Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Samantha Power/Geraldine Ferraro

1

Geraldine Ferraro is smart?

Since when? By whose standards?

Yikes! She is a blathering spiteful moron who has no political saavy if it bit her in the ass.

Now would you like to hear my real uncensored opinion on her?

Posted by Reality Check | March 12, 2008 4:37 PM
2

Dems are too stupid to discuss the issues. Idiotic shit is spewed from the dumb campaigns and their supporters (yes, I'm talking about Sloggers, etc.) on a daily basis. Fight on! McCain FTW

Posted by Go McCain! | March 12, 2008 4:38 PM
3

Better, they should swap. That way everyone will know there's no hard feelings.

Posted by Jez | March 12, 2008 4:38 PM
4

Didn't we cover this already in that ridiculous ECB post yesterday? THEY'RE NOT THE SAME THING, for a whole host of reasons I'm too bored and annoyed to repeat.

Posted by Matthew | March 12, 2008 4:42 PM
5

@1: Yes.

Posted by Dave Coffman | March 12, 2008 4:45 PM
6

Draw? Back in the game?

Not how it's done.

After sinning one requires atonement, rehabilitation, &etc. Such could take a week, or years.

Posted by umvue | March 12, 2008 4:49 PM
7

eh... as ridiculous as ferraro's statement is, i don't think the obama crew should have asked her to resign. in that light, i'm certainly in favor of both coming back to work.

the thing is, power's comment really goes against the tone of the obama campaign. so, despite my belief that ferraro's statement was worse -- as matthew eludes to above and as was posted yesterday -- i don't think a quid pro quo re-hiring would make sense.

i think each should be re-hired based on their merits, and, where applicable, the amends they have made for their error.

Posted by infrequent | March 12, 2008 4:49 PM
8

No, no, no, no. Samantha Power said something stupid, admitted her error, and left quietly. Geraldine Ferraro said something stupid, refused to apologize, dug herself in further with more stupid remarks, and couldn't even resign her post without getting in one last pout.

Posted by tsm | March 12, 2008 4:50 PM
9

well there's one glaring difference between the 2 - powers apologized, ferarro adamantly refuses to.

an incredibly stupid gaffe from an otherwise smart person, vs. unhinged ranting from a possible mental defective. not quite the same thing.

Posted by brandon | March 12, 2008 4:55 PM
10

Ferraro was nearly a heart beat away from the missle codes. *whew* that was a close call. Almost as close as Joe Leiberman being the VP!

Posted by Hate to say it | March 12, 2008 5:01 PM
11

non, je ne regrette rien. Non, rien de rien.

Posted by johnnie | March 12, 2008 5:07 PM
12

What is this "game" of which you speak?

We're choosing a president, not playing a "game".

God, next you'll post about how one or the other candidates is "owed" the election ...

Seriously, we're talking the person who can illegally declare war on Iran, bomb them with nukes, and have our troops die needlessly for 90 days without anyone being able to stop them ...

And, for my money, that sure ain't ThousandYearsWar McCain ....

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 12, 2008 5:08 PM
13

Amazing how 90% or more of the exchanges between Obama and Clinton are not about the fundamental issues facing our country, but are about tangential arguments, ruffled features, and red herrings.

Posted by raindrop | March 12, 2008 5:15 PM
14

Edit @13: make that 'ruffled feathers'.

Posted by raindrop | March 12, 2008 5:18 PM
15

Okay… Help me understand how a personal attack is equivalent to a racist attack?... by that logic its equally offensive to say George W. Bush is stupid as it is to say Colin Powel is an Uncle Tom… one seems patently uglier and more offensive than the other… The relevant correlation would have been if Power’s comment had been sexist, but it wasn’t.

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me | March 12, 2008 5:25 PM
16

@13: No, it's amazing how 90% of the exchanges covered by the press are about tangential arguments. We get snippets of these two sniping about who said what, and never get coverage of the other 45 minutes of every speech and public appearance, when they're talking about health care and Iraq. IOW, 10% of their comments receive 90% of the coverage, and you bought it hook, line and sinker.

Posted by switzerblog | March 12, 2008 5:32 PM
17

yes a more substantive press would have focused not on the monster comment but on Harvard Internation Relations Professor Power's telling the BBC that Obama's statements about pulling out of Iraq within 16 months were not necessarily to be taken seriously.

Nothing is stopping Obama from rehiring her right now if that's who he wants.

Posted by unPC | March 12, 2008 5:51 PM
18

Oh, give it a rest, unPC, your God Bush is giving you another Fake War in Iran, stop gloating.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 12, 2008 6:03 PM
19

@16: Your statement is true if you included their speeches and debates - but I'm talking about just their exchanges through their campaigns and the press and the resulting sound bites.

Sadly, both are unqualified to be president.

Also, I never buy anything hook, line, and sinker. People tell me all the time that I’m not gullible, and I believe them!

Posted by raindrop | March 12, 2008 6:05 PM
20

The thing that gets me is why is Ferraro even on Clinton's finance committee when she has a history of sketchy financial deals? In '84 the House Ethics Committee found that she had violated the Ethics in Government Act for failing to report her husband's finances. There were other allegations about her husband's shady business dealings when she tried to run for Al D'Amato's Senate seat. Considering all the criticism that Clinton is getting for failing to disclose her and Bill's tax returns, I don't think she should be taking any advise from Ferraro on finances.

Posted by blargh | March 12, 2008 6:21 PM
21

@16: Can't pin this all on the press. The campaigns feed them this shit all day on conference calls. Sure, the candidates are still out there giving speeches, but those stump speeches are a rah-rah form of policy and we've heard them a hundred times. It wasn't ugly until the candidate(s?) made it ugly.

Posted by CG | March 12, 2008 7:16 PM
22

Call it even?

In order for this to be even, the Hillary camp would have to catch up by doing something classy. Something really fucking classy, because they are a little far behind in that department.

Posted by elenchos | March 12, 2008 7:17 PM
23

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
We're HATERS!!!!!11!eleventy!!!1!!!

Posted by Some Bitch | March 12, 2008 7:47 PM
24

The only way blacks can get anywhere is through affirmative action. Otherwise, they belong in the ghetto.

You know what they say, you can take a negro out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the negro.

Vote HILLARY!!!! Yes She CAN!!!!

Posted by ecce homo | March 12, 2008 8:32 PM
25

Ferraro said the same thing about Jesse Jackson in '88. I wonder if she said had a similar criticism of herself while running as VP.

Posted by sleestak | March 12, 2008 9:03 PM
26

Keith Olbermann's scathing rant of Hillary on Countdown tonight is a must see. Look for it on youtube tomorrow. Great to see people with a pulpit coming out and labeling her as the "monster" she is

Posted by tco | March 12, 2008 10:08 PM
27

ecce homo said "The only way blacks can get anywhere is through affirmative action. Otherwise, they belong in the ghetto.
You know what they say, you can take a negro out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the negro."

Hey buddy, you are a massive loser and I am going to see to it that you get banned from this site. You have been warned before and you persist. You are truly foul and an embarassment this blog

Posted by tco | March 12, 2008 10:12 PM
28

ecce homo said "The only way blacks can get anywhere is through affirmative action. Otherwise, they belong in the ghetto.
You know what they say, you can take a negro out of the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto out of the negro."

Hey buddy, you are a massive loser and I am going to see to it that you get banned from this site. You have been warned before and you persist. You are truly foul and an embarassment this blog

Posted by tco | March 12, 2008 10:12 PM
29

Samantha Power is hell of a lot more competent and useful than Ferraro. Just the fact that Obama would invite her into his campaign and rely on her advice gives me confidence in how he would act as president. Before this campaign, I always assumed that Power is one of those incredibly smart, knowledgeable people who should participate in a presidential administration, but would unfortunately always be relegated to think tanks and nonprofits.

Posted by keshmeshi | March 12, 2008 10:22 PM
30

Hey TCO,

Sorry, but it is the truth. Gerardo was right. No one would care about Obama if he wasn't Black. He wouldn't have gone to Harvard, etc...

Hillary Can do it on Day One!!! Obama, can't. He is just for show. An uncle Tom in you will.

Vote as if your life depends on it. It does.

VOTE HILLARY!!!!!!

Posted by ecce homo | March 12, 2008 11:09 PM
31

*feeds #2*. Next.

#27, you are banned for double posting, feeding ecce homo, and not recognizing tasteless parody.

Posted by w7ngman | March 13, 2008 12:46 AM
32

No.

Posted by Max Bell | March 13, 2008 8:02 AM
33

Geraldine Ferraro is a fucking bitch. She's always been a fucking bitch. She is still a fucking bitch.

To be honest, Clinton is better off without her.

Posted by monkey | March 13, 2008 8:49 AM
34

i still find it odd how some people seem okay using sexist comments to deride another for for making racist comments....

Posted by infrequent | March 13, 2008 9:12 AM
35

Well when the shoe fits...

Posted by monkey | March 13, 2008 9:31 AM
36

There is a difference between criticizing someone's campaign tactics and saying that they are only a contender for president because of their race. I don't see how you can call this a draw.

Posted by SDizzle | March 13, 2008 9:34 AM
37

Wait. Calling Hillary a monster and pointing out her win-at-any-price strategy is the same as bitter white resentment and race-baiting? Come on. I call shenanigans.

Posted by K | March 13, 2008 9:50 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).