There are a couple of great pieces in the latest Rolling Stone. You can read the article on the Obama campaign — as well as an endorsement for Obama — on their site.
I highly recommend picking up the issue, though, as the piece on the Clinton campaign isn’t up on the site and I thought it was pretty great. And although not stated outright, one of the implications I took away from the piece was that women should actually be a bit peeved by the fact that they’ve waited this long for a viable female candidate and what they got was Hillary Clinton. In other words, demand better.
Along those lines, we get these comments from former VP-candidate Geraldine Ferarro:
“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position,” she continued. “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.”
This has caused a bit of a dust up, and not without reason. But, while her statement is poorly worded, there’s some validity to what she’s talking about.
Specifically, she talking about liberal guilt, or more to the point feminist guilt.
There’s a large part of the Democratic party, both male and female, who have been waiting a long time for a female president. The idea that our country could actually have a role model for young women who isn’t dependent upon her physical appearance for success is fantastic. It’s almost hard to believe that it’s taken this long or that we’re so close.
The problem, of course, is that we are so close, so the idea of voting AGAINST this groundbreaking moment is hard to deal with. But many of the people who have been waiting for a female president have suddenly found themselves in the position where they actually like the other person better as a candidate. Then what? How do they reconcile squashing a dream so close to fruition? How do you make that okay? How do you assuage that liberal guilt?
Well, by voting for the first black president.
Ferarro has something of a point. If Obama were a white man, voting for him wouldn’t pacify those concerns, and since we’re talking about Democrats here you know a certain percentage of them would rather vote their ideals than their issues.
Then again, she also says it would be different were he a woman, which doesn’t make a lick of sense to me.
But it’s interesting to see the Obama campaign starting to wrest control of the story back from the Clinton campaign. She was able to determine the narrative leading up to Texas and Ohio and she won because of it. Obama’s going to need to do the same if he hopes to have a chance in Pennsylvania.