Political Punch

First of all! it's hypocritical for Ferraro to say that Obama is using the fact that he is "Black" to win this election. If Ferraro can make these statements about Obama then she should make the same statements about Hillary Clinton. Now do u think Hillary would be running for president if her husband had not been president? Ferraros statments are hypocritical.
Second. What about Jesse Jackson. Whom I couldn't stand back in the day. NO one wanted that fool in office. As Oprah Winfrey said on 20/20 She has not supported other Black candidates before. This is actually the first Black Politician running for president which she has so much support behind. There have been other Black presidential hopefuls. So Ferraro's statements are BOTH hypocritical, racist as well as illogical and ignorant.

Well I am sick of these old Women offering up years of service as some pass for saying such pathetic and hurt full things, and then as Ferraro did today playing the role of I am so hurt wake up you should be sorry. If in fact your years of service were truly for the cause....shame on you for your comments...you should just go away your days of having valid dialog are long past its just sad. The Clinton's are pathetic, they Hillary does not congratulate Obama publicly for his wins….such losers. They act like they can play by a totally different set of rules which they use to try and minimize his status in the party sad group of people....please just go away and stop trying to stop a great moment in American history that will not include you. Please America wake-up…. do you really want this dysfunctional family embarrassing us again, Hillary has already been called out about her exaggerated claims of diplomacy overseas......she is called a cheerleader at best her experience is like Bills faithfulness...it does not exist..

DC Voter your comparisons between resumes is funny...

First of all I agree she has more years than he does... because ...well she has more years.

But it is more important what they did with those years.(remember this is the guy that left being the President of the Harvard Law Review - if you don't know - that means he could have written his ticket anywhere - but went back to help factoy workers in Chicago and focus on being a Civil Rights lawyer...oh and teach constitutional law.)

If you measure them proportionally Sen. Obama kicks butt... there is no way of denying that (but I am sure people will...it's all about spin).

Yes she was a lawyer for 16 years much longer than he... and I encourage everyone to look at those 16 years as a lawyer.

...Hillary has a longer resume because she has a longer life. and John McCain has an even longer life...

The differences in experience and how you weight their differing types, between Sen Clinton's and Sen Obama's experience, when you put it up against John McCain is not big enough to use that as the reason to pick the candidate. This is a bad trap to fall into.

Whomever you think has the most quality and choice experience ... it is miniscule when you put it next to John McCain's very long resume.

This is not some political spin I am trying here...

Look...
By setting up this argument to have in the primary (and Hillary has to do that she loses on the other arguments) you are setting up the argument for the general election...

I believe she loses even this one but more importantly...

The argument in the fall has to be on judgement and fixing the main problem in Washington which IS (in my opinion and I think most everyone would agree) the use of fear and log jamming in congress to put us in the situation we are in...

If it is on who will protect us, who has the most experience, and not on judgement ...and the race was between John McCain and Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama...who do you think the American people are going to pick?

Get on the judgement issue and stop feeding into the argument they want to have. ...and get away from the fear card...Republicans win that too.

I guess it is time to bring RACE up, because obvious the revote discussion, super delegate discussion and the discussion around future elections all are buried on top of RACE. Let the puss come, so the wounds can heal.

Lauren once again...your reference to Steven Spielberg supporting Clinton and knowing the good guys from the bad guys...

...maybe he has a harder time telling the bad guys after he slept in the Lincoln Bedroom.

Spielberg is not a good choice of reference.

Tim Wise writes:

But one thing we can almost guarantee is not among the reasons why a black voter might say race matters to their vote, and then vote for the black candidate, is deep-seated anti-white bias. After all, black folks have been voting for white people for years... So it's not like black folks refuse to vote for white people. Indeed, the kind of black person whose anti-white biases were that deeply rooted, would probably be the kind of person for whom Obama would be unacceptable too (given his biracial ancestry, generally moderate positions, and fairly bland approach to addressing racial concerns), and who wouldn't vote for him, in spite of a shared skin color. In other words, we can rest assured that when blacks vote for Obama, after saying that race mattered to their vote, they were casting a ballot for the black man, not against the white woman per se.

On the other hand, for a white voter to say race matters to their vote, and then to vote for the white candidate and against the person of color, is almost by definition about something else. It certainly can't be due to excitement at the prospect of electing the first white President, or breaking with tradition, since we've had forty-three white guys in a row. And it's not likely to be about the desire to vote for someone who can relate to their "struggles" as white people. After all, although there are millions of white people in the U.S. who are struggling to make ends meet, none of them are in that position because of their race, but rather in spite of it. So the "white struggle" as such simply doesn't exist. The class struggle is real--and if a white, working-class candidate stood a chance of winning the Presidency lots of white working class folks would turn out for him or her because of that shared experience, and understandably so--but it is simply silly to think that whites would vote for Hillary Clinton, after saying race mattered to their vote, because they think she will be more understanding about their plight as white people.

What this leaves us is the very real likelihood that when whites say race mattered to their vote, and they voted for the white candidate over the candidate of color, the vote so cast was largely an anti-black vote.

Hey, Geraldine is just stating the obvious. There is nothing special about Obama other than his color. Big deal.

Enough already! Obama seems to cry racist everytime he wants to get out of a tight situation. Like now - he has to prove that he will follow through on Iraq after Power said that he wouldnt; he has to prove that he means well with the NAFTA issue; plus the Rezko trial and Nadhmi Auchi issue is unfolding.

He is using racism to divert people's attention from his lies on NAFTA, Iraq, Rezko.

Sadly, Democrats accomodate him every time... no exceptions. And then those he maligns get stuck with a charge that is false but takes time to defend.

Enough!

If Obama keeps this up, half the Democratic Party will be accused as "racists" before the primary ends. See here:

Obama used "racism" when people raised his cocaine use. Obama raised "racism" if we say his middle name. Now he says its racism if we mention that "90% of the black votes - the same race as him? Is Obama going to control our words, our thoughts and our actions by threatening "racism" on the whole country?

Ridiculous.

When Ferraro ran for VP she was very sensitive about being singled out for scrutiny because of her Italian ancestry, especially when it came to an investigation of her campaign finances.

Funny, Hillary still hasn't released her financial statement has she?

Is it because he is black that Mr. Obama has no trouble raising millions over the internet and can be transparent about his finances?

No, it is because he is a true leader.

Is it because there is indeed a latent racism in the Clinton campaign that Mrs. Clinton cannot only officially disavow and reudiate Mrs. Ferraro's commence but also distance herself from Mrs. Ferraro completely?

Perhaps.

When Ferraro ran for VP she was very sensitive about being singled out for scrutiny because of her Italian ancestry, especially when it came to an investigation of her campaign finances.

Funny, Hillary still hasn't released her financial statement has she?

Is it because he is black that Mr. Obama has no trouble raising millions over the internet and can be transparent about his finances?

No, it is because he is a true leader.

Is it because there is indeed a latent racism in the Clinton campaign that Mrs. Clinton cannot only officially disavow and reudiate Mrs. Ferraro's commence but also distance herself from Mrs. Ferraro completely?

Perhaps.

Well... if STEVEN SPIELBERG supports her, I mean... WOW. What have I been thinking???? I was making my decision based on the issues, and the fact that every other word that comes out of HRC's mouth is a LIE... but hey, Steven Spielberg supports her, so she MUST be the right choice.

*running out to take down my Obama sign*

On that...I agree with you. I'm laughing...and going to walk my dog.

Look kitty you're selectively believing what backs up what you already think, and not what others are saying as well.
That's not more objective. There are indepedent outsiders who back what the Clinton's say.

I am a devoted democrat, I started out neutral, I evalutated both candidates - and especially to me at the debates it was obvious that Hillary is our most qualified candidate.

I don't work for any campaign.
Steven Spielberg supports her; he has spent most of his career making movies about good guys vs. bad guys. I think he knows the difference.

Pretty had to quantify character and vision on a spreadsheet.

Far as I'm concerned we know what the "35 years of experience" will get us from "Day One".

I've had enough - time to move on.

dl - looking up tidbits at the LOC requires that you filter through all the legislative red tape and try to discern which bills are important and which ones are not... i seriously doubt you have done that unless you are a political hack or attorney... i do search and read the summaries of the facts and discern which are important or significant... any politician can propose a mountain of bills etc... that does not mean they are not all filled with BS... i find it more appropriate to look at what the experts have put together than try to pretend to be an expert at sifting through them... and the experts say clinton has done much more than her opponent... that is good enough for me.. try reading vote smart to efficiently review the facts

i noticed no one could rebutt my posting of a comparison between them without including the First Lady years and showing clearly that she is more qualified than her opponent... but then, facts are often met by silence

I don't plan to listen to Clinton insiders who have a vested interest in getting her elected. I want independent reports from outside the campaign.

If Clinton exaggerates, why wouldn't her staff? As she said once upon a time, let's get real here!

People who deny the truth when it presented are in denial. Support your candidate all the way, but there is no way, based on published accounts from independent sources (not party insiders, close personal friends, and polical supporters) that she has, at minimium, exaggerated her experience.

Craig was a Clinton insider...another one...who is supporting Obama. Why would he do that when he knows Hillary so well?

Other people have said the same things about Hillary's exaggerations. I for one, don't think Mr. Craig is lying since I don't believe that everyone does what David Geffen, another former Clinton insider, said about the Clintons "Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease it's troubling," Geffen said, among other comments.

To the contrary, Miss Kitty -

There are people who know the Clintons and like them, and know that these things aren't true.

There are two sides to every story.

Sound familiar?

(By the way - the 'fairy tale' was about consistencies in the continued Iraq War voting record.)

If Susan Rice says he is not ready why should america think he is ready. Need to convince your own people before you can convince america.

SuzeQ -

I have a new, occasional nickname for you -

AccuzeQ...!

Look, many people have spun things the wrong way against the Clintons. I have heard many journalists, and others involved who have since realized that the Clintons weren't being racist in S.C. - that Bill would have said "fairy tale" about Barak's so consistently being against the war.

Two people can look at one event or issue and come out with two opposing opinions. That doesn't mean that one opinion is right.

When I see a quote - I look at the whole context.

There are always those who believe spin one way or another.

That sounds like another Barack supporter spin-session to me.