In one of the many contentious comment strings in the last few days I wrote:
"Looks like we're going to be dealing with race and gender for the next 10 months. So good!"
But after further thought I now believe I was wrong. This has gotten so out of control so easily, so quickly, I'm getting a bad feeling about this.
Our mission is to elect a Democratic president, the best Democrat we can put in the WH, in order to stop digging the hole we've been digging since Reagan. And start filling it in. That's everything. There are no moral victories left, no margin for error whatsoever. We can't afford the next president of the United States to be a Republican. The world can't afford it.
From Saturday's WP "U.S. Political Drama Compels and Baffles" http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
But much of the enthusiasm comes from anticipation of President Bush's departure... the election has created high expectations that the new president will be more in tune with the rest of the world.
Any Republican keeps digging the hole.
Up till now I was very optimistic that no matter which of our excellent candidates we put up we would take the day in November. Now I'm worried. No, given the consequences, fucking horrified.
Racism, sexism, double standards, anger, talking past each other, over each other around each other. Hundreds of bitter comments about phrases like "shuck and jive."
"...calling Bill or Hillary Clinton racist, or implying such, from these remarks by Andrew Cuomo alone is idiotic...
"Do you feel so priviliged that you get to determine what is and isn't racist?"
"Obama supporters are mad... lob(bing) racist and sexist smears... unadulterated petulance."
"Slick Willie went around calling Obama a liar."
"If you Obama folks are at all indicative and reflective of your candidate, he's not ready for global leadership."
Disagreement, insults, tribalism...
"...ignore anti semitism as pushy Jews being over sensitive why should I give a rats ass about what Mario Cuomo's kid said?..."
"There's plenty of quiet racism within the Democratic Party. The defensive tone of so many comments in the "shuck and jive" reaction diaries makes that pretty clear... I could imagine a politician using a phrase like that intentionally, just to encourage the doubts many reasonable people have about whether America will elect a black man."
Uh huh. Doubts as to whether we would elect a black man, doubts as to whether we would survive it. Many doubts as to whether any of the change we need would get done. Or would we be fighting over the language of every speech given by and against the president?
I've seen a lot of contentious shit on this site. But the stuff about gender and race always gets wierd. Pie fights anybody?
But this is different because the stakes are so high. If DK is a microcosm of our society as a whole - and I think of it as just a more progressive, better educated microcosm - and this happens here? Then what can we expect from the country as a whole? From the media that loves controversy? From the Republicans who will do or say anything to foment disorder and chaos, if it works for them?
Am I saying don't support Obama? No, I couldn't in good conscience say that. I could never advocate giving up a cause because others are so immature, ignorant, stubborn and bloodyminded that they will do anything to derail that cause.
Moreover, it's a just cause to elect an African American as president. However, I must point out that we only have 1 African American senator (1%) and 1 African American governor (2%) in this country. So it raises the question in my mind: what exactly makes anybody think that we're ready as a country to leapfrog past achieving proportional representation in government right to the White House?
And don't take any joy in this HRC supporters. How many women Senators do we have? 16, most we've ever had! It's great! Progress. Only 34 to go to get to 50/50 which would most likely still not give women the representation they deserve. Governors? 9 chief executives of our 50 states (18%).
These are terrible numbers for 2008 in America. The only good news is that they've never been better.
Just to shoot the shit and be fair, how many Jews (my group, well half of my group, the other half is Italian) do you think there are in these high offices? Actually it's hard to know for sure because all we have to go on for a quick survey is a picture and a name. I think we can rule out Haley Barbour. I count 2 Jewish Governors (Spitzer and Rendell). Wow, what an amazingly white, Christian, male bunch of people our governors are!
We fare better in the Senate - quick survey says 11-12, give or take, and don't you know 2 of them are women so there's overlap. Quick show of hands - how many of us believe that Joe Lieberman was a contributing factor to Al Gore's failure to ascend to the WH in 2000 (notice I didn't say lose so don't jump on me)? My hand is raised. Actually, aren't we all kind of skeeved out that we supported him at all back then? Not because he was Jewish of course. Because he's a creepy undemocratic scumbag neocon. But in 2000 I know that certain people in certain places were able to disparage the Democratic ticket just by saying "Gore/LIE-BER-MAN." Get it? The Dems' Veep candidate is good with money, beholden to Israel and has horns. Enough said.
In short, we Americans live in maybe the stupidest country on Earth. On DK we represent the creme de la creme of thinking in this country, a people powered progressive think tank, and I am afraid to say, we are idiots too.
We have to keep in mind that there are two separate issues inherent in this debate: 1. who can we realistically elect in America in 2008? and 2. can they then achieve the change we need?
I hear people on TV say that they're excited because electing these individuals will "shatter" the status quo and steroetypes. They ask "who could bring more fundamental change than an African American or a woman?" Maybe, it does kind of depend on who the AA or woman is. Even if we stipulate that the people in this instance both are committed to fundamental change (and that should be good for 500 comments alone!) I foresee a result in which these people will, even if elected, run up against a brick wall of intransigence. Maybe the only change will be that little boys and girls will see that a black man or white woman can now be president. That's good. But it's not what we need in this country now. The powers that be will give us that change. That doesn't cost them anything. That's when the "change wars" start, and maybe end, far short of where we need to be.
So my question is even if we're ready to elect a president that isn't a white Christian male, is it the best thing for the country right now, in 2008? After the 8 Bush years of blunder and plunder?
If we are still plagued by racism in this country and consequently still have people who will cry "racism" at every act or phrase that raises their hackles (I sure hope hackles doesn't have a racist undertone); if we still have sexism here, and concommitantly have voices who see sexism everywhere; if we're still going to have double standards about who can cry in public, or who can say certain words or phrases, or who can wear white after labor day or whatever... then are we ready?
Are we? I'm not sure we are.
I'm almost certain we're not ready for a fight between an African American and a woman. The "Brotherhood" vs. the "Sisterhood" fight for the nomination could be a disaster for us as a nation.
If your cause is to get a black man elected president you've missed the big picture.
If your cause is to get a woman elected president you've missed the big picture.
If on November 5, 2008 a Republican is headed to the WH, we will be kicking ourselves over our mistaken, wrongheaded and frivolous choice of a candidate. And we, and the world, can't afford that.
Update It's only going to get worse.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...
I am amazed that commenters could read this and then go right out and say that their guy/gal didn't start it, the other guy/gal did. We are indeed a bunch of idiots and we're going to get this election wrong.