The columnist Michael Kinsley once defined a "gaffe" as an occasion when a politician accidentally tells the truth. In our age of political correctness, some would place Geraldine Ferraro's remarks into this category. Long known for speaking candidly, Ferraro recently remarked that "if Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position."
There's a molecule of truth in this. Obama's appeal is that he is an African American who doesn't sound one bit like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. Blacks are inspired to see one of their own have a serious shot at the presidency. Whites are relieved that Obama doesn't seem to be motivated by the kind of chronic resentment that seems all too prevalent in black America.
Taken this way, Ferraro is stating the obvious. It's equally obvious, by the way, that if Hillary was male--and not married to Bill Clinton--she wouldn't be in her position. Hillary came to national prominence not through her own efforts but through the success of her husband. Virtually all her "experience" prior to being elected Senator is in fact Bill Clinton's experience. She wouldn't even have been elected to the Senate without Bill. So she too owes a great deal to her gender and her "first wife" position.
In a deeper sense, though, Ferraro's insinuation is completely wrong. In reality Obama's political success is due to far more than race. He brings some unique and very attractive qualities at a time when the country wants and needs them. Obama is a man of unquestionable intelligence and grace, and this is why the affirmative action label seems especially unjust when applied to him.
To me Ferraro's comments illustrate two things. First, they show the depths to which Hillary flacks are willing to go. It's typical of the Hillary camp that a sidekick like Ferraro attempts to plunge the knife into Obama while Hillary feigns ignorance and plays nice. Second, Ferraro's attack illustrates how some prominent liberals deep down think that all blacks are only capable of advancing because they are black.
In a way liberal support for racial preferences can be understood as an attempt to cope with this situation. We often hear liberal activists say, "If it wasn't for affirmative action there would be virtually no blacks in top universities." The implication of course is that blacks on their own merits are incapable of getting into Harvard and Berkeley.
The cruel irony of affirmative action is that it reinforces and strengthens liberal perceptions of black inferiority. Athough Obama seems smart enough to have gotten into Harvard, it's quite possible that affirmative action policies were partly responsible for his admission. Consequently policies of racial preference have the effect of placing an invisible question mark alongside the achievements of all persons of color.
When Clarence Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court, it wasn't the Ku Klux Klan or the skinheads who said, "He's just there because he's black." It was the liberal Senators and activist groups that said this. Now Ferraro is saying the same thing about Obama.
Perhaps the day is not far when African Americans will wake up and start asking, "Do these politices of racial preferences actually hurt more than they help?" and "Isn't it time we stopped assuming that liberal Democrats like Ferraro and Hillary are our natural allies?"
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 12)
46. John - GW Bush is twice the man that most of his snobby critics will ever be. Even with all his supposed incompetence, somehow he made it to the office of President. And Al Gore's father was famous and influential as well. What happened to Al on the way to the Presidency? And don't blame Florida. He couldn't even win his home state.
Bush has been fending off ankle-biters for 8 years now, and was pretty much out there alone on the surge, which indicates that he at least has courage of his convictions. What do his critics have going for them? Just bitterness, petty, childish little attacks and revisionist history.
Dave at 6:01PM on Mar 14th 2008
47. I am seriously starting to wonder of all of these "blunders" of alleged racism, sexism, and homophobia made by BOTH the Clinton and Obama campaigns are actually inspired by - or at least exacerbated by the likes of Mr. Rove.
When you get op-ed pieces in the N Y Times suggesting that it's racist to use only white children in a campaign ad, things have gone to the brink in a hurry from what started out as a reasonably "high road" approach.
The only candidate that can profit from such polarization in the fall is not a Democrat.
NavyDad at 6:08PM on Mar 14th 2008
48. JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON, DID NOT ASK GERALDINE FERRARO TO SAY THOSE WORDS, DON'T BE SO STUPID. SHE STATED A CORRECT STATEMENT AND I BELIEVE IT WAS HER OWN OPINION. DO WE NOT HAVE "FREE SPEECH". REGARDLESS WHO SHE IS BACKING, IT WAS HER STATEMENT AND SHE HAD THE RIGHT TO SAY IT. ANYWAY, SHE SPOKE THE TRUTH, AND YOU KNOW IT, YOU JUST WON'T ADMIT IT!!!
Maggie Denson at 6:32PM on Mar 14th 2008
49. Ditto K's comment on #44.
I'd have a lot fewer problems with some conservatives if they had minds that were just a little bit more open and realized that their candidate of choice doesn't walk on water - just like mine doesn't.
X at 6:25PM on Mar 14th 2008
50. I say we put them all under a lie detector, including their wives!
Bridget at 6:23PM on Mar 14th 2008
51. Wow, Dinesh, WOW !
I think you have finally written something I sot of agree with.
I had to squinch my eyes to make sure I was reading YOUR blog.
Keep it up, and I might actually comepletely agree with you someday.... but I doubt it.
mac at 6:25PM on Mar 14th 2008
52. Even with all his supposed incompetence- Dave
SUPPOSED? A little history check for you
GW Bush was a C student who got in a prominent school thanks to Daddy
AWOL in National Guard to avoid war
Bought an oil company and went bankrupt shortly after
First president to enter office with a criminal record (one conviction, drunk driving in Maine)
Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions
Changed pollution to benefit oil companies and made Texas the most polluted state
record for biggest annual deficit in history
Signed more laws and executive orders circumventing the Constitution than any other president
Presided over the biggest energy crises and refused to intervene
Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans
The most secretive and un-accountable administration
Signed bill into law that takes vetrans second amendments away
Destroyed more international treaties than any president in US history
His biggest campaign contributor, Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation, presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history
Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts
Failed to fulfill pledge to get Osama Bin Laden
First president in US history to unilaterally
attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations
First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors
First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation
goddess1prevail at 6:42PM on Mar 14th 2008
53. Re: Dave in Post 46:
I'm not a big Obama or Hillary “From each according to his ability to each according to his need” Clinton fan but I just can't agree with you about "W". He was a drunk and a drug user (I didn't say addict) until the age of 40. Prior to that time he demonstrated no real interest in public service. He has poor command of the facts concerning economics and foreign policy and always has. He is one of the worst extemporaneous speakers I have ever seen in public life when it comes to articulating policy which, like it or not, correlates in his case with being rather dim and confused. The type of nuanced thinking required to navigate effectively as President is completely lost on him (and don’t confuse my choice of the word nuanced with meaning equivocal or dithering…the issues facing a President are very complex and multi-faceted and require, even with an expert supporting staff, the ability of a Chief Executive to weigh properly difficult alternatives). It also takes a strong intellect to effectively manage the many disparate points-of-view and large egos found at that level of politics. The divisive and dysfunctional Bush White House is evidence of his lack of ability in that regard as well. Any action taken (apparently) by the Bush Oval Office is a result of behind-the-scenes handlers telling him what to do vs. Bush soliciting and then sifting through a series of options and using his own judgment and vision to arrive at a decision. When Bush says “I’m the decider” it really means merely that “as the President I’m required to officially agree to what I’m being told to do”. Always standing pat on a decision once made, even in the light of new and important information, doesn’t mean one is “decisive” it means one is intellectually lazy. [Read State of Denial by Woodward for an eye-opener and yes, I know Woodward leans left, but no one has been willing or able dispute his conclusions]. As for Bush managing to get elected, thank Bill Clinton for Monica-gate, Rove for a Machiavellian campaign but mostly thank a meat-grinder political system that discourages intelligent, qualified people from running.
John Galt
John Galt at 7:01PM on Mar 14th 2008
54. Re: 41.” J.G.; did I miss it somewhere? I can't find the blog where DD identified Bush (either of them) as the savior of America. And isn't the fact that there are fewer female politicians the same as fewer female ceo's, pilots, electricians, etc.? It may be long overdue, but it's still just a matter of time.”
Sorry, fanmanaf1, but DD is an ardent supporter of Bush. I’m just saying that it’s a bit two-faced to declare that Hillary is prima facie unqualified to serve because of her Clinton connection while supporting Bush who’s life success is clearly even more attached to a family name. Either getting to a position of prominence based on your name is by itself a disqualifying factor or it isn’t. Can’t have it both ways.
Regarding your other comments about female pilot’s, etc, I agree 100% that equal opportunity has been a factor in the disparate numbers of men and women in certain professions. The problem I was getting at with DD’s Blog is that he asserts that Hillary’s gender is an abject advantage in her run for President. I don’t agree. I think there is still plenty of resistance out there, unfortunately, against a woman running for President. I think that’s hard to argue against and as I stated in my previous post, DD doesn’t bother to enlighten us as to why Hillary being female is an advantage for her. He merely asserts it as if her sex is some type of unfair, extra qualification that helps to cover up for her lack of experience.
John Galt
John Galt at 7:25PM on Mar 14th 2008
55. Sure Ferraro was right. Has this political correctness garbage gotten to the point where it trumps common sense???
Robert Wayne at 7:53PM on Mar 14th 2008
56. For conservatives whining about Hillary being in the Senate because of her husband, Republicans have had the chance to stop her twice..in 2000 and 2006. The truth is your party ran lousy candidates twice. Blame the GOP...but it is easier for you to point the finger at Hillary I guess. Heaven forbid you hold your own party accountable for doing anything wrong.
David S. at 8:42PM on Mar 14th 2008
57. Good article, Dinesh!
Linda at 8:56PM on Mar 14th 2008
58. fanman; The numers according to what I heard and read are 12.7% black, 14.8% Latino, 2% other than white. 71.5% white.
I suppose you could google it.
As I looked at the polling #'s more Democrats are voting than Republicans, but if this deversion in the Democratic ranks continues either of the opposing Dem candidates votes could either go to John McCain or some simply may not vote or do a write in.
Voters are getting very weary of the on going shenanigans, as it may well be indicative of how the candidate will behave in office. And, we are yet 7 1/2 mos from election day.
My personal opinion is we should have one primary day, that being Feb. 29 as elections are always during leap year. I'm a moderate Republican from NH.
This on going BS is not good for our country.
All the candidates spend too much money, and too much time away from the job they are paid to do ... Represent their constituents.
J.E. Hyatt at 9:11PM on Mar 14th 2008
59. The last time I checked, Obama is half white.
He also has very little real world experience that qualifies him for President at this time. At this time, he is nothing more than a good motivational speaker whose speciality is "politics" and is only valuable to Hillary to acquire the minority vote. She cannot win without him and he can't win--with or without her.
The last time I checked Obama was half black.
Rich at 9:19PM on Mar 14th 2008
60. Funny, you said absolutely nothing about how Bush got where he is because of HIS father. At least Obama is a very bright man and Hillary is a very bright woman and has been a competent senator. The current president is a dolt and totally inept.
Gary Math Professor at 9:26PM on Mar 14th 2008