Comments on: Ferraro, Race, Gender, Potpourri

By: brie

brie — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:29:27 +0000

Yes, oh yes, it has. The ‘resignation letter’ was also completely ridiculous.

I watched Keith Olberman’s ‘Special Comment’ last night - his line about Clinton’s failure to distance herself from Ferraro as ‘a suicide pact’ was pretty spot on.

All she had to say was, “I feel terrible that some of my comments have been seen as racist, I was trying to…’

I’ve never seen someone refuse to diffuse a situation this much since… oh, since a vice-presidential candidate named Geraldine Ferraro spent eight days dooming her own 1984 campaign over a financial scandal she refused to talk about.

By: dannygutters

dannygutters — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:30:55 +0000

“Have there been any comments from the Obama camp that could be taken as sexist? I wonder what sort of reaction they would get”

An advisor of Obamas recently ‘resigned’ after calling hillary a Monster. They’ve been pretty militant about avoiding this kind of comment.

As far as Ferraro’s comments, she keeps stuffing that foot deeper into her mouth. Any original point she was trying to make has now been lost in the circus over her stubborn ‘not apologizing’ statement.

By: sam

sam — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 02:54:51 +0000

I certainly don’t think you can seriously discuss the Obama ‘phenomenon’ without touching on race and gender. That isn’t meant to undermine any of his qualifications but I think it unavoidably contributes to how the media have constructed his story. Just as it is unavoidable that HRC’s gender makes up part of her story. And as you say, it remains acceptable to use a gender critically while, quite rightly, it is unacceptable to use race. So I guess it’s not really abotu Obama getting an easy ride because he’s African-American, so much as it is about HRC being given a harder time because of her gender. All that aside, you’d think by now it would have become clear that ANYTHING that could be interpreted as playing the ‘race card’ was going to be lept on by the press and Ferraro should have known better. Have there been any comments from the Obama camp that could be taken as sexist? I wonder what sort of reaction they would get…

By: brie

brie — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:52:43 +0000

No, not at all. The way she’s put it is completely wrong.

But by that token, look at the reaction to her comments about gender. She’s said repeatedly, and also in that Fox clip, that she never would have been on the ‘84 ticket if her name had been Gerald Ferraro.

She says, “I was only on the ticket because I was a woman” and everyone’s like, “well, yeah, that’s true” without missing a beat.

I think - in the larger statements, not just the two money quotes - that she’s trying to talk about the attitudes of the media. I think Obama is a great senator and will make a great president. But I do think that the media is much more careful about how they handle him regarding race, than they do Clinton regarding gender.

And that has been to his advantage. Do I think it’s why he might win the nomination? No.

Perhaps I’m just reading into Ferraro’s comments what I think she’s trying to say, rather than what she is saying. Maybe I’m just hoping that she’s not going to wash the legacy of the only woman (so far) to actually be on a presidential ticket straight down the toilet.

By: dannygutters

dannygutters — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:44:25 +0000

It sounds like you’re rationalizing that two wrongs here make a right. Does unfair treatment by the media towards Hillary excuse Ferraro’s comment?

Even if she’s making a counterpoint on attitudes, it is still a racist statement when she suggests that the reason why people support an experienced senator and harvard constitutional law graduate’s president is his blackness.