yo

1

Hi Jane!

See Todd Gitlins “Twilight of Common Dreams,Why America Is Wracked by Culture Wars ” for a relevant discussion of this issue.

maybe yes
maybe no

Amen Jane.

Had Speaker Pelosi begun pushing accountability in earnest the party would be seen as a party of action.

Same old story. When you take a stand, even if people don’t like it they respect you for taking one.

This war or race and gender between Democrats has grave potential to rend the party asunder.

-G

Review of Gitlin:

Then I read this. It seems that Californians were debating over textbooks for social studies and history. The author, and others, anticipated that the “right” would be most vocal in their comments on proposed textbooks. “Why isn’t there more about St. Joe McCarthy? Why so much about those satanic hippies in the 1960s?” We’ve all heard the diatribes. Well, it turned out the the left was more vocal. Becoming parodies of themselves, “progressives” all over were claiming the texts didn’t include enough references to black, homosexual, working class women (to partake of a comic phrase of many years ago). The concept of which I learned–and which has continually amused me since–is IDENTITY POLITICS!

Indeed, it’s a symptom of what went wrong with the direction the 60s were taking us: we’re all victims now. And if not, we’re oppressors.

Ultimately, it’s led to post-modernism, the “academic left” and other schools of contemporary comedy, and other travesties on which volumes have been written.

Do you want to understand what identity politics means? Or why the left is its own worst enemy? Read this fine volume.

And read other Gitlin too. He’s grown up. That’s more than I can say of some of his contemporaries of approaching 40 years ago.

I watch the TV these days and I see that the image of the Democratic party is quickly morphing from the party of economic justice or the party that will get us out of Iraq into the party that wants to return to the identity politics wars of the 70s. Because the Democrats have largely sat back and been content to watch the Republicans self-destruct rather than step out in a leadership position on issues that could have positively defined them, they’re vulnerable to being cast thusly. It’s a big turn-off to most Americans that shrewd GOP political operatives and cooperative media have been quick to seize upon.

Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important. A failure to do so may find us looking at a resurgent GOP this fall no matter who the Democratic nominee is.

And at that point, we all lose.

My bold.

Yep. I warned everyone about this third rail of identity politics about six weeks ago–and the perils of a zero-sum game (one loses, the other wins) and on how a nonzero-sum outcome migth be desirable…Now it seemsthere’sarrace to the bottom…

DUGG

Yes you did, Biodun.

Agreed… and my personal take was that KO went over the top
in his “special comment” on Hillary…
KO didn’t look too happy/comfortable when he interviewed Obama on Friday night…

Let me be clear on this. I don’t support Obama based upon the fact that he’s a person of color. I do not, not, support Senator Clinton ground in the basis of her not being a man. Is there a way I can be more luminescent on this statement?

I’ve got no nostalgia for disco music. That part of the 70’s was so discouraging.

Simply put. Senator Obama trumps Senator Clinton.

I’ve spent most of the morning reading everything I could find related to the Bear Stearns debacle, and I come away from it all wondering whether this time next week it’ll be “Hillary-Schmillary” and “Obama-Schmama”– i.e., that we’ll all be shell-shocked over the total meltdown of the U.S. financial system. There is some bad shit goin’ on right now.

KO’s comments about Hillary were right on time.

I can see where any African-American who was fire hosed during a peaceful march might carry a grudge.

Lord, I dislike disco.

You don’t think it is limited to Bear Stearns? Please Explain.

There are reasons to be discouraged with Senator Clinton. Starting with Iraq and the DLC.

Myself and lots of other American Democrats who are white had no problem voting for Barack. The ones who are having a hard time with this reality are the racists of our country. See? Hillary, Ferraro, Glenn Beck, Ass Limbo (Rush), are the ones who just can’t understand what Michelle Obama meant when she said for the first time in her ADULT life she’s proud of her country!

I don’t even think it had to happen to a person for it to produce a grudge, just knowing it happened was enough.

If you’d like to be “more luminescent,” please enlighten us as to what this has to do with this particular post.

“…the language and the memories and the baggage of those times.”

Baggage. Baggage? That’s not being very generous, Barack.

I don’t know about this.

I think we in this country are faced with the very real possibility of an economic depression.

I wonder what this will do to the oil market?

LONDON (AFP) — Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell is to cut its reserve figures for 2007, taking about 1.3 billion barrels off its books or the equivalent of nearly one year’s production, The Observer said Sunday.

The weekly newspaper said the company would announce the writedown of at least 200 million barrels off the estimates for its operations in Nigeria while another 1.1 billion barrels would be lost from Russia.

-G

Jeebus, I won’t put Ferraro and Hill in the same sentence with
Beck and Rush..

Gulp.

I just want to make an observation. As they age, some of the senior citizens that I know exibit more of the biases(and in some cases, outright bigotry)that they were instilled with when they were young. What this portends for future voting patterns, I don’t know.

Obama’s easy sophistication with these issues is part of what sets him apart, puts him light years from virtually all Republicans and I suspect just a little bit ahead of the Clintons, as evidenced for example by Bill Clinton being unable to see how different Obama’s campaign is from the earlier campaign of Jesse Jackson. Unless of course Bill does understand but was choosing to speak to those who do not. I am not trying to be a heavy candidate partisan here — the difference is small, I think. We just have to all keep cool and not let the media whip this into a battle royal between race and gender which it is not (for most people). It is a close contest between two very competent candidates.

I agree with that sentiment Raven …. her campaign needs stop this kind of behavior. Of course much is perpetrated and extolled by the MSM just to make news and please their owners!

And perhaps if the Democrats had been less willing to sit back and watch the Republicans implode, we might be less inclined to get sucked into identity politics in the first place.

I think Patricia Williams had a great piece on this issue in the most recent Nation.

House of Cards

as a christian who’s presently unchurched - pastor wright’s radical theology is ok with me…. perhaps he could’ve framed it better but he’s not far off the mark imho

They’re all on the anti-Obama bandwagon. In terms of political stances…I would hope Hillary & Ferraro were nothing like the right wingers. Eeeek.

Reading thought the last book salon “Why we’re liberals” reminds my of the same sort of idea with root in a different time. To some extent I see “Liberal” as a facet of identity politcs.

The take home for me is message of inclusion as opposed to diversion or division.

During the last Fed short-term bank money auction, they auctioned FOUR times the funds they’d anticipated, at rates higher than the then-prevailing inter-bank short-term commercial rates. Conclusion? Everyone knows they all have closets full of bad paper skeletons, and no one trusts anyone else’s books and doesn’t want to get caught in the lurch.

I’m not in a panic state yet, but I am very anxious regarding how quickly this crap could corkscrew into the ground.

Well said.

Oh goody. A possible debate. Can you perhaps be more specific?

United Church of Christ on Rev. Wright

I just want to say that Rev. Wright isn’t the only outspoken black minister out there, if Democratic candidates want to be introduced to black congregations by the local minister, they need to handle this one with kid gloves.

Hi, folks, I am doing an FDL Book Salon chat a5 5 pm, come and join us, re: Iraq and the media…Over at E&P, we were among the first to promote FDL coverage of Plame etc. years ago……Greg Mitchell

Lets do it. Lets bounce.

Absolutely, I was impressed with how he has handled the situation.
His pastor is his friend and mentor and he didn’t throw him under
the bus…

I am impressed with every encounter with Obama. He seems (is) thoughtful and is unafraid to show it. It may not make for a great bumper sticker, but he is showing an understanding and sophistication i have never seen in a politician.
His world view is not black and white. He is painting with a much more varied palatte.

I think the choice between Obama or Clinton and Geraldine’s statements has everything to do with this post.

Political conversations occur in a context. As Jane points out, the possibility of having a productive discussion on some issues, particularly matters of race and gender, is partially contingent on the context in which such a conversation occurs.

With breathtaking consistency online, advocates of one candidate or another use the trappings of a conversation about race and gender to make what is really an argument about candidate advocacy. As kiddo perfectly demonstrates in this thread and all threads, there’s this ineradicable capacity to filter any discussion into the merits of one candidate or another. That prevents any actual conversation about things related to justice for women or people of color.

What’s more, all of this is occuring in a wider media and cultural context, so while candidate partisans are hurling accusations at each other, they are helping Republicans and the Republican controlled media rebrand the new, emergent, 21st Century liberalism into the tired old liberalism of the 1970’s, a brand of liberalism that failed and was rejected by the culture.

As a rad progressive, I love to debate moderate progressives.

As long as it serves HRC and her surrogates to play the race/gender identity card she will do it, damn the consequences to the Democratic party. Remember, at her core she’s still the “Goldwater Girl” who switched for perhaps reasons of “good”, but now with the benefit of hindsight, perhaps it looks more like a wee bit of self-serving opportunism. You all do remember how much Goldwater lost the ‘64 election by, don’t you?

As long as HRC plays a “win at any cost” strategery we all lose. Her sense of entitlement to the Oval Office could cost us the election, and perhaps off-year control of Congress as well, because while she’s the Mistress of Identity Politics, the republicans are the masters of playing the wurlitzer and moving the emotions of Joe Six-Pack and entire family to vote against their own self-interests.

Short answer: Jane you brilliant lady, you’re 100% correctamundo, the Democrats might lose by winning. And that’s the saddest thing of all.

I am one of the reviled old white guys. When the race got down to Clinton and Obama, I saw little difference in their policies, respected them both, and believed that neither would push their candidacies to a point which would split the party and lose the election. When it came time to vote in the Texas Primary, I chose to vote for Obama because he had great momentum, undeniable speaking and motivational skills, and might possibly expand the party. I still thought Clinton was a good candidate. When Clinton herself made statements that she and McCain were qualified to be president, but Obama was not, I felt she crossed a line. It seemed to me that any desparate chance at her own victory had become more important than the party or the country. I’ve become increasingly discouraged with the raising of race and gender as issues. However, I think Obama has dealt with them exceptionally well; perhaps reminiscent of Jackie Robinson’s persisence in just beating the crap out of the opposition on the diamond.

Well said, and the Mets look unbeatable this year..

…men of fierce intelligence coming up in the ’60s he has a lot of the language and the memories and the baggage of those times.

“fierce” intelligence. Excuse me, but is that a euphemism for violence or hatred or both? “Fierce” is some poor choice of adjective to use with intelligence. And yet, Obama being the rhetorician that he is, I can’t conceive of that being accidental.
.

It is my impression from observing that most of the initial race based issues get raised by the Clinton campaign and are then responded to by the Obama campaign.

*Bill Shaheen and the drug dealer comment.

*Mark Penn piling on with the same sentiments.

*Bob Johnson piling on further with the same sentiments.

*Bill Clinton and his “Jesse Jackson won S.C.” line.

*Geraldine Ferraro and her mumbo jumbo.

When Obama’s people respond that these tactics hew close to the race-baiting baiting line the Clinton people respond with “he’s playing the race card” canard.

That’s how I see it.

-G

No one is ever unbeatable. I’m very cautious. It’s a long season.

yeah provided the 2 carlos’ can stay healthy… pedro pitched well today ;o)

To me, “fierce intelligence” reflects a person who is not willing to deny the evidence of his own experiences or compromise with his perception of truth, and is always seeking to gain a more catholic (universal) version of truth.

“Talking about race and gender is important. Finding a way to do so responsibly, with appropriate context — and not simply as a way to tear each other down — is equally important. A failure to do so may find us looking at a resurgent GOP this fall no matter who the Democratic nominee is.”

Good point.

Let’s take, for example, a practice of labeling all criticism of HRC, regardless of source or substance, as “misogyny.”

Which category does that come under, Ms. Hamsher?

I referred to Ferraro’s comments as mumbo-jumbo because they were many and convoluted.

-G

“As long as HRC plays a “win at any cost” strategery we all lose. Her sense of entitlement to the Oval Office could cost us the election, and perhaps off-year control of Congress as well..”
__________

Here’s what I recently wrote the HRC campaign:

I previously wrote regarding my displeasure with your campaign tactics (of which I kept a copy). Now, the Geraldine Ferraro antics have pushed me over the side. The utter gall of this brazen, pompous woman, wagging her finger as she warned Barack Obama in pushback to be careful about further antagonizing her (in the wake of her smarmy, racist remarks), as HE would need HER for fundraising should he become the nominee — that has gotta exemplify the phrase “clinically deluded chutzpah.” We need look no further than the relative fundraising track records of both campaigns.

Here is what is starting to fully clarify for me. The Clinton campaign will do whatever it takes to garner the nomination, inclusive of every irrelevant lowball smear tactic that presents as opportune, and all the way up to actually stealing it via superdelegate machinations at the convention as a last resort.

Of course, it’s all for The Greater Good, and, if elected, a President Hillary would then shed for good the employment of all such slimy practices and govern in full transparency from the High Road thereafter.

Right.

You people leave no choice. I now must not only NOT support Hillary, I must use whatever political energy I have to actively oppose her candidacy. For starters, you can expect to see the contents of these messages out on the blogs. Yeah, I know; I’m just one Small Nobody. Just like Obama (were it not for his skin color).

Call me an idealist, but I don’t think race and gender should figure into any political discussion. But these sorts of situations perhaps, some may say, does give the Republicans extra ammunition.

Obama’s personal spirit is so astoundingly developed over that of Clinton and McCain, it makes you wonder whether they grew up on the same planet. His calm, intelligent, compassionate response to all the hysteria merely confirms what I felt when I first sat down and listened to the man.

I think this will ultimately prove to be a HUGE PLUS, as more and more people realize that what we need in this times is exactly that kind of emotional maturity.

For too long in this country we have not talked about race and color. Now that the need is there, we really don’t know how. We must fine a way because so much depends on it. Someone made the comment that some older people are stuck with the thinking of when they grew up and that’s true, but I have met so many older people who are amazingly progressive - they have the long-sight to know the things that can happen. IMO

And because I thought the last part was particularly important:

Why don’t we try “he is/she is” for a change? Both Democratic candidates represent diversely layered demographics–ones that describe our future. Clinton is a strong, determined, immensely resilient woman; Obama is a culturally amalgamous, quietly brilliant, elegantly intellectual man. They are both tremendously well educated, making all of us the lucky beneficiaries of affirmative action policies that have reconfigured the playing field to include the two of them.

Now we need to direct our attention where it belongs. As President, McCain would do away with what’s left of affirmative action, Roe and habeas corpus. He has been schooled for war and more war. He is committed to and implicated in almost all the domestic and economic lunacies of the Bush Administration. It would be tragic if he strolled in for a touchdown while the rest of us were playing card games in the end zone.

This isn’t a plea for unity. It’s a plea for sanity in this discussion:

Patricia Willians in the most recent Nation

Obama is cool, collective, and honest when a situation arises that he needs to tackle. Hillary always comes across as cocky to me. No different than how Bush reacts to being questioned about something he or someone in his Regime did.

I much prefer to have Obama near the red phone at 3am.

That expresses my feeling and hope very well.

Ms. Hamsher, I am waiting.

Yeah, I love Pedro, When I took my grandson to the Fens, a few years back, he was really gracious to the kiddos… and man can he hit those corners…

John McCain has forgiven the North Vietnamese. Isn’t it time for Rev. Wright & Co. to let go of the distant past just a bit?

If Hillary had been the one wielding a fire hose, he might have a point.

Meanwhile Barack (and especially Michelle) seem to have inherited some of the chip on the Reverend’s shoulder, despite the fact that they spent their youth on scholarship at Harvard Law School.

If Obama was a typical politician, he would have responded in kind by coming out with a barrage of attacks on Clinton. This is how the game has been played for decades now. But while he has defended himself by making some mild attacks, for the most part he has used these incidents in a remarkable way. He turns it around and uses the opportunity to discuss the underlying issues. His comments yesterday I thought were very good:

I just want to say to everybody here that as somebody who was born into a diverse family, as somebody who has little pieces of America all in me, I will not allow us to lose this moment, where we cannot forget about our past and not ignore the very real forces of racial inequality and gender inequality and the other things that divide us. I don’t want us to forget them. We have to acknowledge them and lift them up and when people say things like my former pastor said, you know, you have to speak out forcefully against them. But what you also have to do is remember what Bobby Kennedy said. That it is within our power to join together to truly make a United States of America.

http://thepage.time.com/obamas.....town-hall/

Agree with you GregB! Exactly how it goes down.

oh he was hot today - i cant wait for season to open… this is the last year at shea - i hope to get out to park 1 last time before its done

Jane Hamsher. Not only is kiddo unhappy. So am I.

Lahoma

Oh man, but Bush is demented… you hurt my feelings when you put
Hill in the same category as Bushie…

But to give the impression that all of their black friends, cousins, uncles, aunts or what have you have had the same opportunities is not being truthful on your part.

A rich uncle can say at some point in his life, “My cousin Jack wasn’t so lucky. He was poorer than a church mouse and lived most of his life in his home because he could not afford to enjoy life”.

Michelle Obama has made it perfectly clear that she and Barack have been lucky, but that’s not to say that all blacks has. She points this out over and over. Did you miss it?

Meanwhile Barack (and especially Michelle) seem to have inherited some of the chip on the Reverend’s shoulder

That’s a slur. First of all, Michelle’s comment was about the election process, about which we’ve all complained. And you didn’t even bother to give an Obama example in this slur, which is telling.

The premise of your accusation is false, but it does demonstrate once again how people can’t hear discussions about race or gender in the current environment from anything but their own candidate centric context.

So, blogger writes about how the terms used to attack a given candidate echo the terms used to instantiate societal injustice, be it around race or gender. Blogger does not ever say that all people who criticize X canidate are (racist/misogynist). But a reader who encodes the blogger’s writing only in binary terms (favorable, unfavorable to my candidate) will not stop to think enough about the complexities of language and how it’s used to sustain injustice to sort it all out.

Once the primaries especially distilled themselves down to two candiates, lots of readers only view all content in similarly binary terms, and conversations about race and gender require the ability and the willingness to suspend reaction, parse ambiguities and the subjectivies of perspectives, deal in grays and engage history and language from an entorely different perspective.

Your comments shows how, literally, a blogger who tries to write from the later perspective may be read, but is not heard, by a reader who comes from the former perspective, and then the reader may frequently claim the badge of misunderstood victimhood while hurling allegations of bad faith at the blogger.

That’s the cycle of absurdity we’ve been in for weeks now, if not months.

They both thought Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and could harm America in the form of a mushroom cloud, didn’t they? They have some similarities, but 100% similar? Nope.

We don’t exist to make you happy. Seems you both find 10,000 reasons a day to be unhappy, and we’re not responsible for your emotional wellbeing.

Your collective singular talent seems to be to attempt to make others as unhappy as you are yourselves, at least around here.

With breathtaking consistency online, advocates of one candidate or another use the trappings of a conversation about race and gender to make what is really an argument about candidate advocacy. As kiddo perfectly demonstrates in this thread and all threads, there this ineradicable capacity to filter any discussion into the merits of one candidate or another. That prevents any actual conversation about things related to justice for women or people of color.

But can you lay this solely at the feet of the so called advocates? It seems that much of this comes from the tone set by the campaigns themselves (first black vs first woman). The accusations of sexism and racism from both campaigns and the presense of both in the campaigns make it very difficult to have an actual conversation.

McCain forgiven the Vietnamese? Uh, as much as I get into trouble here for defending McCain’s service, I’m not sure he has much call to forgive “the Vietnamese”. Maybe the guards in the Hilton bit not the Vietnamese as a people.

Jane, I gotta side with kiddo and Lahoma, very respectfully.

I couldn’t disagree more.

-G

Me three

With breathtaking consistency online, advocates of one candidate or another use the trappings of a conversation about race and gender to make what is really an argument about candidate advocacy.
(snip)
[S]o while candidate partisans are hurling accusations at each other, they are helping Republicans and the Republican controlled media …

Amen. It’s exhausting and discouraging. As a non-aligned Democrat who is ready to give and work for the candidate left standing at the end of this miserable primary season, I’ve been bludgeoned so often and so hard by both sides that I’ve given up trying to have a reasonable discussion. Most of my favorite blogs are unreadable at this point and I’ve quit visiting them. Not that they’d notice.

Worse, while the shrill mudslinging goes on (and on and on and on) the Republicans are making hay, McCain’s doing his photo ops overseas while his lapdog press is feverishly gushing over his “foreign policy credentials.”

I can’t help being bitter about watching, all over again, this ugly spectacle. We’ve lost much of the ground we’ve gained because of it. I’m afraid I foresee another four years of Republican Executive because of it.

ok, ya’ll hash it out. I have 2 teams in tourney championship games right now.

I for one, disagree with your characterization of kiddo and lahoma. Now how is it we can have discussions if this is how we treat one another?

“The premise of your accusation is false[.]”

Really? Do you read other posts on this blog besides your own?

Anyone else who’s been around for a while want to weigh in on whether my “accusation” is false?

Yeah, I’m not seeing the “unhappiness” you speak of Lahoma & Kiddo having either. They seem to have the ability to reflect the mood of the nation in a sentence or two and for some of us….we like that. What has happened over the last eight years cannot be summed up with few words, so it’s nice when someone can for us.

1972 baby.

Let’s not forget who won that election.

Peace to all.

-G

I agree to this extent, and Jane has it in her post:

Because the Democrats have largely sat back and been content to watch the Republicans self-destruct rather than step out in a leadership position on issues that could have positively defined them, they’re vulnerable to being cast thusly.

Both Senators have refused to lead on issues using their respective platforms over legislation and policy, and within that context, at the very least, they’ve left the campaign environment to default to a debate about their personalities. Now we reap the consequences.

Oh Mr. Pach. You are so smart. Lord, God what would the world do without you? I’d love to debate you on any issue of your choice. And are you being trotted out to fight other folks’ battles?

We, the progressive blogosphere, were rightfully critical of John Kerry’s lack of appropriate counter attack on the AWOL from the National Guard Dubya. By the time Kerry’s handlers decided to counter it was too little, too late. I’m hoping that Obama has something cooking that will take Hillary out before she wrecks the place. She is not going to go quietly and she is intent on following Rove’s destructive advice. There was plenty of room on the left for either Hillary or Obama to run in order to differentiate them from each other and the rethug candidate. Hillary is encouraging Rove to set the parameters. Hillary as experienced centrist (good according to Rove) and Obama as an inexperienced liberal (the worst thing in the world according to Rove).

Lahoma and Kiddo often offer me 10,000 reasons a day to smile and chuckle.

Ad hominem attacks on regular folks while calling for civil discourse seems rather counter productive to me.

Good night and good luck.

-G

Lahoma and kiddo’s humanity shine luminescent all the time and rarely do they give me the heartburn this post has caused. I too am disgusted with the immaturity of the race and misogeny issues, but Lahoma and kiddo’s comments are the last ones I would accuse of that.

Call me naive, but I take her at her word that she beleived the
false rhetoric… (I could be wrong).
And I give Obama “high marks” for his vote…
In my opinion, the media have done a job on her…
I’m really not worried about either candidate. I will vote Democratic anywhichway…
If we can’t beat McCain, we don’t deserve to lead the country.

Fair enough. I’m sure their onion skin combativeness on behalf of their candidate, and attempts to turn any discussion into an all out fight about their candidate positions, makes other advocates of their position happy.

But this is not a universal experience, and many find it to be a self-indulgent crusade to irritate.

On a practical level, I can’t possibly imagine an approach more designed to alienate anyone who might be persuadable to favor their chosen candidate, but that’s just my point of view.

Simmer down Mr. Pach.

Centrists have always scared me, because their views are almost always “wet finger in the wind” kind of thinking, so it’s no wonder Rove is on Hillary’s side! She’s a naked mold he can work with to shape into what he wants, which is Hillary on the ballot so his party can tear her arms, legs, and head off once and for all.

I interepreted that particular quote much more broadly–that “the Democrats” in question weren’t just the two candidates, but the entire Congressional crowd. There has been a lack of leadership on the part of the candidates and the folks on Capitol Hill that has allowed the conversations about the candidates to move into identify politics.

And many political blogs are unreadable at this point, because no matter the topic, it devolves into what an unsuitable candidate one or the other is.

Tiger Woods might win 3 straight tournaments? That shows you why Clinton’s strategy just isn’t working and is dividing the country…or some such b.s.

you can be fiercely intelligent without hating or being violent. get real.

Good question.
The word “surrogate” comes to mind.

Later.

This is another example of the schoolyard tactics and allegation of bad faith.

Unsatisfied that he’s not gotten Jane’s attention to indulge him in his favorite recreation of turning everything into an attack, now he’s trying to bait me and is accusing me of not actually speaking for myself.

This is (attempted) manipulative behavior, and it’s anything but respectful, the very definition of trollishness. We’ve allowed it to continue so far in the spirit of keeping the conversation open to all points of view.

okay but in the larger sense, that is also not necessarily possible because of how these things are seen differently (generationally) with the example of both Wright and Ferraro. I don’t think any of us believe that these are isolated feelings/viewpoints within our own party, rather a microcosm that is now being played out in front of the whole nation.

amen