For Shame
Posted by MEC on March 11, 2008
Geraldine Ferraro, who of all people should know better, has said that Senator Obama has only gotten as far as he had in the presidential race because he’s black.
As my daddy used to say, “Enough is too much.”
Ms. Ferraro is a fundraiser for Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton has “disagreed” with her statement. Merely expressing disagreement is not enough, particularly since Ms. Ferraro’s statement is entirely consistent with Senator Clinton’s earlier, outrageous statement that she would rather have Bushevik John McCain taking a “3:00 a.m. phone call” than her fellow Democrat.
Senator Clinton, you must recognize that you don’t own the Democratic nomination. There really is a chance you won’t get it. And if Barack Obama wins the nomination, the Republicans will repeat all the foolish things you’ve said against him. Do you really want to be responsible for putting another Republican in the White House, especially an untrustworthy warmonger like John McCain?
Don’t just make the obligatory public repudiation of the things your supporters are saying. Make it clear to them that these attacks on Senator Obama’s fitness for the office must not continue.
5 Responses to “For Shame”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
pt bridgeport said
If one does one’s best to interpret the remarks of other Democrats charitably – and the level of vitriol on both sides out here on the blogosphere makes me eager to do that – one can put a less pernicious gloss on Senator Clinton’s assertion about “the Commander in Chief test”.
I prefer to take her to mean it as an electability argument rather than a qualifications argument. By and large, she is saying (or I hope she is saying), the voters at this point regard McCain and Clinton as seasoned in international affairs. And in subtext as tough and mean enough to deal with the world’s bad guys. The “test” Obama has failed to pass, then, would not be whether he has the requisite seasoning and toughness, but whether he has so far convinced voters that he has them.
In addition to its charity, this reading of her words has the added advantage of rendering sensible what would otherwise be nonsense – her willingness to take on Obama as Veep; and her spokesman’s assertion that Obama has “not yet” passed the putative test. If we were talking about his real seasoning and toughness, of course, nothing that transpires over the next few months could change that reality and get him over the hump. But if we’re talking only about voter perception, there’s plenty of time for Barack to make the case.
If that is what HRC really means, I admit, she could have been a great deal clearer, and she’d better get cracking at getting clearer fast.
I could try to make excuses for Ferraro’s comment too, but that would be a mug’s game. Obama’s blackness has indeed helped him (as well as hurt him), but it hasn’t done so on its own. It’s done so primarily in that the accident of his race gives even stronger resonance to his more basic theme that what we have in common as Americans can transcend our differences. Combined with his rhetorical skills, that theme would have given Hillary a run for her money no matter what other personal characteristics her opponent embodied. Ferraro was as wrong as she was thoughtless.
MEC said
PT, I think you’re being too charitable in interpreting Clinton’s remarks. She compared a Democratic candidate unfavorably to the Republican candidate. She handed the Republicans ammunition to use against him. And you know they will. She should know better, and there’s no excuse for doing it.
Phoenix Woman said
Exactly.
nicteis said
Gee, I seem to chime in with comments here only when I’ve got something contrarian to say. You may well be right, but then I ask myself WWOD (What Would Obama Do?), and plow right ahead being as charitable as the evidence will permit, not as merely as charitable as the evidence suggests.
What really drives it, I guess, is the fact that I have a bunch of blue collar women friends of une age certaine who I was unable to persuade to vote for my guy. They’re open to hearing my doubts about Hillary’s effectiveness as a progressive President, but they’re not open to hearing that she’s a monster. And I want them out there plugging for Barack once he nails the nom.
Michael said
Here’s the question. Will Hillary Clinton defect like Joe Lieberman?