I really have to think about the racial controversies that have hit the Obama/Clinton campaign over the past few months. When Ed Rendell said that there were white Pennsylvanians that wouldn’t vote for a black candidate, I agreed with him. Having experienced the center of this state as a black man, I have said that I feel more comfortable down south than I feel in my own state. What Rendell said was not politically smart, but he was dead on. We’re have more in common in Pennsylvania with Mississippi than we do with the rest of the north east.
So now we have Geraldine Ferraro’s statement that Obama gets better treatment because he’s black. So here’s the thing – I do think a lot of people have been taken by the idea of a black President, but of course I’ve heard more than my share of women say they’re voting to see a woman President – so it goes both ways.
There is all the other stuff that other candidates don’t have to experience because they’re not black. The whole thing about Obama’s middle name Hussein. The internet hoax about him being sworn in on a copy of the Koran. If Obama wins the election he’ll have overcome his share of obstacles. It bothers me that this gets forgotten in all the complaints of the preferential treatment that Obama gets. He has had the most Roveian incidences take place, but that’s this country’s system; unfortunately that’s politics.
Ferraro and others that believe her need to take a step back and view the election in its entirety and not through the eyes of a Clinton hawk.