Remember when David Geffen, an Obama supporter (but NOT part of his campaign) wrote an op-ed in the NYT calling Hillabee a liar? HRC's attack dog Wolfson went ballistic, demanding that Obama denounce him. Now, someone who is PART of Hillabee's campaign makes clearly untoward comments, and all they do is say they "disagree" with them. Is there anyone who does not yet understand that the Clinton campaign plays by a whole different set of rules? What is Powers' "monster" remark compared to Ferraro's screed?

Someone had to say it and I say, "Way to go, Geraldine. More power to you. Don't let people like Adele try to silence you with unsupported claims that you're hurting the party."

Freedom of speech means being able to say something that Adele might not like (even though Adele agrees that what Geraldine says is grounded in fact). What's more harmful to this country as a whole? Insulting Obama and his supporters while marginally 'hurting' the Democratic party, or trying to intimidate one of the heroes of the Democratic party into silence? Geraldine is not alone in feeling this way and she has every right to express that feeling, acting as a surrogate for many. If that harms the party then so be it - the freedom to speak one's mind is more important.

Look, we're only hearing from Ferraro since she's a woman, because she wouldn't have been put on the ticket as VP candidate if she had been a man. And those people who don't like me saying that are anti-commenter.

Twenty-four years ago, I was hoping -- really, really hoping -- that Walter Mondale would pick Diane Feinstein as his running mate.

Geradline Ferraro steps forward to remind us once again that Mondale picked the wrong woman.

Does anybody in Hillary Clinton's campaign care about the future of the Democratic Party? That's what I'd like to know.

Depends on what the meaning of 'Democratic Party' is, I guess. If it's a political/patronage machine belonging to the Clintons, of course they care. If it's a broad-based, diverse national political party attuned to the shifting demographics and needs of this country (or at least a party that is trying to achieve that status), then no, they don't, presumably because they can't even conceive of such a beast.

"If it's a broad-based, diverse national political party"

I would hardly call either the Clinton or the Obama voters a broad based coalition.

The fact that you seem to think so shows how deep in the echo chamber you are

"Geraldine is not alone in feeling this way and she has every right to express that feeling, acting as a surrogate for many. If that harms the party then so be it - the freedom to speak one's mind is more important."

So, what exactly did Samantha Power resign for? And does this now mean that people should feel free to refer to Hillary as a "castrating bitch" if that's what they genuinely feel?

Mike

Q: Does anybody in Hillary Clinton's campaign care about the future of the Democratic Party?

A: No.

As Atrios says, simple answers...

Does anybody in the Democratic party care about the female voters who have kept them viable since men started abandoning the party in droves 30 years ago? That's what I want to know.

This gotcha gamesmanship has got to stop. And the youthful "progressive" blogosphere and the media have got to wake up to the harm they are doing.

What was "racist" and outrageous about Kroft's interview with Clinton in which he made the major BADGERED her about another candidate's religion and made that candidate's religion the major point of the interview? It was Kroft's behavior, not Hillary's. Every time progressives allow and support the media in doing this sort of thing to Democrats THEY weaken the party.

Why don't you ask Olberman and Kroft to cover the obscene incarceration rates of young black men? The plight young working class men and women trying to put together a secure family life in an economy where nothing is certain except the fact that the average per capita wage is insufficient to raise a family?

This campaign has been a revelation about the "progressive" community. A very disheartening and disillusioning one -- and that is what is going to inevitably tear the party apart.

What has been the liberal, and the Democratic Party’s, message to women for the last 30-40 years?

"Stick with us (open your wallets and make sure you vote) because our presidential candidates have attractive, "liberated" wives, and, most important, we're the party that will make sure you can abort your babies."

Beyond that, every Democratic appeal to women -- on the issues that could help make a different "choice" possible for many -- universal, affordable health care, access to child care and early childhood education, family leave, pay equity, more flexible approaches to work and retirement, etc. -- has been made with a wink, a nod and fingers crossed behind their backs.

What we've learned in this campaign is that for affluent liberals, male and female, for whom abortion is a “personal choice” rather than an economic issue, it is the only "feminist" or "woman's" issue they're willing to stand up for. And we've learned that the party's elite leadership and the "progressive" punditocracy that supports it, for the mostly have extreme contempt for all those “older women” who have expected more from the party, and from the many progressive institutions, organizations and media outlets they’ve supported with their time, energy, money and patronage. Worse, we've learned that the party's leadership and those elites have nothing but disdain for all those younger, poorer women, and their families, whose votes they need and seek -- voters who they refer to dismissively as "women with needs."

It doesn't matter who ends up with the nomination. This campaign may be putting an end to any distinctive rationale for the Democratic Party. It has exposed the Party's gender and class hypocrisy and fault lines, and made apparent the extreme diversion of interests between the male and elite female party leadership and the middle and working class women whose votes have kept the party viable over the last 30 years.

I don't know how this will play out in the near future. But I know that in the long run "shut up and vote" will not prove to be a good enough approach to half the voting population.

Geraldine is not alone in feeling this way and she has every right to express that feeling, acting as a surrogate for many. If that harms the party then so be it - the freedom to speak one's mind is more important.

Sure, she has the right to express her feelings, and nobody is taking that away. And we have the right to regard her as an ignorant, resentful bigot and to express our feelings toward her and toward the Clinton campaign's refusal to forcefully repudiate her divisive garbage.

The freedom to speak your mind isn't the freedom to say whatever the hell you want without being criticized.

"I don't know how this will play out in the near future. But I know that in the long run "shut up and vote" will not prove to be a good enough approach to half the voting population."

Excuse me, but any "shut up and vote" message is coming out of the Clinton campaign. That's the campaign that acts as though Hillary is entitled to the nomination and everyone should just "shut up and vote" that way.

Obama supporters can certainly be annoying as heck, but they've got nothing on the irrational conviction of Hillary supporters that she has to be the nominee and anything that interferes with that is automatically illegitimate.

Mike

Mike:

In America, if you want to call someone ... the stuff you wrote above, then yes, please feel free to do so. (I believe you just did, didn't you? But you don't hear me whining that you're destroying the party, do you? That wouldn't be true, would it? You should be allowed to speak your mind, shouldn't you? Adele's point is silly, isn't it?)

Why did Samantha resign? Ask her - I think she gave her reasons. She obviously felt that she had done something WRONG - that's what she said. Geraldine does not feel she has done anything wrong. In fact, she feels that she has been wronged. So why should she resign?

To be frank, either one of these loose-lipped advisors resigned/will resign when their discretion becomes too politically painful for their candidate. So Hill obviously feels like this is working to her advantage. But that does not take anything away from the principle I'm espousing which is that people in this country are free to speak their minds even if it is perceived to hurt someone's feelings or a political party. I object to Adele's initimidation, "Stop saying this kind of stuff or you'll destroy the very foundation of civilization!" Talk about fear-mongering.

Tim:

"The freedom to speak your mind isn't the freedom to say whatever the hell you want without being criticized."

If you would read what I actually wrote I in no way claim that Geraldine should not be criticized. I wrote that people like Adele should not attenmpt to silence someone through intimidation. Criticism is not saying shut up. Adele claims, without support, that Geraldine is somehow destroying the party and that therefore she should shut up.

Adele has every right to do so, you can call Hill whatever you want, I have every right to point out what I have so far.

Let's not intimidate with false threats and ask for silence - let's speak our minds and let the chips fall where they may. That's all I'm asking for - free speech without intimidation. Criticize all you want (as if I could stop you).

Why did Samantha resign? Ask her - I think she gave her reasons. She obviously felt that she had done something WRONG - that's what she said. Geraldine does not feel she has done anything wrong. In fact, she feels that she has been wronged. So why should she resign?

Is everyone supporting Hillary Clinton this crazy and/or stupid?

Let's turn your analysis around: if someone on the Obama staff called Hillary Clinton a [expletive deleted], but didn't think they did anything wrong in doing so, under your analysis it would be quite all right for them to stay on the campaign. That's ridiculous.

I think in the future we will remember yesterday as the date that Hillary Clinton's campaign for president effectively ended. Even if she manages to wrest the nomination away from Barak Obama, she will have no chance of winning the general election after systematically alienating the party's most reliable demographic.

She's already the most reviled politician by the right. Now she's trying to become the most reviled by the left as well.

"In America, if you want to call someone ... the stuff you wrote above, then yes, please feel free to do so."

So, I can assume that when Chris Matthews said Hillary is only where she is in politics because Bill cheated on her...you thought the complaints about that were wrong? Did you feel the need to post anything, anywhere in Tweety's defense on that point?

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend until death your right to say it" - Voltaire

I definitely don't agree with Ferraro's comments. I think it is an expression of an undercurrent of gender victimization in the Clinton camp (if this man hadn't come along, we'd be done by now!). The fact that he is black is almost irrelevant to her true issue, which is that she feels, as many, many women, especially older women, do, that their "time" is being stolen from them. She would probably have said the same thing had it been John Edwards, or Bill Richardson ("he's very lucky to be who he is"). So yes, it's the boiling over of her frustrations, and she has a right to gripe about it. Never mind that Clinton is behind because, deservedly or not, people simply don't trust her to do the right thing. By not getting rid of Ferraro in strong, certain terms, she is only reinforcing that impression.

That being said, as a LEADER of a national political party that depends on both blacks AND women as a reliable voting base, Ferraro's comments were, at best, unwise. The fact that she showed such a clear lack of judgment, and Clinton's refusal to separate herself from Ferraro, only reinforces (again) the perception of Clinton as someone who lacks judgment. By driving this wedge into the party in such an irresponsible manner, and then refusing to take responsibility for it, Ferraro is essentially saying "to hell with all of you who don't vote for Hillary, you've been duped by a man, and a black one at that!" Her comments continue a long pattern of the Clinton camp (and many of her supporters) insulting and disparaging Obama supporters as being "naive idealists" and implied insults such as "cultists" "stupid" and "ignorant".

Hillary will never win people over if she continues to insult them. Voters have a right to chose, just as Ferraro has a right to act like a moron. For Clinton to insult those who she claims to court, and for Ferraro to belittle those people who battled with the difficult decision many millions have made between Clinton and Obama, is a national embarrassment to the party. Please, Pennsylvania, end it before it ends the Democratic party.

"Clinton surrogates have been injecting race into this contest since New Hampshire; the same can't be said of Obama's surrogates vis-à-vis gender."

Really, Adele?! Really?!

How about when Obama national campaign co-chair Jesse Jackson, Jr. went on MSNBC in the wake of their loss in NH and claimed that Hillary's tears (which didn't exist ... but who am I to get in the the way of a good narrative) were about her appearance and also said:

"Those tears also have to be analyzed. They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs. Clinton did not cry for, particularly as we head to South Carolina where 45% of African-Americans who participate in the Democratic contest, and they see real hope in Barack Obama."

Are you seriously claiming that Jackson wasn't injecting race and gender into the discussion with that BS?

Really ... he wasn't saying "Hillary doesn't care about black people" ... you honestly believe that?

"If someone on the Obama staff called Hillary Clinton a [expletive deleted], but didn't think they did anything wrong in doing so, under your analysis it would be quite all right for them to stay on the campaign. That's ridiculous."

I think not ridiculous. It would, indeed, be quite all right for them to stay on. Are you saying that it's somehow against the law? It wouldn't be okay with you, but it would be fine with me. I also think it would be okay for Spitzer to remain even though others might feel that is ridiculous.

As I wrote earlier, loose-lipped advisors "will resign when their discretion becomes too politically painful for their candidate....that does not take anything away from the principle ... that people in this country are free to speak their minds even if it is perceived to hurt someone's feelings or a political party."

"So, I can assume that when Chris Matthews said Hillary is only where she is in politics because Bill cheated on her...you thought the complaints about that were wrong? Did you feel the need to post anything, anywhere in Tweety's defense on that point?"

I will defend him now but I didn't then, mostly because I think he's an a-hole.

Again, the complaints (and ther comments) aren't 'wrong' or 'right'. We are expressing opinions. In my opinion Chris was wrong, but I didn't go to any comment board and demand he shut up before he destroyed MSNBC or demand that he be fired.

I am asking that we not intimidate with false threats and demand silence. Let's speak our minds and let the chips fall where they may. I'm asking for free speech without intimidation. Criticize all you want.

Where is the proof that these comments are 'destroying the party?" What does 'destroy the party' even mean? Are you saying that the Demsd will lose because Geraldine has an opinion with which you disagree? Is the party really that weak?

"Clinton surrogates have been injecting race into this contest since New Hampshire; the same can't be said of Obama's surrogates vis-à-vis gender."

So when Obama keeps pushing the idea -- aas he did yesterday in Mississippi -- that the Clinton campaign circulated that photo of him in African garb that appeared on Drudge ... what was that? Were is the proof that any of this originated with the Clinton campaign? Are we really suppose to take Drudge's word for it? Does no one care that the loonies at Free Republic were circulating the picture days before it showed up on Drudge's website ... or that those 'wingers are probably the source of the photo in the first place?!

"people in this country are free to speak their minds even if it is perceived to hurt someone's feelings or a political party."

So, when Michael Richards screamed the N-word over and over in a comedy club...what exactly should anyone have done about it? Because you seem to be saying that he should only have been criticized, but he shouldn't have lost any jobs because of it.

Mike

June 2007-The Obama campaign issues a press release that refers to HRC as (D-Punjab).
(See http://tinyurl.com/2cnnca)

Assertions that either campaign has been innocent of racial or gender-based appeals are insupportable.

I'm with Andrew here, i'll defend her right to say it, but it's pretty ridiculous. I'm sure there are people who are voting for Obama just cause he's black. They see an opportunity to help elect the first African American president and they want to be a part of it. But i'm also sure that there are a fair amount of people voting for Clinton for the same reason (well, not cause she's black, but you know what i'm saying). Most of my friends who are Clinton supporters hate a lot of her stances on things (like her vote for the war and her vote on the bankruptcy bill) but they overlooked all that cause they wanted to see a woman in the White House. I don't see that as being much different.

The reason Clinton is losing isn't because the country has thrown aside the last 250 years of it's history and now wants to vote for "the cool black guy". The reason she's losing is cause she's run a terrible campaign. Poor organization, blowing off caucus states, not planning for after Super Tuesday, not tapping into small donor fund-raising earlier, these are what's really to blame. I know in politics (especially in elections) admitting your mistakes can really be seen as showing weakness, but there's got to be a better way of acknowledging why things have gone wrong than by making insulting and divisive statements like these or any of the other put forth by the Clinton campaign.

"So, when Michael Richards screamed the N-word over and over in a comedy club...he should only have been criticized ... he shouldn't have lost any jobs because of it."

Not at all. In fact, who am I to say what his 'punishment' should be? It's not up to me whether he loses a job - it's up to a (future) employer. I can simply choose to not purchase his products.

I would criticise him but, unlike Adele, I would not attempt to intimidate him into silence by using a false threat that he will destroy the stand-up comedy business.

I think we should all rarely approve of prior restraint of free speech through the use of false threats and fear mongering.

Is everyone supporting Hillary Clinton this crazy and/or stupid?

At least that blinkered. Does Obama get a lot of support because he's black? Yes. Does he probably lose more support for this same reason? Yes. Both propositions would also be true of Clinton's gender, as well as the fact that she is a Clinton. No less than Tina "Bitch is the New Black" Fey more or less stated her support for a co-presidency.
But if Obama's all about race, why wasn't Carold Mosley Braun or Al Sharpton the Dem nominee in '04? Why didn't either of them even win a primary?
The simple and unavoidable fact that all Clinton supporters want to simply avoid is that her vote on the AUMF is a much larger factor in this primary than either race or gender. An actual, honest-to-god issue.

"I think we should all rarely approve of prior restraint of free speech through the use of false threats and fear mongering."

Okay. Now I get it. You're the sort of person who equates someone saying something on a blog to government enforced censorship. Sorry I wasted my time.

Mike

"I'm with Andrew here, i'll defend her right to say it, but it's pretty ridiculous."

It's ridiculous when you consider that she's comparing him to someone whose claim to fame is that she's Bill Clinton's wife.

Hey, I have an idea: Silda Spitzer for President in 2012!

Oh wait-- that would be Dina Matos McGreevey's turn. She was here first.

"It doesn't get much more disingenuous than that. Clinton surrogates have been injecting race into this contest since New Hampshire; the same can't be said of Obama's surrogates vis-à-vis gender"

please see below. agreed the following aren't from surrogates but from Obama himself, especially after the only male remaining in the race, Edwards, dropped out:

"It’s that experience, that understanding, not just of what world leaders I went and talked to in the ambassador’s house I had tea with..."

"You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out."

"I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal"

And gosh darn if his numbers among white men didn't improve after each and every one.

"It's ridiculous when you consider that she's comparing him to someone whose claim to fame is that she's Bill Clinton's wife."

ahh the negative hypothetical, a stalwart of American nothingness

yeah, o.k., what utter bullshit...when you get your wayback machine up and running, you go ahead and turn back time, stop that Clinton wedding and report your results to the class, k?

More likely is the case that Bill slowed Hillary's career path down.

ferraro isn't saying Obama is where he is because of his race, only that the press has given him a free ride IN THIS CAMPAIGN because of it.

ahh the negative hypothetical, a stalwart of American nothingness

Um... that's what started the halfwit, bitter jackass Ferraro on her hate-filled rant, a negative hypothetical.

But that "periodically" thing? That doesn't at all make you sound like a crank. Keep it up.

that the best you got?
fail.

but keep insulting fellow democrats...that's sure to get votes come November

Geraldine said, if he were not an African American man...one only need look at Mississippi election 91% of the black voted for him, because he was black.

The Obama camp is playing
the race care, in order to get into the spotlight, and hurt the Clinton Campaign.

What was it when Obama called
Bill Clinton out on the dance floor to prove how black he was, and then looked
at Hillary and said well you're a woman, then looked at John Edwards, and said well your just John...How condesending!

What really bothers me is that like Bush, the Obama camp is going to put a muzzle
on Hillary's supporters, and
then when President then take
away our first amendment rights.

If Geraldine has committed a crime, I suggest the Obama camp take this case to court.
She is NO RACIST, and neither
am I!

We are such sheep! Wake up people; it’s not about race, it’s about money. It always has been. Obama raises 55mil.in Feb. / Clinton raises 30something mil.in Feb.

A large chunk of that campaign money is spent on the major networks including CNN.

Why would the media want to stop that gravy train?? So the media sensationalizes its coverage by playing on the prejudice and fears of the lowest common denominator of the American people.Racism, sexism, classism, and any other ism that is convenient to the media.

The ratings soar through the roof. The campaign money keeps rolling in to the networks, and the media continues to laugh at us ignorant and shallow Americans and our petty infighting about race and gender all the way to the bank.

Can you say Cha-Ching!

88% of black voters supported JOHN KERRY in 2004. 90% of the black electorate voted for AL GORE in 2000. Bill Clinton was "the first black president" and HRC had the majority of the black vote in her pocket before her campaign put their foot in their mouths... repeatedly.

But of course, now they're all voting for Obama because of his skin color, instead of being the best Democratic candidate.

riiiiggght.

The commentary here is hilarious...

Hillary's campaign slogan should be "The ends justify the means." Until then, she's a wolf in sheeps clothing!

It is sad that Ferraro thinks the ONLY reason for her nomination was the fact that she was a woman. While there is true that race and gender WILL influence some people's votes, it is ridiculous to say that Obama is only in because of his race Why is she projecting her own failure and poor sense of self on this campaign. If she thinks she wasn't being racist, she needs to look up the definition of racism...

Will somebody please have the Hillary Staffer SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.........FIRST THEY HAD TO CLAMP THE MOUTH OF THAT JERK HUSBAND, THEN CAMPAIGN WORKERS, STAFFERS AND NOW WE'VE GOT LOUD MOUTH GERRY IN THE FRAY AS WELL...

DOES ANYBODY ON THAT SIDE OF THE ISLE EVER LEARN ANYTHING FROM THE DAY BEFORE OR IS IT THAT THEY THINK THE NAME CLINTON REALLY MEANS SOMETHING SPECIAL IN THIS COUNTRY...WELL SO DID ELIOT SPITZER UNTIL TODAY WHEN HE RESIGNS AMONGST THE DISGRACED...I CAN'T BELIEVE ANY BODY WITH HISTORY OF THE CLINTON'S WOULD HAVE ANYONE CONTROVERSIAL WITHIN EYE BALL RANGE, OR SHOULD I SAY ANYBODY SHOULD WANT TO BE WITHIN EYE BALL RANGE GIVEN THE ODDS OF ALL THAT HAPPENED IN THEIR HISTORY AT THE WHTIE HOUSE PRIOR...

I PERSONALLY WILL NOT BE SUPRISED IF HE SHOWS UP ON THE LIST OF ELIGIBLES AT THE MAYFLOWER...BUT I'M SURE HILLARY AROUND WENT AND ASKED HIM FIRST IF IN FACT SHE WAS GOING TO HAVE TO STAND BY HER MAN ONE MORE TIME.. I UNDERSTAND THAT MRS. SPITZER ACTUALLY WENT TO HILLARY FOR ADVISE WHILE HER HUSBAND WAS RUNNING FOR OFFICE OR SHOULD I SAY RUNNING AROUND FOR OFFICE...THEY ACTUALLY SPOKE...OBVIOUSLY HILLARY DID NOT TELL HER MUCH OR MAYBE SHE JUST WANTED SOMEONE ELSE TO BE SUPRISED LIKE SHE WAS....WELL ELIOT WON'T BE DOING IN THE WHITE HOUSE AT LEAST...OF COURSE HE IS INVITED BACK AGAIN...

SICK AND TIRED OF DEMOCRATS...

Is anyone else seeing this like I am? The first time that I was old enough to vote in 1988, there was a Bush on the ticket. (And Bush Sr.was vice pres. For 8yrs before then)

since then, there has been a Bush or a Clinton in the white house. What’s next if Hilary wins and serves an eight year term? Jeb Bush? Then what?

Is America really so lacking in talent that we have entrusted the presidency to the Bush’ and the Clintons indefinitely?

If Hilary wins we will have created a virtual royal family, consisting of the Bush’ and the Clintons.

Come on, let's be real. Obama is half black. Hillary is a woman. Is it any wonder why these two firsts are competing for the historic post at the same time? Everyone's being way too sensitive. Yet, Chris Matthews accuses Hillary of having "mood swings" or says she's only where she is because she slept with the president. Obama supporters yell out to Hillary "Iron my shirts!" Obama even said that Hillary only attacks him "when she's feeling down." To top it all off, pundit Michelle Bernard called Geraldine "an angry white woman." Double whammy. Where's the outrage then?

Geraldine Ferraro stepping down is one step back for women.

She said things that many think. Barack Obama has been treated gingerly. He is in a unique situation.let's get real.he is black . hillary is a woman. Men won't vote for her and some white folks won't vote for him that is just fact. Blacks are proud of their candidate and women are proud of their candidate and that's it.

Blacks for Obama, women vote for Hillary. But some might say just now I am racist. But I'm just stating a fact. 90% of Mississippi blacks voted for Obama. if he was white maybe not as many would have voted for him...

let's get over the racist stuff. Let;s point out sexism but as we've seen on many media outlets they really don't know what it is?

Geraldine Ferraro stepping down is one step back for women.

She said things that many think. Barack Obama has been treated gingerly. He is in a unique situation.let's get real.he is black . hillary is a woman. Men won't vote for her and some white folks won't vote for him that is just fact. Blacks are proud of their candidate and women are proud of their candidate and that's it.

Blacks for Obama, women vote for Hillary. But some might say just now I am racist. But I'm just stating a fact. 90% of Mississippi blacks voted for Obama. if he was white maybe not as many would have voted for him...

let's get over the racist stuff. Let;s point out sexism but as we've seen on many media outlets they really don't know what it is?

Let’s not romanticize Hilary. The love fest from the people was always directed toward Bill Clinton, not Hil.

Honestly, if you take away Obama and replace him with John Edwards with Obama’s money; I don’t think the race would be much different.

Even as first lady, she seemed to rub a lot of people the wrong way.

>>"I am asking that we not intimidate with false threats and demand silence. Let's speak our minds and let the chips fall where they may. I'm asking for free speech without intimidation. Criticize all you want.

Where is the proof that these comments are 'destroying the party?" What does 'destroy the party' even mean? Are you saying that the Demsd will lose because Geraldine has an opinion with which you disagree? Is the party really that weak?"

Is it?

In a word...yes. Because large chunks of the party represent a coalition of 'identity voters': blacks, women, Latinos, fossils (er, excuse me...retired persons).

I was a Clinton supporter until right before the New Hampshire primary, when I heard a snippet of a speech she gave that basically told women to get out and vote for her because they have vaginas, too. When I listen to the unification speeches of Obama versus the dead dull, slightly passive aggressive Clinton verbage, the choice became obvious. I'm tired of identity politics. I'm tired of people feeling entitled to be something they haven't really earned. And nobody can convince me that the 2008 election should include a reparations for a long-time disenfranchisement of women from the political elite.

Geraldine Ferraro was wrong; she illustrated clearly that she doesn't have a clue yet what the dark side of Affirmative Action is, and how harmful and denigratory (and in her case, hypocritical) it is to allude that Barack Obama has risen to the level he has because of his race. Since I now support Obama, I say "let her scream her crap at the top of her lungs, and sing Hillary's name as her champion while doing it." And let the Obama camp keep pointing out why Geraldine Ferraro is wrong.

The danger to the Democratic Party is that a large chunk of them are sick of the crap. They see Obama as a source of hope and unification, and they resent having Clinton drag their champion through the mud. In a rare fit of intelligence, one media pundit compared the Clinton attacks on Obama as "telling the kids there's no Santa Claus while stomping on a stuffed reindeer." Some people may like having their heroes made real. But I like having someone to look up to. There are so few these days.

Leaders govern through consent of the people. Hillary will never gain more fans than she already has. Obama has done more to turn around the climate surrounding U.S. politics, than anyone since RFK. He can lead, because people want to follow. And there is nothing...NOTHING...in that magic, that has anything to do with his race or gender.

This is clearly a disgrace to this country. I am still amazed as to how dumb some people in politics are. Someone should replay the comments she made about Mr. Jackson in the 80's... Sound about the same, which mean a deep rooted racist sentiment, in my humble opinion.

Pedro

Gotta comment. This is so fun to read. It's like listening to a classroom half full of critical thinkers and half full of straight up retards (no offense intended btw).

The race and gender cards are not fair to play. Look at the issues and the history. Then look at their campaigns and their upbringings. Even the folks voting for Hillary feel her campaign could do without the negativity. Obama inspires so many people.

*sigh*

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one.

Well the longer this drags on the less of a chance that we'll a Dem Prez.

Bilary needs to give up and realize theyve been beat at their own game.

I think this sad and very disgusting. Do they understand they are creating racism by harassing her for her right to freedom of speech?
Does anybody in the Obama camp even care about the Democratic Party?
I don’t think so.
White people can no longer say anything before the blacks screams racist.
Sick and tired of it now.
I would not vote for Obama under ANY circumstances, never EVER!!

White Democrat and proud.

"Clinton surrogates have been injecting race into this contest since New Hampshire"

I call BS on this tripe...layout your, documented with links, examples or shut up. People can check out www.dailyhowler.com if they are remotely interested in the facts.

"The only reason why Hillary is getting votes is because she's a woman."

Does this sentence look offensive to you?

WAKE UP PEOPLE or McCain will own us all!

Geraldine Ferraro's comments about Barack Obama were simply wrong. To suggest that he got where he is because he has black skin, is well, simply ludicrous. If we are honest, we would acknowledge that folks with black skin are still disciminated against. Barack's Harvard education, his brilliant oratorial skills and his ability to be inclusive, regardless of skin colour, gender or ethnic background - that's why he is where he is today!