I agree with Ferraro on her basic point: no one would be who they are if they were someone else. Basically, that's it.

Hillary Clinton would not have been first lady, would not be a senator, and would not be a candidate for president if she were not a white woman. Why? Because if she had been someone else her life would have gone differently. Same with John McCain. Same with Barack Obama.

What I won't agree with her is that this is some somehow a criticism. Saying that if the world were different, it wouldn't be the same is not a criticism of anything, it's just stating the obvious. So what, Geraldine?

Larkin, this is nothing new for Ferraro..She made almost the same racially charged remarks about Jesse Jackson in 1988.

"If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race," Ferraro said then.

There is no doubt Hillary is leaving the door open to more than hint at race in their pursuit of 'identity politics'. I thought this was quite funny ..with the caveat it is a spoof.

You just can't make this stuff up . . . including the analysis which finds that Ferraro's terrible faux pas will galvanize Obama's support . . . among blacks.

Darn that Geraldine and her non-Manhattan manners! If not for her, no one would ever have noticed that Obama is "the black candidate" at all!

>> I agree with Ferraro on her basic point: no one would be who they are if they were someone else. Basically, that's it.

LOL

>> Hillary Clinton would not have been first lady, would not be a senator, and would not be a candidate for president if she were not a white woman.

Hillary also would never have become US Senator if she had not been married to a former President.

This race is getting hysterical by the day. And the fun's just starting...imagine the canmpaigns in two months, Obama with a slight pledged delegate lead, and Hillary with a slight popular vote lead. At this rate, Denver looks to be a blockbuster, literally.

At this rate, Denver looks to be a blockbuster, literally.

This won't go to Denver. I think after Pennsylvania/North Carolina/Indiana it will be obvious Hillary can't catch Obama. The superdelegates should then close ranks behind Obama and force Hillary out.

I *think* the Clinton campaign may have jumped the shark on this one. Let's hope.

(I mean, faux pas from lackeys are nothing much, but Geraldine is even now all over the place amending her statements in the most motor-mouthed way which can only remind the casual voter of the malevolent potential of a harpy with a pulpit.)

On the CBS evening news I though Ann was going to let Geraldine take over the interview, But she didn't. Geraldine lied through her teeth.I did not belive anything she said.

This was just getting fun. Too bad Gerry had to quit!

"This won't go to Denver. I think after Pennsylvania/North Carolina/Indiana it will be obvious Hillary can't catch Obama. The superdelegates should then close ranks behind Obama and force Hillary out."

Keep hope alive.

This is a train-wreck which will blow up in Denver. Here's why:

"I think after Pennsylvania/North Carolina/Indiana it will be obvious Hillary can't catch Obama."

It is already obvious that Hillary can't catch Obama. It is also already obvious that neither can Obama clinch the nomination. So the SDs will decide the nominee. (And if Edwards wants to play cute, even the SDs may not be able to decide. Remember, he has 26 pledged and 7 SDs.)

It is more than likely that Hillary will have more popular votes. If FL and MI re-vote (which I consider unlikely, simply because Obama would be foolish to allow that. If he agrees to a re-vote, he might as well close shop and go home), it is 100% certain that Hillary will lead the popular vote.

Add the fact that Hillary will go to Denver with PA, MI, FL as recent wins.

There is no mechanism whereby SDs decide anything as a group. Each of them decide on their own, and stand up on the convention floor and announce their vote. They don't get together in a room and say, "let's all give our votes to X." That is why the votes will come down to individual SD, and he/she will have to decide on their own. A SD in NE Ohio, with heavy union presence, whose district was won by Clinton is not likely to vote for Obama. Just wait for the union pressure to be appiled to such a delegate once the primaries are over (remember that many of them have to run in the general election themselves.)

"The superdelegates should then close ranks behind Obama and force Hillary out." There is a big difference between SHOULD and WILL.

Based on the dynamics of the Democratic party, I give Hillary over 60% chance of getting the nomination.

Here's further confirmation of my thesis that there will not be a re-vote in MI and FL, and the matter will come to a boil in Denver.

From the IHT today:

"Clinton and Obama split over Florida and Michigan

After a week of shadow-boxing, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama issued their clearest statements yet on how they would prefer to resolve the impasse over the disputed Florida and Michigan primaries.

Not surprisingly, they staked out opposing and irreconcilable positions.

Clinton, in an appearance before a Hispanic business group in Washington Wednesday morning, argued that the delegates should be seated based on the results of the Michigan and Florida primaries, which were held in January in violation of Democratic Party rules.

Clinton won both contests by sizable margins and would narrow the delegate gap with Obama by about 60 delegates if the January results are honored, but the delegations have been barred because of the party rules violation. She now trails Obama by more than 100 pledged delegates, according to most counts.

"The results of those primaries were fair and should be honored," she told the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce here.

Alternatively, she said, Florida and Michigan should hold new primary elections, probably in early June after the remaining primaries are completed and perhaps by statewide mail-in ballot. She and her advisers believe she would do well in any revote and gain a major boost in delegates and momentum with two season-ending victories.

Obama, speaking on MSNBC Tuesday evening, ruled out any solution that accepts the January results. "We were told that Michigan and Florida wouldn't count, and so we said we wouldn't campaign there," Obama said. "Senator Clinton said the same thing, that they wouldn't count. Now her campaign is suggesting that they should."

Clinton said last October that the Michigan primary was meaningless, but she left her name on the ballot. Obama and the other major Democratic candidates removed their names from the ballot in a gesture of good faith to early-voting states whose primaries were officially allowed by the Democratic Party. Neither candidate campaigned in Michigan; Clinton won with 55 percent of the vote over 40 percent for "uncommitted"

Obama's did not spell out his Plan B, but he said that any revote would be problematic, particularly if conducted by mail in Michigan and Florida, two states that have never conducted a mail-in election. He said he would like to see the Michigan and Florida delegations seated in an "equitable" way, without spelling out what that would mean.

Obama advisers declined on Wednesday to say what a fair distribution of delegates would look like but have floated a plan to apportion the delegates 50-50, wiping out any advantage that Clinton might have gained from the votes in January and essentially making the two states meaningless in the nomination fight.

David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, said on Wednesday that the campaign was open to a party-run caucus in one or both states, a format that Obama has dominated this year. That is a nonstarter with the Clinton people."

Don't let Ferraro be a diversion

Though I can't believe Geraldine Ferraro, a self made woman, is supporting the sociopathic parasite MRS Clinton, I don't believe she is racist: her history refutes this charge.

I believe she is saying that a white man would not have a chance against the first woman to run for president at least in the Democratic Party. Look at Joe Biden, John Edwards and the field of white men left by the wayside by the emergence of a incompetent woman and a gifted man who is African American. And of course, she could have stated it more eloquently but as an isolated statement, not as part of the Clinton race smear, the statement holds up and is not racist. I think the word lucky should have not been used but his timing is perfect.
She also said she was given the second slot on the ticket because she was a woman But that didn't mean she wasn't qualified. I think Barack Obama is the most exceptional candidate to emerge from the Democratic Party in the last two centuries. He is bright, creative, a quick study who shows exemplary judgment and organizational skills.

Let's not heap abuse on Ferraro who has owned her clumsy statement and let's instead question Hillary's credentials which should begin with 'Once upon a time".

-- Posted by james d granata