Michelle, Heinz-Kerry, and the "Underdog"

Teresa Heinz-Kerry is joining Michelle Obama on the stump in Pennsylvania:
Teresa Heinz Kerry joined Michelle Obama at a rally at Carnegie Mellon University today, saying she hoped the state would support Obama the way it had voted for both of her husbands.

“Pennsylvania voted for both of these good men,” she said, referring to the late John Heinz, a former Republican senator in the state, and Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 presidential candidate. “And this election, I hope Pennsylvania will join me in casting a ballot for another great and good man, Sen. Barack Obama.”
They're both human gaffe machines, so you might as well keep them together. What really stuck out to me in that article, though, was this passage:
“We are gonna need Pennsylvania,” [Michelle Obama] said. “Because in this ever-shifting, moving bar, Barack Obama will always be the underdog. No matter how much money he raises, no matter how many wins he pulls together, no matter how many delegates he accumulates; he is still the underdog. It’s the way it works.”
Huh? So what disadvantage does she think that he has, that after winning more states, more delegates, and raising more money, he is still the underdog? We already know that Mrs. Obama sees the United States as being a "downright mean country" and violent toward to people of color. Is she claiming here that Obama is (and, presumably, always will be) the underdog because he is black?

No comments: