Ruben Navarrette Jr. has written a column today entitled:
Liberals don't know what to do with nondeferential minorities.
He has recently taken to categorizing all Democratic efforts to block minority appointments by President Bush as actions of subtle racism rather than what they truely are: Opposition to Alberto Gonzales concerning torture memos, opposition to Janice Rogers Brown concerning her poor decisions on the bench in California.
As Democrats we hold certain values and convictions that call us to oppose torture and poor interpretation of the law no matter if its the actions of a white, brown, orange, or purple American. We are all senstitive to race issues, and recent diaries on dKos have begun to allow members of this forum to discuss where we stand with minority outreach. I think Ruben is trying to grab to moderate ground in this coulmn with his tone, but it falls off mark and leaves a real sour taste afterwards. I'm a fire-breather when it comes to party politcs myself, but issues of life and religion and race cause me to take great reflection and cringe at heated discourse that would seek to tear us apart as Americans. My feelings concerning the war are of particular nuances due to friends in the military. Give a read at
Never Apathetic.
What follows is my response to Mr. Navarrette's column which I sent by email this morning.
Mr. Navarrette,
I found your column today upsetting. I respectfully disagree with your analysis of liberal Democrats and their feelings concerning race. I am a self-described "liberal Democrat" and your column does not reflect my character in the least.
I return to my question: How does this coulmn help America? You have drawn narrow conclusions about a group of Americans that you needed to stereotype in order to make your claims fit. You provide no insight from such Americans except two quotes. The first from Sen. Boxer provides no oxygen to your fire: Many see Judge Brown's decisions (her actions on the bench, not her ideology or her life story) as detrimental to the fair progression of American society, particularly in California. You may disagree, but don't demonize the opinions of those that disagree with you; it does little for the heated discourse in this country.
Second you have quoted the DNC chair, Howard Dean. Again, like the rest of the established news media you have taken to quoting Gov. Dean out of context. I understand the press does not like him, too bad. Gov. Dean was again generalizing the Republican LEADERSHIP to a Democratic audience. The fact is that despite the President's great accomplishments in appointing minorities to prominant roles in our government, the Republican Party establishment remains monolithic and heavily controlled by white evangelical members following their support that resulted in President Bush's victory in November. Janice Rogers Brown is a federal judge and is not included in the Republican party leadership; that is not her place as an independant member of the judiciary. If Judge Brown or yourself feels offended when Gov. Dean refers to white christians running the RNC, than perhaps we have larger issues to dicuss about the roles of "independant" federal judges in party politics.
All Americans need to work on race issues in this country, Republicans and Democrats. These issues will not be solved by seeing who can sling more mud. Perhaps for your next column you can choose to leave your office and talk with members of each party about their feelings concerning race issues and party politics. I know you have a "hunch" but there is nothing better than an engaging conversation to generate material for a great column.
Sincerely,
Brian Wasik
Bloomington, IN