Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Yup, Aaron Eckhart Is at the M... | Mark, Bob, David, Larry, Gavi... »

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Ferraro Resigns

posted by on March 12 at 14:24 PM

From Clinton’s finance committee.

RSS icon Comments


Countdown until the next Clinton hack makes a reprehensible statement starts now.

Posted by ghostlawns | March 12, 2008 2:28 PM

There goes all that experience...

Posted by Chris B | March 12, 2008 2:28 PM

HRC is banking on the wave that will come from the Perez Hilton endorsement in April.

Posted by mackro mackro | March 12, 2008 2:32 PM

This is totally unfair! She never would've had to resign if she didn't suck.

Posted by Ziggity | March 12, 2008 2:33 PM

I wonder how many days before the next Clinton supporter makes another racist comment?

I'm guessing maybe three, four days tops.

(note: most Clinton supporters are NOT racist at all)

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 12, 2008 2:33 PM

Until Clinton rejects and denounces Ferraro, Ferraro is her surrogate.

Posted by mirror | March 12, 2008 2:40 PM

Ferraro succeeded. She has sealed the deal for Clinton in PA, IN, WV, and KY. Obama's campaign is permanently damaged. The winner will lose to McCain.

Posted by Sad | March 12, 2008 2:51 PM

i'm with 7. this was great for clinton. even better with the resignation.

Posted by infrequent | March 12, 2008 3:03 PM

But how could she "resign" if she was never part of the campaign? (huh?)

And how does she get to be "on the finance committee" but as Wolfson told NBC "she's not an adviser", "not part of the campaign"? And note that there is not even a tiny drop of apology anywhere in any of this. She's just stepping aside because she was attacked. Just awful. Blind ambition trumping all.

Posted by Barak | March 12, 2008 3:14 PM

You know things are bad in your campaign when your regular everyday ordinary supporters start resigning, eh Erica?

Posted by K | March 12, 2008 3:57 PM

Oh, come on. There's a little blood in the water. Big deal. Yes, it plays into the hands of racist shitheads in PA and WV. If Obama was a rock or tree, this would be a massive problem. He's not, so he has the option of campaigning around it -- a skill he's going to need for the rest of this year.

Posted by Fnarf | March 12, 2008 4:04 PM

i don't see how this can be anything but bad for hillary. she scored a few bonus points with people who would never vote for a black man anyway. so what? desperation is never flattering.

Posted by brandon | March 12, 2008 4:09 PM

I heard she really resigned because she paid a male prostitute to poo in her mouth...

or somethin'...

Posted by michael strangeways | March 12, 2008 4:24 PM

@11 - but if he were a rock or a tree he would not be running for president.

Posted by Barak | March 12, 2008 4:27 PM

I would be willing to bet this is more Hillary theater to somehow invoke sympathy and solidify the women vote. So calculating

Posted by TCO | March 12, 2008 4:41 PM

yes -- it might end that way even if not intentional.

Posted by infrequent | March 12, 2008 6:29 PM

I'd vote for a tree, but never a rock. Fuck the rocks. The rocks are what got us into this mess and I'll be damned if I'm going to let a rock dig us one inch deeper into this fucking hole the rocks thought would work out so brilliantly. Remember what happened when the rocks thought they could beat the scissors? Has it been so long? The trees remember.

No, the time has come for a tree to lead us away from the failed rock policies of the past and towards a better future that only a tree can understand, reach for, or grasp.

Posted by elenchos | March 12, 2008 7:28 PM

Yes – what GF said plays well to racist whites. But I might suggest these individuals have already refused to vote for BO - they did not need GF to become racist. Further most exit polls show maybe a 1.5 to 1 ratio of whites for HRC vs. whites for BO as I recall.

BUT - where are the attacks and or comments by Black Political Leaders when African Americans vote almost 90% for BO?

Does no one think the 9:1 ratio of Black support for BO to be racially motivated? Does no one else find that voting pattern at least some what non democratic and possibly racism? Is it not a race card for BO? Is it not bigoted?

When does Black pride become white avoidance?

OOPS - some one put these questions on the table. Maybe that person did so in a clumsy angry or near brutal way – but that does not defeat the legitimacy of the issues and questions raised or better yet heretofore unmentionable and avoided. GF is now booed and hissed and condemned. Come on people GF is not KKK and has a track record of civil and personal liberty support that should make people listen and think before they call her names.

The policy differences are not great between the two liberal democrats running for the DEM presidential slot. That can be seen as HRC finds it near impossible (other then Health Care) to draw major POLICY distinctions.

So with little true policy distinction - and no other demographic group going for any prior or current Dem or Rep candidate by say more then 2:1 --- Why is it simply fine and not to be discussed as to its correctness and potential bigotry -- that Blacks are voting for BO in ratios near 9:1 recently?

Voting for a minority by minorities is quite understandable - hell I expect I would vote first for BO if I were Black vs. HRC given both are qualified. But still - should we not see leaders of the DEM party forcefully point out that this racial pattern of voting is not the dream of MLK jr. This is not what he and so many others marched to accomplish. Would he be pleased to see people vote on race lines – be it for a white or Black?

IS IT just as wrong for Blacks to vote for BO because he is black as it is for whites to vote for HRC because she is white? Maybe we are far enough down the road of tolerance to have this discussion without name calling. I hope we as a nation are ready to talk about this in a civil way. But the discussion that would heal is absent - and its absence IMO screams loudly for leadership. Yet no one rises to the occasion.

I support HRC as I view her as the fighter we DEMS need - as everyone would guess from the above - but I have no - zero - problem with voting for BO in a nanosecond if he wins the DEM nod vs. the REP candidate and party because I disagree with “them” on at least a dozen or 20 policy issues.

But who (or is it whom?) are we helping if close our collective eyes and voices to the racial divide – more so by the minority – that we keep seeing in the exit polls? Was GF attacked so hard at least in part because she had the gumption to speak out loud about the 800LB gorilla in the room? IMO BO should speak forcefully to the issues on the table and not just accept 9:1 vote ratios as an entitlement. Is it only white racists who are to be the subject of admonishments and needed education of the value of true fair tolerance and democracy?

BO enjoys 90% support from about 20% of DEMS and accuses others of racial dicing and slicing? How is this not wrong? I indeed ask more then I accuse - because while I note and write the above - I flat out declare – it hurts to do so – and I am confused and bothered by all of it - from BOTH sides.

Posted by Ted in Chicago | March 13, 2008 3:27 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).