Would someone please stuff a sock in this woman’s mouth?
She is making an absolute fool out of herself every time she speaks:
Ferraro: My comment wasn’t racist, it was fact
First she says that Obama is only where he is because he is black. This is hilarious. Why on earth does Clinton-supporter Ferraro think Hillary is in the position she is in? Does Bill’s presidency qualify her? What exactly are her qualifications again? (On Obama, I think he is where he is because he is a pretty charismatic and inspiring speaker, but also because a lot of people like him more than they do Hillary.)
So, she takes a swipe at Obama, and then when she is called on it, she follows up with “Racism works in two different directions. I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white. How’s that?”
At this point, if I am associated with the Clinton campaign, I call her up and ask her to please shut up. But she didn’t. She keeps digging deeper:
An unapologetic Geraldine Ferraro said Wednesday that her comments about the impact of Barack Obama’s race on the electorate were taken out of context, and she stands by her words.
“It wasn’t a racist comment, it was a statement of fact,” she said on CBS’ “The Early Show,” adding that she would leave Hillary Clinton’s national finance committee if she were asked, but would not stop raising money for the New York senator’s presidential bid.
She also blamed Obama’s chief strategist, David Axelrod, for misinterpreting her remarks.
Ferraro also told ABC’s “Good Morning America” that “every time” someone makes a negative comment about Obama, they are accused of racism.
Note that when one of Obama’s advisors called Hillary Clinton a monster, she was immediately asked to resign. I have yet to hear the Clinton camp suggest that Ferraro do so. Perhaps if she commits a felony, they will start to wonder if it might be time to distance themselves.
Meanwhile, Hillary, having failed in her bid to get front-runner Obama to accept her offer to step aside (but he could be her Vice-Presidential running mate!), continues to try to steal the election, since she can’t win it fairly.
I can’t wait to see Hillary lose this election. I think we will see a cleanly fought election between Obama and McCain. I think a Hillary/McCain election would be pretty nasty – because that’s the way Hillary and company operate.
14 thoughts on “Someone Muzzle This Woman”
Give the Dems credit: they devised a very complicated system that cannot pick a winner in a close race. On top of that, the party who whined “This is America, count every vote” is going to use Superdelegates to decide! So much for listening to the little guy.
The best part is listening to those tortured explanations of why the superdelegate thing is supposed to make sense.
This is why you do NOT want to vote for Hilary. This is only a taste of things to come, in my opinion.
Listen, there’s a reason why women major in english, psychology, and education. There’s also a reason why men major in science and engineering.
Men and women are NOT equal. Men do some things better, and women do somethings better, but we are in no way on the same playing field.
Women really need to stop pretending about this. No one says they are lesser than men, just as no one says men are lesser than women. Each gender has different things it excels at. No gender is the better gender, and the sooner women (correction: womyn) realize this, the better off humanity will be.
My question for these fools is this: What happens when, say, 100 applicants apply for a particular science or engineering program that institutes a quota that 60% of acceptances must go to women, and out of the 100 applicants, 90 are men and 10 are women?
I should have put the link to the story first… Sorry for the confusion.
I should have put the link to the story first… Sorry for the confusion.
With friends like GF, who needs enemies?
calisoca – you can’t say things like that. Look what happened to Larry Summers .
It is amusing that some members of the Democrat Party are finally getting a dose of what the Republicans have put up with for years – getting tagged with the racist label even where it doesn’t apply. I don’t think GF is a racist any more than Larry Summers was some sort of mysoginist.
It appears the Dems can’t run congress, can’t run a primary system, and can’t even competently order hookers. Geez why would we want them to run the country?
I don’t know if calisoca is looking at things the right way. There are absolutely tasks that women tend to be poorer at then men. Mental rotation is one of the best documented.
However, if you went looking for practicing female engineers or practicing engineers period, you’d probably find a greater percentage of Indians and Chinese then you would in the US population. Is this because of a genetic difference in brain structure? I don’t know.
Assuming it is, does this mean that Indian and Chinese folks would make better presidents than folks of other ethnicities?
What does the difference between men and women have to do with anything related to this race, or to Geraldine Ferraro’s comments? The previous poster’s comments seem to imply that because men are supposedly better in physics and engineering, they are therefore more capable of governing. What the hell is that? How many scientists and engineers made good presidents — or how many were ever presidents for that matter? In fact, why would we ever want an engineer or mathematician in a political office?
If men are really inherently better at science and women better in the “communications” fields such as english, psychology and education, then it would seem that women are MORE qualified to hold political office. Go take a survey at any law school in the country — I am willing to bet that the majority at most every school are women.
Sure, men and women are different. But the content of an individual’s character is far, far more important than any supposed biological difference. I am no Clinton supporter, but let’s take both her and Obama’s views at face value and leave it at that.
Whoa, hold yer horses there, partner.
That article I posted was more of a non-sequitur than it was anything else.
I definitely was NOT trying to imply that because men are better at science and math that they are better at governing.
Considering most people who visit this blog are probably associated with some sort of science discipline, and if not, then they at least understand science and math, I figured that would be a topic of interest to readers.
Additionally, given the politically charged nature of the piece, as well as the political nature of the blog entry, I thought it would be a good place to put such a story and get people’s feedback.
Hilary may or may not be a good president for the country? I don’t know. That’s up for you to decide.
So do not take my intentions of posting that out of context.
Just to note, I do feel, however, that if she was elected president, she would try to implement more severe versions of “gender affirmative action” programs that would leave young males of all races, who are already greatly lagging in educational performance when compared to females (thank you feminism), behind in education.
Well RR, they must have heard you in the Clinton campaign: Ferraro Quits .
One of the things I’ve wondered about is if electing Barak Obama puts an end to tossing the racism claim around.
calisoca – I think you are right. A Hillary Clinton presidency may see an increase in gender politics and affirmative action. When I was an undergraduate many years ago men slightly outnumbered women. To close the gap there were all kinds of programs and scholarships for women for women. Now women outnumber men, I’ve wondered if we have any male affirmative action programs.
I think that the declining precentage of men in average colleges is a matter of some concern. It would take a ot of work to figure out why such a decline exists though.
1. Men believe college is biased toward women so don’t go.
2. Men go but quit after encountering such gender bias.
3. Men are more sensitive to the cost of going to college then women and don’t go for that reason.
4. Men, but not women, believe that college won’t help them get ahead.
Are you happy now RR? You done gone and got that poor woman fired. I suspect your attack was racially motivated. 😉
I’m in the UK, but I’ve never been able to ferret out data for various time periods about the proportion of the two genders actually in education as well as their relative performances. I’ve often wondered if an apparent historical “males doing better academically than females” being a combination of a significant proportion of girls being pushed into domestic roles early independent of their intellects BUT ALSO the boys who weren’t academic being able to leave for blue collar jobs at early ages, so that the remaining population of boys appeared brighter. Now that the government imposes a later school leaving age different populations of boys and girls are being evaluated than, say, 40 years ago. I’m inclined not to blame feminism for the lesser performance of boys at school than that we’ve probably never known how to effectively educate rowdy, testosterone fuelled boys. Wheeling out the “oh that damn feminism ruining everything” response won’t do the research into educational strategies that I think is probably needed. (To pre-empt: this isn’t political correctness speaking, I’ve got issues with positive discrimination in job hiring, but I really don’t think school educational issues for boys are anything to do with a feminist agenda in teaching.)
My name is Tia and I’m an editor at OpposingViews.com, the debate website. Since we both cover race issues, I thought I’d drop you a note. I would’ve e-mailed you but I couldn’t find an address.
See, we’re currently having a discussion about whether or not we still need affirmative action. You can see it here:
Although vetted experts are the ones doing the debating, anyone can contribute by choosing a side and posting comments about the experts’ arguments.
Check it out and, if you have the time, let me know what you think at email@example.com
Comments are closed.