(no subject)

[bryant]

"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."

Ignoring the irony of those words coming out of Geraldine Ferraro's mouth, and ignoring the fact that they're a restatement of classic anti-affirmative action rhetoric, she's still flat out wrong. Cast your mind back to 2004, and you'll remember a young first-term Senator who was in second place down the stretch and who eventually became the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee. Which is exactly the job Clinton's offered Obama.

Comments

[tahnan.livejournal.com]

Er? I mean, yes she's flat out wrong--add to the irony of Ferraro saying them that Jesse Jackson was also running in 1984. But what does the analogy to Edwards have to do with it? Ferraro wasn't commenting on Obama's good fortune to be offered the VP slot by Clinton, as far as I can tell; she was commenting on race. And, of course, Obama isn't "in second place down the stretch"; he's leading by 100 delegates, which isn't decisive but also isn't Edwards in 2004, when (in May) Edwards had about a fourth the delegates Kerry did.

[bryant]

She's commenting on race plus Obama's inexperience, yeah. I think the implication is that his inexperience would disqualify him if it wasn't the case that he was black.

I think that's inaccurate because you only have to go back one cycle to see another first term Senator doing well in the primaries; certainly not as well, but the difference between Edwards and Obama is not just the fact that Obama's black.