In a campaign of dozens of blunders, perhaps one of the worst occurred this week as the Clintons suggested that the current front-runner for the Democratic nomination ought to consider running as Hillary’s vice-president. This is outrageous—and is clearly implying that when a black man has a lead in the popular vote, in number of states won and in number of total delegates, this is not as important as a white person’s credentials.

There is now an evident pattern in the Clinton camp of trying to use Obama’s African-American heritage against him. Bill Clinton was lambasted by the press for his statements during the South Carolina primary: he tried to paint Obama as the “black candidate” who could only appeal to fellow African-Americans. This was part of the Clinton strategy of trying to pit whites and Hispanics in their own party against black voters.

The racist undertones of the Clinton campaign were made plain this week by Ms. Geraldine Ferraro, who is a member of the Clinton campaign finance committee. She told the Daily Breeze: "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 then went on to use another stale Clinton tactic. The media, she lamented "has been uniquely hard on her [Sen. Clinton]. It's been a very sexist media.” This is a neat trick indeed: be racist while you attack others of being sexist. And blame all the Clinton mistakes on others.

Ms. Ferraro needs to be reminded that the media (and any sound thinking person) dislikes Sen. Clinton not because she is a woman but because she is corrupt, duplicitous and ultimately, vacuous. She would be disliked and under similar scrutiny even if she were a man--as indeed, her husband is despised in many circles for those very same characteristics.

The Clintons are also increasingly disliked among liberals because they are not authentic in their convictions. Their willingness to play the gender card, the Muslim card and the race card whenever it suits their interests is a testament to the fact that, under pressure, they do not stand firm for many of the progressive values of their party.

"It is the sort of comment that we have heard repeatedly, I'm afraid, from some of the Clinton surrogates," said Susan Rice, Obama's foreign policy adviser in reference to Ferraro’s comments and to the tone of Clinton’s campaign. "I think if Sen. Clinton is serious about putting an end to statements that have racial implications, that diminish Barack Obama because he's an African-American man, then she ought to really repudiate this comment and make it clear that there's no place in her campaign for people who will say this kind of thing.”

Sen. Clinton has waged a campaign on the premise that she is more competent than Mr. Obama. In all the tests the candidates have faced throughout the campaign, this is not apparent: Mr. Obama is a better orator, he is at least equal if not occasionally a better debater, he is a far superior fund raiser, he has a better and more extensive organization on the ground and he has a much more diverse voter base. Evidently her “experience” is thin as lettuce and does not translate into tangible results.

The last gambit of the Clintons therefore is to claim that Mr. Obama has less foreign policy experience than Mrs. Clinton. But beyond accompanying her husband and making exaggerated claims about her foreign travels, Mrs. Clinton’s superior foreign policy credentials are practically nonexistent. In light of all the evidence of racist undertones from the Clinton campaign are we to conclude then that this too, is ultimately another racist assault? Is not the implication that a white person’s “contacts”--namely, Bill Clinton in this case--are more effective than a black person’s capabilities? When Sen. McCain touts his foreign policy credentials, this is based in reality. But when Mrs. Clinton does so, it leads us to wonder what she is really saying.

The nonsensical statements emanating from the Clinton campaign regarding Mr. Obama’s foreign policy qualifications were criticized by Sen. John Kerry, who supports Mr. Obama. "The first threshold question about a vice-president is: are you prepared to be president?" said Mr. Kerry this week. "So on the one hand, they are saying he's not prepared to be president. On the other hand, they're saying maybe he ought to be vice-president."

Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota put it succinctly: "It may be the first time in history that the person who is running number two would offer the person running number one the number-two position.”

Unfortunately, for black people, it is not “the first time in history” that they would be subjected to that kind of argument and be forced to sit at the back of the bus. Yet, indeed, Mr. Daschle is correct that among white candidates, it is unprecedented and unthinkable to even suggest second place when one is in the lead.

In Mississippi, Bill Clinton said that his wife and Mr. Obama would be "an almost unstoppable force." He got half of that right: Obama is unstoppable in the Democratic race; Sen. Clinton, on the other hand, has squandered a fortune and a lead which she had in the polls for over a year. She is now in a desperate gambit to remain relevant. She can at least make amends by curbing her inner racist impulses and cleaning up her campaign.

-Grace Vuoto is Executive Director of the Edmund Burke Institute for American Renewal. The opinions expressed are her own.