Geraldine Ferraro, the former vice-presidential candidate of the Democratic party, caused a firestorm by saying: "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." Ms. Ferraro backs Sen. Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House.
Unfortunately, Ms. Ferraro doesn't understand the Democrat politics of victimhood as well as she should. If Obama was a woman of color, the nomination would already be sewn up, because then both blacks AND women would be voting for him (or in this hypothetical case, her).
You see, the politics of victimhood assigns people to one of two groups: Victims and oppressors. Victimhood is cumulative: The more victim groups one belongs to, the greater one's personal victimhood and the greater the merit that accrues to that person (and the amount of restitution that is owed to that person by oppressor groups, and by association, the government).
The big debate within Democrat circles is over which group has the claim to greater victimhood: Blacks or women. If either candidate was a member of both of those groups, there would be no argument, and having won the victimhood sweepstakes, the candidate would sweep to coronation in Denver. But since Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton can only lay claim to one victim group each, the race remains close.
So who are the victims and who are the oppressors?
Blacks, Hispanics, Asians
Speakers of other languages
Muslims, Other non-Western religions, Atheists
* - Note that Jews who support Israel are not considered to be victims and are, instead, oppressors.