Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Olbermann's Special Comment on Clinton and Ferraro: "This Is Not a Campaign Strategy, This Is a Suicide Pact" [VIDEO]

Posted by Adam Howard, AlterNet at 7:50 PM on March 12, 2008.


"This, Sen. Clinton, is your campaign, and it's your name. Grab the reins back from whoever has led you to this precipice, before it is too late."
Olbermann's Special Comment on Clinton and Ferraro:

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Adam Howard in your
mailbox!

 

Transcript via MSNBC

Finally, as promised, a Special Comment on the presidential campaign of the Junior Senator from New York.

By way of necessary preface, President and Senator Clinton -- and the Senator's mother, and the Senator's brother -- were of immeasurable support to me at the moments when these very commentaries were the focus of the most surprise, the most uncertainty, and the most anger. My gratitude to them is abiding.

Also, I am not here endorsing Senator Obama's nomination, nor suggesting it is inevitable. Thus I have fought with myself over whether or not to say anything. Senator, as it has reached its apex in their tone-deaf, arrogant, and insensitive reaction to the remarks of Geraldine Ferraro... your own advisors are slowly killing your chances to become President.

Senator, their words, and your own, are now slowly killing the chances for any Democrat to become President. In your tepid response to this Ferraro disaster, you may sincerely think you are disenthralling an enchanted media, and righting an unfair advance bestowed on Senator Obama.

You may think the matter has closed with Representative Ferraro's bitter, almost threatening resignation. But in fact, Senator, you are now campaigning, as if Barack Obama were the Democrat, and you... were the Republican. As Shakespeare wrote, Senator -- that way... madness... lies.

You have missed a critical opportunity to do... what was right. No matter what Ms. Ferraro now claims, no one took her comments out of context. She had made them on at least three separate occasions, then twice more on television this morning. Just hours ago, on NBC Nightly News, she denied she had made the remarks in an interview -- only at a paid political speech. In fact, the first time she spoke them, was ten days before the California newspaper published them... not in a speech, but in a radio interview. On February 26th, quoting...

"If Barack Obama were a white man, would we be talking about this, as a potential real problem for Hillary? If he were a woman of any color, would he be in this position that he's in? Absolutely not." The context was inescapable.

Two minutes earlier, a member of Senator Clinton's Finance Committee, one of her "Hill-Raisers," had bemoaned the change in allegiance by super-delegate John Lewis from Clinton to Obama, and the endorsement of Obama by Senator Dodd. "I look at these guys doing it," she had said, "and I have to tell you, it's the guys sticking together."

A minute after the "color" remarks, she was describing herself as having been chosen for the 1984 Democratic ticket, purely as a woman politician, purely to make history. She was, in turn, making a blind accusation of sexism -- and dismissing Senator Obama's candidacy as nothing more than an Equal Opportunity stunt.

The next day she repeated her comments to a reporter from the newspaper in Torrance, California. "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

And when this despicable statement -- ugly in its overtones, laughable in its weak grip of facts, and moronic in the historical context -- when it floats outward from the Clinton campaign like a poison cloud, what do the advisors have their candidate do? Do they have Senator Clinton herself compare the remark to Al Campanis talking on Nightline... on Jackie Robinson Day... about how blacks lacked the necessities to become baseball executives, while she points out that Barack Obama has not gotten his 1600 delegates as part of some kind of Affirmative Action plan?

Do they have Senator Clinton note that her own brief period in elected office, is as irrelevant to the issue of judgment as is Senator Obama's... ...while she points out that FDR had served only six years as a governor and state Senator before he became President? Or that Teddy Roosevelt had four-and-a-half years before the White House? Or that Woodrow Wilson had two years and six weeks? Or Richard Nixon... fourteen... and Calvin Coolidge 25? Do these advisors have Senator Clinton invoke Samantha Power -- gone by sunrise after she used the word "monster" -- and have Senator Clinton say, "this is how I police my campaign and this is what I stand for," while she fires former Congresswoman Ferraro from any role the campaign? No.

Somebody tells her that simply disagreeing with and rejecting the remarks is sufficient. And she should then call, "regrettable", words that should make any Democrat retch. And that she should then try to twist them, first into some pox-on-both-your-houses plea to 'stick to the issues,' and then to let her campaign manager try to bend them beyond all recognition, into Senator Obama's fault. And thus these advisers give Congresswoman Ferraro nearly a week in which to send Senator Clinton's campaign back into the vocabulary... of David Duke.

"Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up. "Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. "How's that?"

How's that?

Apart from sounding exactly like Rush Limbaugh attacking the black football quarterback Donovan McNabb? Apart from sounding exactly like what Ms. Ferraro said about another campaign, nearly twenty years ago? Quote:

"President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race." So... apart from sounding like insidious racism that is at least two decades old? Apart from rendering ridiculous, Senator Clinton's shell-game about choosing Obama as Vice President? Apart from this evening's resignation letter? "I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign. "The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you." Apart from all that?

Well. It sounds as if those advisors want their campaign to be associated with those words, and the cheap... ignorant... vile... racism that underlies every syllable... And that Geraldine Ferraro has just gone free-lance. Senator Clinton:

This is not a campaign strategy.

This is a suicide pact.

This week alone, your so-called strategists have declared that Senator Obama has not yet crossed the "commander-in-chief threshold"... But -- he might be your choice to be Vice President, even though a quarter of the previous sixteen Vice Presidents have become commander-in-chief during the greatest kind of crisis this nation can face: a mid-term succession. But you'd only pick him if he crosses that threshold by the time of the convention. But if he does cross that threshold by the time of the convention, he will only have done so sufficiently enough to become Vice President, not President.

Senator, if the serpentine logic of your so-called advisors were not bad enough, now, thanks to Geraldine Ferraro, and your campaign's initial refusal to break with her, and your new relationship with her -- now more disturbing still with her claim that she can now "speak for herself" about her vision of Senator Obama as some kind of embodiment of a quota...

If you were to seek Obama as a Vice President, it would be, to Ms. Ferraro, some kind of social engineering gesture, some kind of racial make-good. Do you not see, Senator?

To Senator Clinton's supporters, to her admirers, to her friends for whom she is first choice, and her friends for whom she is second choice, she is still letting herself be perceived as standing next to, and standing by, racial divisiveness and blindness... And worst yet, after what President Clinton said during the South Carolina primary, comparing the Obama and Jesse Jackson campaigns -- a disturbing, but only borderline remark, after what some in the black community have perceived as a racial undertone to the "3 A-M" ad... a disturbing -- but only borderline interpretation... And after that moment's hesitation in her own answer on 60 Minutes about Obama's religion -- a disturbing, but only borderline vagueness...

After those precedents, there are those who see a pattern... false, or true. After those precedents, there are those who see an intent... false, or true. After those precedents, there are those who see the Clinton campaign's anything-but-benign neglect of this Ferraro catastrophe -- falsely or truly -- as a desire to hear the kind of casual prejudice which still haunts this society voiced... and to not distance the campaign from it. To not distance you from it, Senator!

To not distance you... from that which you as a woman, and Senator Obama as an African-American, should both know and feel with the deepest of personal pain! Which you should both fight with all you have! Which you should both insure, has no place in this contest!

This, Senator Clinton, is your campaign, and it is your name. Grab the reins back from whoever has led you to this precipice, before it is too late. Voluntarily or inadvertently, you are still awash in this filth. Your only reaction has been to disagree, reject, and to call it regrettable. Her only reaction has been to brand herself as the victim, resign from your committee, and insist she will continue to speak. Unless you say something definitive, Senator, the former Congresswoman is speaking with your approval.

You must remedy this.

And you must... reject... and denounce... Geraldine Ferraro. Good night, and good luck.

AlterNet is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by its writers are their own.

Digg!

Adam Howard is the editor of PEEK.


Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Keith is the King of Broadcasting
Posted by: foreverhope on Mar 12, 2008 8:51 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I worship him.

(rubbing hands together)

Now things are cookin! :-)

WOMEN FOR OBAMA, YES WE CAN!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a Shame!
Posted by: pauldd on Mar 12, 2008 8:59 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was a time recently when I felt very confident (and even hopeful) about the upcoming election in that we had two very qualified center-left candidates, either of which could easily face down John Neo-McCain.

In such a short time Ms. Clinton has not only exposed herself as a shameless megalomaniac but she's sullied Obama's character through party affiliation.

It's difficult to accept but undeniable that as a result of Clinton's campaign tactics McCain is now a viable candidate. Yikes!

Randi Rhodes predicted today that Clinton will likely run as an independent if Obama gets the nomination.

I pray her supporters abandon her en masse if she pulls a Joey (Lieberman) on us 'cause can you imagine McCain as our next president?.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Randi Rhodes Posted by: Lincolnfan
Daaaaaaaamn!
Posted by: Fishbone Soldier on Mar 12, 2008 10:08 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Take that, Calvin Coolidge!

I can't wait to see the Clinton reaction to this. I imagine they'll go with the whole "the media is against us" thing, but daaaaaamn. Or since they behave so similarly to Bush's White House these days, they'll probably just ignore it.

Fight the Youth

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» pfft! Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: pfft! Posted by: Longdream
Stop before it's too late?
Posted by: RobNLA on Mar 12, 2008 11:59 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think for Clinton it is already too late. She is committing political suicide slowly before our eyes.

She thinks somehow she'll pull off a few more wins..still be way behind at the convention...and pull the nomination anyway.

I don't think so. The Democratic leadership is not stupid enough to pull that bait and switch.
They know that many Dem voters would call foul en masse, would fail to vote or worse, would vote against Dem candidates on the national, state and local levels. That's too much to put at risk just for one candidate and they know it.

So she won't regain the delegate lead, and superdelegates won't nominate her against the voters.

Therefore, it's high time for Clinton to step down and concede for the good of the party. I know a lot of people really support her, but it's time to face facts, she is too far behind to catch up. And she's done far too much damage already with her dirty tactics.

It's too late for her, but not too late for the the Democratic Party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Stop before it's too late? Posted by: thinkverybig
» For the good of the COUNTRY Posted by: pauldd
» RE: For the good of the COUNTRY Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
It's called "showing your ass" here in Texas
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Mar 13, 2008 2:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A few weeks ago, when it became apparent that Obama had won the nomination and Hillary could only act as a spoiler, I said in this and other forums that if Hillary had any class, she would concede and endorse Obama.

I freely admit that I was never a Hillary fan - I supported Edwards. When he dropped out, I resolved to only speak positively about my preference, not to trash the Democratic opposition and I promised to stick to that in various forums - including this one.

When I see an unprincipled jerk employing Nixon's racist southern strategy against a fellow Democrat, heedless of the damage it will cause the eventual nominee, I can't stick to that resolution.

The only actual government experience Hillary had before she used her choice of a bedmate as a ticket into the Senate was her nepotistic appointment to the health care commission. She immediately closeted herself with industry insiders, excluding consumers and single payer advocates and produced an abortion of an insurance lovin, corporate panderin monstrosity that many hated and nobody loved.

This had been the number one issue in the '92 campaign. Hillary single-handedly took it off the table for 15 years! Some "experience."

I watched in horror as she set records for sucking up corporate cash - beating the Republicans in that regard. I give her no credit for her health care plan - since she lifted it from Edwards. I simply don't believe she would make any real effort to get any reasonable plan passed. Considering that she is the number one recipient of the corporate cash from that industry, anybody who does is deluding themselves.

She can't win, she has no class, and she is McCain's only hope. From here on out, I'll do whatever I can to stop her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Quit the race Hillary!
Posted by: thinkverybig on Mar 13, 2008 6:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is very sad to see a power hungry woman like Hillary try to drag a decent politician down with lies and divisive tactics. Obama has ran one of the most respectful campaigns I've ever witnessed and he is deserving of the democratic nomination moreso than Clinton.

Throughout this campaign Hillary has shown her true colors that she would do anything to become President and the people have rejected her. The next best thing is for Hillary to wake up and accept what the people are saying and quit the race.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This was not a one time mistake
Posted by: mike1997 on Mar 13, 2008 6:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I heard MS Feraro yesterday on the NBC news try to explain away her comments by saying that she said it in response to a question at a paid event. Nonsense. Ms Feraro has been repeating this line evrytime she speaks for two weeks. There are several iterations of the same remarks floating around out there to find. This has been a calculated attempt to bait the Obama campaign into responding. They (the Obama campaign) held off for two weeks and not until the Corporate media started to pick up on it did they respond. So why would the Clinton campaign do this? Her only chance to win is to win very big from here on out. Their only chance to win big is if they can portray Obama as the "black candidate". If they can turn him into Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton they can win. They have been trying to find some way of doing that since South Carolina (see Bill Clinton's comments on Obama's win after S.C.). I am convinced ,however, that it is too late for them to win. Obama's lead is too big.

So, where are we? We have a candidate that can't win and wont quit. In desperation they turn to the worst sort of race based politics and legitimize the same in a way that the Republicans never could. In here desperate flailings Ms Clinton is not only going down her self but she is dragging the Democratic party down with her. Isn't this the exact situation that the Super delegates were designed to prevent? It is time for the party leaders (the Super delegates) to end this thing and they could do it this week. It is time for the leadership of the party to lead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keith Olbermann is OUTSTANDING!
Posted by: thinkverybig on Mar 13, 2008 6:06 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I respect Keith Olbermann's honesty and I must say this man has a very good vocabulary and a great way of putting words together.

Keep up the good work Keith.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Hillary gets the nomination I will vote for McCain
Posted by: Rod on Mar 13, 2008 6:41 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will for for all other democratic canidates though.

If Congress is democratic and the president is republican I can live with that. Much better than all republican.

I do not like Hillary at all. I was a Edwards supporter, and a Obama/Edwards ticket would be the best I can now hope for. If Edwards has any sense he will come out and endorse Obama and put a stop to the nonsense.

Otherwise I may lose respect for him, like I have with Gov. Dean the "leader" of the democratic party.

Rod

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Slightly Off-Topic Response Posted by: OldRedleg
Eloquent, KO but a bit OTT
Posted by: wagadog on Mar 13, 2008 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Someone had to say it, and KO said it eloquently as always...but I really did find Obama's own response to this whole mess a lot more satisfying.

Obama would not even entertain Ferraro's comments as being racist -- that would be giving more regard than they warranted. Though in dismissing that idea, he did raise it. Old rhetorical trick.

Look again: Obama's response dodges of the Clinton Campaign's now-obvious set-up for accusations of "playing the race card." (You know a verbal set-up because when the response dodges the set-up, the people attempting the set-up just follow their script anyway--and often fall flat with it. And here are the Hillaryites screaming "Race Card! Race Card." Good luck with that, ladies.)

Furthermore, by dismissing Ferraro's comments, he wasn't "making a big deal over nothing." "Making a big deal over nothing" was the other charge the Clinton campaign had probably already prepared to level against him. By goading him to "Make a big deal over it" they probably hoped to be able to characterize him as an "angry black man."

But Obama dodged that one too.

Instead of walking into that trap, Obama did rather dismiss Ferraro's comments as "simply ridiculous. "

Brilliant!

Now what does "ridiculous" mean? "Ridiculous" means deserving of ridicule. That, Ferraro's comments certainly were. So take the cue!

Sinbad's demanding "Some LOVE!" for his passing the same "CinC test" as Hillary in Bosnia was hugely effective, for example. (Maybe someone needs to do a mash-up of Ferraro's comments and Flip Wilson's Geraldine getting all defensive and huffy--and finally blurting out "But The Devil Made Me Say That!") Effective ridicule is in order (not to be confused with some fake-looking SNL setup).

Geraldine was right about one thing: Obama is lucky to be who he is. By this I'm sure she meant that he is the candidate with the greater subtlety, humor and gentle wit, the candidate who can effectively jolly people along towards a less destructive path, the candidate who can maintain that capacity in even the most trying circumstances--the very essense of cool.

And did you see Obama anticipate that Rovian set-up coming from the Clinton camp, and dodge it three ways like Ali? Breathtaking!


But thanks KO. We've all got a rant on about it, and yes, yours was a work of fiery eloquence, if a bit Over The Top.

But I stand in absolute awe of Obama's devastating understatement and rhetorical skill. He is a modern-day Cicero.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: loquent, KO but a bit OTT Posted by: meadowlake59
» RE:Eloquent, KO but a bit OTT Posted by: Longdream
Olbermann- Obamaholic
Posted by: epd071148 on Mar 13, 2008 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't help but feel that I was duped into believing that Keith Olbermann is open-minded. I am a long-time liberal, who applauds Olbermann for his challenges to those who have blindly accepted Bush's dangerous, immoral and illegal domestic & foreign policy positions. However, I am amazed at how he has bought into the same unquestioning, biased support of Barack Obama.

He, like the majority of the non-Fox media, treats Obama like he is some sort of Gallahad, whose motives and fuzzy policy positions can never be questioned. Hope is a wonderful thing, but there must be some substance. Other than his Giulianni-like focus on his one claim to fame, constantly pointing out that he was against the war from the beginning, what does he stand for? I don't think that he has ever differentiated between the War in Afghanistan, which was justified, and the War in Iraq, which was not.

While you can always find inconsistencies in any politician's positions, particularly a member of Congress, at least we have some idea of where Hillary Clinton stands. Obama is becoming a cult figure, comparible to Reagan. Reagan's appeal was, & Obama's appeal is, their unthreatening nature, and ability to make people feel good. The media never forces him to expand on his ill-defined policy positions.

Olbermann & others obsess over Clinton attacking poor, defenseless Obama. It is fair to point out policy differences, and question Obama's lack of experience & public record. Obama is portrayed as being above the fray, but it is he who claims that, while Clinton followers will support him, his followers will never support Clinton. He, like all politicians, has an enormous ego, that constantly seeks validation.

Because of the media's capitulation to the Obama-Phenomenon, I have grave questions about his overall political philosophy, and his ability to work with Congress and other nations to achieve worthwhile goals. I know that Clinton is both tough-minded, and capable of working with fair-minded republicans in Congress, without giving away too much for the sake of compromise. I have no such assurances about Obama, who seems to want to be liked. I also question whether he may be too conservative on some issues, and that his current positions are just pandering, telling people what they want to hear.

Take a studied look at both candidates, and don't perpetuate the republican-created myth that everything that the Clintons do is politically motivated. Among lower & middle class Americans, other than blacks, who I can not blame for overwhelmingly supporting a black candidate, working class people support Clinton, because they realize that she has their best interests at heart.

Also, I have yet to hear anyone in the media question the validity of Obama's delegate count, given that his lead is heavily dependent on the outcome of state caucuses, which would seem to be biased against working class people, who don't have time to fully participate in them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: thinkverybig
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: Schroeder
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: OldRedleg
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: Schroeder
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: gjohloc@hotmail.com
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: Schroeder
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: bittershaman
» RE: What? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: What? Posted by: epd071148
» RE: What? Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Olbermann- Obamaholic Posted by: meadowlake59
» "It is a significant moment...." Posted by: foreverhope
» Obama for President! Posted by: foreverhope
» LOL! Funny! Posted by: foreverhope
» 12 stepping with Obama Posted by: jmooney
» Do you really want to know? Posted by: None-So-Blind
the Clinton's to smart to be the 'victoms' of their handlers
Posted by: dgleason on Mar 13, 2008 7:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Olbermann, as always is brilliant and nuanced.

And I think gives the Clinton's a little too much wiggle room.

There are those of us who are experienced in the nuance of the language of priviledge. There is no way that the Clinton's are not.

There is no way that the Clinton's would not have control of these aspects of their campaign.

While some campaigns are not well versed in this territory, this campaign is, and has many involved in it that are equally well informed.

They thought they could plead ignorance and get a 'pass' as well intentioned white kids... while they collected the markers of Archie Bunker's all over the United States.

There is no way that they don't know exactly what they are doing.

And just to add fuel to the fire, a white guy with Hilary's experience wouldn't have a prayer as a presidential candidate in this era, with a couple years in the Senate, Laura Bush has a similar background.

Anyone jumping up and saying she has met the commander in chief thresh-hold?

(to Obama's credit that he hasn't mentioned that it is likely the military would rather have Bozo the Clown as commander in chief than Hillary.)

Danielle

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This was not a one time mistake
Posted by: mike1997 on Mar 13, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I heard MS Ferraro yesterday on the NBC news try to explain away her comments by saying that she said it in response to a question at a paid event. Nonsense. Ms Ferraro has been repeating this line evrytime she speaks for two weeks. There are several iterations of the same remarks floating around out there to find. This has been a calculated attempt to bait the Obama campaign into responding. They held off for two weeks and not until the Corporate media started to pick up on it did they respond. So why would the Clinton campaign do this? Her only chance to win is to win very big from here on out. There only chance to win big is if they can portray Obama as the "black candidate". If they can turn him into Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton they can win. They have been trying to find some way of doing that since South Carolina (see Bill Clinton's comments on Obama's win after S.C.). I am convinced ,however, that it is too late for them to win. Obama's lead is too big.

So, where are we? We have a candidate that can't win and wont quit. In desperation they turn to the worst sort of race based politics and legitimize the same in a way that the Republicans never could. In here desperate flailings Ms Clinton is not only going down her self but she is dragging the Democratic party down with her. Isn't this the exact situation that the Super delegates were designed to prevent? It is time for the party leaders (the Super delegates) to end this thing and they could do it this week. It is time for the leadership of the party to lead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keith Honey!
Posted by: Grandma Crabby on Mar 13, 2008 9:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keith is the best TV news writer/reporter on the planet. When it comes to Keith Olbermann, I am sorta, kinda like a giddy teenager with Beatlemania. Actually, I don't have the energy to jump up and down like that, but he does inspire this old bitch to cheer and swoon!

My boyfriend is jealous of Keith, and he should be! :)

Hillary is self destructing in public and it is not a pretty sight. Perhaps this Ferraro flap is the the breaking point for Keith, but I personally reached mine quite some time ago. She needs to get over herself and do the RIGHT thing and not let her ego and ambition ruin and destroy the positive things her and Bill have done over the past 30 years.

I was also terribly disappointed in Ms. Ferraro in this fiasco. The way she defended herself sounded like the same tactics used by Bill O'Reily or Rush.

Hillary...you will NOT be the first woman president. Deal with it.

P.S. Keith, honey....if you're ever here in Tennessee, stop by for some home cooking! Fresh! Made from scratch! Keep up the good work, Granny luvs ya!

VideoProductionTips = Learn Internet Video

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They will probably try to steal them however~~
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN on Mar 13, 2008 9:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If this bitch steals the nomination, it will be absolutely necessary for all REAL AMERICANS to write in our candidate, whether it be Obama or someone else.
We cannot allow the clinton/mcpain ticket to win.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: So far Posted by: Longdream
» RE: So far Posted by: bittershaman
» RE: OK Posted by: Longdream
» RE: OK Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: OK Posted by: bittershaman
» RE: OK Posted by: Longdream
» RE: So far Posted by: Denver Dem
Gender, race and class
Posted by: Dianka on Mar 13, 2008 10:07 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Grab the reins back from whoever has led you to this precipice." Who LED Hillary Clinton? Of course. Women aren't able to make their own decisions, and should they find themselves in a situation like this, it is because they were LED into the situation (and, evidently, were just too femininely dumb to figure it out). Girls -- ya gotta love 'em, but they aren't so bright!

I can hear Mr. Olbermann declaring, "That's not what I meant!" I'm just applying the standards to him that he is applying to Clinton. If this sort of incident proves that Clinton is a bigot, it might be time to take a closer look at the sort of comments that could be considered sexist.

My point is that maybe we are looking too hard at race when the real problem is class/economic status. I haven't seen a whole lot to indicate
that Clinton is racist, but her record establishes that she has "issues" with class/economic status. I have noted her years-long support of shredding the New Deal. The New Deal dramatically reduced our economic disparities and was central to the establishment of a solid middle class. Taking an ax to the New Deal has had a tremendous impact on the US -- our poor now have some of the highest rates of infant mortality in the modern world, and the life expectancy of America's poor is now below that of many Third World nations. These things are more important to me that the occasional (Freudian) slip of the tongue. The majority of those who were aided by New Deal policies were white, and the majority of those harmed by shredding the social safety net are white. I'd say that, based on her record, Clinton's problem concerns class, not race.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gender, race and class Posted by: MThomson
Racist cartoon
Posted by: backyardbbq on Mar 13, 2008 10:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From another thread that I posted to:

I was sitting at my quiet desk today when a co-worker sent around a racist cartoon copyrighted from the Halifax Herald Limited in Canada showing a caricature of Obama standing next to a sign that read “White House”. The balloon caption next to his rather enlarged head read, “…well first off, that sign’s gonna have to go…”

I’m seriously considering voting third party if Clinton gets the nomination. Her campaign will not stop attacking Obama and dividing us like Republicans have been doing the past 7 or so years.

I’ve had enough of Corporate Republicans and Democrats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: acist cartoon Posted by: bittershaman
Erk! This is madness!
Posted by: polsi33@yahoo.com on Mar 13, 2008 10:37 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can no one see that it is to no one's good to reflexively deny there race has no relevance in America anymore?? Ferraro's remarks can be interpreted in several ways but it seems the media is 'en masse' choosing to perceive them as a racist attack. Could they just possibly point out that in our desire to 'prove' we whites are not racist, he does indeed have an edge a white man or another woman wouldn't have? Clarence Thomas knew that we white Americans are appalled at our own history of racism and was thus able to (unfortunately) secure his appointment to the Supreme Court of this land just by calling his examination for sexual harassment a "high tech lynching". Brilliant!....but bullshit.

The most politically astute person I have ever known is a black teacher who said the Obama campaign should make all thinking people sit back hard on their heels and ask how and why a black man no one heard of until 2004 could have so many 'muscle men' and long time party operatives and contributors solidly in his corner as a mostly untried politician. He believes we are seeing another 'front man' for a political agenda not our own and not his own but one geared to keep the "powers that be" in place.

So, what is going on? Why is it seemingly easier for us "liberals" to accuse someone of racism than to treat everyone as truly equal, which means deserving of hard questions and equal scrutiny? I am appalled at this rush to crush a woman with a longstanding personal record of compassion and service to this nation......and I honestly groaned and had to flinch when that always-imminently-lurking word for competent, strong women appeared in one of these postings.........the word, "bitch". Let's face it - both racism and sexism are still rampant and no amount of denying it or blaming others will change that fact. How shameful, horrible, and disheartening this all is!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Opinions. Posted by: Longdream
Worship at the alter of KO no more
Posted by: GeorgiaBlue on Mar 13, 2008 10:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
KO has been my hero for telling the truth, but he went out of bounds about Hillary. For weeks, he has suffered the same lockstep fate of the rest of the media and has picked her apart for every syllable. Those guys should come South and see what I see every day. Ferraro's remark was simply stating a fact. Black voters WILL vote in a block for a black candidate! That is not a racist statement, just simple facts. They voted in a block for Bill C and started out supporting Hillary, but along came a charismatic black man they could look up to and voila..the tide turned. I live in a mixed neighborhood and my neighbors and I get along great, but they have stars in their eyes and can't wait to "stick it to the white candidate". They are so excited about a black man being on top of the world. Can't say that I blame them, but I do blame anyone who says stating such facts is racist is just plain wrong and doesn't know the black mindset.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An American Tragedy
Posted by: Mary Price on Mar 13, 2008 10:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hillary and Bill have not only trashed Obama and all of his voters, but they have trashed their own legacy. On top of this, they may very well have given the race to the Republicans. This strategy has gone on for so long that no one can imagine that it is not deliberate. Ferraro is right....Obama is where he is today because he is a black man...but she has it backwards. If he weren't black he would already be declared the nominee...he is AHEAD in spite of The Clinton's Nixonian & Rovian strategy. But it may not be enough after all the campaigning she has done for McCain. It truly is An American Tragedy.

David Brooks said at the beginning of this campaign that the 2008 election was the Democrats to lose. I'm sure he never thought that Hillary and Bill would hand it to the Republicans on a silver platter.

And don't bother to call her "I'm sorry if you were offended.." an apology. That's one more backhanded but deliberate put down. I am white, but I hope that all people, black and white, will see these destructive tactics for what they are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: An American Tragedy Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: Tragedy? Posted by: Longdream
Race&Gender
Posted by: ivpatti on Mar 13, 2008 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Again, I repeat my thought that to NOT include the facts of race & gender as it relates to each of us in this most historic of elections,is the greatest of denial. Too continue this denial is to support the quiet predjudice so many Americans practice against race & gender. Only by open discussion will we shake out the old meaningless dust that appearance equals behavior. If we continue to scream obsenities at one another we will win no progress.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is always a kernel of truth in these "hateful" statements
Posted by: truthteller on Mar 13, 2008 11:30 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you look strictly at resume qualification, the two main contenders for the Democratic nomination for President are at the bottom of the list. I would add Mike Gravel to that list mostly because he has been out of Government for almost 30 years, and I have some questions as to his mental stability (admittedly subjective).

If you were going to pick nominees based on resume, then Biden, Dodd, Kucinich and Richardson would be at the TOP of the list - all public servants with long records of accomplishment in office. Obviously, there are intangible "X" factors that have much to do with who actually rises to the top of the nomination race. I would argue that corporate/corporate media approval is the number one of those factors in who we get to "seriously" consider for high office. If you look at where the money comes from for the campaigns of all three major candidates left, I think that view is vindicated. Despite the best efforts of progressive activists to force a real choice for a "People's" candidate, we have ended up (as usual) with candidates chosen by the corporatocracy.

In that sense Ferraro is right. The powers that be have found Obama to be acceptable (read: willing to go along with the program). However, the same could be said for Hillary as well. The choice is between a first-term Senator with several years of state legislative and grass-roots organizational experience, and a former first lady who ran a failed attempt to come up with a corporate national health insurance scheme, and is a term-and-a-half carpet-bagging Senator. Yes, they are both well-educated, but so were other candidates running for the Presidency.

The real reason that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the two Democrats left standing, is because of the constant drumbeat of corporate media for over a year that they (and especially she) are the viable candidates. The largely uninvolved and uninterested electorate is being easily steered by said corporate media. As exhibit "A", I give you the totally outrageous way that Dennis Kucinich (and to a slightly lesser extent Edwards) was treated from the start of his campaign (crazy, delusional, tin-foil-hat-wearing, UFO believing, short, pixy-ish). One of the most outrageous media incidents involving the Kucinichs in the campaign was CBS' Hanna Storm spending nearly a minute of network airtime trying to get Elizabeth Kucinich to show the viewers her tongue stud! Talk about none of your business. I don't think you need any more evidence of a calculatedly dismissive attitude towards a true "People's" candidate than that display!

I think the media largely generates the "charisma" of candidates for the most important offices. I'm not saying that Obama doesn't have it, but it certainly is amplified by the media. It's the rare occasion when a Donna Edwards (MD-4th Dem. primary) manages to overcome the corporate party machinery, and it takes a massive national effort by progressives to do it. Doing it at a national level is probably impossible until we get the Supreme Court to overturn the ridiculous notion that money is speech, and we find a tall, attractive well-qualified candidate who is also a true progressive, who "keeps it in his pants", that we can keep alive long enough to win the Presidency.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well done
Posted by: andrushka on Mar 13, 2008 12:55 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keith, thank you, thank you! Clinton deserves this dressing down for running a very base campaign thanks to her supporters or advisors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let Hillary's Train Wreck of a Campaign Self-Destruct!
Posted by: colleenwhalen on Mar 13, 2008 2:02 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I loved the quote "it isn't a campaign, it's a suicide pact." Hillary/Ferraro are excellent examples of self serving, self righteous "Female Macho" "Republicrats" who completely abandoned the progressive movement.

As a white feminist - these kinds of women give feminism a REALLY bad name. Hillary/Ferraro have taken on all the negative characteristics of Corporate Mafia Ultra-Macho nefarious demagogues.

I am a WHITE FEMINIST FOR OBAMA! Yes, I'd love to see a woman Presdient - but not THAT woman!

Let us expose Ferraro & Hillary for what they really are - not Democrats - but "Republicrats" two crypto-fascist, racist, self-serving, megalomaniac Carpetbaggers masquerading as Progressives.

I've watched both Clintons for years - both Bill & Hillary have always been profoundly self
destructive. She's a rage-aholic control freak dominator - he's a sexual predator sex-aholic. Bill had a decades long history of getting his nuts in a sling with countless sex scandals. Hillary always enabled him, bailed him out and did "damage control" by utterly destroying the credibility of ANY and ALL women who were brave enough to come forward and report Bill for his sexual harrassment and attempted/and or actual rapist behavior.

How can Hillary call herself a "feminist" when she defends, protects and enables a sexual predator of a husband. What kind of "feminist" tolerates a skirt-chasing, chronic adulterer who has humiliated her throughout their entire marriage? They are both far too emotionally disturbed to serve in the White House again. In all fairness - the Clintons need inentsive counseling and a LONG spiritual retreat to heal their fractured psyches.

It is finally catching up with them - the public is seeing the Clintons for what they really are - recipients of Corporate Mafia PAC campaign donations - Lady Macbeth & her husband, Lord Macbeth - who will walk over anyone to get in power and stay in power. Two "Republicrats" of the very worse kind. Hillary is behaving more like Sen. Joe Lieberman and Sen. Dianne Feinstein....another example of Crytpo-Fascist "Republicrats". Sen. Dianne Feinstein is just Sen. Joe Lieberman in drag.

Let the Clintons and Ferraro self-destruct on their own petard.

I used to admire the Clintons in the early 1990's - back when they still had some vestigal last shred of their shining young idealism from their student days in the 1960's. Really, it is quite tragic - on some levels I have genuine compassion for the Clintons. They started out as shining young idealists - then made the "Faustian Deal" - sold out, corrupted themselves.

There is nothing more tragic than the cynicism of a "Failed Romantic". What we've got here is two highly emotionally disturbed "Failed Romantics". The Clintons started out as progressives - but somewhere along the line, they both "lost their way." Same thing happened to Colin Powell - who a VERY long time ago had some shred of decency. Colin Powell, the Clintons and Ferraro - are just a pale shell of a human being.

P.S. Oberman is the BRAVEST man alive in broadcasting - he is absolutely "channelling" Edward R. Murrow! If Obama becomes President, Oberman would make a great White House Press Secretary.

Keep Hope Alive,

Colleen

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We only have ourselves to blame
Posted by: backyardbbq on Mar 13, 2008 2:44 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We only have ourselves to blame for what has happened to our country. The only sane way to stop this Clinton/McBush mad hateful war monger machine is to get out and vote. Even if Clinton doesn’t get the nomination and decides to run as a Lieberman style Democrat, all we can do is get a 100% turnout to vote for Obama. He’s not the end all, but only one small step toward sanity.

Then we need to work hard to get progressives in office on every level of government from the local dog catcher to the President. It’s time us adults took charge because the children who have been in charge have screwed everything up for everybody. Then and only then will we be able to stop this insanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

FERRARO WAS RIGHT!!!!!
Posted by: bbfmail on Mar 13, 2008 4:00 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From Progressive Review:

CRIB SHEET: THE OBAMA-FERRARO FLAP

Ferraro told the truth. Name one other state senator ever invited to keynote a Democratic convention. Even Bill Clinton was a governor before he was invited. Obama got his national kickoff because the powers that be were looking for a fresh look for the party and you couldn't come up with a much better branding cliche than a young, attractive black Harvard Law grad.

There's nothing unusual about this nor racist in noting it. It is the way politics has worked from the beginning. In fact, it's one of the reasons politics works: you look for where the votes are and how to get them. Sometimes it's a white labor guy, sometimes it's a war hero, sometimes it's a woman and sometimes it's a young, attractive black Harvard law grad.

Ferraro had to resign not because she said anything wrong but because you don't help your candidate by hanging around after you've caused so much ancillary noise, especially when liberal activists and media types believe that what you say is more important than what you do.

Ferraro knew it was true because she had experienced it herself: "In 1984 if my name had been Gerald Ferraro, not Geraldine, I would never have gotten nominated,” she said. "Was I qualified? Absolutely.”

The same goes for Obama. Said Ferraro: "Why is his candidacy historic? Can you give me another reason why it is an historic campaign? Why are we afraid to say this?”

As Ferraro said of David Axelrod, "He knows damn well that the best thing to do in a situation like this is to come back and hit with race." That's one of the things that campaign managers are there for: to make a big deal out of nothing.

Ferraro told another uncomfortable truth: "It's OK to be sexist in some people's minds. It's not OK to be racist."

Obama in attacking Ferraro, misquoted her.

###

The above article is from www.Prorev.com, by a writer who has no love for Hillary Clinton. It seems like whenever anyone says anything not praising or criticizing Obama, the Obama team plays the race card. This is getting ridiculous. Ferraro should have never resigned. She only told the truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: FERRARO WAS RIGHT!!!!! Posted by: Quannah
mindtrvlr
Posted by: mindtrvlr on Mar 13, 2008 5:09 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keith, your comments were good, but I believe you went way overboard with them. It was too obvious that you really hate Hillary for your own personal reasons, and you were more obvious that you support Obama only. I hope Obama is as good as he sounds, but something has me worried about him, Actually all three have me worried. This whole selection process has been rigged from the start.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New HRC Tactic
Posted by: Denver Dem on Mar 13, 2008 8:36 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think this is Hillary's new way of attacking Obama. She won't attack Obama directly anymore. She'll have supporters do it for her. I think the change was prompted by the party's reaction to her comment that McCain is more suitable to be Commander in Chief. I think the super delegates basically told her to knock it off, or else they would vote for Obama. In fact, Bill Richardson, who served under Bill Clinton, actually said that there needed to be a positive campaign after March 4th, and the party should get behind whoever was ahead after those primaries. I think the implication of those comments is pretty obvious, and I do think those comments had an impact. Hillary's own comments have been more subdued recently. But in the end, all the Clintons know how to do is sling mud, and if they can't do it, they'll get someone else to do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clinton did "denounce" and "reputiate" it!
Posted by: bweisman on Mar 14, 2008 6:22 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Olbermann went overboard with this one! He also got his facts wrong! Senator Clinton is the a Senior Senator and Senator Obama is the Junior Senator!

Additionally, Sen. Clinton had a news conference in which she did "denounce" and "reuptiate" the comments by Ms. Ferraro

Sen. Clinton can no more prevent people from saying what they will no more than Elliot Spitzer's wife could prevent him from sleeping with call girls the last 8 months!!

Finally, Olbermann's comparison of Senator Clinton to David Duke puts him in the SAME CATAGORY as Ms. Ferraro!!!!!

Olbermann is not a KING HE IS AN ASS!! LATELY!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Remember, Clinton is a "closet Republican"
Posted by: metamind on Mar 14, 2008 8:00 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the choice in November comes down to Clinton or McCain there is no choice at all ... the Republicans win either way.

When you look at the kind of politics Clinton is practicing it looks very much like the kind Republicans have been practicing for years.

"Divide and conquer."

Reject Hillary now. Give us a choice in 2008.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No Worries
Posted by: rgoalierob on Mar 15, 2008 6:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are a family, that in spite of our squabbles, will sit together at the table and find a way through this.
In my mind, this just clarified who the REAL change agent will be.
Billary will come back to the flock and the DLC will be a footnote in our political history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No Worries Posted by: Longdream