Sex, Race, and Videotape.

“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.” I saw this yesterday and was going to leave it well enough alone, but since it’s growing into a full-fledged dustup today, and since Team Clinton recently made a point of calling for Samantha Power’s scalp: former veep candidate and Crossfire host Geraldine Ferraro makes some rather unfortunate remarks about Sen. Obama. To quote Ambinder (whom I generally find irritating, but he pegged this one): “Because running as a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama is soooo easy.” At any rate, if the door is now open to playing this ridiculous identity game, I think it’s rather obvious to all that if Ferraro herself was a white man, we’d never have heard of her, since her gender was basically the sole reason for her inclusion on that historically terrible ’84 ticket. Similarly, if Sen. Clinton wasn’t the spouse of a former president, it’s hard to imagine her still in this race, particularly given her virtual mathematical elimination and all.

Perhaps, before Ferraro makes any more dubious claims about an easy road for black males in our society, she should read Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson’s editorial today in the NYT, where he examines the old-school racial fears stoked by Clinton’s infamous 3am ad: “I have spent my life studying the pictures and symbols of racism and slavery, and when I saw the Clinton ad’s central image — innocent sleeping children and a mother in the middle of the night at risk of mortal danger — it brought to my mind scenes from the past. I couldn’t help but think of D. W. Griffith’s “Birth of a Nation,” the racist movie epic that helped revive the Ku Klux Klan, with its portrayal of black men lurking in the bushes around white society.” Some pundits argue that Patterson is over the top here, but I actually think he’s on to something (and, note, I’ve recently defended the Clinton ad people on charges of intentional racism.)

As Chris Orr notes, this wasn’t just a warmed-over Mondale/LBJ Cold War leadership spot. Team Clinton explicitly turned it into an old-school home invasion ad, the kind that’s so passé that even Slomin’s Shield has moved on. The Clinton campaign still could’ve forestalled any possible racial subtext by changing the race of the family, but, as it is, you’d have to be willfully naive not to see a problem with the Clinton version of “Barack Obama is a menace that will harm your sleeping (white) children in their beds” as it came out. At the very least, the ad gurus at Camp Clinton are guilty of willful ignorance about racist cultural tropes in American history, and perhaps a good deal more. Update: In response, the Clinton campaign points to a blink-and-you’ll-miss-her African-American child in the ad, although, given the lighting, that wasn’t immediately obvious, to say the least.)

Update 2: Ferraro blows a gasket, now claiming: “I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white. How’s that?” Well, if it’s any consolation, Rep. Ferraro, I’m sure your fellow national embarrassment, Sean Wilentz, agrees with you. (Patterson rebuts Wilentz here.) Update 3: Ferraro’s done this before, back in ’88: “If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn’t be in the race.

Update 4: “It wasn’t a racist comment, it was a statement of fact.” Ferraro can’t seem to stop digging herself deeper. At this point she’s either dogwhistling to Pennsyltucky or just completely off the rails. Either way, Keith Olbermann’s disbelief about Ferrarogate last night is worth watching. Update 5: She’s gone, and not very gracefully.

3 thoughts on “Sex, Race, and Videotape.”

  1. Not to say that Ferrarro is correct, but even if she was, why does it matter? To imply that voting for an otherwise good politician for the wrong reason makes the politician bad is not an intelligent or even logical attack. If uninformed voters elect a good candidate, this is a problem? This is just another example of the Clinton camp not having any issue-based arguments to air…

  2. This needs to stop. They’re embarrassing themselves and the party. When are the grownups(ie, superdelegates) going to step in already? It’s not like the race is actually in any doubt at this point. Hell, he just made up her March 4th gains tonight. She’ll probably win Pennsylvania by 10 or so, but so what? She just won Ohio by that and it made absolutely no difference. If it goes that far, he’ll probably win back whatever she wins in Penn. right after that in Indiana and NC. The two days have basically the same number of delegates available, so I’m not sure why Penn. is seen as such a bigger deal. It is more important in the general, but he could even put NC in play in the general, and she could never dream of that.

  3. I can’t belive she’s trying to claim that Obama’s success is a result of his race. Because, as history has shown, America loves nothing better than black men and will stop at nothing to push their agendas and see that they prosper. What an idiot that woman is. But I’m probably just saying that because I’ve been biased by the “sexist media.” How convenient that Hilary is always the victim.

    Also, there’s nothing more irritating than a white person claiming racism when they are criticized for their own patently racist comments.

Comments are closed.