Geraldine Ferraro is back in the news. The first woman on a major party presidential ticket has been sharply criticized for her comments about Barack Obama; "He happens to be very lucky to be who he is," that is, a black man.
I live in prime Jesse Jackson territory, so I have been acculturated to look at race as an explanation for everything. But it is very hard to believe that a black man has an advantage, especially when Ferraro also has decided that the press is sexist because they don't support Hillary the way, well, she does.
It was Cokie Roberts, I think, this past Sunday who said that it was hard to believe that John McCain was doing so well in current polls. And she was right. Here is a candidate who advocates staying in Iraq for as many years as it takes, when the vast majority of the country just wants to be out. A candidate who admits knowing little about economics during a race in which economic issues are going to be the most decisive factor. And a candidate who is roundly shunned by the most powerful blocs of his party for being insufficiently conservative. Yet he runs virtually even with either of the Democratic candidates.
This is one of those rare times in history when a black man or a woman has a shot at the presidency. But that has only come from the rampant unpopularity of the current president, and disillusion with politics as usual (which has led to a veritable paralysis in Washington about the issues that really concern Americans). In any normal course of events, any Democrat should have a substantial lead over any Republican - but we're not seeing that.
Much as we hate to admit it, sexism and racism do still play a role in our political decision-making. Not with everyone, not even with a majority (we have come a long way), but enough to turn a slam dunk into a contested jump shot. There are people who will not vote for Hillary because she's a woman, and who won't vote for Barack because he's a black man. And, I believe, there are more of those than people who are patting themselves on the back for our country's new tolerance or their own willingness to "make history."
Which effect, anti-woman or anti-race, is bigger? I have no idea. But it is naive to think it doesn't exist, therefore it's hard to think that, even in this day and age, it's an advantage to being a black man. Maybe Ferraro needs to read some history and stop whining.
I live in prime Jesse Jackson territory, so I have been acculturated to look at race as an explanation for everything. But it is very hard to believe that a black man has an advantage, especially when Ferraro also has decided that the press is sexist because they don't support Hillary the way, well, she does.
It was Cokie Roberts, I think, this past Sunday who said that it was hard to believe that John McCain was doing so well in current polls. And she was right. Here is a candidate who advocates staying in Iraq for as many years as it takes, when the vast majority of the country just wants to be out. A candidate who admits knowing little about economics during a race in which economic issues are going to be the most decisive factor. And a candidate who is roundly shunned by the most powerful blocs of his party for being insufficiently conservative. Yet he runs virtually even with either of the Democratic candidates.
This is one of those rare times in history when a black man or a woman has a shot at the presidency. But that has only come from the rampant unpopularity of the current president, and disillusion with politics as usual (which has led to a veritable paralysis in Washington about the issues that really concern Americans). In any normal course of events, any Democrat should have a substantial lead over any Republican - but we're not seeing that.
Much as we hate to admit it, sexism and racism do still play a role in our political decision-making. Not with everyone, not even with a majority (we have come a long way), but enough to turn a slam dunk into a contested jump shot. There are people who will not vote for Hillary because she's a woman, and who won't vote for Barack because he's a black man. And, I believe, there are more of those than people who are patting themselves on the back for our country's new tolerance or their own willingness to "make history."
Which effect, anti-woman or anti-race, is bigger? I have no idea. But it is naive to think it doesn't exist, therefore it's hard to think that, even in this day and age, it's an advantage to being a black man. Maybe Ferraro needs to read some history and stop whining.
1 comment:
Don't forget that equal opportunity when it comes to caucasians means refraining from ponting out the obvious, which is exactly what Gerry did.
This gaffe was no accident. Its timing (Gerry F. on Hillary's campaign coming in out of nowhere and then disappearing just as fast) on their way into Pennsylvania with its vast caucasian voting bloc looks like a planned maneuvre to rattle the Obama people and to deftly reinforce racial sentiments amongst caucasian undecideds.
The sharpened knives are slowly coming out, those Hillary handlers. They are just beginning to warm up, showing Obama what Arkansas scrappy dirty poltics looks like. But hey -- Obama's peeps ought to thank the Hillary campaign for giving them a freebie in what things will look like (if) Obama wins the nod.
Post a Comment