Does recognizing reality = being racist?

[Cornus]

That is, assuming it really is reality. I think that GF's comments were made with no racist intent. Here is a c&p from another forum (gardening, if you can believe it...but politics are often discussed). It represents how I feel and expresses it so much better than I could, thus the c&p:

_______________
Here is exactly what was said,

"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."
-- Geraldine Ferraro

Is it untrue? He is where he is because he is eloquent, accomplished, charming and black. He could be all the above and not black and back in the pack with Edwards and Kucinich trying not to jump or be pushed.

Being black gives him that "little something distinguishable" that makes him the only real competition Hillary ever had. "Monster" is name-calling.

I agree Ferraro probably should have kept her mouth shut, but I also believe that not many people don't agree, in some way, even if not the "right" way (mine! LOL)

Signed
Devil's Advocate
______________
Recognizing the fact that Obama has that "little something distinguishable" that sets him apart from all of his earlier opponents, does that make one a racist?

[AX10]

1. It does not make one racist

[Lerkfish]

2. SPIN, SPIN, SPIN

don't y'all get dizzy, now.

[ginchinchili]

24. Rather than just say, "spin, spin, spin"...

can't you address the post in a mature and intelligent fashion? Can't you be specific?

[Armstead]

3. Problem is she keeps repeating the "affirmative action" message about him

If it were merely a clumsy way of expressing a truth it could be forgiven.

But she has repeatedly been bashing Obama along the same lines.

[LittleClarkie]

21. Indeed. Affirmative Action implies someone was just trying to fill a quota

as if he weren't qualified. Just black.

[ingac70]

4. I think with his personality..

he'd till be doing just as well if he were white.

Edwards voted to go to war in Iraq, and poor Dennis just ain't ever going to get any further than he is.

[sandnsea]

16. Or a woman

And it isn't just the personality, it's the choices he's made in his life as well, to work with the people instead of filling his pockets.

[ginchinchili]

35. Obama recently spoke at a predominately black college...

Jackson State in Mississippi, and there were an estimated 2,000 people who were waiting outside, in addition to the crowded auditorium. The vast majority of the crowd was black. Many of these people were not particularly engaged in politics, but they are now. That's the good news. But the fact is, they wouldn't have turned out for a white politician in the same way. He's not the only politician with a good personality, but he is one of the very few having the success he's having with so little experience. To say it's only because he's black would be untrue. To say he wouldn't be where he is if he were white is true.

[Saturday]

5. "and the country is caught up in the concept." So true Geraldine.

In fact, everything you said is true.

[ingac70]

7. Gerry rather we be caught up in the concept...

of voting for someone just because she has a pussy.

Cuts both ways.

[tyne]

10. Realizing that W got

where he was because of his dad and voicing that is recognizing reality.

What Ferraro said has nothing to do with reality. Her comments were ludicrous.

[Barack_America]

6. Obama is qualified to be where he is regardless of his race.

If you believe, as Ferraro apparently does, that Obama has only achieved success as part of affirmative action or politcal correctness then, yes, you have at least one racist belief.

[mmonk]

8. I was thinking just the other day

about the all the advantages a man of color named Obama would have in an election for President of the U.S.. Just isn't fair.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

9. Regardless of her intent, her comments were interpreted as racist

If she had any sensitivity she would have apologized immediately when they were published, instead of adding to them and just letting the situation snowball.

It's not the comments themselves that are the big issue. It's the refusal to retract them, and the insistence that anyone who was offended by them is some kind of "reverse racist".

Additionally, Clinton's campaign, in waiting so long to do anything about Ferraro, is complicit in the whole thing at this point. If she had immediately fired Ferraro (as Obama has done when someone in his campaign says something out of line), then the whole situation would have been defused, and people wouldn't still be tying the comments to the Clinton campaign.

[jean627]

11. If I say Clinton got where she is

because she is a woman?

[peacebird]

18. or because her husband was President...?

[DesertFlower]

25. she got to where she is because

she is the wife of a former president. would anyone have ever heard of her if she wasn't? she was first lady of arkansas, but so was janet huckabee.

[sandnsea]

12. No because an unknown governor of bumbfucknowhere

who gave a good speech, didn't get anywhere, did he.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Yes.

Because the comment by Ferraro did not specify there were other reasons for Obama's success. She stated his success was ONLY because he was black. Not partly because he was black, but only because he was black. And in no instance, over the past 48 hours, has she clarified that he's helped his position by skill rather than color.

Remember, when this thing started, Obama was STILL black and well behind Clinton in the polls -- in fact, essentially tied with Edwards in most national polls. It wasn't until he began to campaign and got his message out that he rose in the polls. He's a bigger beneficiary of people disliking the status quo more than anything else and it's absurd to state otherwise.

So while Obama does get support because he's black, there are also people who do not support him because he's black. The fact he's overcome that and gotten where he is today speaks volumes for the type of guy he is. And anyone trying to diminish his accomplishments by saying he's only where he is in this race because of his color are no better than those who say Clinton is only where she is because she's the wife of a former popular president. But if Obama's campaign had even hinted at that, all of the Clinton supporters and Geraldine Ferraro herself, would be calling him a sexist. And they would be right, those types of comments would be sexist. Just as these comments had a racial tone.

[anigbrowl]

14. Here we fucking go again

Regardless of whether he's black, Obama is a superb orator and has had a superb career, built upon hard work, high achievment, and public service. Actually I do think he'd be out front even if he was white, because he's a way better communicator than most posls and read the signs on the Iraq war correctly, when most Democrats were tap-dancing around it.

I find the idea that I and so many others are just supporting him because he's black extremely offensive.

[gerrilea]

31. Did you happen to look at the results in Mississippi or South Carolina

Looks to me as though the blacks are only voting for him because he black and they went after other blacks for supporting Hillary...wow...no one reads anymore...

[peacebird]

15. Being a black man in America is definitely NOT an "advantage"

I have been impressed with Obama's calm reasoned demeanor throughout this overly long campaign season. That said I do not think his race has been an advantage for him in his life. The fact that he has come so far in his life is inspiring.

[stillcool]

27. It's amazing how they can twist that around...

I thought Bush's logic was contorted.

[Generic Brad]

17. My personal observation on what makes someone racist --

They can't stop talking about it. They keep pointing out the differences in skin color and ethnicity. And they do it in a way that is intentionally hurtful or denigrating. Then when you call them out on it they say their statements were harmless, misinterpreted, and that they have been wrongly accused.

It's like watching my family dynamics play out on a national level.

[Mooney]

38. That's a good observation.

The other type of racist I've encountered will display a mixture of solipsism and righteous anger when called on it.

They will angrily insist that what they're saying is "fucking true," and they'll say it in a way that's meant to imply that you secretly agree with them, yet lack the courage to say so.

[C_U_L8R]

Yes it's racist and divisive.

it's a dismissive hateful comment to make.
It lazily proves an ignorance of the person or his ideals (no matter who the person is)
and most odiously attributes his/her accomplishments to the color of his/her skin.
It's a very racist thing to say. And you all should be ashamed of yourselves.
Really.

[Hepburn]

19. Here is the problem, IMO:

If one makes racists comments or takes racist actions, it is irrelevant that one did not possess the intent to be racist. Attitudes are ingrained and some people just do not get it. It's like saying that Fred Phelps is OK...because he really has good intentions...and we all know what total bullshit that is.

JMHO

[Cant trust em]

20. It's not reality.

It's the way Geraldine sees things and is not necessarily fact. Obama moves me in a way that no other politician has since I've been following. He makes Bill Clinton seem boring by comparison, and I love Bill. Blowing him off like this is not fair to him as a person. Taking away his skin color doesn't make him just like everyone else.

Moreover, I'd rather have someone call me a monster than essentially say that the best thing I had going for me was something I have no control over. Monster is an insult, but pretty childish. Ferraro's comments are demeaning of his entire lifetime of accomplishments.

[Drachasor]

22. He ran a better campaign that Edwards, with better support, he's a better speaker

He would still have soundly defeated Edwards, but his demographics in southern (and possible other) states would certainly be different.

Honestly, you can't say what things would be like if he was white. To say he would be where where he is now has no supporting evidence. For all we know he'd be better off!

[meow mix]

23. "eloquent"? wrong. we dont f'ing care if he's black. we identify with his socio-political beliefs.

when will the racists get this thru thier thick fucking racist skulls.

eloquent???
your post reads like a bad Geiko commercial.

[Cornus]

40. I think Obama is quite eloquent.

I also think that your post reflects your ignorance.

[meow mix]

44. so do i, duh. he would be eloquent for anyone, of any race or culture.

because he just is.

that was my point lol

[kwenu]

26. It's racist because it is an excuse to avoid recognizing the fact that Obama is highly intelligent

and running a brilliant campaign!!!!!

[Johnny__Motown]

28. Yes, it is untrue. He ran the best campaign, no white person ran a better one.. he earned what he

has


Unlike Ferraro, she did nothing and was simply picked by Mondale as his running mate.

Just because all she did to get on the ticket was say "yes" does not mean that Obama has not worked his ass off and beaten people like Edwards, Biden, Richardson and Dodd fair and square.

Why didn't any other candidate say "I only lost to him because he is black"? Because it isn't true

GF is just spewing more slime and racial crap to obscure another Obama victory in a state with a large African American population.

Also she did this more than once, here is a link to a radio interview, separate than the Newspaper interview that is getting all the coverage.


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


It wasn't just one little mistake, she keeps repeating it every chance she gets

[Cornus]

42. But...

...she also admitted that one of the main reasons that she was selected for VP was because she was a woman. Had she had the same qualifications but been male, likely someone else would have been selected.

[sueragingroz]

29. it is in the Obamaverse

[MadMaddie]

30. Problem is this isn't the first time she has made comments like

this, she made them when she ran against Jessee Jackson.

Look if you play sports like I do - when an opposing player is outmatched and is getting beat - what do they do? The go for the dirty play because they are being outmatched and outplayed. The nasty slide-tackle from behind, the football horse collar tackle in you name it. In the end the better player and the better team usually prevails.


The fact is EEOC may have leveled the field for many people in America but Barack, women and all others who have succeeded didn't rest on their laurals and assess, they chosed to achieve higher goals. Not because of their race or gender but because of their character.

GF is one of those recipients and she should be embarrased by her remarks and her actions.

[jmg257]

32. Problem was she prefaced all that with more statements about superdelegates

supporting him only because he was black, and it driving her "lunatic", and "so dissapointing she could die", and 'if Barack wasn't black, Hillary would not be having this problem', etc.

[ProSense]

33. Being black gives him that "little something distinguishable" WTF? n/t

[EffieBlack]

34. No - but defining a black candidate in terms of his race after never once defining a white politicia

in terms of HIS race IS extremely problematic.

If Geraldine Ferraro had spent as much energy throughout her entire career bemoaning the fact that white politicians wouldn't be where they are if they weren't white as she has spent in the last two days saying that Barack Obama wouldn't be where he is if he weren't black, I'd have no problem with her recent comments.

But that's not what she's done.

As far as I know, this woman has never once uttered a public peep, in complaint or otherwise, pointing out that any white politician - be he George Bush, Ronald Reagan, Jack Kennedy, Franklin Roosevelt or George Washington - would not have been where they were if they were not white. Yet, lo and behold, along comes Barack Obama and she can't WAIT to point out to the world that somehow he has an unusual advantage and is, in fact, LUCKY that he is black because if he weren't, he would never have been where he is in this race.

THAT kind of double standard racial analysis - seeing, analyzing, defining and limiting a black candidate through the prism of his race while apparently never once doing the same thing to a white candidate is the very essence of racism.

THAT's the problem with what she said.

How sad that so many DUers seem unable to understand it. Perhaps their inability to understand this is the result of the fact that they, too, see Obama as a black candidate while seeing white candidates as people.

And, fyi, most racists believe they are just stating facts - that's the problem. What they believe to be "facts" are based upon racial stereotypes and negative assumptions about people of other races, not reality.

[pdxmom]

36. Why did she even have to bring up race at all? For any reason? That

shouldn't be an issue in any campaign, but most especially in a Democratic primary. There had to have been a reason that she pushed this message, not once, but multiple times. And since it isn't a campaign issue, and there is no reason to push Obama's race or for her to even make any type of comment, then yes, I think she may well be a racist.

[Political Heretic]

37. I think its the very fact that it is so completely out of touch with reality that makes it racist

She called him an affirmative-action candidate. Which is not only insulting, its completely absurd and yes, it is racist to suggest that the only reason - or even the primary reason - why the person who is leading the nomination race, winning the most states and winning the popular vote WOULDN'T be doing so without the color of his skin.

It's an insult to the majority WHITE VOTERS who make up his total vote numbers and its an insult to all his voters of color implying that they couldn't possibly be voting based on qualifications and belief about what makes the best candidate - all those dark people know how to do is vote dark.

Now, I would have been inclined to just believe that she had a lapse of reason and made a thoughtless stupid comment. But the more she talks, and given the fact that she's been making comments like this for over a decade now (Jesse Jackson, 1989) I am starting to see the characteristics of an honest to god racist here. :(

[suston96]

39. Race, sex, religion, ethnics, and every other demographic, play a function in elections....

...or these statistics would not be presented before, during,, and after each election.

Check out all the official state election statistics that definitively validate what Ferraro said. Those same stats also document how people voted by sex, ethnics, age, religions, and more. Why would official government statistics be so demographicated if there was anything wrong with such demarcations and stats?

Check out all the news channels that report election results. Their analysts all do the same thing.

You wanna flog Geraldine Ferraro for making a comment that all those places and people clearly make before and after every election?

There is no way that statistically discussing these demographics is racist, or sexist, or whatever else.

Nor is the obvious fact that if Barack Obama was white he "would not be in this position"

[Berry Cool]

41. Yeah, I guess the OP is right.

I mean, look at THIS guy. By all accounts he was eloquent, accomplished and charming, but did he ever get anywhere in politics? Nah. And why not? Because he was white.

Obviously, eloquence, accomplishment and charm mean NOTHING unless you are also black.

[MADem]

43. Uh, let's be HONEST about that guy. The dead voted, and THAT is how he won the Presidency.

And they voted in Sweet Home, Chicago. And they did it because he had "friends" there...."friends" who were "friends" of his very wealthy DADDY, who bankrolled his campaign. The way the voting went there made what Bush did to Gore AND Kerry actually "plausible" by comparison.

Nixon actually won that contest. He thought about protesting, but realized it would take six months, divide the country, and he'd be labelled as a sore loser in the interim. But he knew he won, by a hair, but he DID win.

Don't use the fuzzy, BaBa WaWa lens when looking back at recent American history. Use the one with the "truthful" aperture.

Yes, JFK was eloquent, charming, accomplished... and he was handsome, inspiring, witty, and quick to learn.....and his daddy CHEATED him into office. That's just the way it was.

[fishwax]

45. Kennedy had enough electoral votes to win even if he had lost Illinois

Kennedy had 303 electoral votes; even had Nixon won Illinois, he still would have had 276.

[MADem]

46. LBJ was on that ticket to make a TX victory "plausible" even when it didn't happen, though

It wasn't just IL:

Morton's minions failed to uncover much fraud in most states, but they hit pay dirt in Texas and Illinois.

In Texas, Kennedy's 46,000-vote margin was the closest statewide race there since 1948, when Kennedy's running mate, Lyndon B. Johnson, won a Senate seat by 87 votes (the origin of the nickname "Landslide Lyndon"). Morton's operatives, aided by local Republicans, uncovered plenty of political chicanery. For instance: In Fannin County, which had 4,895 registered voters, 6,138 votes were cast, three-quarters of them for Kennedy. In one precinct of Angelia County, 86 people voted and the final tally was 147 for Kennedy, 24 for Nixon.

On and on it went. The Republicans demanded a recount, claiming that it would give them 100,000 votes and victory. John Connally, the state Democratic chairman, said the Republicans were just "haggling for headlines" and predicted that a recount would give Kennedy another 50,000 votes.

But there was no recount. The Texas Election Board, composed entirely of Democrats, had already certified Kennedy as the winner.

In Chicago, where Kennedy won by more than 450,000 votes, local reporters uncovered so many stories of electoral shenanigans--including voting by the dead--that the Chicago Tribune concluded that "the election of November 8 was characterized by such gross and palpable fraud as to justify the conclusion that was deprived of victory."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A36425-2000Nov16?language=printer

[fishwax]

48. that's speculation

but widespread fraud in Texas in that election was certainly never proven. Fraud in Chicago is pretty much accepted as fact, but there were also plenty of irregularities in republican downstate Illinois, and GOP challenges in Illinois were rejected by the state's election board (which was dominated by republicans).

[MADem]

52. Of course it was never 'proven'--did you read the cite I provided?

That TX result was totally and aggressively FIXED. But Connally made damned sure that the traces were kicked over.

Of course there was GOP fraud, too, but back then, the situation was reversed--they were the pikers, the rank amateurs, and we were the Rovian pros. They sure learned a well-focused lesson from that business--we're paying for it still.

That wasn't a "free and fair" election. If it had been, we probably would have dealt with President Tricky Dick, not JFK, and who knows what may have happened? About the only thing sure to have changed is that there wouldn't have been a Watergate--and there probably wouldn't have been any rapproachment with China OR Detente--under Nixon, anyway--simply because of the timing. Who knows how Vietnam would have progressed...? We might still be there...!

Joseph P. WANTED that result, and he got what he paid for. He pulled in every favor, every connection, to vicariously realize his own personal ambition through his son.

And then he had a stroke. The good Lord moves in mysterious ways...

[fishwax]

53. I read your link. It certainly offers no evidence that Texas was rigged.

I've also read plenty of other material on the 1960 election.

It's often suggested (as you did in your original post on this topic) that Kennedy won in 1960 because the dead voted Chicago. And they probably did. Given the power (and corruption) of Daley's machine, it would certainly be no surprise. But when the fact that Illinois wouldn't have been enough for Nixon is pointed out, Texas must be thrown in as well.

It's pure speculation to say "That TX result was totally and aggressively FIXED." You're welcome to believe it. I'm not convinced. That's not to say I think the election overall was free and fair or was clear of fraud. (I wonder what Kennedy's margin in Texas would have been were it not for the poll tax keeping most African Americans from registering.)

[MADem]

54. But see, the TX machine did the mop up and rapid certification--they made Katherine Harris look like

Pokey. And they made sure the evidence stayed hidden.

I guess we'll have to disagree on this one. I think that cheating paid off in that election, but I do think cheating happened, and Tricky was denied what was rightfully his--under those admittedly discriminatory "rules" of the day.

[Straight Shooter]

50. LOL, thank Joe Kennedy for his son becoming president. He did all the heavy lifting.

Seriously, dig a little deeper into the JFK myth.

[Occam Bandage]

47. Reality? It's the opposite of what she said two years ago.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5050783&mesg_id=5050783

Back then, being black was a greater disadvantage than being female, in her eyes. Now, in her eyes, being black is a greater advantage than being female.

So, was she right then, or is she right now?

[TheDonkey]

49. So a black man cannot run for president without having to bank on his "race"

well not according to that crackpot Hillary surrogate. This isn't the first time she's gone of the edge.

[bhikkhu]

51. So she is saying "I am not a racist, but the US is"

Is that true?

In my case, no. Or it has nothing to do with how I think about people.

But what if I think similarly that "people" are racists?

No, I don't, or I would have nothing to do with politics and no hopes for this country.

Geraldine is wrong, and wrong to foist her old opinions upon a younger generation that has no use for them. To some extent, they are like an infectious disease. One can be a carrier even if one is not sick.