse, that bigotry itself.

    It's a speech code of a very perverse kind, because it is not unitverdal. It only applies to certain people.
    It's okay for blacks to speculate about the effects of race in politics. It's okay for Oama supporters to do so. This is a special rule that applies only to Clinton supporters.They can not speculate about the effects of race, because, of course, they are the Clinton people, and so, by definition, anything they say or do is evil. . That, at any rate, is the story line.

    What is 'special', or different, about a candidate is always a part of his/her successs or failure, It can work in a positive way, as well as a negative way. JFK's charm, wit and sex-appeal, which are hardly qualififications for a commander-in-chief-, had a major impact on his election. How is it malicious to say so? Is it denigrating to even wonder aloud about this question?
    I wish those of you so hot under the collar would explain that.

    The issues of race and gender have been a malignant factor in our society for a long time. The assignment of a-priori evil intent, which underlies these Clinton specific speech codes is as malignant as racial bigotry itself.

    Here I am, an Obama supporter, whose conscience is revolted by these kinds of mental gymnastics. I'm clinging to hopes for the success of Obama's message in spite of, ratther than as a relut of, , this kind of commentary.
    • ^
    • v
    "JFK's charm, wit and sex-appeal, which are hardly qualififications for a commander-in-chief-, had a major impact on his election."

    It applies to Obama even more than to JFK, who was better known than Obama was at the start of their campaigns. Both Obama and Edwards are Pretty Boys.

    "How is it malicious to say so? Is it denigrating to even wonder aloud about this question?"

    It applies to Obama and the very naive youth who worship him, as well as others who have become so conceited already about Obama's prospects they expose the much more vicious nature of the Left and some in the Dem community than anything comparable among non-liberals and on the GOP -- directed not only at Hillary Clinton, but toward the many people who support her this year rather than Obama. These are groupies and cult club members with a very vicious streak.

    No, it is not denigrating at all to say that, as opposed to what the relevent facts say.
    • ^
    • v
    "[Obama is] going to have to get up off the mat and show the same kind of fight that [Clinton] did when she went down..."

    http://pewresearch.org/pubs/760/clinton-gets-me...
    • ^
    • v
    "blatantly stupid and incredibly ill timed"

    OK, Shaun, I'll take that and drop my initial reaction, respecting your greater familiarity with Ferraro ... and no, that's NOT a comment about our age difference. Hell, what's a couple decades among friends. :-)
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Obama Picks Up Four More Delegates From California
Eliot Spitzer: Is he a sex addict? Just human »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.