Keith Olberman - Kind of Pompous, But Kind of Right
posted by DC Viking at 2:26 PM
1 people of discerning taste are saying
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Geraldine Ferraro - Has been and hypocrite
There are lots of angry words directed at former VP candidate and Hillary Clinton supporter Geraldine Ferraro flying around the interwebs right now. I couldn't in good conscience refrain from adding a few of my own.
Ferraro made a statement to the Daily Breeze yesterday, putting forth the idea that Barrack Obama wouldn't be in the presidential race if he were a white man. Where to begin with this one?
Let's start with the hypocrisy. Ferraro was a congresswoman for nearly 5 years before being tapped as Walter Mondale's running mate. Obama was elected as a U.S. Senator in 2005 after serving for seven years in the Illinois State House. I can only assume that her remarks cut to the argument that Obama isn't experienced enough for executive office. If that's the case, then neither was she. In point of fact, her relative inexperience came up during the VP debates, to which she responded;
"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."
That's a really good point, and her resume sounds similar to another minority running for elected office. The only difference 'on paper' then, seems to be that she's a white woman and he's a black man. Her point must be that nobody is going to vote for Clinton because she's a woman. But that doesn't hold water, either. Gloria Steinem, a pretty prominent voice of feminism, wrote in a NY Times editorial, "I’m supporting her because she’ll be a great president and because she’s a woman.”
Okay. So if Ferraro had roughly the same level of experience as Obama when she was running for the second highest office in the country, and Clinton very obviously has supporters that are following her because she's a woman, than what exactly is her beef with Obama's popularity?
I agree that experience plays a role in preparing an individual for assuming the mantel of President, but only to a degree. It's not as if there are many jobs that accurately predict success when presented with the responsibilities of commanding the most powerful army in the history of the planet, managing a stumbling economy in the face of increasing globalism, and trying not to get caught getting head from interns. So voters have to focus on experience in the absence of good predictors of success. But, here's the thing, there are plenty of predictors of success for Obama that go beyond a list of accomplishments and positions.
Hilary Clinton has had every advantage over Obama in this race. She had an established organization due largely to Bill's previous elections, more financial resources, the backing or party insiders, an air of inevitability provided by the media, and her husband was the president. It's not like she's some insurgent candidate that was given a raw deal by the press and never had a chance to get her message out. But in the face of all this, Obama is getting people to follow him. Seems to me that having followers is a pretty good indicator of leadership ability.
Look, I agree that Obama's race may help him in some circle's. Whether that has to do with some people being able to relate to him, or believing that it's time a multicultural country like the U.S. had a little diversity at the top, or because he makes people believe in 'The American Dream' is really not germane to the issue. Race and Gender are important in this race, but with the economy struggling and our armies fighting in Iraq, I think that you would have to work pretty hard to find a voter retarded enough to be following either candidate based solely on identity politics. Obama is winning this race because people believe that he can best lead the country, and I happen to agree. Race and Gender will be a bonus for some people, just as it will be a negative for others.
If Geraldine Ferraro or anyone else supporting Clinton thinks that Barrack Obama is doing as well as he is because he's a black man and for no other reason then I'm not really surprised that they are losing to him.
Ferraro made a statement to the Daily Breeze yesterday, putting forth the idea that Barrack Obama wouldn't be in the presidential race if he were a white man. Where to begin with this one?
Let's start with the hypocrisy. Ferraro was a congresswoman for nearly 5 years before being tapped as Walter Mondale's running mate. Obama was elected as a U.S. Senator in 2005 after serving for seven years in the Illinois State House. I can only assume that her remarks cut to the argument that Obama isn't experienced enough for executive office. If that's the case, then neither was she. In point of fact, her relative inexperience came up during the VP debates, to which she responded;
"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."
That's a really good point, and her resume sounds similar to another minority running for elected office. The only difference 'on paper' then, seems to be that she's a white woman and he's a black man. Her point must be that nobody is going to vote for Clinton because she's a woman. But that doesn't hold water, either. Gloria Steinem, a pretty prominent voice of feminism, wrote in a NY Times editorial, "I’m supporting her because she’ll be a great president and because she’s a woman.”
Okay. So if Ferraro had roughly the same level of experience as Obama when she was running for the second highest office in the country, and Clinton very obviously has supporters that are following her because she's a woman, than what exactly is her beef with Obama's popularity?
I agree that experience plays a role in preparing an individual for assuming the mantel of President, but only to a degree. It's not as if there are many jobs that accurately predict success when presented with the responsibilities of commanding the most powerful army in the history of the planet, managing a stumbling economy in the face of increasing globalism, and trying not to get caught getting head from interns. So voters have to focus on experience in the absence of good predictors of success. But, here's the thing, there are plenty of predictors of success for Obama that go beyond a list of accomplishments and positions.
Hilary Clinton has had every advantage over Obama in this race. She had an established organization due largely to Bill's previous elections, more financial resources, the backing or party insiders, an air of inevitability provided by the media, and her husband was the president. It's not like she's some insurgent candidate that was given a raw deal by the press and never had a chance to get her message out. But in the face of all this, Obama is getting people to follow him. Seems to me that having followers is a pretty good indicator of leadership ability.
Look, I agree that Obama's race may help him in some circle's. Whether that has to do with some people being able to relate to him, or believing that it's time a multicultural country like the U.S. had a little diversity at the top, or because he makes people believe in 'The American Dream' is really not germane to the issue. Race and Gender are important in this race, but with the economy struggling and our armies fighting in Iraq, I think that you would have to work pretty hard to find a voter retarded enough to be following either candidate based solely on identity politics. Obama is winning this race because people believe that he can best lead the country, and I happen to agree. Race and Gender will be a bonus for some people, just as it will be a negative for others.
If Geraldine Ferraro or anyone else supporting Clinton thinks that Barrack Obama is doing as well as he is because he's a black man and for no other reason then I'm not really surprised that they are losing to him.
Labels: politics
posted by DC Viking at 3:49 PM
0 people of discerning taste are saying
Good Stuff
Bloggers in Our Nation's Capitol
Previous Posts
- In DC we celebrate independence by crapping on the...
- Totally Boss Video Wednesday
- Moving Sucks
- I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find GAMBLING going on here!
- Totally Boss Video Wednesday
- Totally Boss Video Wednesday
- Dear God Is It Over Yet Haiku
- At least he didn't park his Prius in the pool
- I Miss Jed Bartett Too
- Totally Boss Video Wednesday
Vallhalla
- Drinking and Riding
- I’m a Polite Driver
- Going Postal at the DMV
- RIP Kirby Puckett
- Vegas Baby, Veg...Ah, screw it
- A Little Bit About DC Viking
- HAAIIIIII-Ku!
Archives
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
- June 2008
- July 2008
