....Such a stupid and vacuous statement from someone who should know better...I wonder sometimes about some racist liberals and think there really is no difference between them and some racist conservatives...sadly though, her sentiments are really not that surprising at all...
gtfohwtbs. Obama is the 3rd black senator....ever. He is a young, good looking guy with a background that is screen play worthy. Ferraro was inarticulate in what she said, but the truth is that Obama's blackness has not done him a disservice since becoming a Senator. I'm not discounting the hardships he grew up with or the racism that stood in his way to become a Senator, but his identity, including his racial identity have contributed to him becoming this enormously popular figure.
Lets not get it twisted here about who his voters are...and i'm not talking about black people. his supporters are voting for CHANGE. what spells change more than rejecting the white protestant males that we continue to elect. Ferraro should have said that Obama is winning votes because he symbolizes change more so than because his policies favor change (any more than Hillary's do).
Also, I think the opposite of what you have said is true. Nothing spells ignorance more than liberals who are afraid to talk about race...and gender. Bill Clinton was crucified but listen to what he said. This race is effected by people choosing their own. Blacks are overwhelmingly voting for Obama and women have favored Hillary. Clinton made an obvious and factual point, but people were soo offended because he pointed out that in South Carolina, where over 50% of democrats are Black, Obama's blackness played a major role, just like it did when Jesse Jackson won that state twice in '84 and '88.
Cmon, the Clintons really are playing this shit kinda dirty. All these denouncements, outrage and calls for resignation over the word 'monster', and Hillary and co can boil his entire career and achievements down to his race and "a speech". I see you're trying to narrow her comments down to just the campaign, but where's the similar clarification from Clinton's camp. If we're going to play it hyper-sensitive, it has to go both ways. Trying to pretend its not a popularity contest, with the faux-naivety and feigned outrage, is bullshit, esp when they largely share their positions. The fact is, regardless of gender or race, a lot of people find her divisive, and find him inspiring.
The worst part is, it seems to me like Hillary's campaign is trying to have it both ways and (not so) subtly appealing to liberal racism. "We don't agree" is not exactly a forceful denunciation....
....Such a stupid and vacuous statement from someone who should know better...I wonder sometimes about some racist liberals and think there really is no difference between them and some racist conservatives...sadly though, her sentiments are really not that surprising at all...
gtfohwtbs. Obama is the 3rd black senator....ever. He is a young, good looking guy with a background that is screen play worthy. Ferraro was inarticulate in what she said, but the truth is that Obama's blackness has not done him a disservice since becoming a Senator. I'm not discounting the hardships he grew up with or the racism that stood in his way to become a Senator, but his identity, including his racial identity have contributed to him becoming this enormously popular figure.
Lets not get it twisted here about who his voters are...and i'm not talking about black people. his supporters are voting for CHANGE. what spells change more than rejecting the white protestant males that we continue to elect. Ferraro should have said that Obama is winning votes because he symbolizes change more so than because his policies favor change (any more than Hillary's do).
Also, I think the opposite of what you have said is true. Nothing spells ignorance more than liberals who are afraid to talk about race...and gender. Bill Clinton was crucified but listen to what he said. This race is effected by people choosing their own. Blacks are overwhelmingly voting for Obama and women have favored Hillary. Clinton made an obvious and factual point, but people were soo offended because he pointed out that in South Carolina, where over 50% of democrats are Black, Obama's blackness played a major role, just like it did when Jesse Jackson won that state twice in '84 and '88.
I'm not sure if we want you on the team--maybe you could go back to the Hillary camp?
The worst part is, it seems to me like Hillary's campaign is trying to have it both ways and (not so) subtly appealing to liberal racism. "We don't agree" is not exactly a forceful denunciation....
Why does Hillary have to denounce Ferraro? Would Obama have to denounce Jesse Jackson if he said the same thing about women? Jackson and Ferraro are both historical figures in that they were the first legitimate presidential and vice presidential candidates. We aren't talking about denouncing some campaign spokesperson here. A lot of Black leaders have repeatedly said: without Martin, there would be no Jesse, and without Jesse, there would be no Barack. Someone could easily say: without Ferarro there would be no Hillary. I don't know if that example holds the same weight, but my point is that for Hillary to say she doesn't agree should be good enough for her critics.
....Such a stupid and vacuous statement from someone who should know better...I wonder sometimes about some racist liberals and think there really is no difference between them and some racist conservatives...sadly though, her sentiments are really not that surprising at all...
gtfohwtbs. Obama is the 3rd black senator....ever. He is a young, good looking guy with a background that is screen play worthy. Ferraro was inarticulate in what she said, but the truth is that Obama's blackness has not done him a disservice since becoming a Senator. I'm not discounting the hardships he grew up with or the racism that stood in his way to become a Senator, but his identity, including his racial identity have contributed to him becoming this enormously popular figure.
Lets not get it twisted here about who his voters are...and i'm not talking about black people. his supporters are voting for CHANGE. what spells change more than rejecting the white protestant males that we continue to elect. Ferraro should have said that Obama is winning votes because he symbolizes change more so than because his policies favor change (any more than Hillary's do).
Also, I think the opposite of what you have said is true. Nothing spells ignorance more than liberals who are afraid to talk about race...and gender. Bill Clinton was crucified but listen to what he said. This race is effected by people choosing their own. Blacks are overwhelmingly voting for Obama and women have favored Hillary. Clinton made an obvious and factual point, but people were soo offended because he pointed out that in South Carolina, where over 50% of democrats are Black, Obama's blackness played a major role, just like it did when Jesse Jackson won that state twice in '84 and '88.
I'm not sure if we want you on the team--maybe you could go back to the Hillary camp?
she's going around on TV shows defending herself not backing down at all
Here she is on Good Morning America (according to Time's summary):
Said ???every time someone opens their mouth??? to speak about Obama they are accused of racism. Stood by the comments, and is ???absolutely not??? sorry she made them.
She stopped by CBS's Early Show, too; clearly the Clinton folks see some benefit in stirring up these issues.
kamikaze campaign continues not even McCain would let this fly, much less enable it
my point is that for Hillary to say she doesn't agree should be good enough for her critics.
Seriously...
How soon we forget. That shits not even good enough for Hillary herself. What a Frickin' hypocrite.
"CLINTON: I just want to add something here, because I faced a similar situation when I ran for the Senate in 2000 in New York. And in New York, there are more than the two parties, Democratic and Republican. And one of the parties at that time, the Independence Patty, was under the control of people who were anti-Semitic, anti-Israel. And I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. I said that it would not be anything I would be comfortable with. And it looked as though I might pay a price for that. But I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory and untrue charges against either Israel or Jewish people in our country.
And, you know, I was willing to take that stand, and, you know, fortunately the people of New York supported me and I won. But at the time, I thought it was more important to stand on principle and to reject the kind of conditions that went with support like that."
no more than 15 seconds later...
"CLINTON: No. I'm just saying that you asked specifically if he would reject it. And there's a difference between denouncing and rejecting.
And I think when it comes to this sort of, you know, inflammatory -- I have no doubt that everything that Barack just said is absolutely sincere. But I just think, we've got to be even stronger. We cannot let anyone in any way say these things because of the implications that they have, which can be so far reaching."
Clinton also did not denounce/reject or even Frickin' acknowledge this racist shit:
"Obama has the problem that he happens to be Black," said Callejo when asked if it was smart for Senator Barack Obama to reach out to Latino voters.
"When Blacks had the numbers, they didn't do anything to support us," said Callejo. "They always used our numbers to fulfill their goals and objectives, but they never really supported us, and there's a lot of hard feelings about that. I don't think we're going to get over it anytime soon."
you are missing the point. look at the analogy between Ferraro and Jesse Jackson. if Jackson made an ill-advised comment about women, would you want Obama to denounce him? Of course not. He should just say "i don't agree", which is what Hillary did.
you are missing the point. look at the analogy between Ferraro and Jesse Jackson. if Jackson made an ill-advised comment about women, would you want Obama to denounce him? Of course not. He should just say "i don't agree", which is what Hillary did.
Comparing Ferraro to Farrakhan is retarded.
Apples and oranges to me, but either way, I don't think that Hillary would let it slide. That's the difference.
Farrakhan aside, why not "reject" Callejo's comments or Rush Limbaugh's endorsements in Texas or Ann Coulter? Hitler could come back from the dead and endorse Hillary and she wouldn't say a thing about it.
"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."
....Such a stupid and vacuous statement from someone who should know better...I wonder sometimes about some racist liberals and think there really is no difference between them and some racist conservatives...sadly though, her sentiments are really not that surprising at all...
Not surprising because she said the same thing almost exactly 20 years ago about Jesse Jackson. What a Frickin' racist pig!
"Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday (April 15th 1988) that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."
In an interview with ABC News affiliate WHTM, Clinton ignored calls from the Obama campaign to remove Ferraro from her campaign, saying, "Well, I don't agree with that and I think it's important that we try to stay focused on issues that matter to the American people."
Because you know... American people don't care about racism OR the ones that do aren't truly American.
Obama hasn't "let it slide" so you really don't have a point.
You really think anybody gives a shit if Hillary denounces Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter...who else - Rosie O'donnell? Jerry Springer?
What hasn't Barack let slide? Aren't you the same dude that implies he's a toothless softie?
And if Farrakhan wasn't Black no one would care about him. What's your point? I'm saying that there's a definite double standard that Hillary holds Barack to that she does not apply to herself.
She definitely should have distanced herself from her own husband's (is he insignificant as well?) remarks, but AGAIN did not acknowledge them.
wait - so Jesse Jackson would have had enough support to run if he were not black??? come on!!
The clintons have had overwhelming Black support for their entire careers. Now because Ferraro makes an inarticulate comment they are members of the kkk. You guys are giving liberals a bad name. Can we talk about race without being immediately labeled racist? Lets go over the things Bill has said that have people branding him a racist. Please show me where he lied about anything.
wait - so Jesse Jackson would have had enough support to run if he were not black??? come on!!
The clintons have had overwhelming Black support for their entire careers. Now because Ferraro makes an inarticulate comment they are members of the kkk. You guys are giving liberals a bad name. Can we talk about race without being immediately labeled racist? Lets go over the things Bill has said that have people branding him a racist. Please show me where he lied about anything.
The point is that the Clinton camp is showing its ass as being racially divisive during this campaign. Then, when she has the chance to make a statement that what Ferraro said wouldn't be tolerated by cutting her out, she doesn't. I think that says a lot, and certainly more than enough to almost completely turn off Black voters to the prospect of her nomination. Go figure...
Clinton ignored calls from the Obama campaign to remove Ferraro from her campaign, saying, "Well, I don't agree with that and I think it's important that we try to stay focused on issues that matter to the American people."
Yes, the issues that matter. Such as whether 20 debates is enough, the "commander in chief threshold", whether caucus delegates, or delegates in general matter, whether small states matter, and exactly how offensive the word "monster" is.
These are the real issues facing Americans today. She's too busy taking bold stances on them to be worried about a little inflammatory racial rhetoric from inside her campaign. Look at all the hypothetically sexist things Jesse Jackson could have said!!
wait - so Jesse Jackson would have had enough support to run if he were not black??? come on!!
If a White man would have had the same stances, he would have had the same support from Blacks., ie., Bill Clinton 1992. You prove yourself wrong.
The clintons have had overwhelming Black support for their entire careers.
Operative word = HAD
He fucked that up himself and hopefully for his wife as well. The Clinton's are necessarily Grand Dragons, but they're type of racist that can only tolerate (or pander towards) a group when it fully supports them. At the first inkling of Blacks wavering on their Clinton support, Bill lets his true colors shine. It's ok to use Blacks as a stepping stone, but Blacks having their own opinion? Hell no!
You're of the same thinking though. You subscribe to the drivel that Blacks are only supporting Obama because of race. I doubt that you could ever see it any other way.
Now because Ferraro makes an inarticulate comment they are members of the kkk. You guys are giving liberals a bad name. Can we talk about race without being immediately labeled racist?
Theres a tangible trend in the Clinton campaign steering towards bitterness for Black people. They say "fuck us", so we say "fuck them".
To ignore Obama/Jackson as legitimate candidates and reduce them to affirmative action cases is no different than saying that they don't qualify BECAUSE they are Black.
Lets go over the things Bill has said that have people branding him a racist. Please show me where he lied about anything.
You wouldn't have seen it if he said, "all niggers must die".
yea, god point, the real issue facing Americans right now is whether its acceptable for Hillary to say she doesn't agree with Ferraro...or...should she "denounce" Ferraro, a liberal democrat who happens to be the only woman ever selected to be a VP candidate.
wait - so Jesse Jackson would have had enough support to run if he were not black??? come on!!
If a White man would have had the same stances, he would have had the same support from Blacks., ie., Bill Clinton 1992. You prove yourself wrong.
DUDE - GO HOME!!!
what was jesse jackson's political experience in '84 or '88? I prove myself wrong? You haven't made an intelligent point on a political thread...ever. Stick to cutting and pasting other people's words.
yea, god point, the real issue facing Americans right now is whether its acceptable for Hillary to say she doesn't agree with Ferraro...or...should she "denounce" Ferraro, a liberal democrat who happens to be the only woman ever selected to be a VP candidate.
Dude, who cares about Ferraro's own politics or her legacy? Why would those be mitigating factors?
What's wrong is wrong--denounce her and keep it moving. I guarantee Clinton and her camp have invested far more time in discussing internally just how to finesse this schitt than an actual thirty second soundbite of a denunciation would have taken.
because her politics and legacy trump a series of inarticulate comments. mother teresa has been criticized for writing a letter to the judge presiding over the case of a guy who defrauded people out of $250 million - and asking for clemency simply because he gave some of that stolen money to the church. should we denounce mother teresa? or is it okay to say we didn't agree with some of the things she has done.
"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."
wait - so Jesse Jackson would have had enough support to run if he were not black??? come on!!
If a White man would have had the same stances, he would have had the same support from Blacks., ie., Bill Clinton 1992. You prove yourself wrong.
DUDE - GO HOME!!!
what was jesse jackson's political experience in '84 or '88? I prove myself wrong? You haven't made an intelligent point on a political thread...ever. Stick to cutting and pasting other people's words.
You're pretty crappy at lawyering. I'm strictly speaking on issues. Where did I mention experience? Black people often see experience in government as a bad thing.
because her politics and legacy trump a series of inarticulate comments. mother teresa has been criticized for writing a letter to the judge presiding over the case of a guy who defrauded people out of $250 million - and asking for clemency simply because he gave some of that stolen money to the church. should we denounce mother teresa? or is it okay to say we didn't agree with some of the things she has done.
Dude, be serious.
Nobody is calling for Hillary to denounce Ferraro the person. Nobody is expecting Hillary to devote an hour to enumerating all of Ferraro's sins. All she needs to do is denounce THESE COMMENTS. Whatever Ferraro has said or done in the past is not a factor in that analysis.
Comments
actually, I think he did go by 'Barry' in High School
---
gtfohwtbs. Obama is the 3rd black senator....ever. He is a young, good looking guy with a background that is screen play worthy. Ferraro was inarticulate in what she said, but the truth is that Obama's blackness has not done him a disservice since becoming a Senator. I'm not discounting the hardships he grew up with or the racism that stood in his way to become a Senator, but his identity, including his racial identity have contributed to him becoming this enormously popular figure.
Lets not get it twisted here about who his voters are...and i'm not talking about black people. his supporters are voting for CHANGE. what spells change more than rejecting the white protestant males that we continue to elect. Ferraro should have said that Obama is winning votes because he symbolizes change more so than because his policies favor change (any more than Hillary's do).
Also, I think the opposite of what you have said is true. Nothing spells ignorance more than liberals who are afraid to talk about race...and gender. Bill Clinton was crucified but listen to what he said. This race is effected by people choosing their own. Blacks are overwhelmingly voting for Obama and women have favored Hillary. Clinton made an obvious and factual point, but people were soo offended because he pointed out that in South Carolina, where over 50% of democrats are Black, Obama's blackness played a major role, just like it did when Jesse Jackson won that state twice in '84 and '88.
Cmon, the Clintons really are playing this shit kinda dirty. All these denouncements, outrage and calls for resignation over the word 'monster', and Hillary and co can boil his entire career and achievements down to his race and "a speech". I see you're trying to narrow her comments down to just the campaign, but where's the similar clarification from Clinton's camp. If we're going to play it hyper-sensitive, it has to go both ways. Trying to pretend its not a popularity contest, with the faux-naivety and feigned outrage, is bullshit, esp when they largely share their positions. The fact is, regardless of gender or race, a lot of people find her divisive, and find him inspiring.
The worst part is, it seems to me like Hillary's campaign is trying to have it both ways and (not so) subtly appealing to liberal racism. "We don't agree" is not exactly a forceful denunciation....
I'm not sure if we want you on the team--maybe you could go back to the Hillary camp?
Why does Hillary have to denounce Ferraro? Would Obama have to denounce Jesse Jackson if he said the same thing about women? Jackson and Ferraro are both historical figures in that they were the first legitimate presidential and vice presidential candidates. We aren't talking about denouncing some campaign spokesperson here. A lot of Black leaders have repeatedly said: without Martin, there would be no Jesse, and without Jesse, there would be no Barack. Someone could easily say: without Ferarro there would be no Hillary. I don't know if that example holds the same weight, but my point is that for Hillary to say she doesn't agree should be good enough for her critics.
not backing down at all
kamikaze campaign continues
not even McCain would let this fly, much less enable it
Seriously...
How soon we forget. That shits not even good enough for Hillary herself. What a Frickin' hypocrite.
"CLINTON: I just want to add something here, because I faced a similar situation when I ran for the Senate in 2000 in New York. And in New York, there are more than the two parties, Democratic and Republican. And one of the parties at that time, the Independence Patty, was under the control of people who were anti-Semitic, anti-Israel. And I made it very clear that I did not want their support. I rejected it. I said that it would not be anything I would be comfortable with. And it looked as though I might pay a price for that. But I would not be associated with people who said such inflammatory and untrue charges against either Israel or Jewish people in our country.
And, you know, I was willing to take that stand, and, you know, fortunately the people of New York supported me and I won. But at the time, I thought it was more important to stand on principle and to reject the kind of conditions that went with support like that."
no more than 15 seconds later...
"CLINTON: No. I'm just saying that you asked specifically if he would reject it. And there's a difference between denouncing and rejecting.
And I think when it comes to this sort of, you know, inflammatory -- I have no doubt that everything that Barack just said is absolutely sincere. But I just think, we've got to be even stronger. We cannot let anyone in any way say these things because of the implications that they have, which can be so far reaching."
Clinton also did not denounce/reject or even Frickin' acknowledge this racist shit:
"Obama has the problem that he happens to be Black," said Callejo when asked if it was smart for Senator Barack Obama to reach out to Latino voters.
"When Blacks had the numbers, they didn't do anything to support us," said Callejo. "They always used our numbers to fulfill their goals and objectives, but they never really supported us, and there's a lot of hard feelings about that. I don't think we're going to get over it anytime soon."
Called out for pulling the race card, she pulls another race card.
Comparing Ferraro to Farrakhan is retarded.
Apples and oranges to me, but either way, I don't think that Hillary would let it slide. That's the difference.
Farrakhan aside, why not "reject" Callejo's comments or Rush Limbaugh's endorsements in Texas or Ann Coulter? Hitler could come back from the dead and endorse Hillary and she wouldn't say a thing about it.
You really think anybody gives a shit if Hillary denounces Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter...who else - Rosie O'donnell? Jerry Springer?
Not surprising because she said the same thing almost exactly 20 years ago about Jesse Jackson. What a Frickin' racist pig!
"Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday (April 15th 1988) that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."
And that's ok with Hillary...
In an interview with ABC News affiliate WHTM, Clinton ignored calls from the Obama campaign to remove Ferraro from her campaign, saying, "Well, I don't agree with that and I think it's important that we try to stay focused on issues that matter to the American people."
Because you know... American people don't care about racism OR the ones that do aren't truly American.
Fuck these people!!!
What hasn't Barack let slide? Aren't you the same dude that implies he's a toothless softie?
And if Farrakhan wasn't Black no one would care about him. What's your point? I'm saying that there's a definite double standard that Hillary holds Barack to that she does not apply to herself.
She definitely should have distanced herself from her own husband's (is he insignificant as well?) remarks, but AGAIN did not acknowledge them.
"I'm gonna sit this one out Clarence! I'm gonna sit it out!"
If I cringed any further I'd be in my downstairs neighbor's apartment.
The clintons have had overwhelming Black support for their entire careers. Now because Ferraro makes an inarticulate comment they are members of the kkk. You guys are giving liberals a bad name. Can we talk about race without being immediately labeled racist? Lets go over the things Bill has said that have people branding him a racist. Please show me where he lied about anything.
The point is that the Clinton camp is showing its ass as being racially divisive during this campaign. Then, when she has the chance to make a statement that what Ferraro said wouldn't be tolerated by cutting her out, she doesn't. I think that says a lot, and certainly more than enough to almost completely turn off Black voters to the prospect of her nomination. Go figure...
Yes, the issues that matter. Such as whether 20 debates is enough, the "commander in chief threshold", whether caucus delegates, or delegates in general matter, whether small states matter, and exactly how offensive the word "monster" is.
These are the real issues facing Americans today. She's too busy taking bold stances on them to be worried about a little inflammatory racial rhetoric from inside her campaign. Look at all the hypothetically sexist things Jesse Jackson could have said!!
If a White man would have had the same stances, he would have had the same support from Blacks., ie., Bill Clinton 1992. You prove yourself wrong.
Operative word = HAD
He fucked that up himself and hopefully for his wife as well. The Clinton's are necessarily Grand Dragons, but they're type of racist that can only tolerate (or pander towards) a group when it fully supports them. At the first inkling of Blacks wavering on their Clinton support, Bill lets his true colors shine. It's ok to use Blacks as a stepping stone, but Blacks having their own opinion? Hell no!
You're of the same thinking though. You subscribe to the drivel that Blacks are only supporting Obama because of race. I doubt that you could ever see it any other way.
Theres a tangible trend in the Clinton campaign steering towards bitterness for Black people. They say "fuck us", so we say "fuck them".
To ignore Obama/Jackson as legitimate candidates and reduce them to affirmative action cases is no different than saying that they don't qualify BECAUSE they are Black.
You wouldn't have seen it if he said, "all niggers must die".
Seriously--the Clintons act like Black people owe them something.
DUDE - GO HOME!!!
what was jesse jackson's political experience in '84 or '88? I prove myself wrong? You haven't made an intelligent point on a political thread...ever. Stick to cutting and pasting other people's words.
Dude, who cares about Ferraro's own politics or her legacy? Why would those be mitigating factors?
What's wrong is wrong--denounce her and keep it moving. I guarantee Clinton and her camp have invested far more time in discussing internally just how to finesse this schitt than an actual thirty second soundbite of a denunciation would have taken.
As a lifelong 'yellow dog' Democrat, if Hillary is the nominee I may just have to ask her to go f*ck herself...
If you follow her logic why don't we see a "black" candidate in every presidential election?
You're pretty crappy at lawyering. I'm strictly speaking on issues. Where did I mention experience? Black people often see experience in government as a bad thing.
Dude, be serious.
Nobody is calling for Hillary to denounce Ferraro the person. Nobody is expecting Hillary to devote an hour to enumerating all of Ferraro's sins. All she needs to do is denounce THESE COMMENTS. Whatever Ferraro has said or done in the past is not a factor in that analysis.