Ferraro was an early supporter of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and earlier this week she made the following statement to a newspaper reporter in in Torrance, California about Clinton’s opponent, Senator Barack Obama.

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. 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.”

Let’s see if we have this right. The "concept" is, that it is an advantage to be a black man running for national office. And it appears that carrying the name Barack Hussein Obama, rhymes with Osama, is the equivalent to having the key to the Oval Office.

Ferraro has since resigned her position as a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Clinton. However she remains unapologetic and claims the Obama campaign is painting her out to be a racist.

At his core, Barack Obama is a brilliant, motivating, articulate agent for change with a dynamic ability to work a crowd. Whether you agree with him or not, he has a well-reasoned platform that appeals to millions. Ferraro seems to be forgetting two white men who had the same precise qualities.

Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton.

So, what might Ferraro be suggesting? There can only be two answers. One is that Obama has managed to coalesce the African American community into a dynamic effective voting juggernaut. Well, that’s true. In most states, Obama is winning between 65% and 88% of the black vote. But as of the last census in 2000, African Americans only made up 12.3% of the U.S. population. Hillary Clinton has an equally strong constituency among Latinos, 12.5% of the population, so this is a ridiculous argument.

It seems likely that Ferraro, 24 years after her electoral debacle, is harboring latent resentment that a woman is again on the verge of losing the opportunity for high office. Yet, by any reasonably objective standard, Hillary Clinton has done remarkably well.

The odd twist to all of this is that the arguments Ferraro is making about Obama, actually work better when applied to Clinton. No one can argue that her name recognition and national stature haven’t been dramatically enhanced via marriage. For those non-believers lets toss out a few other names. Murray, Boxer, Feinstein, McCaskill, Landrieu, Cantwell, Hutchison, Collins, Dole and Snow. They are all women currently serving in the Senate.

All of them have vastly more actual on-the-job experience than Senator Clinton, but none of them are nearly as electable on a national level. So, who’s the lucky one?