Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

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

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
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
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
St. Geraldine and the PC Dragon
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, March 12, 2008

I think one of the most useful aspects of the Democratic primary, because a black man and a white woman are running, is the debate it is forcing over charging sexism and racism at the drop of a hat.

Complaints made by the right for decades about how everything is twisted into a charge of sexism or racism when convenient are now seeing the light of day among Democrats and the left. It is as if a huge veil is being lifted from their eyes as the accusers of the past are suddenly the accused.

Take Geraldine Ferraro. Accused of making racist comments by claiming Obama wouldn't be where he is if he wasn't black, she responds:
"Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up," Ferraro said. "Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"
Frankly that's hilarious. It's obvious they're attacking her because she's a woman.

But seriously, she hits on the most important point to be made in this dust up. These sorts of counter-attacks have a purpose and that purpose is to silence the critic and end the discussion by citing race (or sex).

It is a tactic the left has used successfully for years. Whether you agree with Ferraro's point or not about why Obama is where he is today, you can't deny that the purpose of pulling the race card is to marginalize her and shut her up. If she can be successfully branded as a racist (or having made a racist comment) then she can be ignored.

And right on cue, Hillary Clinton enables that:
In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton distanced herself from Ferraro's initial remark.

"I do not agree with that," she said. "It is regrettable that any of our supporters on both sides, because we've both had that experience, say things that kind of veer off into the personal. We ought to keep this on the issues."
The politically savvy Ferraro knows what's going on and goes after Obama campaign manager David Axelrod who called Ferraro's comments "part of an "insidious pattern" of remarks from Clinton supporters that have drawn attention to Obama's race":
"He knows damn well that the best thing to do in a situation like this is to come back and hit with race," Ferraro said, adding that the response is a sign that the Obama campaign is "worried" about the first-term senator's lack of experience.
Precisely. Pull the race card and successfully deflect attention from the real point of weakness - experience.

Ferraro then acknowledges the obvious:
Ferraro said she was not trying to diminish Obama's candidacy, and acknowledged up front that she would not have been the vice presidential nominee in 1984 if she had been a man.

But she also echoed remarks of feminist leaders like Gloria Steinem, who argued in the New York Times that Obama would not have succeeded if he were a woman because gender is "the most restricting force in American life."

"Sexism is a bigger problem," Ferraro argued. "It's OK to be sexist in some people's minds. It's not OK to be racist."
To some extent, I agree. In reality, a politician doesn't want to be accused of being either racist or sexist, but in the hierarchy of accusations that hurt, racism is far more powerful than sexism.

That said, the point to be made here is the "racism" and "sexism" chickens have come home to roost with a vengeance during this Democratic primary. And those slapped with it are understanding both the purpose and the result of such tactics. And interestingly they object and object mightily.

Good. Maybe, finally, we can begin to put all this PC nonsense to bed, recognize that not every reference to race or gender involves racism or sexism. Maybe we can actually have debates and discussions about the reality of statements and opinions vs. marginalizing and muting those who may say something we disagree by using false charges.

Maybe.
_________________

Linked by Outside the Beltway and Sister Toldjah - Thanks!
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
I’m enjoying this. I’m quite enjoying holier than thou types like her being tagged as a racist. And I’m enjoying her obvious anger at it.

Because she IS a racist, at least by the ground rules they make everyone else play by.

So let her suffer. I’m not inclined to say anything to defend her and take her off the griddle. Sauce for the goose and all that.

But you all better save these stories. Once we hit the general, you know all of this will be down the memory hole, and the first one to criticize the Dem nominee will be called a racist/sexist at the drop of a hat, probably by the campaign itself.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Everybody sing!

"I’m a racist
"She’s a racist
"Wouldn’t ya like to be a racist, too?

"Be a racist!
"Act like a racist. . . ."

(With apologies to Dr. Pepper. I knew the good doctor, and he was no racist. He was, however, a sexist.)
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
I have yet to see a good defense that a white male could be a serious presidential candidate with Obama’s qualifications. Obama’s arrogant decision to run for president with all of three years in the senate still astounds me.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
"It is a tactic the left has used successfully for years."

And they will continue to do so as long as it is convenient - Truth be damned.

"Maybe, finally, we can begin to put all this PC nonsense to bed, recognize that not every reference to race or gender involves racism or sexism. "

SOrry had to laugh at this one. The left doesnt recognize common sense. They only are about winning at any cost. Look at the reports that have come recently about the right being correct about Hillary and Bill and their tactics. Yet look at the votes she is getting.







 
Written By: retired military
URL: http://
McQ:
Maybe, finally, we can begin to put all this PC nonsense to bed,
You’re kidding, right?

We’ve just seen a 40-year investment by the Left in making the entire past, all of the present, and the future about identity politics.

There’s no way in hell that they will give that up.

As for Obama and race, it was Ferraro’s tone and conclusion that started the uproar. Pundits et al. have been commenting from the beginning about how Obama being black is one of the two most compelling aspects of his candidacy.

The other most compelling aspect of his candidacy is that he is "inspiring." Well, I’ll stipulate that he’s slick, because he doesn’t inspire me with anything but dread, but to each his own, I suppose.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
SOrry had to laugh at this one. The left doesnt recognize common sense. They only are about winning at any cost. Look at the reports that have come recently about the right being correct about Hillary and Bill and their tactics. Yet look at the votes she is getting.
It’s not a question of whether "the Left" will cease to exist as an entity.

The question is, will this peel individuals away from "the Left", weakening it electorally? And since the answer to that is almost certainly "yes", "how many?" and "how much will it matter?" are the next questions.

It probably won’t even affect how many people vote for the Democrats; it’ll affect the party itself, instead. Political parties are not static entities, and the worst thing a political party can do is forget that, as the Democrats have. They’ve been in desperate need to restructure their coalition for most of this century; perhaps this will finally encourage them to do the hard work that entails.
 
Written By: Jeremy Bowers
URL: http://www.jerf.org/iri
Political parties are not static entities, and the worst thing a political party can do is forget that, as the Democrats have. They’ve been in desperate need to restructure their coalition for most of this century; perhaps this will finally encourage them to do the hard work that entails.
Interesting. I tend to agree.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
To some extent, I agree. In reality, a politician doesn’t want to be accused of being either racist or sexist, but in the hierarchy of accusations that hurt, racism is far more powerful than sexism.
Yes, and there is good reason for that: racism can result in slavery and genocide. And, while slavery doesn’t have to be restricted to those of other races, a good argument can be made that slavery correlated with race is the worst kind.

Aside from that, men and women really are significantly different, while race provides only superficial differences (aside from cultural differences which sometimes correlate with race). The women I know appear to feel equal to men in general, yet the vast majority admit to male superiority in some respects. I doubt that I know anyone who isn’t "sexist" in some sense.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
I have yet to see a good defense that a white male could be a serious presidential candidate with Obama’s qualifications. Obama’s arrogant decision to run for president with all of three years in the senate still astounds me.
Umm... didn’t Abraham Lincoln only have two years in the House before making, according to huxley, an arrogant decision to run for prez?

And don’t you think that all of this noise from supposed libertarians about lack of government experience is kind of ironic?

Me, I’m not so sure that its that important. And I’m not alone.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
And don’t you think that all of this noise from supposed libertarians about lack of government experience is kind of ironic?
I must have missed that on the libertarian test - where was it asked whether or not preferring someone with experience over someone no experience was non-libertarian?

Heh ... I know what you’re driving at, but no, it isn’t at all "ironic" nor is it out of school for a libertarian to be asking for experience as a prerequisite to taking a job which has, over the years, pretty well demanded it. Sometimes, depending on the situation and the person, experience is perferred.
And I’m not alone.
You’re never alone as long as you have a pint in your hand, sir.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
...and the chickens of identity politics come home to roost. Between this and the Spitzer deal, the news has suddenly become very entertaining, I must say.
 
Written By: rob
URL: http://
Pogue — It’s true that Lincoln had only two years in the Senate (not the House) before his successful run for President in 1860. However, before that he had a long and distinguished career — four terms in the Illinois House of Representatives, one term in the US House of Representatives, 23 years as a one of the most respected lawyers in Illinois, a prominent voice opposing slavery, and a founder of the Republican party.

This is a rather dazzling array of credentials. Obama is nowhere near Lincoln’s league, though his supporters continue to make the spurious comparison.

I don’t necessarily require government experience, but since that’s the job, direct experience is useful. I also want to know a candidate has demonstrated that he or she is extraordinary in some respect other than giving speeches.

Obama is an undistinguished junior senator with a background as a political organizer in Chicago and that’s about it. I consider his candidacy close to shameful.

For the record, I define myself as a classic liberal, not a libertarian.

 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://

 
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.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider