Taylor Marsh – TaylorMarsh.com – News, Opinion and Weblog on Progressive Politics

Michael Smerconish beats Ed Schultz, who then loses track of his Obama talking points, which further reduces him to dribbling spittle on his shirt. The premier Phillie radio host, Smerconish, whether you like him or not, is not going to fall for some reverse racism. Philadelphians are made of stronger stuff. By the end of the segment, Ed Schultz didn’t have a clue what had just happened, but it was clear to the audience. Schultz got his clock cleaned.

Mickey Kaus explains
further:

If Obama’s Face Were … : Here’s Andrew Sullivan in his big, widely applauded Atlantic piece making the case for Barack Obama: What does he offer? First and foremost: his face. Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial—it’s central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West’s advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in. Consider this hypothetical. It’s November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. In one simple image, America’s soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama’s face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can. His face. Hello! Mrs. Ferraro? If one of the “formeost” things Obama offers voters is the “face of a brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia, etc.” doesn’t that mean “he would not be in this position if he were white”? If you like Obama because he might “rebrand” America to the world–well, he wouldn’t accomplish that simply by having his election televised, as Sullivan suggests he would, if he were white, would he? Or think in purely domestic terms. If Obama were white, he wouldn’t embody hopes of a post-racial future. Duh! That’s part of his appeal. It seems obvious. Why does Obama dispute it? Why isn’t Ferraro allowed to acknowledge it? Is it OK for Obama’s “face” to appeal to egghead Atlantic subscribers but not ordinary Wyoming caucusers? Or was Sullivan being “offensive” and “ridiculous” too? (emphasis above original)

Frankly, I understand why Ferraro resigned. I also understand Clinton’s response. However, I don’t agree with it and don’t think it shows much courage either. Ferraro said what she believed, and Clinton distanced herself yesterday. The further comment from Clinton won’t get her one vote, but it does give energy to people like Olbermann who don’t deserve it, haven’t earned, and will simply use Clinton’s comment against her again, which happened in a later segment on “Hardball” after the one shown above.