I was about to sign off for the night but I took one more peek at the blogosphere and ran across this great post from Jerome Armstrong on MYDD: “The regular offense.”
Jerome comments on Michael Kinsley’s recent WaPo OP/ED: “Offense Taken” and he says:
While I’ve watched other progressive bloggers out there cry wolf and use the race card, and dealt with the accusations of racism here through banning, its made me wonder, where is this going?
I could have never imagined a couple of years ago, that the 2008 Democratic primary would become so fractured over accusations of racism. Not today’s Democratic Party. Maybe it’s some sort of karmic due date for the sins of its past, like the 1876 deal between Hayes and southern democrats that ended reconstructions federal presence in the south and re-began black suppression in those states. I don’t know, but whatever it is, the accusation has become entrenched in the narrative. And campaigns as they are, once a tactic becomes a well-worn path, it becomes nearly impossible to change the direction.
Of course it cuts the other way as well, which Kinsley has to say, but the charges of sexism have been directed toward the media much more than within, while the accusation of racism have seemed to cut deep into the psyche of the Democratic Party. I would point back to condescending remark framed in electability that said ‘her voters will vote for me but mine will not vote for her’ as the moment of crystallization, both as a signal to his, and a dismissal of hers [and as pointed out in the comments, this, in context, arguably, wasn’t meant to divide, but thats obviously how its been integrated into the narrative of the campaign– on both sides. Fairly taken as condescending to hers and a signal by his]. It’s done nothing but harden since.
Well, since silence isn’t an option, why don’t the accusers seem to understand how much resentment they are building up within the ranks the Democratic Party? I’m sure someone will take offense of this as some sort of counter-accusation, but it’s not that, I think its easy enough to see through the accusations, as they play out in the net, as a tactic being used mostly by upper-class, mostly white, persons as a means of support through attack. I have more general concerns.
If successful for the nomination, how on earth can the accusers be expected to handle themselves in a GE, where voters are even less liberal, less tolerant of the phony racist callouts (or have grown so tired of the wolf calls that the real thing is ignored), and even more likely to resent it come the election?
Points well taken from Jerome. Read it all here.