Flog Ferraro Because She Got It Right

Note: Updated a bit as the story developed today.

Geraldine Ferraro won't shut up. And that's probably a good thing.

In 1988, when asked if then-presidential candidate Jesse Jackson got softball questions because he was black, she took it a bit further, saying:

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

Then just last week, she told the Daily Breeze, a South Bay daily in LA we lovingly call the Daily Sleaze,

"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."

Let's understand that right. Obama has one thing to thank for his place as the front-runner for the Dem candidate for POTUS, his close encounter with the most important job in the world. Without it, the mobs would throng around him, and Hillary would have clinched the nomination three heartbeats after Iowa and New Hampshire.

And that is that he's a black man. Sort of. Half way.

Before you slam me and call me racist, read on. I understand that Ferraro's comment minimized Obama's accomplishments and pinned them on one factor -- race -- when actually much of his appeal has nothing to do with his race. In that regard, Ferraro's comment doesn't cut it. But there is a kernel of truth in what she said. She missed that kernel entirely, as did most radio commentators. But I didn't.

First, anyone with smarts and honesty needs to recognize that for some people, voting for Obama is all about race. You need not look any further than the results in Mississippi (95 percent of the black vote?!) or the blogstorm surrounding Ferraro's comments. To quote one of the more temperate examples:

So, being Black is now a CONCEPT.

A CONCEPT, People.

Well, she can CONCEPT this.

Kiss.My.Lucky.Black.Ass.

Did you even catch the word "concept" in Ferraro's quote? If you did, did it strike you as racist? Of course not; no more than "fairy tale." And that's why being black gives Obama three advantages, which I have not heard anyone lay out:

• "America's first black president" captures the imagination much more than "America's first first-term Senator president" ever could.
  
  
• It gives him a cushion, a usually subtle but sometimes quite evident protective field, discouraging tough questions.
  
  
• And most importantly, it gives him the ""you're racist" defense for any tough challenge. Not said by him, mind you, but by leagues of people like the blogger above, who will circle the Obama campaign like a protective black cloud.
  

As the too-tough-talking Ferraro told the Breeze:

"Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up."

I wrote about this last month, when the race was even more up in the air than it is now:

As the Dems are all too eager to tell us, this election is about change: We'll either have a black or a woman running from president -- and that changes everything for the GOP, setting up what will be the most difficult campaign to message in the GOP's history.

If Bill Clinton gets charged with using dirty, racial politics for calling an Obama position a "fairy tale," how in the world will serious questions be raised by McCain, old white guy that he is?

How indeed? The gal who ran for Veep just may have the answer:

"Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"

There's some serious victimhood going on there, especially given that Ferraro admits that she would not have been on Mondale's ticket if she were a man. Still, it takes some serious huevos to throw something so obvious and straightforward into the PC cesspool that is American public discourse today, and God bless Ferraro for not giving enough of a darn and just doing it. I would say it differently, however:

Asking questions of a political candidate, as I have, certainly is not racist. Attacking me because I asked questions of a candidate who is a black man most certainly is.

The McCain staff should be building a file of questions and statements about him that would be called racist or sexist if they were asked of Obama or Clinton, so when the question arises, the McCain team can answer it with their own question.

And call me racist or sexist, but the McCain team also should be considering a Veep who is not a white man. Like Sarah Palin, who, as Gov. of Alaska, has appeal far beyond bringing him a state he's already assured of getting and could care less about.

There's another thread that's worth exploring as we struggle to deal with the messaging challenge posed by either Obama or Clinton: Ronald Reagan earned his "Teflon" status, but Obama/Clinton is demanding that it be issued to him/her as standard equipment for black people/women.

Remembering Reagan in this manner will help not just with the rank and file of the party, but also with all the Reagan Democrats, who just might be looking a bit askance at their party's offerings.

By the way, if you want to read an excellent case history on the cushion being black provides, read Rhymes with Right's The Pittsburgh Airport Incident and ask yourself, how would this have turned out if Monique were white?

Finally, upon getting the news that Ferraro has resigned from Hillary's finance committee, Hugh Hewitt pointed out to his radio listeners that Ferraro's gone, but Eliot Spitzer's still in office -- which means bringing up the subject of race in America is a more heinous crime today than all that Spitzer is charged with.

Hmmm. He may have something there.

Palin For Veep?

So the Token Dem and I were talking today about McCain's VEEP selection.

Being unnuanced in GOP-think, he went to Huckabee as the logical guy, which kind of curled the edges of my gray matter since adding a guy who's great on social issues but RINO on economic issues is hardly what McCain needs.

"What we need," I said, "is someone younger to balance out the age thing, and strong on economic issues, to balance out his gaffe there."

"I'm having trouble thinking of young, attractive Republicans," he said in that oh-so-smug Obama supporter tone.

Well, no sooner do I go back to my desk and click through two or three emails, than suddenly this blog was in front of my face:

How about that? The Alaska Gov, primed and ready for the GOP Veep slot. And according to the Palin for VP blog, there's a bit of momentum going on:

Here's a brief rundown of our success in the last few days.

1. Ace of Spades, a MAJOR player in the conservative blogosphere, has posted in favor a Palin nomination and linked our blog.

2. Instapundit has once again mentioned a possible Palin nomination.

3. WeeklyStandard.com has suggested Palin not once, but twice for the VP nomination.

4. And here's the big one: Governor Palin is running THIRD (tied) in RealClearPolitics' "Veepstakes!" Only Condoleeza Rice and J.C. Watts recieved more mentions, and Colin Powell had to settle for a tie with Sarah. Other major contenders left in Palin's dust include Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, Rudy Giuliani, Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Charlie Crist, and Kay Bailey Hutchison.

The blog also posts this:

My latest find was this comment on a recent Daily Kos post (bolding added):

Sarah Palin would be by far be the most attractive VP for McCain (literally and figuartively). That's probably the toughest ticket we could face (assuming Lieberman is telling the truth when he says he won't run with McCain). But I think most likely, McCain will choose someone under age 50 to off-set concerns about his age and make him seem less like an insider, so Tim Pawlenty or John Thune could also be possible choices.

I don't think McCain is stupid enough to choose Huckabee (The Republican base would explode) or Rice (Do you really want THAT strong of a connection to the Bush administration?).

Where is she on policy? Who cares! McCain needs a hottie on his ticket, right? Just kidding, although she single-handedly knocks off the post-Mitt GOP ugly stick, doesn't she?

Back to policy. Let's talk polar bears. C-SM readers know I've seen through the political gambit the radical enviros are playing with their proposed threatened listing of the polar bear, and Palin sees it too, writing in an NYT op/ed:

This month, the secretary of the interior is expected to rule on whether polar bears should be listed under the Endangered Species Act. I strongly believe that adding them to the list is the wrong move at this time. My decision is based on a comprehensive review by state wildlife officials of scientific information from a broad range of climate, ice and polar bear experts.

The Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, has argued that global warming and the reduction of polar ice severely threatens the bears’ habitat and their existence. In fact, there is insufficient evidence that polar bears are in danger of becoming extinct within the foreseeable future — the trigger for protection under the Endangered Species Act. And there is no evidence that polar bears are being mismanaged through existing international agreements and the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.

Any pol who takes on the CBD in the NYT is a pol after my heart. Beyond polar bears, GOP activists will note she's pro-life and opposes same-sex marriage, although she supports equal rights for gay couples short of marriage (my position, too).

Token Dem made a crack about Alaska being a den of GOP corruption to which I responded, "sort of like a Louisiana for Republicans" (heh), but it got me thinking, so I Wiki'd this:

Governor Murkowski did appoint Palin to serve as a commissioner on the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission which she served on during 2003–2004, but later resigned, in protest over what she perceived to be the "lack of ethics" of fellow Alaskan Republican leaders. This included the state party's chairman, Randy Ruedrich, a fellow commissioner, who was accused of doing work for the party on public time and providing a sensitive email to a lobbyist. She filed formal complaints against both Ruedrich and former state Attorney General Gregg Renkes, who was eventually found not guilty.

Nice story. But on the negative side, polar bears notwithstanding, she's glommed onto the global warming bandwagon, proposing to create a new sub-cabinet to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Alaska. Sub-sub-sub cabinet would be better. Alaska would benefit from global warming ... if it ever happens.

All in all, I confess: I'm too new to Palin to say she's #1 for the #2 slot, but she's definitely an intriguing possibility.