Tuesday, January 29, 2008

the race and gender card

For decades now in the card game of politics, the democrats have consistently played two cards against the republicans. Female leaders who were democrats accused republicans of being male chauvinists who wanted to perpetuate a male dominated society. This tactic was a favorite of the National Organization for Women (NOW). This also helped democrats get the woman vote.

Black leaders who were democrats accused republicans of being racist. This tactic was a favorite of Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and other fringe NAACP leaders. It helped democrats get the black vote. But this year something interesting has happened. The true colors of these kinds of tactics have been revealed for what they are. The democrats are now turning these tactics against themselves as they try to launch their candidate through the primaries. It's interesting to watch democrats try to out "accuse" each other with the potential of either a white woman or a black man as their next candidate.

A week ago, Bill Clinton started firing away at Barak Obama. Many in the black community started to turn on their favorite Arkansas "son of the south." In their view, he got dangerously close to making race the issue. It upset so many democrats, that even those in the far, far left (Ted Kennedy) decided to support Obama instead of Clinton. For democrats, being too hard on a black candidate seems too close to racism for them, even if it comes from "the first black president" Bill Clinton.

Then the women took their turn at the accusation table. Because Kennedy endorsed Barak Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, the NOW called Kennedy a sexist. Wow, if the National Organization for Women is willing to call one of the most liberal politicians in America a "male chauvinists sexist" then the rest of us don't have a chance. And why did they accuse him of this? Did Kennedy say something hurtful toward women? No. Does he have a record of being against women? No. Just the opposite. So why did he get this accusation leveled at him?

The only reason he was accused of being a sexist is because he said he was going to vote for Barak instead of Hillary. SURE, he MUST be a sexist. It can't be because he actually thinks Barak will do a better job. The only POSSIBLE explanation for Kennedy wanting to back Obama is because Obama is a dude. What????

This just shows how ridiculous it can get when the dems play the gender and race card. When they used those cards against republicans, people assumed it was true. But now that they are accusing each other, the jig is up. It's obvious to everyone that these democrats pick and choose who they accuse based on who they like and dislike, not based on social justice. They sling around accusations about gender and race because they think it will get their candidate more votes. The problem is that many leaders in the NAACP and the NOW are still living in the '60's, whereas the rest of America has grown up.

Yes, race and gender are still a legitimate issue SOMETIMES. But these days, you need some hard evidence before you throw out the race or gender card. They used to be trump cards in the hands of the democrats, but now they are just "over-used false accusations" that do more harm than good.

Democratic voters are now in a pickle, especially if they are white and male. If you are a white, male democrat this election cycle, you are screwed. If you vote for Obama, the NOW will call you a sexist. If you vote for Clinton, the NAACP will call you a racist. If you vote for Edwards, someone should call you a doctor so you can get your head checked. Either way, you are screwed.


Post a Comment

<< Home