I first ventured into the bizarre world of politically correct presidential politics six weeks ago when I wrote about Bill Clinton being scolded by the national media for comparing Barack Obama's success in South Carolina with Jesse Jackson's success there 20 years before.
We heard that Clinton had "played the race card," and he was castigated by the national media for having somehow done something dastardly, when all he actually did was tell the truth at a time when many Democrats did not want to hear it.
The same thing happened last week when liberal Democrat Geraldine Ferraro made the mistake of questioning whether Obama was the right person to be elected president in 2008, or whether he was just the right man in the right place at the right time to get elected.
Those are, of course, two very different things, and if we were reasonable people we would be able to have a reasonable discussion about the differences. Ferraro, who supports Hillary Clinton, raised the prospect in an interview with the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Calif., that "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."
Ferraro is certainly not the first person to consider the possibility that Obama has become a nearly unstoppable force in the Democratic Party in large measure because of who he is - not because of what he stands for. This seems almost like a foregone conclusion, when you consider all the better qualified candidates who were easily trounced by Obama. And it clearly plays a part in the political pundits' pronouncement that Obama cannot lose the nomination now without ripping apart the Democratic Party. The so-called superdelegates are supposed to be able to vote for whoever they wish to vote for, but they are being warned that if they "steal" the nomination from Obama, black voters will revolt and throw the election into doubt. And, of course, Obama would not have a lead in the delegate race today at all were it not for the fact that he has been receiving 80 percent or more of the black vote, which is the core Democratic vote in many states.
That certainly sounds like "who" Obama is matters at least as much as what he says.
As noted, Ferraro is just the latest of several liberal Democrats who have found out that race, not Social Security, is now the deadly third rail of American politics.
Ferraro is not just any liberal Democrat either; she is the former front woman for the advancement of women in politics, replaced only in the current year by Hillary Clinton. It was Ferraro who was the first woman to appear on a major political party's presidential ticket, albeit on the bottom of the ticket, when she ran with Walter Mondale in 1984.
And Ferraro is wise enough to admit that she was picked to run as vice president solely on the basis that she was a woman. "In 1984 if my name were Garard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would never have been chosen as the vice presidential candidate," Ferraro told Diane Sawyer on "Good Morning America."
Sawyer was one of several reporters who tried to paint Ferraro as somehow saying something inappropriate, which made the news coverage appear almost to be a sequel of the "Saturday Night Live" sketch where members of the press fawned over Obama and savaged Hillary.
In this case, however, even Sen. Clinton was taking Obama's side, calling Ferraro's comments "regrettable." It's too bad Clinton doesn't have the courage to acknowledge the truth of Ferraro's comments, because she has no chance to win the nomination unless she can counteract the notion that Obama "deserves" to win.
Of course, not everyone agrees with me. Keith Olbermann, the paid political consultant masquerading as a journalist on MSNBC scolded Hillary Clinton quite loudly in one of his "oh so special" comments Wednesday night, noting that her "insensitive reaction" to the words of Ferraro was "slowly killing the chances of any Democrat to be president."
"Not that there's anything wrong with that," as we would expect Jerry Seinfeld to say after making such a politically unbalanced remark. But Olbermann has long since given up any pretense of fairness in his reporting - he is merely a mouthpiece for Democractic Party propaganda. No wait, I need to give credit where credit is due. Olbermann is not just a mouthpiece; he is actually a very inventive rhetorical assassin who doesn't just mouth the party line, but oftentimes originates it. In large part, he is to the Democratic Party what Rush Limbaugh only thinks he is to the Republican Party.
Earlier on his show, Olbermann had interviewed Eurgene Robinson of the Washington Post who noted correctly that "Geraldine Ferraro says, you know, she's been called a racist and Bill Clinton was called a racist," but then he argues that "Nobody calls her a racist. Nobody called Bill Clinton a racist. What was said is that what she's - you know the sentiments she expressed, what she said was arguably a racist thing to say. But that's about action, that's about words. It's not about her essence or her being."
Of course, Robinson was doing what most television commentators do - he was saying what he thought he could get away with, and within 30 seconds of saying he knows that Ferraro is not a racist, he said that Ferraro's comments were "clearly meant to belittle and denigrate Obama because of his race."
Huh? Come again? Sounds racist to me, if that's really what she meant to do. And apparently it sounded racist to Keith Olbermann, because he concluded his special comment by demanding that Hillary Clinton distance herself from Ferraro's "words, and the cheap, ignorant vile racism that underlies every syllable of them."
Yet hold on here. Let's take another look at the words that caused all this controversy - "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."
Vile? Ignorant? Racist? Not even close, but the more that the mainstream media tries to inoculate Barack Obama from the legitimate conversation about who he is, how he became who he is, and where he wants to take the country, the more they will damage the cause of race relations in this country. You cannot run for president in this country without being able to absorb criticism and demonstrate convincingly to the public that the criticism is unfounded.
Ronald Reagan didn't have to convince anyone to vote for him on the basis of race, but he did have to persuade people that he was not too old to be president. People questioned his fitness for office on the basis of his age much more overtly than anyone has used race as a factor in the 2008 election. But Reagan did not condemn people for their "age-ism" or demand that people stop asking questions about his age. He just used his age to his advantage by making Walter Mondale squirm (and even laugh) as the elderly president cajolingly responded to a debate question: "I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit for political purposes my opponent's youth and inexperience."
Too bad, none of today's candidates (white or black, man or woman) have the grace or wit of Ronald Reagan. Instead of a humorous rejoinder to an obvious poke, what we get today is defensive self-righteousness and finger-pointing.
Within two days, Ferraro had been forced to resign her honorary position with the Clinton campaign, but to her credit she refused to be silenced even though she had been marginalized.
And by the end of the week, a new controversy had erupted - the words of Barack Obama's longtime pastor had come to light blaming America for AIDS, importing illegal drugs, and promoting white supremacy. In one now famous quote, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. even called on God to damn America for its profligate ways.
No word yet on whether it is racist to point out that Barack Obama has called Wright a mentor, a consultant and a "sounding board" for more than 20 years. Let's wait a week and see whether this, too, falls into the category of things best left unsaid in Democratic politics. It seems like the black hole of unmentionables is growing by leaps and bounds, but eventually we have to come out the other side, don't we?
NSM
I think that it should be noted that Ferraro's comments, regardless of the racism issue, are not correct on the point of Obama's success. While he certainly has done well among blacks in southern states, Iowa was where he first gained momentum, and is about as white as as an albino sheep covered in snow. Neither has Hillary gotten where SHE is because of her gender, although women have certainly helped her campaign. -----Obama's success, whether he deserves it or not, it more about being a movement that is really not about race. Perhaps its about youth, liberalism, hope, change, charisma, momentum itself, etc., but race actually has played little outside of the South (and perhaps Texas if a Hispanic/Black rift effected voting). --Maybe Obama wouldn't have gotten the attention in the first place that led him here if he was white? But his campaign has done remarkably well winning white voters over, and if he is chosen, its not because of his race. ---Ironic for Ferarro that the comment that put her in hot water was really irrelevant. She may have been on the ticket because of gender, but Obama and Hillary will do it mostly (but not completely)
Rob
As a typical, white male middle class American brought up to be polite when dealing with other people, Franks' question this week is truely a mine field...... "The use of the word "American" to describe the United States is being written out of U.S. History and Government textbooks for fear of it being "politically incorrect" and offensive to South Americans and Canadians.".....I just don't know what to say? But listening is all that bad, sometimes.
Rob
But listening ISN'T all that bad, sometimes......Why can't spell check do 'meaning'? Why can't cats be taught to run a maze? Why do Canucks get so offended when asked if they are the Lead Sled Dog since their nose isn't turned up?
FutureResident
Rob : On the Annapurna circuit trek, we would go over a 5400 meter pass. Haven't decided if I'm doing that one yet. Right now we are only definitely planning on the base camp at 4130 meters. To get into China, we'll fly. It's not legal to go from Nepal to Tibet to China. Side note - violence and protests about Tibet are cranking up here, Tibet and China in advance of the Olympics. Should be interesting being around the next couple months.
denise
Obama is distancing himself from his Mentor of 20 years as fast as he can.......unfortunately this distancing comes with a few lies, similar to his attempted distancing from Rezko with When Obama said "If all I knew were those statements I saw on television, I would be shocked," or when he suggested that he had 'NEVER' heard statements such as the ones played from Rev Wrights own best-of DVD, sold in his church - do you believe him?? By his own admission - 20 years he and his family have been listening to Rev. Wrights teachings, Michelle and Obama were married by Rev Wright, their children were baptized by Rev Wright - yet he is SHOCKED - shocked to learn that such vile utterances could come forth from his mentor and good friend. Anyone believe this? And if you do, exactly how much kool-aid does it take to get to that state?....just curious.
Woody
I wonder, would John McCain be the republican nominee if his ancestors were African? How does Frank "know" that the reason black people in South Carolina vote for Obama is that he is also black. Is it significant that 100% of white republicans vote for a white candidate. I might wonder what motivates Frank to write these columns, but, I have done web searches on him.
Rob
FutureResident: I am glad to hear you are in Nepal. Every March in Tibet is rough, since 1959, as well it should be. The Chinese needed the 9000 to 15,000+ foot plateaus to get their underpowered ICBM's to Europe, Moscow, and beyond. Why they still claim Tibet is beyond me. They (Tibetans) are not Chinese, as they will tell you. Be careful. Habeas Corpus is a foreign idea.
bimmermt
Personally, I like Obama because he has a message to all of us. He is bright and has earned respect from many Americans. He has my respect. Win or loose. Reagan, the "fox guarding the hen-house." Alzheimer's does not suddenly strike folks. George H.W. Bush, in my opinion, representative of the (true?) Republican party. Limit government... W? What is he? Received all votes from christian right (CR)? Why, born again and friend. Huckabee, votes from CR, why, Baptist. Let us be fair folks. Frank, gets kudos from CR and other irrational (oops) folk in the Valley. Why, he is CR and irrational. So, follow the bouncing ball. Sorry, I fully intended to make this nonjudgmental.
bimmermt
You are right Woody. Perhaps Obama receives votes from all of us is because of his message or persona. But, why can't we just leave race alone? It is a non issue. It is the politics of who wants to do what and their visions of this country, not their color. It is up to us to determine what is important. It is up to us to know what we want and why we want it. It is up to us to filter out the non essentials. It is up to us to determine the values of this country. It is up to us to vote as we wish. It is not up to us to make heritage an issue. Vote your intellectual choice, be informed, and do what you need to do. I will and that is all I can say or do... Best of wishes FutureResident. Fly under the radar.
bimmermt
Blake, where did you come from? Thanks for the recognition.
frank
Woody: Just for the record... if all you know is what you found on Google, you are sadly misinformed. More than one person in the world is named Frank Miele, and I am not the one you are trying to associate me with. Old lesson from "Ox-Bow Incident": Before you lynch someone, make sure you have the right guy.
Rob
bimmermt: So, outside of a message of "hope", "change", "better", what is Obama's Philosophy? You know, that big, whole, glob of glue that not only holds everything together, but encompasses everything that has been. Does Obama have depth? I really don't know. Because he ain't talking about it. And McCain, when those two finally square off for the final, has experiences and pragmatism and survivablity. But no Philosophical Depth that I can see. Do either of them understand the current state of derivatives leveraged and hedged and totally dependent on psychology and trust and 'god it could get ugly'! Neither are talking about it. The biggest thing that's going on so far is that Race has replaced Social Security as the untouchable "Third Rail". Touch it, and your fried. How P.C., and empty. Like watching a PHD candidate lobotomize a cat inorder to see if it will still get angry....
bimmermt
Rob, what am I doing wrong? I cannot return to this blog unless I post. I have tried numerous ways to keep connected, yet it does not work.
bimmermt
What would make any one of us think we know more than anyone else? We possess one very small piece of the big picture. Why would we attempt to reduce such complex worldly and American issues to race or health insurance, or taxes, or guns. Some of us use aliens, conspiracies, religion, costs of doing business, as the basis for our arguments. Anyone's views can be supported, just pose a question on the Internet, or read literature that supports preconceived ideologies. It does not mean anything to anyone other than yourself. So go and vote your conscience. Keep the conversations alive. Tell everyone what floats your boat. Defend your cause, it's all a mind game.
bimmermt
Thanks jO
Woody
Rob, Bimmermt at the top of the postings is a hyperlink to instructions on how to set up different browsers so they don't "cache" this blog. The caching causes them to only update once a day.
Woody
Frank Now you have me worried. There are 2 of you and you look that much alike. The world is shrinking.
lousia
thanks denise was nicely put i agree. and standlow thanks for your imput. i don't see what obama has done, or what he is going to do. all i see and hear is a lot of confusing talk.(big speeches) i have heard we have to rasise taxes a lot on the american people, and we don't need a military, and we must be nice to all the other countries that hate us. and he will see to it duh;;;
lousia
Thanks Frank, for another great column.sunday's (3-16) 2 cents. I can tell by the comments you get, and have gotten already. you are good at reporting on this information.so sit back and enjoy some of these comments. shall we say, some are different. thanks to all.