Last November, Geraldine Ferraro made some headlines by trying to defend Senator Hillary Clinton against accusations that she was playing the gender card by…playing the gender card. I wrote about this back then. In a post dated November 5, 2007, I wrote:
Geraldine Ferraro, former vice presidential candidate in 1984, spoke to the New York Times attempting to defend Hillary against accusations that Hillary’s campaign was “playing the gender card” in responding to the quote politics of pile-on unquote. Judge for yourself how well she did:
“We can’t let them do this in a presidential race,” [Ferraro] said. “They say we’re playing the gender card. We are not. We are not. We have got to stand up. It’s discrimination against her as a candidate because she is a woman.”
Is it just me, or does Ferraro play the woman’s card as she says she’s not? It seems that Hillary isn’t the only member of her campaign who can contradict herself within a two minute time limit. I think this type of verbal feat – taking two opposing positions within two minutes – should be called a “pulling a Hillary”.
Now that Ms. Ferraro is in the news again, this post has started getting some search engine traffic. What I find odd is that since March 11, the post has gotten about 100 hits from Google and other search engines – and of those hundred hits, 8 people have left comments – an unusually high percentage for this blog. Additionally, most of the comments are pro-Hillary – also unusual. None of this would be exceptional if:
a. the blog post were new;
b. the blog post were about Ms. Ferraro’s most recent comments, or comments significantly similar;
c. the blog post discussed race in any way;
d. the comments were not so similar-sounding, and all by women (except one);
e. any of the comments had responded to the post in any manner.
Clearly – none of the commentors read the post they were commenting on. The comments they are referring to were about race. Not a single comment mentions anything about the post – or in fact mentions that the post is over four months old. ((I should also mention that two of the comments were defending Mr. Obama.)) Recently, two sites linked to this post: a commenter on BarackObama.com and MyNewswire.
I don’t know quite what to make of this. Has anyone else noticed anything similar? Does anyone have a plausible explanation for this?
Update: Ten more people “viewed” the post, and I received one more comment. I’m also noticing that two of the commentors – Catherine Fadden and Eileen Lewis – have:
- Requested to “follow” the post; and
- Given fake email addresses – or at least, email addresses for which I am getting this error: “A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error”
That means that my email box is getting errors for every comment posted.