Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Hoist by their own Dogwhistle
Posted by: Jon Henke on Sunday, February 17, 2008

For the past few months, Democrats have been throwing accusations of racism and sexism back and forth between the Hillary and Obama camps, with pundits eagerly jumping in to accuse their opponents of using code words and subtle signals to exploit the racism and misogyny of....well, I guess Democratic primary voters. The latest example is Obama's innocuous statement that "I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she's feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal." The fight is breaking out all over.

After years of Democrats leveling these kinds of absurdly paranoid charges against Republicans - see Paul Krugman and Bob Herbert, among others - I'm almost enjoying watching them reap the paranoia that they have sown for so many years. I'm almost gleeful at the new Krugman position that it's unreasonable "the way pundits and some news organizations treat any action or statement by the Clintons, no matter how innocuous, as proof of evil intent" after he's spent so much time doing precisely the same thing to Reagan.


It would be better if they simply stopped using race-baiting and paranoia to score political points. In the meantime, I'm enjoying the spectacle of Democrats tripping on their own culture.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

I confess I’m more than a bit mystified over the various contretemps between the Clintons and Obama. I’m not fond of the Clintons but the way the race suddenly tipped over because of the Clintons’ apparently major dissing of Obama followed by Obama’s holier-than-thou replies seems weird to me.

Don’t Democrats have more substantive ways of choosing their nominees? At least the conservatives who are unhappy with McCain are unhappy with what McCain has done, not the subtleties of how he said things.
Written By: huxley
URL: http://

No, they never have.

It’s like I told someone else, this morning; Race and Gender baiting and the politics of separation cannot be separated from the Democrats.

A look at the ’superdelegate’ issue, is an example. That whole thing is an exersize in the Democrats trying desperately to separate themselves from the Clintons. Given their usual stands for gender feminism, and for race baiting, they can’t do it by normal means. Usually, this wouldn’t be a problem, were it not for the desperate need to keep Hillary Clinton ourt of the nomination.

I said;
They find themselves looking at a nomination process, which was altered several years ago to keep Jesse Jackson out of the nomination, now being used by Hillary Clinton to take the nomination. Ironically, what we have is Democrats railing against the system doing precisely what it was designed to do, that is; keep the black man out of the presidency. Jesse Jackson, when it was originally designed, and Barrack Obama today.

Now, the Democrats are not responding to this situation, because of some perceived inequality. Certainly, equal rights in the voting process has been their mantra, but their actions tell a different story. If enabling the voter to effect real change was what they were about, they never would have installed thismonstrosity of a system, back when Jesse Jackson was the problem. And they’ve not changed it since. But now Hillary Clinton is the problem, and they have been forced to move. Not for the stated reasons of equality and voting, but to solve the problem of Hillary Clinton and the nomination. And they’re going to be forced to change the rules in midsteam, with all the party unrest such rule changes would imply.

(Chew on that one for a bit, and then tell me again how the left is where the best path for the minority is.)

...What we’re seeing here is an oncoming battle for the soul of the Democrat party; Who will win? The Gender huckters or the race hucksters? Something to think about the next time we hear Democrats complaining about the politics of division by race and gender.

Written By: Bithead
If Hillary gets the nomination through the superdelegates instead of popular vote can we start saying "selected not elected"

Written By: retired military
URL: http://
Excellent, RM.

Written By: Bithead

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks