Mrs. Ferraro said the same thing about Jesse Jackson when he ran for president. All voters need to do in 2008 is substitute Jackson's name with Obama. How sad!

Her comments from the 1980's were posted on The Politico website:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/A_Ferraro_flashback.html

Ferraro's comments to The Daily Breeze newspaper are right on target in describing the teflon-coated candidacy of Barack Obama. Whenever Obama stands up to mesmerize an audience of kids and politically correct, he plays the race card; he parries any critical comment about him as "racist"; blacks who want to vote for Clinton are bullied and insulted; blacks are voting as a bloc--85% in one state,91% in Mississippi. He has combined a civil-rights movement with a political candidacy to get a prize. This is our country at stake. Go to www.savagepolitics.com for considerable background information.

I too agree with Ferraro, and I'm glad that she point it out. I feel like American freedom of speech has been violated. I'm really sick of this race card to an extreme.

I'm neither white nor black so I will say this: White folks need to stand up against this accusation of racism. This will always be an issue if never addressed.

Superdelegate Spitzer's damage to Hillary will be forgotten quickly, but her advisor superdelegate Ferraro's racism will be remembered by the voters. If the Florida primaries are repeated, Hillary will discover that she is getting a lot less votes.

A Statment of fact boy menopausal women are bi-polor. Geardine and Hillary go get a fan and cool off.

My mother is turning over in her grave. She love Gearldine when she ran and lost for Vice President.

She picked to smallest paper in California to make this comment. Bill and Hillary gave her the go ahead.

CLINTONS THINK WE CANT SEE THE FOREST THROUGHT THE TREES. YES WE CAN!

Racism is not really racism, it is just true colors shining (sorry - I forgot the politically correct term)

If Geraldine Ferraro had uttered these poisonous words in a workplace, she would have been called out for creating a hostile work environment. She ought to be called out, her comments renounced and rejected.

This is not about political "correctness," as so many are fond of saying, but about a basic respect for others.

Her comments diminish not only other black people but by extension all people who don't happen to be white and our society in general.

Her comments do a disservice to her history as a trailblazing candidate for the vice presidency, and they serve as a poor model for Americans, who need to treat others who are not white with respect and not subject them to racial objectification.

Obama's message of reaching out to others and working together to solve the problems that plague our country -- to get past the division and divisive tactics of the past -- is particularly meaningful and relevant because he's black. His position as the front-runner for the democratic nomination reinforces the belief of many Americans that anyone can rise to the top in our society, no matter their creed or color.

But that's not what Ferraro meant. She is belittling his accomplishments and significance by defining him primarily by his race, and that is shameful. Given the opportunity to clarify or amend her remarks, she simply reiterates them. Amazing. Is she utterly unaware of the deep irony of herself talking like this, when I'm sure after she overcame significant sexism to achieve many things, her gender undoubtedly played a role in her selection to various posts? Is she unaware that the primary reason her candidate is a serious candidate is her role as the wife of a relatively successful president? No doubt she is aware of it, actually, and this whole thing is just another cynical play by the Clinton campaign to diminish Obama in any way they can (e.g. suggesting him as a vice presidential candidate).

As a white, jewish, woman over forty, I take very seriously my party's history of leading on racial justice issues, and I am beyond disgusted with the repeated playing of the race card by the Clinton campaign (recall WJC's comparison of Obama and Jesse Jackson). They are employing a southern strategy that Lee Atwater would be proud of, and it's appalling. I wonder if they have figured out how they would possibly win a general without the black vote -- but I suspect they don't care, they are just looking to PA and they'll figure out the general later. As a DC resident my vote doesn't really matter, but as a frequent contributor maybe I do, a little, and there is no way I can support someone with absolutely no character like her.

She is absolutely correct. Further more to spin her statements as racist is an Obama political foil. What she is saying is that neither Jesse Jackson nor Obama are qualified to be president regardless of the color of their skin. If Obama does become the president the country will find that out in short order. Social movements do not make for effective presidents. The religious movement that put Bush in office created the disaster we have now and the movement to put Obama in office will prolong it. Possibly even exacerbate it because of the divisions it is creating in the party.

I was really proud of America a couple of weeks ago. I felt that we went beyond the color of ones skin. But since Hillary is throwing the kitchen sink everything goes! Race shouldn't be an issue, and the democratic party will pay a price for this. Record number of people are voting, people that never voted before are doing it for the first time. And this is what we have to offer? I'm offend by bring race into the debate just as I would be about gender!

And Ferraro's comments where planned, it's a setup for Penn. Hillary, shame on you..I thought you were better than this! Now I know!

Idiots! Every last one of you, IDIOTS!!! We have suffered for 8 miserable long years under the rule of king george and rather than come together to make sure his successor, John McBush doesn't get into office and continue bushes policies, we self destruct. IDIOTS! IDIOTS !!

The dinosaurs of the Second Millenium pontificate.
Ferraro: Obama's lucky to be winning just because he's black.
Rendell: Obama's worthy but can't win Pa because he's black
Bill Clinton: Obama = Jackson; they're black.
Finally the Clinton campaign speaks with passion and hope on an issue: that racial profiling will prevail in the election.

Ferraro: Obama's lucky to be winning just because he's black.
Rendell: Obama's worthy but can't win Pa because he's black
Bill Clinton: Obama = Jackson; they're black.
Finally the Clinton campaign speaks with passion and hope on an issue: that racial profiling will prevail in the election.

Were anyone to say that Hillary would not be in the position of competing for the Democratic nomination unless she were a woman, I would take that as a blatantly sexist comment, disrespected her innate strength and judgement.

What a cynical trap. Damned if you don't succeed, and if you do, damned and dismissed because your success was just a product of your race. No way to win. It feels like a segment of the Democratic party is much more comfortable with "Just go to the back of the bus and vote for us."

And Ferraro claims she has no connection to the Clinton campaign while serving on the finance committee.

Barack Obama deserves to be the democratic nominee.

The stricking thing here is that Mrs. Clinton is using all these attacks as ways to scare white voters to not trust Obama from the pictures to the "far as I know comment" on Obamas religion and the late call message. These things scare whites and the uninformed. Very good way to get votes but it may cause black voters to realize that the DEM party only serves you if you blindly serve them. If Clinton is successful the Black Vote will be lost forever and the tensions on race will go back to Rodney King & OJ. Most inportantly blacks will be considering voting for a REPUBLICAN Pres.very seriously. McCain may surface as the bridge builder in all of this.

Mrs Ferraro is on the money, and we'll see that when Obama is elected to a single term in office. If you want to see a real parallel, look at the the David Dinkins mayoral debacle in NYC. The only things NY got out of that administration were Arthur Ashe Stadium and 8 years of Rudy.

While it is clear neither candidate has any real "executive" experience to speak of at least Mrs. Clinton has been doing more in the Senate than simply running for president. In fact, we has much more experience in federal government than he, and while everyone likes to say she voted for the war, almost every senator voted for it. Move on people... her strategy is more sound or Richardson would still be on the ticket.

What a pathetic figure Ferraro is becoming with these comments. So... her entire career was paved by being female, I assume? Oh noooo, I'm sure that's totally different. And Hillary, who without the blind "want a woman in the White House" vote would be long gone in this race, is not benefiting from some of that? Oh, I'm sure it's more about her deep foreign policy credentials - giving a speech in Northern Ireland and answering the phone for Bill at 3 AM. Yes, I'm sure Ferraro's argument cannot be used in reverse. (Clinton will "demonize" you if you do, anyway, like she promised her aides she would do to anyone who got in her way.)

Just pathetic. Is it possible that Ferraro is simply still smarting from LOSING THE 1984 ELECTION TO A MAN WHO GAVE GREAT, INSPIRING SPEECHES? Why don't you lay down on the couch here Geraldine and tell us all about your unresolved bitterness.

I happen to agree with Geraldine Ferraro and I don't like the fact that she should be censured or thrown under the bus for saying what many people feel is a truism.

Enough with the race card already.

Trying to b.... slap a woman because of her opinion is b... s...

there

It is nice for her to try to frame it differently today, but listen to the whole interview on radio that she gave back in Feb, after her op-ed piece in NYT. Judge for yourself if her explanation holds any water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqL_sm0J8jc

what a disgusting monster.

Ferraro is just plain ignorant to make such remarks. She is just as igorant as theguy who tried to diminish Larry Bird as only being a star because he is white. Obama and Bird are both stars in their respective filds because of what they do and how they have distinguished themselvs from other journeyman such a Ferraro. I hope the DNC, Dean, Gore, Edwards and Richardsn put an end to this by telling Clinton to fire her and get Ferraro to shut her stupid trap.

As much as I admire Obama, although I will not vote for him, or Clinton for that matter - but Ms Ferraro speaks the truth. I also wonder - here we are in the middle of a war - and I have yet to hear anyone question that neither of the Democratic candidates has much if any experience in the military world or the Intel community - I'm not talking about committees they might attend every six months - I'm talking real world experience and understanding of the real situation. "Bring the troops home!" just to get a cheer from an audience is not a well thought out plan.

Structurally, Geraldine's argument is identical with arguments made for the inferiority of people of African descent, women, and other groups throughout American history. The strategy is to reduce a person's subjectivity and humanity to the status of a gernalized object. For years, people have argued that people of African descent were inherantly inferior because of their Black skin. Now, Geraldine argues that Obama is successful because of his black skin. Structurally, these arguments are identical.

For years, people have argued that people of African descent were inherently inferior because of their Black skin. Now, Geraldine argues that Obama is successful because of his black skin. Structurally, these arguments are identical.

Here's a great piece on Ferarro's racist remarks from the American Spectator website.

"Ferraro's condescension captures the tone of paternalistic liberalism perfectly. Its "victims" should know their place and plot their ascent according to the progressive charts set up by the white liberal establishment.

We'll let you know, Barack, when it is your time to win -- that's been the tacit theme of the Clinton campaign all along. Such is the generosity of Lady Bountiful she'll even let him serve as her apprentice in the VP chair for eight years.

But chaos has erupted and the plantation progressives don't know what to do, except to blurt out pent-up racial resentments. Then, the victims, whom they spent the last few decades training in hair-trigger racial sensitivity, turn on them in righteous fury, detecting nuances of racism in everything from Andrew Cuomo's description of Obama's press conferences as "shuck and jive" events to Bill Clinton's belittling Jesse Jackson comparison to Ferraro's sniffing at his "luck."

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=12883

Andrew Sullivan's elaborates on the idea of entitlement:

"The most irritating but revealing trope from the Clintonites in the face of Obama's success these past two months has been "Get real." By "get real," they mean, I think, that it is unimaginable that a young black freshman should beat a Clinton. That's how she can offer the veep slot to a man who has beaten her. That's how she can treat white ethnic voters in Pennsylvania as if they mean more than black voters in South Carolina. I'm not even sure that Ferraro or Clinton realize how unconsciously racist these assumptions are."

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/ferraro-and-ent.html

Good stuff.

I hate o say it, but, I think this is just the Clinton machine trying to say, remember, he's black. I think they are trying to keep that going. It is sick but I think it is true. They won't do it because it is too risky. However, send out someone loud and wrong and let them do it. Someone we can fire and look good over it. Obama didn't take the bait. In fact, he praised Ms. Ferraro. She deserves it. However, she is loud and wrong. She needs to check herself quick. Obama never called her a racist either; he said she was making divisive comments, and she is. If he were white, of course, the race would be over. The guy is sharp, polished, open-minded, not a ideologue, and accomplished. What he doesn't know, he is willing to learn. What he does know, he is willing to share.

1) I can't believe Ferraro made that comment, dug herself further into the hole, and is refusing to apologize

2) I can't believe the Clinton campaign hasn't denounced and rejected this

3) I can't believe the Clinton campaign is trying to blame this whole kerfluffle on the Obama campaign

4) I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW MANY POSTERS ON HERE THINK THIS IS A-OK!!!

I am deeply disappointed. Pull your heads out of your rear ends people. The fact that this became news is not a function of sexist media, it's a function of the fact that the comments were racist and totally unacceptable. Was Geraldine Ferraro ever President of the Harvard Law Review? Was she ever elected to the U.S. Senate? Hmm, no. Golly, it must be because she's a woman. On the other hand, Obama clearly achieved these things because he's black.

In the sarcastic words of Howard Fineman, "I think we've all observed how many advantages black men have in American society."

For the love of all that is holy, people. Just 'fess up. These were obnoxious, racist comments, and the Clintons should kick Ferraro off the campaign. It's that simple.

If it had been a Republican male making those statements, the Democratic party would have fallen all over itself talking about how racist they were. Instead, the Republicans don't have to do a thing, Ferraro does it all for them.
This is what it's really about. The Clintons were hoping that the country wouldn't be ready to elect an African American man as President. When signs showed that might not be the case after all, they felt they needed to remind the country that hey, Obama is African American as if people were voting for someone they shouldn't. Yes Obama may be in the spotlight because he is the first African American that has a serious chance at being President but the real reason he's popular is the same reason that will make McCain win: he's a positive person who fills people with hope for the future. Hilary will do anything to win and once she's the Democratic Candidate, you might as well just hand the keys to the White House to McCain.

I think it is ironic how many people keep saying that Barack's campaign is using the race card by calling out Ferraro for being racist, when she is the one that made race the issue. This is a play right out of Rush Limbaugh's handbook. "Say something racist, then when everyone rightly calls you a racist, protest that they are using the race card." I have been truly sickened by the tactics of the Clintons and many of their clonies (black and white) during this campaign. I hate to say it, but I think many democrats will either stay home or vote for McCain in the general election if she gets the nomination. She is tearing the party apart.

Hillary's campaign first became openly racist since Bill's speeches in South Carolina. To have an outspoken, longtime racist like Ferraro as her advisor will finish the job, if Hillary does not immediately disassociate herself from this person. I can hardly wait for the results of the black vote in Philadelphia and in Florida. Looks like Bill moved his office to Harlem for nothing.

This is a divisive tactic. It is my hope that the essence of such language can be understood for what it is. She has every right to believe as she does. My point of contention is that she is wrong. Facts are based on empirical data, not the perspective of a person.

The only retraction that I hope to made is the truth that these statements are based upon her perspective, not facts.

Mr. Obama excels in this race because he is a blessedly excellent leader with a brilliant mind. The issue that she is raising question not so much Mr. Obama, as the judgment of the American people. We finally see beyond color and chose a man who is obviously answering the true call renewed leadership and she pulls the race card.

As a woman of color and as an American I'm hurt and would have expected a better perspective.

Ferraro's comment was NOT racist. It was reality about Jesse Jackson. He was NOT a player on the national political stage when he made his ostensible runs at the White House - they were done to position him for a role in platform-making and he was never taken seriously for that reason. He had accomplished nothing to merit the office.

It is the reality now about Obama. Observing a fact is NOT racist. It is a FACT that Obama received endless media attention far far far out of proportion to his experience and achievements. The media has endlessly obsessed on "the first black to have a serious chance.' (Although why they persist in solely calling him 'black' eludes me as he can equally be called white.)

(1) He was an innocuous state legislator with no great record, no involvement in national issues or party matters, no experience at much of anything and had gotten his backside kicked in his attempt to run for the US House in the primary when he was picked to give a speech. The Dems do that a lot - they try so hard to be politically correct. There certainly were no reasons of merit behind the choice.

(2) He arrived in the Senate having had a basically uncontested race and no major achievements in his prior activates. Those activities include

getting bored with being a law firm associate and having to do the slog work without the glory so off he goes to run for the US House where he promptly got flattened in the primary so he tries the state senate from a safe district and does get elected but makes no major substantial contribution and tries not to antagonize anyone and sits in the middle of everything without taking hard positions until he sees a chance for what he feels to be his due in terms of recognition and aims for the US Senate where he was in 3rd place until both his opponents self-destructed so he wins in a walk-over and gets to the US Senate Where he decides within less than 6 months that he isn't getting enough attention or power and that he can run the US where he will be 'appreciated' as he deserves (or at least he thinks he 'deserves.')

Okay, if some boring white guy (or woman of any race) had announced after less than 10 months in the US Senate that with no relevant experience and no outstanding achievements in any field that they were fit to run the country as President, they would have been laughed off the stage and ignored by the media.

He got the media attention - endlessly fawning as it was for the over the first year of this drawn out dog 'n pony show - and he got it because he was a novelty to the media. A half black/half white man taking aim at the presidency with no valid credential to back it up and who hadn't even put in a year in the US Senate but launches his campaign based upon having just been elected to the US Senate.

It gave the media their dream primary season - black man against white woman and they deliberately ignored all the white men running.

They did the same with Clinton. She wouldn't be in the US Senate 'but for' whom she married. The day she announced she was running for the US Senate, the media began fawning and panting and treating her like she was the leader of the Democratic Party hanging on her every word for the next 7 years! She was a 1st term Senator who got there based upon her husband's name and the media immediately anointed her as a presidential candidate. It gave them great headlines - "first woman with a serious chance of winning"
And then the media played the two off them off against the other - and no other candidate existed except the two anointed who made the best headlines.

Good grief - BOTH of them received a leg up on the primary competitions because of their race or sex. Recognizing that is NOT racist nor sexist. It is merely reality.

Considering the fact that black voters flock to Obama in a near monolithic block, one would have to be thick as two bricks not to see the voting on racial lines.

If anyone knows about the media attention from being the 'first' of a type to have a serious chance of winning as Pres or VP, it is Geraldine Ferraro. She went through it as the first woman nominated for VP. She knows exactly the kind of media coverage someone gets in that position and how it gives them a boost, and how they are treated when they are a novelty as the 'first' to do something.

She is absolutely right - Obama's being 1/2 black got him a lot of favorable press (they adore novelties) and let him avoid the dismissive ridicule that another candidate with the same credentials (or lack thereof) but who was a white guy would have endured since such ridicule would have been labeled 'racist.'
It is not good nor is it bad. It just 'is.'

If the Obama campaign doesn't want anyone mentioning his racial ancestry, I suggest that he kick out every reporter who has written 'the first black to have a serious chance' or anything at all about his race and its effect on his campaign and how he is perceived by voters. Better yet would be if he looked at black voters and said "DO NOT VOTE FOR ME BECAUSE I AM 1/2 BLACK." (Naw, won't ever happen.)

Rather than the whining response, he should have just shrugged and said "Yep being the 'first' has helped as it helps the voters remember me. Works for Mrs. Clinton to since she is the 1st woman to get this far. In politics, you play the cards you are dealt and take anything that helps."

Having his campagin whining "racist, racist" at someone who was supporting and voting for civil rights matters when he was still playing in the school playground more than over the top.

As I recall, when Obama was running for US Senator, he said something like 'Who thought that a skinny black kid from Chicago would ever be running for...'
Sure seems like playing the race card to me-- to paraphrase, 'Look at me, I'm black and I'm successful, isn't that great.' Well, to a certain extent it is.

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

how sad to have someone who claims to be an educated person saying such idiotic things...Thank GOd we woke up in the election booth on her.

I find Geraldine's comments quite offensive. When she ran for VP, she had 6 years in the House, but she felt ready to run and felt she touched the glass ceiling. Her comments are to polarize voters, by forcing white voters who support Barack Obama to go to Hillary Clinton, because it's time for a "white woman" to win. Hillary is behind in delegates as well as popular vote, however, the psychology is to run as if she is entitled to be top dog, called "white skin privilege". Yes, Geraldine, your comments are quite racist, and Hillary, putting your black face campaign manager out as the spokesperson to justify Geraldine's comments is shameful. Geraldine said she could raise tons of money for Barack, so he better back off. Well, Geraldine, it seems he's raised a lot more money than Hillary, without your help, so maybe you better back off. Everyone thinks affirmative action benefited a lot of unqualified blacks, but white women benefited more than any other protected group. So, go figure. Just like the Hispanics/Latinos should remember American history and civil rights, it was the blacks who fought so hard and put up with the hangings, brutality, racism, dogs so that you can benefit in this country.

Of course Obama having the delegate count, poll standing and political messiah enthusiasm he does among a large fraction of the electorate, and the media darling position he has occupied since he announced has much more behind it than only that he's black. It's the KIND of black he is and represents, or anyway that it's very possible for people to imagine to be.

He's undeniably highly articulate and has great personal charisma, of a reassuring as opposed to a fiery and scary sort (to whites and other non blacks). He's also undeniably highly intelligent by pretty much any measure, in addition to being articulate. Yeah his combo AA and legacy status may have help a lot in getting him into Harvard law school and as well onto the law review there, but at a minimum he had to be one of the smartest blacks in the country to get that far academically, which is intelligent indeed. (His election to president of the Law Review seems to have been almost entirely due to internal politics, but that's not such a bad harbinger either, though it was in a very left shifted universe.)

However nothing Ferraro said was inconsistent with her recognizing ally of this, and I'm sure she does. The fact is she's right - it's highly unlikely that any white man or even woman with as little highest level political not to mention executive experience (and field testing) as Obama has had would be in his current position. He is indeed filling a niche that the liberal media certainly, but also much of the recently and fairly recently college educated public (nearly all of whom have been indoctrinate by an educational and esp. elite educational system which has for the last two decades and more been shifted FAR to the left of the overall American median - as has been not only the liberal news media, but more importantly the even more liberal entertainment media.) After a while people do get mugged by reality, but it takes awhile.

My main point about Obama is that he's an unproven individually capable and skillful political actor upon people project their hopes and dreams with minimal recourse to hard headed reality. For example, would any other Democrat who has THE ABSOLUTE MOST LIBERAL voting record in the US Senate by many reconnings be likely to be in his delegate position, or to have that fact paid so little attention (so far) by either his opponents or the media?

I find Geraldine's comments quite offensive. When she ran for VP, she had 6 years in the House, but she felt ready to run and felt she touched the glass ceiling. Her comments are to polarize voters, by forcing white voters who support Barack Obama to go to Hillary Clinton, because it's time for a "white woman" to win. Hillary is behind in delegates as well as popular vote, however, the psychology is to run as if she is entitled to be top dog, called "white skin privilege". Yes, Geraldine, your comments are quite racist, and Hillary, putting your black face campaign manager out as the spokesperson to justify Geraldine's comments is shameful. Geraldine said she could raise tons of money for Barack, so he better back off. Well, Geraldine, it seems he's raised a lot more money than Hillary, without your help, so maybe you better back off. Everyone thinks affirmative action benefited a lot of unqualified blacks, but white women benefited more than any other protected group. So, go figure. Just like the Hispanics/Latinos should remember American history and civil rights, it was the blacks who fought so hard and put up with the hangings, brutality, racism, dogs so that you can benefit in this country.

Hold on a minute.
Before there was a black candidate, most african-americans were clearly for Hillary.

Now, african-americans are voting in large blocs, 91% in Mississippi, for the black candidate, but insist that it is not because he is black, but because they think he has better ideas.

As they say, I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night. Obviously, race has become a factor in this campaign, at least with african-americans and probably with others.

Now why do some insist on castigating a person for pointing out the obvious? Ferraro is correct in her assessment and has the right, as an american, to express her opinion.

bcurtis
OKLA.

I'm not sure if I would call Ferraro's comments racist....I think "delusional" would be a better word. She's right that if Obama were white he wouldn't be where he is today - he'd have already clinched the nomination! As for saying that he "happens to be very lucky to be who he is," perhaps she should ponder where Hillary Rodham's campaign would be if she didn't have the name Clinton on the end.

For those that agree with Ferraro that Barack would be nowhere without the support of blacks, you would also have to agree that Hilliary would have lost already without the support of women. Otherwise, you would be a hypocrites. So, please lets stop with the identity politics. "People, can we get along?"

Finally, finally, finally! God, finally we have a Clinton supporter with a spine. It was disgusting how Bill Clinton folded when he was baited and labeled a racist. 90% blacks just got done voting for a black candidate against the Clintons, one of whom was Blacker than Black until Christmas, 2007. So who's being racist here? We are slamming Ferraro for pointing that out?! What a pathetic bunch.

80-90% of blacks have been consistently voting for Obama. It is time for other colors to take note of this, forget the issues, do the opposite and vote for Hillary. To look away would be to sanctify the very thing we progressive democrats have criticized for so long.

In the years since the Modale/Ferraro ticket was wiped off the charts, I see that Geraldine still has not learned how to keep her big mouth shut. All of this bickering over who will be the eventual presidental nominee on the Democratic ticket is doing nothing more than to help sink that ship before it ever gets out of dry dock this November.

Finally we are seeing a pattern of race-baiting.

The so-called great candidate has two strategies in his playbook:
1. Give high flown speeches on hope and unity.
2. Call the opponent racist at every turn.

It is easier to see this pattern in reverse. Yesterday, New York Times hand an opinion piece asserting that the 3am ad was racist! Now, one may call the 3am ad many things but to call it racist requires a certain tortured logic that left even the Obama supporters somewhat confused and embarrased. Sift through the comment pages and you will see. You will find a near unanimous agreement that this is taking things too far.

Then we have Ferraro being indicted for basically saying that 80%+ African-American vote (91% in Mississipi!) is crucially responsible for getting Obama this far. Let's face it, Comrades: 90% Blacks did not vote against a Clinton (one of whom was Blacker than Black until Christmas 2007) on policy grounds - it has just a little bit to do with Obama's color. Just for pointing that out Ferraro is labeled a racist.

With this background let's evaluate the past. Bill Clinton's remarks that Obama's Iraq War thesis was a fairy tale because it falsely romanticizes an anti-war position was declared racist by Obama surrogates. Why? Apparently the phrase "Fairy Tale" in any context is racist when applied to an African-American.

Hillary's comment that an activist (MLK) requires Washington (LBJ) to turn an issue into a law was deemed as belittling MLK. Her suggestion that the Civil Rights Law required partnership between MLK and LBJ was basically considered a hate crime.

One may assume Obama camp's affront on one or two of these issues as a genuine case of misunderstanding. But viewed through the prism of yesterday's happening - no way.

All this is especially galling coming from a guy who is not such a principled saint.

1. Once Obama was for a single payer health system, but now opposes plans that cover every American.

2. He promised to repeal the Patriot Act, but then voted to extend it.

3. He promised to normalize relations with Cuba, but flip-flopped when he started running for president.

4. He rails against NAFTA in Ohio while his top economic advisor assures the Canadians his rhetoric is just "political positioning."

5. He promises to opt in to public financing if the GOP nominee does, but then breaks that pledge in real time.

6. He promises to withdraw from Iraq within 16 months, and now his top foreign policy adviser says that he's not relying on the plan.

It is this sort of chicanery that has finally driven Clinton supporters like us over the edge. Because these scurrilous charges are not just an insult to Clinton but to people like us.

That is why, CNN exit poll from Mississipi:

"Of those who voted for Obama, 42 percent said they would be satisfied if Clinton was the nominee, according to the exit polls.

Among Clinton voters, only 16 percent said they would be satisfied if Obama wins the party's top spot."

Obviously, some of the people who support Clinton do not know how to respond to those of us that choose Obama, the better candidate (white, black, male or female). So they tear down, insinuate, patronize and desparage. Clinton has shown similar tendencies since South Carolina. In as much as this is not leadership, I suggest they follow or get out of the way.

If Hillary manages to con her way into the nomination after this, her "prize" won't be worth a bucket of warm spit. As gdavis4 noted above, Ferraro's comments could be equally applied to Clinton's or McCain's race or gender, and yet it's only Obama's race that gets singled out. This is the sort of highly selective "truth telling" that too many whites seem to find persuasive, and don't think that black people aren't paying attention.

If those uncommitted superdelegates let her get away with this sort of sliming by surrogates, the Democrats will deserve to lose this election. Then let those rabid Hillary supporters come crying to them when McCain appoints 2 or 3 more Roberts clones to the Supreme Court, and their daughters have to travel to Canada to get their abortions.

So any man of color (black, hispanic, asian, south pacific, indian, etc.) is not worthy of the presidency and could not have earned front runner status for any reason other than the color of their skin. Shame on you, Geraldine Ferraro! You. Of all people.

... is enough. This outrage from the same bunch that put out an article claiming the 3am ad was racist. Can we really take these disgraceful creatures seriously? Bah! Go Ferraro! Don't let these sexist b@st@rds browbeat you.

Let's charge Ferraro with a federal hate crime. This kind of speech must be ruthlessly suppressed, Constituton be damned!

She speaks a truth so obvious and banal as to be not worth speaking in the first place.
Obama is black, but his appeal was about more than his blackness.
To suggest otherwise is not criminal - it is just negative.

Ferraro was right on the money and I am glad someone finally said something and is not backing down. I agree that we finally have a democrat with a spine!

People want something different and Obama's message is just that. Different, hopeful and engaging. One feels that if he is elected we the people will have a say in our government. He says that he is not perfect and he will make mistakes as president. Who says that? Someone who is transparent. People are tired of the Washington D.C. games. He won't make a good president...He can be my VP. He uses other people's words...then does the same on a live debate. Hillary is just more of the same. She just has a dress on. Most attacks on her are seen as attack against women and that is simply not true. It's just an attack on Ms. Clinton.

How interesting that Geraldine says that the only reason she is was a vice-presidential candidate was due to her gender, but she did not say that the only reason that Sen. Clinton is a presidential candidate is due to her gender. It can be inferred, right? But, if she came out a made the definitive statement - don't you believe that Sen. Clinton would have publicly denouced and fired her from her staff?

So, why is Sen. Obama then subjected to criticism of "playing the race card?" Actually, if we want to look at the definition of race card - typically it means that someone is being discriminated against due to the color of their skin. What Sen. Obama is saying is the exact opposite -- he isn't being discriminated against. He's actually the front runner.

He's just stating that he isn't the beneficiary of special treatment due to the color of his skin. I mean honestly -- do we really believe that being a black man is the secret recipe to winning the presidential nomination? I don't care if you win 100% of the Black American vote, it's not enough -- thus the definition "minority"

I'm a bit surprised that there is a group within this community that actually believe that it's prudent to resort back to the old tactics of justify success and failure based on race and gender. If it's not OK for some Black Americans to claim that they have failed because of racial discrimination from White Americans, then why is it OK for some White Americans to claim that some Black Americans are successful because of racial discrimination?

When a candidate receives 92 percent of the votes of a particular race, there seems to be a some valid reason to call that ethnocentrism.

To OKLA...I'm voting for Barack Obama because I feel he is the better candidate who can beat McCain. Of course, people may have voted for Hillary before Barack came into the picture, but what option did they have? Another 4 years of Bush policies? Don't assume that this is just about race, but possibly about a better candidate who offers at least a hope for a better way to run things in Washington.

If Barack were not in the race today, I believe the enthusiasm would not be there for people to participate. Hopefully, their enthusiasm will not be destroyed over all the current bashing. Whoever comes out the winner, I hope that candidate will submit to the winner gracefully and not create a circus or more controversy. Otherwise, I have heard some say that they may not vote at all!

I believe that there little wrong with our political system that a large dose of campaign reform can't resolve. So I was impressed with Obama's fund raising (90% of all funds raised in very small contributions). I then became impressed with how calm he remains no matter what's thrown at him. Finally, I decided that HRC's stance on the war was a deal buster.

None of these issues is even remotely tied to the issue of race. Ms. Ferraro is wrong: Barack Obama is successful because he's a smart, poised politician who could well become a stateman if he keeps listening to what a Bush-battered electorate needs.

Go ahead and give the nomination to a do-nothing Senator because he is an articulate black man. Hillary's supporters, me included, will be voting for the other "Democrat" in the race, John McCain.

First of all, I'm not saying that Ferraro is racist and no one in Obama's campaign has accused her a racism. She is guilty of ignorance. Her words were racially charged. I find it funny how she says Barack is only in the position he is in because he is black, then accuse Obama of using the race card when in fact SHE was the one who brought up race. You think Barack is taking any solace in this? He is a presidential candidate who happens to be black. Ferraro wants to make him the black presidential candidate to create an us against them mentality. Which is exactly what Bill Clinton tried to do in South Carolina. She has the freedom to say whatever she wants to say, no matter how out of touch it is. But we also have a right to respond with disgust. Many people found what she said to be reprehensible. Then she said she was being attacked because she was white. But Obama is playing the race card???? That boat just doesn't float.

Ferraro and other Clinton supporters can't see how patently racist her comment is? Several months ago their position was Obama is not black enough. Hillary would get the black vote because of Bro Bill who is so cool with his sunglasses and saxophone; the implication was Bill is more of a black man; after all he "was" the first black president. If Hillary was receiving 90 per cent of the black vote, she, Geraldine and the rest would be ecstatic. Would they have said she wouldn't be in the running except for the fact Bill is black; of course not, because everyone "really" knows he is white, not black. How paternalistic can you get! Now all you black folks, give your vote to the white massa because he is so cool and has many of us as he good friends. The worm turns and today Obama is too black. His blackness will deny him the election but his blackness will guarantee him the nomination? How abobut none of us ever bringing up race again. Does anyone who does think the issue will go away if it keeps being mentioned? Hopefully there will be a Clinton/Obama ticket and the Republicans will choose Condi as John's running mate. My, my, it would sure be interesting to see all the consternation that would cause: who would be the real black and the real woman and yada, yada.

What does the color of ones skin have to do with anything, or that fact ones gender. If someone votes for a candidate because of their gender or color of their skin they are just plan ignorant! Now we bring race into the equation because someone wants to win at all cost! And could it be that record number of people are voting for Obama because of his message? This is exactly what Hillary wanted, to bring race into it!

Clinton's campaign really started the race baiting in this contest, and they are continuing it here with Ferraro as the mouthpiece. Even if Clinton does come out to "denounce and reject" Ferraro some point soon, the task has been accomplished as far as Clinton is concerned. Clinton has looked at voting demographics. She knows that a third or more of whites in Mississippi cited race as an influencing factor in voting for her, and that many more may not admit it but have still been voting for her based on race. Clinton herself, of course, avoids these racially charged statements, but she's more than happy to have Bill and Ferraro make them for her.

Clinton had her husband plant this seed of anti-Obama racism a month ago, and now she has another minion watering it.

Criticize Obama for his politics, rip him for his Rezko connections, but the race baiting should be denounced and rejected, and I hope American voters see fit to do so.

Seriously, for all that Clinton claims to support for minority communities, to accept and even push the argument that Obama only is where he is because he is black is to basically accept all of the conservative complaints about affirmative action and more. Black people are more successful and more popular in American culture because they are black? Ummm...have you looked at poverty and incarceration statistics.

Yeah, women certainly haven't had it easy in the halls of power either. Neither a woman nor a black person has ever come this close to the presidency, but there have been 29 women serve as state governors. Blacks? Only three.

I am a white female voter and are very disappointed about Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro for being so divisive and conducting a campaign out of Karl Rove's playbook.

We have had almost 8 extremely divisive years with George Bush and by the look of how Hillary conducts her campaign that's what we are going to get with her as well. Not to mentioned all her strategic mistakes and voting for the Iraq war that cost us so dearly. Is that how she wants to run the country as a president? She is dividing her own party, and lost sight on how all this will effect the election in November. Are Democrats really their own biggest enemy???

Who pulled her dusty butt out of the grave for an interview anyway?

Since 99% of the Presidents have been white male Protestants; by her logic Kennedy won only BECAUSE he was a Catholic. No wonder she and Mondale didn't get elected. Actually my first ever vote was for them in that election.

Her statements about Obama and the responses I'm reading here concerning his race are so nonsensical is it any wonder the Republicans are always kicking our butts?

She failed to tell the truth about one thing for sure though...Obama is earning his way to the nomination by going through the process; Ferraro was given the opportunity without ever doing a thing.

Just like Hillary, she rode the coattails or money of her husband to a position of consequence before these popular or rich men were brought down by lack of character and the law.

Last thing...have yet to hear the "racism charge" come out of the Obama camp, only the Clinton camp.

Party on!

If you need any convincing of how deeply cynical and disturbing it is that Ferraro still has her campaign position, ask yourself this -- had Ferraro said this about a latino, in other words a member of a group that is voting for HRC, how quickly would she have been fired from the campaign?

Any former Vice Presidential candidate who doesn't know the proper use of the subjunctive ought to be ignored.

wonder if all of this country's White presidents were elected on their great intellect! poor gents, what would have happened to them had they been Black?

Hillary is getting in way over her head. Had her campaign been unified in the first place she would know this. You know when Bill was in Offc I respected him, up until the Sex and other scandals. I always thought Hillary was a very brut woman. I never in a million years thought she would run for President. The thought of it immediately turned me off. She is willing to do whatever to get this nomination. She is talking out the side of her neck...I laugh so hard when she makes the speech about the wealthy and the well connected, and the lobbyist that run washington. Aren't those all her friends she's talking about? P.S. I'm sure Bill and Spritzer shared a few gang bangs in their day! That is a subject Hillary will never want to be brought up. Furthermore....that old hags remarks were way worse than Hillary being called the "Monster" that she is. Why else was Bill always skirt chasing and looking for the next best thing. He wants to keep her busy being President so HE can get some pre-paid prostitute loving on US!!!!

Think about it folks, The comment can be applied to all three candidates interchangeably and will be no more or no less true. Lets try it with McCain first. If he were a black man he would not be in this position, if he were a woman he would not be in this position, he is very lucky as a white man to be in the position he is in. Now Hillary. If she were a white man she would not be in this position, if she were a black man she would not be in this position, she is very lucky to be in the position she is in. In other words it was a pointless infinite remark that can be applied so many ways and mean the same. Does anyone else notice this or is it just me?

It is clear to me that the Clinton campaign is trying desperately to marginalize Barack Obama, and Geraldine Ferraro is another helpful friend. Otherwise why did she have to go "public" with this at best shaky at worst abhorrently racist opinion of "hers", which also came in various forms from the Clinton campaign at different times?

I am a 50+ white man. I am an independent who frequently votes for the Democrats. This race is taken hostage by the self-important Clintons that decided to use hate and fear politics once they started losing. This tells me how they will govern.

Shameful. I lost all respect for Hillary Clinton.

Sorry white people, you play the race card to the point that you now portray yourselves as the victims of racism more than blacks. Its a week argument. For every one of you who are using Obama's candidacy as so backward rational for playing race victim I can show you 10 white people who just plain would not vote for obama just because of his race. Its white people who keep making the bigger deal about his race, accusing him of using his race to advantage is actually an example of whites playing the race card but just not openly acknowledging their own behavior. Stop playing head games with yourselves. If you repeat something enough I guess it catches on I suppose. When a black person runs for president and is successful to this point how can you accuse him of playing the race card when a black man has never come remotely close to being president in this country before? How do white people ignore one fact in their face to over emphasize a lesser valid point. Thats just selfish elitist thinking by some whites. Its like the bully wants to be regarded as the victim.

Methinks Ferraro doth protest too much.

And Clinton should "live and die by the sword" here. It wasn't good enough for Obama to "denounce" Farrakan, Hillary insisted he had to "reject" as well. Farrakan isn't working for Obama, but Ferraro IS working for Clinton --at least as a fundraiser. "Strongly disagree" isn't a strong enough response.

I'm an independent. I'm for Obama. But this isn't about Obama. I expect virtue and ethics in my president --This sort of behaviour is a mark against Hillary. If this all comes down to Hillary vs. McCain, this kind of thing will make a difference in my November vote.

Isn't it clear that these Ferraro talks are targeted at those 'older whites' who are be more than ready to agree? The point is ... do you want the country to move forward towards greater unity or move backwards to the same old divisive past and present. That's what Obama represents and he will have my vote.

When Clinton compared Obama's win in South Carolina with Jesse Jackson's win, he was comparing two black men running for president. Obama and his followers didn't like that.

Posted by: Shaun

Shaun, you can't be that naive that you don't know how polarizing Jesse Jackson can be with white folk. That was Mr. Clinton's intent! Make a link between the Rev. Jackson and Senator Obama and not in a positive way.

Geraldine Ferraro was just relating her own personal experience and what she had learned in looking back on her own personal history and applying it to her reasons why she supports Hillary Clinton and not Barack Obama. It has to do with experience and qualifications period. He is running on star power not qualifications or experience and part of her star power in 84 was her being a woman. Part of Barack Obama star power is being the first African American who really is expected to win the white house.

That does have a amount of star draw power and we all agree on that. That is all she was trying to say not anything else the spin doctors are trying to turn in to a racist issue. It is the Obama camp and now Obama himself who is trying to pump more into it so they can suck more out of it for Political gain. Typical politics.

We had a whole tread where we talked open and honestly about things like this and now we are resorting to making that thread a sham by this kind of discussion. Here Geraldine Ferraro was relating in and open way her personal lessons learned as to why she was the VP on the ticket. Now was that her only qualifications ..no. She had some experience and had done a lot of good work and was also ask for that. She had to have political qualification other then being a woman or they would have just picked any woman with a big name or a woman off the street. Still one of the biggest factors of picking her at that time was to create star power from her being a woman. The Times and what she brought was responsible for that. The times and who Barack Obama is (all parts of him) is making him the success he is today. He could not have done this 30 years ago or even 20 years ago or maybe even 10 years ago. To say there have never been qualified African Americans before Barack Obama that could have run for office before 2008 is just absurd an not true. The list is way to long to even attempt to say that... it has been shameful and stupid that we as American have not had such ability and wisdom running for President long before 2008 just because of ones race or gender.

What she is saying bottom line is that qualification and experience is not being place on a equal standing with other factors in the success of Barack Obama in 2008 just like qualification and experience was not being placed on equal standing when she was asked to run as VP in 84. Ask yourself what YOUR motives are for sharing in this thread?

Look past the smoke screen it is not that hard to do. She is kind of right that they are attacking her and yes her being white is part of the excuse but they could care less about her race it is the opportunity to attack for political advantage that is the important part. She could be purple or any other color and they would use it. This has nothing to do with Racism in any direction ....it is just who can take and twist and turn for political gain. A show, A Act. We the people are the only ones getting hurt in all this. I don't buy into it from either side after the fact of her first comments. My above post says what she was originally trying to say and relate to and anything and everything beyond that is just media hype and political gamesmanship.

People! PEOPLE! Use your God-given brains, for goodness sakes. Ferraro and the rest of the Clintons' campaign are so desperate that they once are appealing to the worst in people. To say that the only reason he is where he is, is because Barack Hussein Obama is black, has got to be the most riduculous thing I have ever heard! He is where he is IN SPITE OF his name and race. He is winning white and black votes because of WHAT HE REPRESENTS: A break from the divisiveness of BUSH/CLINTON/BUSH. Haven't we had enough of nearly 8 years of Bush fear-mongering, which has lost the U.S. its moral authority in the world? Do we honestly want 4 years of Clintons' lust for personal power and self-indulgence. Do you really want to support Clintons' campaign, when they continue to trash the values of equality and justice that we Democrats hold dear?

Paul J. Nolan

Good point, That was Isaiah Thomas who made that remark about Larry Bird, saying if he were a black guy he would be just another good ball player. I think Isaiah was proven wrong and Geraldine is to. If being black gave you some free pass to being president I think there would have been a black president before 2008 and still counting. White people please get over yourselves. Selective racism is played out. If you think black people are lame when they play the race card how do you think you sound doing it? Even more ridiculous.

This is the perfect illustration of liberal self delusion. The Democrats put forward two candidates who primary qualification is their victimhood status, make empty claims about competence and then freak out when someone points out the obvious. If it weren't so pathetic, it would be funny.

Look, the facts are that we have a black man and a white woman running for president. Obama doesn't want anyone making any comments about him being black. We have a black man running for president with the middle name of Hussein. Obama doesn't want anyone mentioning his middle name.

When Clinton compared Obama's win in South Carolina with Jesse Jackson's win, he was comparing two black men running for president. Obama and his followers didn't like that.

Is there a way to through Hillary's people out of the party after they destroy it?

Roger

First of all it was a politically STUPID remark. Anybody could have told you it would be trouble as soon as they heard it come out of her mouth. This isn't "spin", it's stupidity.

Second, it IS racist. Read it again:

if Obama were "a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is."

Like there's some ADVANTAGE in this country in being African-American? People win elections because they're African-American? Go look at the rolls of Congress if you think that's true.

It's also simplistic to assume that Obama is successful because he's black. Frankly I think he's successful because he's the right candidate for the job. Conversely, is Hillary is successful because she's a woman? Or is it because some think she's the right candidate for the job?

" Well, let me first say that I wasn't born at the age of forty-three when I entered Congress. I did have a life before that as well. I was a prosecutor for almost five years in the district attorney's office in Queens County and I was a teacher. There's not only what is on your paper resume that makes you qualified to run for or to hold office. It's how you approach problems and what your values are. I think if one is taking a look at my career they'll see that I level with the people; that I approach problems analytically; that I am able to assess the various facts with reference to a problem, and I can make the hard decisions. I'm intrigued when I hear Vice-President Bush talk about his support of the president's economic program and how everything is just going so beautifully. I, too, recall when Vice President Bush was running in the primary against President Reagan and he called the program voodoo economics, and it was and it is. We are facing absolutely massive deficits; this administration has chosen to ignore it; the president has failed to put forth a plan to deal with those deficits and if everything believes that everything is corning up roses, perhaps the vice-president should join me as I travel around the country and speak to people. People in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, are not terribly thrilled with what's happening in the economy because they're standing in the light of a closed plant because they've lost their jobs. The people in Youngstown, Ohio, have stores that are boarded up because the economy is not doing well. It's not only the old industries that are failing, it's also the new ones. In San Jose, California, they're complaining because they can't export their high-tech qualities -- goods -- to Japan and other countries. The people in the Northwest -- in the state of Washington and Oregon -- are complaining about what's happening to the timber industry and to the agriculture industry. So, so things are not as great as the administration is wanting us to believe in their television commercials. My feeling, quite frankly, is that I have enough experience to see the problems, address them and make the tough decisions and level with people with reference to those problems. "
http://obamarumors.blogspot.com/2008/03/geraldine-ferraro.html

Sound familiar?
It's another quote from Ferraro.
Shame on her... a woman is qualified, but a black man isn't?

DISPATCHES FROM THE GROUND WAR ... RACHEL SKLAR OF THE HUFFINGTON POST IS REPORTING ... Keith Olbermann To Do "Special Comment" About Hillary Clinton Tonight -- First Time Targeting A Democrat ... Olbermann feels about exactly what cards she's been playing (hint: It has something to do with her not firing Geraldine Ferraro for her controversial statement saying that Barack Obama wouldn't have been as successful if he weren't black. Last night Olbermann called Ferraro's statement "clearly racist" and accused the Clinton campaign for being like South Africa under apartheid for not rejecting it and firing her. It's a significant moment, because it marks the first time a full-throated special comment will have been directed exclusively at a Democrat. ...

I hate so say it but hillary supporters are using race more than we ever imagined obama could and its make the point for republicans when they say that democrats take the black vote for granted. Its ok to vote for a democrat so as long as he is not black because god forbid if you vote for a black candidate your only voting for him because he is black. Is that what happen in Iowa? All those white people felt sorry for the black candidate and voted Obama? Lets face it everyone has loyal votes based on race sex and religion but to single out obama as if he is the only one is playing to the lowest in people by implying that Obama is the 08 presidential race's version of affirmative actions? Thats reaching and desperate and will not serve clinton will because thats an insult not only to blacks that vote for obama but every one else too.

Ferraro's comments are true, but Obama and his followers were quick to translate truth to racism. Instead of Obama turning the comment into a positive, such as HE is the one who will make a CHANGE to that situation, he chose to cry racism. He is using perceived racism to rile up his followers -- and they don't even realize how he is using them.

If Hillary Clinton were not Bill Clinton's wife, she would not be in this position.

She happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.

Oh... I'm sorry. Was that sexist?

At the risk of being tarred and feathered by Obamatos, Ferraro was just calling a spade a spade....

The historic element to Senator Obama's campaign is his ethniciity and his ethnicity is winning him 85%+ of the African American vote. That's a fact. Saying so does not make one a racist.

The media as usual has its role in muddying the waters and trying to make it a race issue, as does Senator Obama. Whenever he thinks it suits him, he plays the race card. This time, to help get peoples' mind off Samantha Powers comments about Senator Clinton being a "monster" and more damning, that Obama might not hold to timetables after he's President, despite his persistent attacks on Clinton for not having timetables.

Wake up people. Only Senator Clinton has a chance to beat Senator McCain. And Obama is not on my short list of best choices for VP. I think General Wesley Clark would be a far better choice in a time of war.

The world needs to hear Bill Clinton on the Rush Limbaugh Show
Bill Clinton is not a honorable person...

This is the link: Bill on Rush limbaugh begging for votes

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/10/115320/234

This is same Rush Limbaugh show that aired this video and song about Barack Obama: The video is called - Barack the Magic Negro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm6hlj-BV0s

The same Rush Limbaugh who talked about immigrants:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHPm_TEQ0PA

The Clintons are using Minorities/ Racism to get Hilary in office.

This is all insidious race baiting by the Clinton camp. Ferraro's comments are blatantly racist because she is so in your face about them. She and the Clinton camp should be ashmaed of themselves.

If Obama were white he would have done much better in Texas and Ohio AND he would be the nominee by now. For a black man with a name like Obama to get as far as he has in this post 9/11 Country of ours is nothing short of miraculous AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

How dare Feraro denigrate his accomplishments.
America needs to tell the world we don't tolerate this kind of thing.

And oh by the way I'm a centrist, not some big lefty. And I voted for Bill twice.l

When will we ever get beyond racism. It is okay for supporters of Obama to say "Now is our time" - not racist?

I think we are delighted to see someone like Obama run. It represents the best in all that America has to offer. Yet, the Black card is being played by both sides. We should just stick to the issues.

The world needs to hear Bill Clinton on the Rush Limbaugh Show
Bill Clinton is not a honorable person...

This is the link: Bill on Rush limbaugh begging for votes

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/10/115320/234

This is same Rush Limbaugh show that aired this video and song about Barack Obama: The video is called - Barack the Magic Negro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm6hlj-BV0s

The same Rush Limbaugh who talked about immigrants:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHPm_TEQ0PA

The Clintons are using Minorities/ Racism to get Hilary in office.

Mrs. Ferraro is a dyed in the wool racist.
This is not just politics, but real racism from a so-called Northern Liberal who is actually an ultra conversative Fascist. She would have fitted nicely into the social structure of Nazi Germany 1933-1945. More than likely she would have had a role as a Extermination Camp Commadant. My question is: "How much were you paid by the Clinton Campaign to make these remarks?" Or were you promised a position as a house maid in the Clinton Whitehouse?

Why didn't Al Sharpton achieve the level of success in 2004. Isn't he African American?

Has anyone thought just for a moment that Geraldine Ferraro is just not very bright? I thought what she said was less racist than it was just plain stupid and illogical. What could be accomplished with this kind of commentary? It is very fortunate that she did not eventually become a president.
Also. When did she officialy become a Republican?

Imagine what the Clinton campaign would be saying if someone suggested that she was a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination because she was lucky enough to be the wife of an ex-President. You could hear the screaming from Scranton to Honolulu. This is a racist ploy by the Clinton campaign. It draws attention to the fact that Sen. Obama is "lucky" enough to be black. As her supporter governor Strickland admitted, there is an undercurrent of racism among protions of the low income blue collar whites that Clinton has made the foundation of her campaign. Her exploitation of this is shameful.

With respect to the US Constitution, Sen. Obama fulfills the requirements for the Office of the Presidency.
...No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

It seems however that his candidacy (and the voters) have gotten in the way of the Sen. Clinton.

Don't waste your time directing your fury at Ferraro, a minor has-been who was once, long, long ago, a token candidate for Vice President. Bill Clinton's fingerprints are all over this smear. (I voted for Clinton twice and defended him against unfair attacks like the ones he is guilty of now.)

It's time for Biden, Richardson, Edwards and Gore to hold a joint news conference and endorse Obama. The Clinton tag team won't stop until they make John McCain the next president.

Obama writes in The Audacity of Hope about how one of the worst parts of political life is removal from the real world; your entire waking experience can become flying chartered jets, schmoozing with fundraisers (whose support you really need), and becoming disconnected from both the people you serve and the society they live in. This is part of his push for ethics reform. Clearly you see that disconnect in Bush II, "What? Gas is $4 a gallon? Wow."

I think this disconnect is cropping up in older politicians' perception of society. This isn't 1984. Or the 70's. Or the 60's. Many people are willing to look past race and gender when assessing a candidate, and a Geraldine Ferraro just doesn't get it. The cognitive dissonance the Clinton campaign is manifesting in their actions is bound to become more and more obvious. And I seem to recall that the behavior of the Clinton campaign had something to do with Obama's big win in South Carolina. Character, actions, words matter.

Oh, and of the past 17 democratic contests, all since Super Tuesday, Obama has won more delegates than Clinton in 15 of them.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

I think America gets it.

Geraldine is right on the money!

Everybody needs to stand back and take a deep breath. Ms. Ferraro didn't say anything racist. What she said was that Barack Obama's race, in the current political paradigm, is an advantage to him as a candidate for President. It is.

While I regard most of what Charles Krauthammer writes as tripe, he did a column on this very subject last week. Because Obama is the first candidate to run for president as a "candidate who happens to be black" rather than "the black candidate", people see him as bridging the gap that has been missing in racial politics for so long. This has served him well, as people see him as a candidate who can reach out to others who are different from him successfully. That's why he's viewed as a candidate who can unite the country.

Obama supporters need to get a grip. Not every criticism of their candidate is racist, nor is every criticism unfair. The Clintons and their supporters are not monsters, and in fact, what negative campaigning there has been has been rather tame. Compare that to what the Bushies did to McCain in 2000 or Kerry in 2004. Remember all the crap the Republicans threw at Clinton for eight years. BTW, I did vote for Obama in my primary.

If and when Obama receives the Democratic nomination, he will want the Clintons and their supporters fully behind him for the general election campaign. People need to get off their high horses, remember that politics "ain't beanbag", and stop all the screeching. The enemy isn't the Clinton's, it's not Geraldine Ferraro, it's not Louis Farrakhan, it's the Republicans.

OK so that's it. clinton is the campaign of BIGOTS.

BITTER, OLD, HATEFUL, SPITEFUL BIGOTS WHO HATE.

Are you all gonna stay in that club of losers?

Come over here to a positive, uniting, red-white-and blue campaign that celibrates diversity and self determination in the face of hate!

Vote OBAMA for President!

You don't have to say EVERYTHING that you think. I vehemently disagree with Ms. Ferraro. But, she is entitled to her opinion. You don't have to be a genius to know that the rules are always different for people of color and when they follow them, the dominant culture CHANGES the rules. How much experience did Bush have? See where that got us. Or Ford, or Nixon. OR the iconic actor Ronald REAGAN! They had tons of experience huh?

When Clinton compared Obama's win in South Carolina with Jesse Jackson's win, he was comparing two black men running for president. Obama and his followers didn't like that.

Posted by: Shaun

Shaun, you can't be that naive that you don't know how polarizing Jesse Jackson can be with white folk. That was Mr. Clinton's intent! Make a link between the Rev. Jackson and Senator Obama and not in a positive way.

It's things like this that turn people off to politics---what happened to the fact that Barack Obama is also 1/2 white--guess that doesn't count? Just remember the source--when she ran for a presidential v.p. they lost 49 states!!!!!!!

Name: Barack H Obama

Experience:
1996 elected to Illinois legislature. Ran unopposed after I had my four opponents disqualified by nit-picking mistakes made on their nominating petitions to appear on the ballot. Proved my smarts and toughness by the use of these strong-arm tactics.
Started slowly in legislature, but ended up with a bang in my last year when Illinois Senate Majority Leader, Emil Jones, selected me to sponsor many high-profile bills that other Democrats had spent years championing. They called it bill-jacking, but I call it smart politics. After all, those bills would not have passed without me.

2004 Elected to U.S. Senate when first my Democratic primary candidate and then my Republican candidate in the general election imploded due to divorce scandals. Finally ran against Alan Keyes in general election, who was imported from Maryland by a desperate Republican party. Won with over 70% of the vote showing how great a candidate I was.

2007 Announced candidacy for President of the United States. Why not, since I am such a great speaker and ... and .... and ... um, ah, ah ..... since I am such a great speaker.

And Geraldine Ferraro has the nerve to question my qualifications! She much be a racist!

The irony is that Geraldine Ferraro had far less legislative experience than Sen. Obama and far fewer legislative accomplishments when she was asked to be on the Mondale ticket (6 years as a House representative from a gerrymandered district). She did not win any primary campaigns and was elevated to the ticket precisely because she was a woman and therefore a novelty--oh, that glass ceiling sexism strikes again!

Similarly, John Edwards ran both his '04 and '08 elections on six years of legislative experience with no landmark reforms to Obama's 20 years as a legislator and 3 landmark Senate bills. Yet, criticism of Edwards focused on his policy positions instead of on his naivete or inexperience.

Ferraro and Clinton are pushing the affirmative action undeserving kid angle because they know this is one area where non-educated white voters and elite conservative political pundits still feel comfortable expressing their racism. This is one of many examples of the Clintons using the race card to try to reduce Obama's appeal with non-educated whites and Hispanics. A quick look at Sen. Clinton's record as a legislator--again, six years in all, in which she authored a paltry 20 bills, mostly honorary--shows that she doesn't have much else to stand on.

Anybody who buys this Clinton experience argument needs to take a quick glance at the Library of Congress website and compare Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama side-by-side. The press has failed once again to be diligent before parroting campaign talking points. The experience argument does not stand up to the facts. Ferraro and Clinton push this angle because they know most voters won't do that quick, basic research and will instead assume that a black man like Obama could not possible have gotten to where he is on the merit of his accomplishments.

Ann

Sure ann, the obama campaign never cried racist, he said her comments were divisive didn't he? Or are you like Ferroro and make up your own opinions and call them facts. Now I guess the obama campaign should just take the high road and continue to let the clinton people make issues of race which is what he is doing by the way. You have put words in obamas mouth just so you can have an argument against him when what your really trying to do is justify what Ferarro said. Obama never cried racist. If so please show us where. I guess you assume he would. Or divisive means racist. It seems the white people who are trying to justify this like you are more racially sensitive and willing to whine than obama is. Try reading your own post. It is basicall a rush limbaugh classic. Take some comment that is race baited, support it and call anyone who disagrees the racist. Thats your post in a nutshell. Hey, ever thought about this, If george bush were black he would not be president. Am I racist for saying that?

It was unnecessary and just plain ignorant for Ferraro to make such statements. It's also ironic in the fact that i'm sure this is the same type of thinking that led many whites in Mississippi to vote for Clinton -- solely based on race.

And I am sick and tired of hearing people say that Obama has been playing the "race card". When did Obama explicitly try to coddle black voters into voting for him? I don't remember him saying to them that they should vote for him because he's black. As far as I've seen, he's left that choice up to them since maybe 10% were supporting him prior to the statements made by the Clintons.

When I first heard Hillary's remarks at that time I didn't immediately think that they were "racist" but the way she said those remarks were highly questionable in tone. Newsflash, people: We STILL don't live in a color-blind society and I think Obama knows that -- that's why he hasn't and won't base his campaign solely on him being black. And so far, that's been consistent on his part. The media chooses to do whatever they want regarding campaign footage and statements but if we're going to just talk about Obama's words (and not his actions as the Clinton campaign states time and time again) then maybe one should've figured out that he has not called anyone out as being racist, not even Ferraro. No one wanted to call the Clintons racist either but their comments angered a lot of black people (because they have a mind of their own and are free to vote for whoever they want to) and I'm sure they voted for Obama solely on race too.

There are still some black supporters of Clinton but after those comments, she LOST the majority of the black vote and HAS NOT DONE ANYTHING since to try and win those voters back.

Hmm . . she's still getting a majority of white women and Latinos though. Where is this supposed "affirmative action clause" to the presidency in the Constitution?

If the Clinton campaign said something explicitly denouncing illegal immigration or something like that, you can be sure that she'd lose a majority of the Latino vote just as quickly -- and would those comments be considered "racist" when many people think that way about this issue?

I agree with gdavis4 and others here who understand that comments like Ferraro's and the Clintons really have no place here. If you want to voice your opinion, that's fine but realize that those will have repercussions and will anger a lot of people on both sides.

It's just plain ignorance.

We have a caucasian president today and he is the most unqualified president that we have ever had. All of his decisions have beeen made because of personal agendas. He has come in like a lone cowboy and nobody can alter his decisions, he vetoe's whatever he does not agree with. This country is more divided than it has ever been and the division is not about race. The race issue has not change,we still have the things that make us different, car loans are higher for us not because of credit, but because of skin color, homes cost more for us not because of credit but skin color. This has been documented by studies that have been done.

Obama's attempt to extrapolate history to argue that he is not riding a trend involving race is absurd at best. Ms Ferraro is expressing her own view of a fact, and it is not even news worthy. The reason Obama camp make a big deal out of it is totally political - this allows them NOT to address real issues Americans care about. This is Karl Rove politics.

Sorry folks but a Democrat getting a huge percentage of a black vote is NOT unique to Obama. Combine this with what many black voters PERCIEVE as innuendo by the Clinton camp and you have the recipe for the voting results. Fair or unfair the Clintons started losing the black vote due to comments around South Carolina. Before that primary Obama was getting more black votes but it wasn't nearly as lop-sided as it became AFTER South Carolina. In 2000, black voters made up nearly 11 percent of the overall voter. They gave the Democratic presidential contender Al Gore 90 percent of their vote. In 2004, black voters made up nearly 12 percent of the vote and gave Democratic presidential contender John Kerry 88 percent of the vote. Gore and Kerry lost. Please LET GO of the racial thing or the gender thing. Does it really matter whether or not Obamas success is partially predicated upon race? Is Hillary's success partially predicated on Gender? The problem is there is NO NEED to point that out. There is NO need to reduce discussions to this level. We have a historical Dem ticket. A Woman and an African American. Neither campaign can ignore the historical aspect of each campaign, but neither should be reduced to the some total of that observation.

Where is the great orator and fine, decent man I hear everyone gushing about when they speak of Obama? A great orator and a fine, decent man would have responded to Ms. Ferraro's comments by asking voters and the Clinton campaign to stay focused on the issues, not on the race (or gender) of the candidates. He would have taken the opportunity to thank black voters for the passionate and unwavering support they've shown him. He might even have said he is humbled to be the first black candidate in US history who has come so far in a presidential election and who might hope to go further still. He might even have disputed Ms. Ferraro's claims that the only thing that qualified her for her VP candidacy was her gender - he might have said he felt she was the most qualified candidate at that time.

Instead, he alluded to an American past fraught with racial discrimination. And he didn't mention a word about change.

Geraldine Ferraro isn't a candidate for US President, Barak Obama is. Fortunately, he's not the best the Democrats have on offer.

In 1984, my fifth-grade teacher held a mock Presidential election in my three-classroom schoolhouse in rural Wisconsin. When the results were tallied, Mondale/Ferraro garnered only two votes--mine and that of a friend I convinced to vote for the Democratic ticket. As history well knows, the nation followed the example of my class. Having read Geraldine Ferraro's recent remarks, they have solidified my feeling that Hillary Clinton is the wrong woman to be carrying the mantle for women to the White House now, just as they also have provoked an angry sense in me that Geraldine Ferraro was the wrong woman to be carrying the mantle for women then (angry enough that I would take back my mock vote now, if I could). Derogatory statements by this particular, high-profile Clinton surrogate that both REFLECT and PREY ON bigoted views are part of a pattern of angering and offending in a way that mere months does NOT heal.

I've been voting Democratic all the way back to the mock 1980 election in my first-grade class, which I also still remember, so I will not vote for McCain. Mark my words, though, Hillary, in the general election, I might not vote at all. I increasingly doubt your ability to accomplish any of your promises given your ability to antagonize and provoke animosity, and McCain (although I wouldn't vote for him) has demonstrated better ability to reach across the aisle, so I cannot say which would be worse for our country. I don't expect sparring candidates to lick each other like purring tigers, but I want to help my son, when he votes for the first time in his first-grade mock election in 2012, to be able to vote for a candidate he will be proud of for his lifetime.

This year, for sure, Wisconsinites got it right.

Ferraro is a hack politician. She didn't have a chance when she ran for VP. NOT because she was a woman but because she was a nasty, divisive, pandering politician. She wasn't trying to solve anything. She did favors and worked the system instead of serving the people. Her terrible personality,political ambitions and her husband's crooked money deals brought her down. She isn't even in the same league as Obam