Good riddance. Get this idiot as far away from politics as possible.

Autocrats and dictators do not abide criticism and dissent. This type of intolerance has no place in a democracy.

Geraldine Ferraro is not a racist. She made some valid comments in an atmosphere where the truth is unacceptable if it does not further the ambitions and advance the cause of getting Barack Obama into the White House. Many Americans see this and wonder what is going on. The problem is that, unlike Mr. Ferraro, most people are unwilling to go on record with their concerns. Well, can you blame them? Speak the truth, raise legitimate issues, say the emperor is naked---and be labeled a racist. Neat little Catch-22, isn't it?

Good, now wash your mouth out with soap and stay out of sight until after November.

But did she apologize...NO !
she did not.

She stated this was just another attack by Obama on Hillary....

What a disgrace she is.
Talk about duplicity!!

I just watched an interview with her on CBS, she's still saying that the Obama campaign is playing the race card. Really? You made the comments about him being a BLACK candidate. She's a disgrace, as is Clinton for not asking her to leave as soon as this happened. If she was a member of the finance team, anything she says is taken as a member of the campaign - that's just how it works.

In truth, Hillary would not be where she is in the campaign if she were not a woman. The only voting block that she has maintained is of older women, who want to "right" their perceived wrongs. There is no innocent way to construe Ferraro's comments other than what they first appear to be, and her indignance is similar to Clintons.

She needs to go retire in Palm Springs...

I notice that Hillary didn't fire her...

Hillary liked Ferraro's racist comments and she's hoping that it will get her some more votes.

It's all about winning for Hillary, nothing else matters, not even the loss of her integrity.

I just think she's a crazy misguided old lady saying things she really believes. Maybe if she knew more about Obama she'd keep her crazy mouth quiet.

Geraldine F., aka THE BIGGEST LOSER, the VP candidate who lost 49 of the 50 states, was chosen with nothing on her resume, never campaigned or faced public scrutiny before being “exalted” at the convention, never won a single state or a single delegate, and was boosted to the front of the line because she was a white woman. Still, her comments were not racist, just part of the continued effort by the Clintons to marginalize Obama as the "blacks only" candidate, in spite of his winning in Utah and Wyoming, as well as Virginia and Missouri. It is not about black voters, but an effort to suppress the votes of white voters who are considering Obama.

"GERALDINE SPEAKS"

I guess "KILLER" is in the HOUSE today.

Somewhere down the line, the media and the press have to find the "SPIRT OF RACE" in their inability to be; or not to be; in their "INFOTAINMENT" style of news worthy journalism.

She is a Great Lady, who has done great things for the people of this country and to the many of women in this country and it not a great day in the "SPIRIT OF RACE" in the "SPIRIT OF GENDER" when "simple minded" statements as such have "RESIGN from all of ours true RESOLVE."

Excellent. I hope her comments will get an extra 100000 voters out in Philly to vote against Hillary. Not a classy way to exit public life, she should of apologized, whatever her motives were for her comments.

Ferraro spoke without considering her phrasing and her comments were construed differently than what she intended. We have ALL done something similar and wished later we would have kept quiet so we wouldn't have to explain or defend what we really meant. I think Obama "used" her mis-construed remarks to his advantage. He COULD have said he understood ala Tiger Woods.

Maybe Ferraro is right. But it’s a GOOD thing if we like that he’s black.

To those of ou bloggers who are dissing Geraldine: Would you care to opine why Romney did so well in Utah? Or are you afraid of being called a religious bigot?

What's wrong with stating the obvious? OF COURSE his race is an issue! How blind do you have to be not to see that? Utter liberal hypocrisy to push affirmative action and then back away from Ferraro's remarks.

To Roger Morris: What the heck are you trying to say? Your emotional outburst is almost unintelligible. In any event, here's the truth. Hillary is not a very good example of a competent, straightforward, and trsutworthy female candidate. There are many many women who would be better candidates. On the other hand, Obama is a very good example of a competent, straightforward, and trustworthy black candidate. Unfortunately, not as many black males have been raised in an environment that would have supported their chances of being equally prepared candidates. SO the odds were more against Obama than Clinton, and clearly he has risen to the occasion, with dignity and professionalism. Hillary's brand of politics reminds me of backroad Arkansas politics.

]]I notice that Hillary didn't fire her...

Hillary liked Ferraro's racist comments and she's hoping that it will get her some more votes.

It's all about winning for Hillary, nothing else matters, not even the loss of her integrity.''

Hey, guess what? Obama didn't fire his person either. She quit. And she was even worse, as she told an interviewer her boss, the sainted Obama one, had no intention of living up to the scenario he has outlined; the linchpin to his presidential campaign, if it events don't bear things out when he's elected. If that is what he plans, maybe he shoudl inform the American people and let them decide if it suits them. No, he'd rather mislead us.

Ferraro's comments were racist. The Clinton campaign finds this kind of thing useful and has been doing it regularly, e.g. Bill's comments in Carolina. They put it out there and then disavow it, leaving it lingering. Hillary wants the Penn. white vote. She thinks she will get it this way. Desparate tactics.

So Obama gets his wish. He played the race card and the media gave him a pass. He could reign his staffers in if he wanted but he sits back while they charge racism at anyone who speaks his mind. He's as far along as he is because the media don't want to be tagged racial if they dare cover him like they do Hillary. He should keep in mind that he needs women to get elected. He needs women that helped to build the party. He should also prepare for a backlash at polls from voters (which he deserves). Ferraro is NOT RACIST, but he is showing what he's all about. Is this a victory? He sat back and let these surrogates defame this woman. Then the crazies begin to deliver threats. Is this what the Obama campaign wants?

Dose anyone really believe she was wrong? If so name one thing Obama has done in office that should merit him running this country an
I might even consider voting for him.I don,t know if it's true ,but I heard he got 91% of the black vote in Mississippi, you think that would have happened if he were White ?

time has passed her on to the future and I am a 60's woman

Another toadie slithers back under the Clinton out house.
Not all is lost for the She Weasel-word in the gutter is that Spitzer guy is looking for a new gig with like minded scumbags. A perfect sidekick for the disbarred scumbag semi spouse. They can slither across PA together.

call me crazy, Perch, but I would guess that they voted for Romney in Utah because his political beliefs were most like theirs. That is the reason I vote for my candidates.

I'm sure being black has helped Obama with some of the black vote just as being a woman has helped Clinton with some of the female vote....

and I'm also sure that Obama being black has hurt with folks that would never vote for an African American as well as Hillary being hurt by those who would never vote for a woman.

There for Ferraro should have never made the comment without mentioning how this also hurts Obama.

The Democratic campaign is seriously split along racial lines, adding substance to what Mrs. Ferraro said. In Mississippi, it is estimated that 95 percent of blacks voted for Obama and Mrs. Clinton captured the majority of white voters. So much for the myth that white Democrats favored inclusion of blacks. It was just pandering all the time. And it will play itself out one way or the other in November, but neither will spell unity.

* * * * *

Posted by: John Hussein E | March 12, 2008 6:51 PM

You are right, John. And she didn’t fire any of the other staffers who developed foot-in-mouth disease either. All the others who took responsibility resigned, which gave Hillary the ability to deny affiliation with them while reaping the benefits of their misconduct. This was true of the “Obama-uses-drugs” episode. However, no one has ever ‘fessed up for the “Obama-is-a-Muslim” stuff. Hillary wants to destroy Obama’s campaign with a thousand tiny wounds, yet suffer no backlash. She will do anything to win the nomination and the White House.

So, now you believe me.

Hillary Clinton was on her way to being the first woman president, when the prospect of the first African American president raised its head, dividing the Democratic party.

Ferraro is correct. Is a substantial part of the Democratic base energized by the prospect of the first African American president? Of course, and without question. Where would that aspiration for an African American president be if Obama were white? Nonexistent of course. Without Obama on the scene, would African Americans be voting for another white man instead of Hillary? If Obama were white, would he be getting as much as 90% of the African American vote against Hillary. I don't think so.

Even Obama to his credit didn't suggest it was a racist statement. And it wasn't. It was a comment on the politcal reality of the Democratic race.

There is a time-honored political maxim that goes like this:

Oberling to underling: "Do what you have to do but don't tell me so I can say I didn't know."

Left unsaid: "If you get away with it I owe you, if you don't I don't know you."

This silly little tale is a prime example.

Q: Is there anything special about Obama? Are his positions markedly different from Hillary's positions?

Do those of you who are for him not feel EVEN FOR A SECOND that it is FAR OUT that he is what he is and has a FAR OUT name and that when expressing support for him they are very progressive and enlightened? And if one of the reasons why you vote for him is the fact that he is partly black, isn't that a bit racist?

Us white folks lost the monopoly on racism long ago, but a lot of us white folks don't seem to realize that folks of different colors (BTW white is a color too) like to play the race card with us because we feel so guilty.

There IS such a thing as white liberal guilt, but some of us got over it.

* * * * *

P. Diddy:

It’s one thing to bring up the issue of race, just as it is one thing to bring up the issue of gender. Yet, it is something completely different to state that Obama’s race has been the dispositive factor in his campaign, as Geraldine Ferraro has done. She said that Barack Obama wouldn’t be where he is now if he were a white man. In other words, she has accused Democrat voters of carrying Barack Obama to the nomination in some form of mass affirmative action movement. The clear subtext is that his race is causing mass errors in judgment regarding him. Is this not an insinuation, at least, that, as a black man, he couldn’t have the talent or character to do the job?

The message is for people to be aware they might be voting for Obama (the inferior candidate) just because he is black, so that people can avoid doing so in the future. This is race baiting, pure and simple. I don’t know how much clearer that can get. Do I have to draw a picture?

DON'T BE DUPED!!!

Large numbers of Republicans have been voting for Barack Obama in the DEMOCRATIC primaries, and caucuses. Because they feel he would be a weaker opponent against John McCain. And because they feel that a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket would be unbeatable. And also because with a Clinton and Obama ticket you are almost 100% certain to get quality, affordable universal health care very soon.

But first, all of you have to make certain that Hillary Clinton takes the democratic nomination and then the Whitehouse. NOW! is the time. THIS! is the moment you have all been working, and waiting for. You can do this America. “Carpe diem” (harvest the day).

I think Hillary Clinton see’s a beautiful world of plenty, and comfort for all. She is a woman, and a mother. And it’s time America. Do this for your-self, and your children’s future. You will have to work together on this and be aggressive, relentless, and creative. Americans face an even worse catastrophe ahead than the one you are living through now.

You see, the medical and insurance industry mostly support the republicans with the money they ripped off from you. And they don’t want you to have quality, affordable universal health care. They want to be able to continue to rip you off, and kill you and your children by continuing to deny you life saving medical care that you have already paid for. So they can continue to make more immoral profits for them-self.

Hillary Clinton has actually won by much larger margins than the vote totals showed. And lost by much smaller vote margins than the vote totals showed. Her delegate count is actually much higher than it shows. And higher than Obama’s. HILLARY CLINTON IS ALREADY THE TRUE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE!

As much as 30% of Obama's primary, and caucus votes are Republicans trying to choose the weakest democratic candidate for McCain to run against. These Republicans have been gaming the caucuses where it is easier to vote cheat. This is why Obama has not been able to win the BIG! states primaries. Even with Republican vote cheating help.

Hillary Clinton has been out manned, out gunned, and out spent 2 and 3 to 1. Yet Obama has only been able to manage a very tenuous, and questionable tie with Hillary Clinton.

If Obama is the democratic nominee for the national election in November he will be slaughtered. Because the Republican vote cheating help will suddenly evaporate. All of this vote fraud and republican manipulation has made Obama falsely look like a much stronger candidate than he really is. YOUNG PEOPLE. DON’T BE DUPED! Think about it. You have the most to lose.

The democratic party needs to fix this outrage. I suggest a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama ticket now! Everyone needs to throw all your support to Hillary Clinton NOW! So you can end this outrage against YOU the voter, and against democracy.

I think Barack Obama has a once in a life time chance to make the ultimate historic gesture for unity, and change in America by accepting Hillary Clinton’s offer as running mate. Such an act now would for ever seal Barack Obama’s place at the top of the list of Americas all time great leaders, and unifiers for all of history. But the time to act is soon.

The democratic party, and the super-delegates have a decision to make. Are the democrats, and the democratic party going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee to fight for the American people. Or are the republicans going to choose the DEMOCRATIC party nominee through vote fraud, and gaming the DEMOCRATIC party primaries, and caucuses.

Fortunately the Clinton’s have been able to hold on against this fraudulent outrage with those repeated dramatic comebacks of Hillary Clinton’s. Only the Clinton’s are that resourceful, and strong. Hillary Clinton is your NOMINEE. They are the best I have ever seen.

“This is not a game” (Hillary Clinton)

Sincerely

jacksmith...

I loved Ferraro, my hero and I will not forget this and move onto the issues. I will not turn my check and walk away.....there really is no way of turning back now, I will not ever vote for Obama. The Obama camp is naive if they think people like me will turn the other check and forget this.

well, good. it was insulting for her to float her little trial balloon and expect people to take it at face value.

she is a clinton operative. her comment was meant to sow confusion and doubt...to position obama as a blacks only candidate.

calculating. that is the word to describe clinton and her team. and disingenuous, too.

float the trial balloon, get the inevitable protest, then claim that it is your opponent who is injecting race into the campaign. you were PRAISING your opponent's ability to get black votes. he should be PROUD of that accomplishment.

resurrect a photo of obama in african garb, get the inevitable protest and then question why your opponent isn't proud of his african heritage.

here's a thought, stick to the issues. stop the gamesmanship.

Enjoy your NEW AMERICA and the speech police. What a bunch of BS this whole Obama clown is. Not getting my butt on that bandwagon.

Geraldine ran for the White House as a VP nominee and lost. That makes classifies her as a LOSER! Losers need to retire to their corner of society and wait to die.

Ferraro also says she woulnd't have been where she was had she not been a female. Almost all Clinton supporters know that Clinton is there because she is Bill's wife...so why are people bent out of shape if someone says Obama is there because he is black. That doesn't mean that any of the people I mentioned in this post don't have outstanding qualifications. There are a lot of people with outstanding qualifications.

So long, Geraldine. The probable thousands of previously undecided voters who flocked to Obama in a backlash against your provincial stupidity will not miss you at all, and neither will I!

This is an OUTRAGE!

Keep these ugly comments going Obama supporters and don't come crying back if he wins the nomination and loses by a landslide to McCain.

From the desk of:

Geraldine Ferraro

I have decided to resign from the position that I have never held with the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign.

I am deeply disappointed that Senator Obama has chosen to attack me in such a racist manner. However, should he become the nominee of our party, I am still willing to engage in fund raising for him, provided that he changes his ways, and promises to stop being a Black Man.

The whole point of GF, the unqualified, gender selected VP who only won 1 of the 50 states, is to continue the Clintonistas effort to marginalize Obama as the limited appeal, black candidate. The more anger and backlash they generate among blacks manifested in the vote for Obama, the more they can argue the that whites should not vote for the black man. This plan may have worked in Ohio, but it flopped in Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Connecticut and other states where Obama could not have won without white voters.

This whole thing is ludicrous and taken out of context by the media. I can't understand the double standard in the United States. Obama's minister can get up in church, run Hillary down whites, Jews, and/or just whatever comes to his mind from the pulpit that he is against and the IRS won't take action and the news media, as a whole, sweeps it under the rug. Obama was man enough to take it by his response. He is going to have to have tough skin if he is President because obviously not everyone will care for him. The news media jumped on Ferraro's statement like it is the "unpardonable" sin! It is a bunch of "hogwash" and stupidity for the news media to belabor this issue.

Why aren't we getting the real issues in the media instead of sensitivity about ever time some one blows their nose!

The whole point of GF, the unqualified, gender selected VP who only won 1 of the 50 states, a 2% score on the national test, is to continue the Clintonistas effort to marginalize Obama as the limited appeal, black candidate. The more anger and backlash they generate among blacks manifested in the vote for Obama, the more they can argue the that whites should not vote for the black man. This plan may have worked in Ohio, but it flopped in Virginia, Maryland, Missouri, Connecticut and other states where Obama could not have won without white voters.

Regarding balcks voting 90% for Obama in Mississippi must be viewed in the context that blacks in Mississippi were legally denied vote until about 40 years ago. You can imagine they would turn out in great numbers to support a legitimate candidate who would have also been unable to vote.

John W:

I don't know if she did or didn't insinuate all of that which you have divined from her statements but nonetheless it in no way detracts from the validity of her statement however much libs prefer not to accept it. He's an articulate black guy and that gets him votes. Get over it.

Shooting the messenger won't help.

Geraldine Ferraro's comments were completely inappropriate. As a former political figure and attorney, she should have acknowledged how Hillary Clinton's campaign has also benefited from her gender. The comments also imply her believe that people who vote for Barack Obama lack the intelligence to distinguish between his race and his political message. Bill Richardson is Latino and he did not have the financial support or the votes to continue. Therefore her argument becomes mute based solely on the multicultural and racial make-up of the democratic candidates. Mrs. Ferraro needed to resign.

If Mr. Obama were white, he could still have the momentum based on his message of hope and change, which is reaching a portion of Americans. If he were white, he could also be a strong contender because many Americans will not support another Clinton vying for a presidential dynasty. With that being said, I am not a supporter of Mr. Obama because his affiliation with the Chicago political machine. I also do not support Mr. McCain. McCain represents the Reagan - Bush dynasty.

However with this new Clinton emergence of racial baiting and political manipulation; basing her possible win on undereducated white racists. I cannot support her either. She is showing a great lack of character in this race. She has also buried a potentially damaging lawsuit against her and President Clinton with numerous continuances, which will have the case go to trial after the general election. This also illustrates her lack integrity. For me, this truly a sad election year.

So if I understand the pundits correctly, Geraldine Ferraro (whom I used to admire) believes that if Mitt Romney was black -- he'd get elected President of the United States? What has happened to this woman?

Carol

In the last three elections, and I include this one, the Republican candidate has been VERY beatable.
In each of the last two elections, the democrats have managed to find the ONE candidate that the Republicans can beat, and whoever wins the nomination it looks as if the democrats will continue their losing ways - the party will be too splintered by then.

The vaunted 'Republican hate machine' and the much-feared, legendary 'VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY' ain't got NUTTIN'!!! on the dems when they get into one of their food fights, and this one is a corker.
Whoever wins the nomination, the supporters of the other one are gonna be mightily PI++ED! because the nomination will have been denied, and probably by skulduggery, to a qualified representative of one of their core bases - women or African-Americans.

In re superdelegates - it reminds me of 'Animal Farm' where the pig says - "We're all equals, but some of us are more equal than others."

Enjoy your foodfight, cuz I sure am

"They should apologize to me for calling me a racist.''

Continue reading "Ferraro quits Clinton campaign after racial remark" »"

No one, at least not Bama or the official campaign, called her racist.
Neither did I, but they were certainly stupid comments unworthy of Democrats.

Regardless, no one owes Geri an apology.
She needs to apologize, sincerely, to Obama in particular, and the whole Dem effort and voters in general.

ferraro is asked, "Why is Obama doing so well?" She answers, "...because he's black." Then she goes on NBC and says that the Obama campaign is playing the race card.

LOL.

How delusional are the Clinton people? Well, at least now we know why Hillary kept complaining about the vast right-wing conspiracy.

John Edwards has proven in two elections in a row that Ferraro is correct. He's a young, white guy with one senate term, and has been killed twice.

Geraldine now gets to the learn the punishment for speaking the truth.

Sadly, it's the same old negative politics.
A. Make the remark
B. Apologize for the remark
C. Have someone else take responsibility
D. have an underling resign

But......ALWAYS, ALWAYS make sure the remark gets printed.

This stuff is getting so old!

Always more than one side to any issue.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/dont-fire-geraldine-ferr_b_91059.html

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=fd72d239-fb33-4493-be6a-2a869fa597d2

http://broadcatching.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/ambassador-joseph-wilson-endorses-hillary-clinton-calls-her-battle-tested/

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070219/hayes

Tony, "Unfortunately, not as many black males have been raised in an environment that would have supported their chances of being equally prepared candidates"? Have you read Mr. Obamas history as a child? These "affirmative action candidates" are creating an enviorment akin to Stalinist Russia.

Hussein,

Please read 'The Gulag Archipelago' Parts I,II, and III, (Alexander Solzenitzen) then tell me our political environment is akin to Stalinist Russia.

Sheesh!!!

Geraldine Ferraro has never been a racist, but she got tired of seeing the press give Obama a pass for fear of being accused of being racist. All candidates should be covered with respect, but with close scrutiny of their words, their plans, and their record and experience. I admire Rep. Ferraro for speaking the truth, that the emperor is buff black naked strutting around like the pied piper trying to cast his spell on the gullible. He's not qualified. He belongs to a racist church. He takes money from everyone, even wealthy Iraqi's. It's time someone broke the spell. If he were all white with the same credentials, would anyone have voted for him?

Ferraro is still the loudmouth double-speak that she has always been. Remember her stupid ststement in the 1984 vice-presidential campaign in which she declared that there is a diversity of opinion among Catholics about the morality, or immorality, of abortion. How can such an ignorant person keep pushing herself into the public arena?

R M Kraus
Akron

We now know that Kathleen Gingrich was absolutely right about Hillary.

See you next Tuesday, Gerry. And GO, OBAMA!!

Ms. Ferraro sould not apologize. She's right about Obama. The Obamanites should offer her an apology and call off those who dare to threaten this woman. It's a sad day when a black man tries to muzzle free speech. If he's going to play the political game, he need to stop crying about what someone said. Develop a SPINE.

Robert M Kraus Sr.

Sir,

I would suggest that on any given Sunday in any Catholic church there are some women there that have had secret abortions.

She spoke the Truth. Whatever happened to freedom of speech in this country or is the left so obsessed with power that they will stifle anything that gets in their way. Wow. Would Oprah be pouring her millions into the campaign if he was white. I think not.

Obama is not a what he pretends to be...he has publicly said how much he has been inspired by Rev. Wright's sermons for the last 20 years. Mr. Wright is a man that preaches hate and racism, yet Obama calls him a mentor. Click on the link below and read the beliefs & hidden truths behind the great pontificator of so called change. http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/12/obamas-controversial-pastor-puts-church-in-hot-water/

Ferraro's chief benefit to the Clinton campaign is that by comparison, standing side-by-side Hillary looks and sounds like a sweet, sweet lady.

I personally believe that she didnt mean anything with that remark...lets just leave her alone, anyway she left the campaign already, I think thats just about it.Lets just support Obama, i hope he wins!!!

Truly open-minded people would not consider race, gender or religion at all--either for or against-- when deciding who to vote for. We all know that not choosing someone on the basis of race, gender or creed is racist, sexist or bigoted, respectively. But so is choosing someone solely because of their race, gender or creed racist, sexist or bigoted. I've heard more talk about the first black president or the first woman president than I have about the issues. That doesn't speak of a very sophisticated, open-minded electorate. Who is the best person for the job, race, religion and gender notwithstanding? That's what we should be discussing.

Old Creaky,

While you were reading Solzhenitsyn, I was living under Stalin in communist Poland and was in Poznan when the Russian tanks arrived in 56. Freedom of speech is being stifled by political correctness and is a detriment wether blatant or nuanced.

I like how Ferraro is claiming that it's racist of other people to claim that SHE'S racist. I wish stuffwhitepeoplelike.com would do a post on "reverse racism" because we LOVE pulling that one out, don't we.

I'll make a deal with Geraldine Ferraro: I won't call her a racist if she stops talking like one.

I had so much respect for Ferraro before I heard about this. And I am a committed feminist. But in 2008, there's no excuse for race baiting. Obama is an excellent candidate and trying to discount his achievements on the basis of race is beyond the pale.

* * * * *

“He's an articulate black guy and that gets him votes. Get over it.

Shooting the messenger won't help.”

Posted by: P.Diddy | March 12, 2008 8:41 PM

P. Diddy:

Geraldine Ferraro said Barack Obama wouldn’t be where he is today if he was a white man, and all you can say she was right in saying “he’s an articulate black guy and that gets him votes”?

I think you’ve missed the direct import of her statement. She did not state that his race has just helped him get votes: she indicated his race is the only reason he is in the contest. Read it again. She said, and I quote:

“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."

If she said only the bit you’re suggesting, nary a person would have gotten upset. It’s the weight she attached to his race (and sex) that makes it racism (and sexism too). She said, without any resort to conjecture, that these facts are dispositive rather than merely helpful. She’s challenging Democrats to believe that their eyes and ears have deceived them because he is a black man.

And I didn’t “divine” or “distill” this message from her words. It is the clear and unmistakable import of what she said.

Furthermore, I am not “shooting the messenger” by defying your perceptions. I am merely challenging you to look at the truth.

Finally, I am not a liberal. Opposing racism is everyone’s business.

She was Right and She has all the right to say things, even if i disagree with her, which in this case I don't.

We need more people with more cojones/chutzpah to speak the truth, only to be emasculated by our political culture of allowing only "politically correct" statements.

what is so wrong about calling something for what it is?

If somebody tells me I am brown, I simply have to look at my skin to confirm the verity of the statement. And I am brown!

If I am not a Muslim. and somebody tells me I am, there is no shame in denying that I am not, but hopefully I am secure enough in my belief of the individual's freedom to choose his/her own faith and respect his/her own persona and religion as well.

I am proud of my own heritage, as every American, in whatever shade of color-ranging from albino to deep black complexion,should be proud of who and what they are!

The one thing that bothers me about Barack Hussein Obama and his campaign, that was supposed to bring a new "brand of politics" to Washington, is the LACK OF INTEGRITY TO ACCEPT WHO HE IS.

Barack uses the "phone-in-whore" trick of telling the caller "I can be whoever you want me to be".

With his glib and mellifluous words, he can transport an already suggestible populace to project to him their own dire need to hope, and their need to believe in someone to obliterate their fears. But just as a phone sex is hallow, the blank screen, when the lights are on, is just what it is-a blank sheet of whiteness without any pretense.

Obama's desire to bring in a new brand of politics is only as good when he is not tested by the fawning media and luminaries who fall prey to his pied piper oratory.

His new brand of politics, has long been hijacked by AXELROD and his minions in the Obama campaign, and for once, Obama has shown his true color-A PUPPET ON A STRING by an INSIDER POLITICAL ADVISER who was once associated with Bill Clinton's campaign.

Just imagine the ethics of this all, a person who was so intimately involved, politically, with Bill Clinton, who now uses his insider's information to backstab his former boss with a political stiletto!

What is so new with this brand of politics, Mr. Obama that Shakespeare has not written about a long time ago?

Back to sipping cocktails at the country club for Ferraro, complaining about those uppity young punks disrespecting a national treasure like Hillary. Sometines you actually reap what you sow...

This is what happens when you get a candidate who defies catagorization such as Obama.

The Clinton folks don't know how to handle it. So they resort to the things they know best...Republican tactics, the most famous of which is the southern stategy. Works everytime. And although Obama is half white we seem to be implementing the one drop rule. Not surprising, afterall, Hillary started political life as a Goldwater republican.

Ann Curry - you go girl !

You handled Geraldine so well.

Yesterday was Ferraro.

Obama is Tomorrow.

This wasn't an isolated event but a series of events and a concerted effort by the Clinton campaign to paint Obama as an under-achiever who was lucky to be judged by a lower, i.e. "Black" or "affirmative action" standard. This insidious racism running through the Clinton campaign, started w/ the MLK statements, then the Jesse Jackson statements, then the "he's not a Muslim, as far as I know" statements, and now the tepid response to Ferraro's statements, and Hillary's willingness to allow this is stunning! Her campaign has allowed all of these events to go on without real rebukes, which only confirms what we already know:

Hillary will say and do whatever to get elected and she has essentially decided that if she can't have the presidency, Obama certainly won't have it. It's a sickness, really. . .

Black, purple or polka-dot, NObama is no good, regardless of skin color.

It's his liberal, weak-kneed, politically-correct, anti-Christian, anti-life, anti-America garbage that makes him bad for this country.

NObama in '08 or EVER!

All you Clinton backers, watch out: if you criticize Saint Barack in any way, he'll call you a "racist".

You've been warned.

I do not understand what is meant by a spam number!!!

I am just an observer who cannot vote. I am also a level-headed black person.
It is not understood how someone with so little legislative accomplishments on the American national scene could be doing so well against a person who, on the contrary, has a political portfolio of political experience on the US National scene.
Ferraro's comments have clearly been twisted by the media and the Obama campaign staff to cover-up his in-experience. Clinton and her supporters are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. If she attempts to legitimately call Obama on his legislative in-experience, the media, who are both overtly and covertly doing everything to "crown" Obama, as well all Obama supporters will easily play the race card -- as they have done with Ferraro. If she doesn't criticize Obama, she stands the chance of losing the nomination. On the contrary, Obama tacitly knows that no one will dare legitimately criticize his candidacy for fear of being seen as racist, and he silently is riding this wave of fearful silence to a free pass to the nomination.
I believe and insist that whatever I attain must be acquired on merit. And I would not accept any position if I believed that my judgment, fortified by my experience in the particular field, did not qualify me for the position.
Neither colour nor gender should play such a major role in their campaigns. And indeed, it seems to me that the media are critisizing Clinton just as they would as if she were a male candidate. On the contrary, the media do not criticize Obama as if he were a male candidate, but only as if he is a black male candidate who's untouchable because he is black.
Any keen observer does not find it difficult to see even in the media's choice of words, images, choice of phraseology, and choice of porridge questions about, or to Obama, that the media are providing every possible opportunity to suggest to the voter that Obama must win the nomination. Examples: when Obama wins a primary/caucus he always wins decisively even if the percentages are close. And Clinton is always badly defeated by Obama. When Clinton won the Texas and the Ohio primaries, it was not so much how well Clinton did, but how close Obama was to her win. His loss is quickly glossed over. On one segment, when Clinton was interviewed by a major cable network, the audio portion of the interview was cut, and later there is an apology citing "technical difficulties." On the contrary, Obama who was interviewed immediately before Clinton, by the same network, the audio was not cut.
Ferraro probably stated what many know, but are afraid to say. It is interesting that no one has yet asked Obama, face to face, to give concrete credible evidence of his national legislative accomplishments. Ferraro may be right in suggesting that were Obama White, he would not have such an easy ride. What is laughable is that as an attorney, Obama would not dare present such paucity of evidence in a case where he was representing anyone.

I am just an observer who cannot vote. I am also a level-headed black person.
It is not understood how someone with so little legislative accomplishments on the American national scene could be doing so well against a person who, on the contrary, has a political portfolio of political experience on the US National scene.
Ferraro's comments have clearly been twisted by the media and the Obama campaign staff to cover-up his in-experience. Clinton and her supporters are damned if they do, and damned if they don't. If she attempts to legitimately call Obama on his legislative in-experience, the media, who are both overtly and covertly doing everything to "crown" Obama, as well all Obama supporters will easily play the race card -- as they have done with Ferraro. If she doesn't criticize Obama, she stands the chance of losing the nomination. On the contrary, Obama tacitly knows that no one will dare legitimately criticize his candidacy for fear of being seen as racist, and he silently is riding this wave of fearful silence to a free pass to the nomination.
I believe and insist that whatever I attain must be acquired on merit. And I would not accept any position if I believed that my judgment, fortified by my experience in the particular field, did not qualify me for the position.
Neither colour nor gender should play such a major role in their campaigns. And indeed, it seems to me that the media are critisizing Clinton just as they would as if she were a male candidate. On the contrary, the media do not criticize Obama as if he were a male candidate, but only as if he is a black male candidate who's untouchable because he is black.
Any keen observer does not find it difficult to see even in the media's choice of words, images, choice of phraseology, and choice of porridge questions about, or to Obama, that the media are providing every possible opportunity to suggest to the voter that Obama must win the nomination. Examples: when Obama wins a primary/caucus he always wins decisively even if the percentages are close. And Clinton is always badly defeated by Obama. When Clinton won the Texas and the Ohio primaries, it was not so much how well Clinton did, but how close Obama was to her win. His loss is quickly glossed over. On one segment, when Clinton was interviewed by a major cable network, the audio portion of the interview was cut, and later there is an apology citing "technical difficulties." On the contrary, Obama who was interviewed immediately before Clinton, by the same network, the audio was not cut.
Ferraro probably stated what many know, but are afraid to say. It is interesting that no one has yet asked Obama, face to face, to give concrete credible evidence of his national legislative accomplishments. Ferraro may be right in suggesting that were Obama White, he would not have such an easy ride. What is laughable is that as an attorney, Obama would not dare present such paucity of evidence in a case where he was representing anyone.

The racist windbag is gone...good riddance. Next, Hillary the Demagogue will be sent to the dustbin of history. Monica, Monica, wherefore art thou Monica ??

It is the truth...he certainly wasn't and isn't the best candidate. We are ready for a almost black candidate.

To: Lisabeth & kipper

Where do you guys get off talking like Geraldine Ferraro’s right to free speech was abridged? She spoke freely, her message was heard, and then got criticized for it.

There is no right to free speech free of all criticism. Speech always raises the possibility that someone might dislike the message enough to criticize the speaker for it. But society cannot stop the criticism; nor should it. If it did, it would violate the free speech of the critic. The idea behind free speech is that a free flow of ideas provides the best environment for creativity and decision making. If we shut off the critics, we risk having issues presented to us in an incomplete and false light. The answer to free speech is more free speech. The answer to a critic is a counter-criticism. And if you can’t stand the heat the process creates, then you should just stay out of the kitchen.

Geraline was stating a fact! The problem is, it took a woman to have enough balls to say it.

Obama campaign -- just like Jesse and Sharpton -- started the race card game.

She called them on it. Now they can't take it.
Poor little babies...

Again Obama and the "f"ing media, did not listen very well! what she said was not racist! IF YOU ALL WANT RACIST THAT TITLE BELONGS TO OBAMA, SEE FOR YOURSELF!
Obama’s Church website is below, here is some of what they say;
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black.
Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.
A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
WHENEVER ANYONE SAID ANYTHING AGAINST POOR OBAMA IT IS RACIST AND BAD, BUT DO IT TO CLINTON OR MCCAIN AND THATS OK!

http://www.tucc.org/black_value_system.html

What a graceless figure Ferraro is.

An undistinguished political career, an undistinguished mind, and a not especially pleasant personality.

Now she adds what is genuine racism, not just the kind of words we've had before in the campaign that bothered perhaps touchy people, but the genuine article. No other interpretation of her words is possible.

Of course, when the graceless attacks the truly graceful the effect is only to make the speaker ridiculous.

And to top it all, her grammar is poor.

"If Obama was a white man..." of course should be "If Obama were a white man...."

"Old Creaky,

While you were reading Solzhenitsyn, I was living under Stalin in communist Poland and was in Poznan when the Russian tanks arrived in 56. Freedom of speech is being stifled by political correctness and is a detriment wether blatant or nuanced.

Posted by: Hussein | March 12, 2008 10:33 PM"

Then you know there is no real comparison.

Interestingly enough, both sides are guilty of similar commentary and both have attempted to cover it up with minimal retribution. I was always taught that "birds of a feather flock together" and it appears that everyone's flock is starting to appear one by one. From Hillary's undercover denial of her affiliation with Peter Paul to Barack's association with a so-called racist minister. We are all guilty of racism in one form or another; we just haven't all been penalized in the same way for the ways in which we express it.

Are we truly looking at any of these candidates (Democrats or Republicans) based on their respective qualifications and their potential to impact our nation or are we looking (as we all have historically) at the surface and then passing judgement from there? Barack has been labeled the black candidate, Hillary the female and McCain the old (and now, possibly unhealthy) man. What difference should it make on what they possess externally? Frankly, the playing field looks even; one candidate has better track records here while the other has more experience there. It's what we connect with after the issues are discussed that will lead one of them on to victory. If we really want to see change in America, we will make a concerted effort to "blindfold" ourselves to the outward appearance of these candidates and focus on the substance, character, values, experience and tenacity that they possess.

The real test is yet to come and in the words of the late great Dr. Martin Luther King, "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy."

Let's all be cognizant of the character of each of these candidates as they move forward in the race. It will most likely get worse before it gets better between the Democrats and McCain has no competition so he's just waiting for November. Make a difference! VOTE the RIGHT way!

She needs to go toe-to-toe w/ Russert or Matthews, then, we'd see how silly it is for her to claim she was talking about the "historic nature" of the campaign, when she said people who were voting for Obama "were caught up in the concept." Caught up in the concept?? Please! In the words of Chris Rock (paraphrasing): "No white man would ever trade places with a black man, not in the a milions years -- and I'm rich!"

Buh-bye, GF and good riddance!