This election season has become a cauldron of finger pointing, sssshhhhing and ppllleeeaaassee don’t say that. If you chose the candidate with more experience and ideals that mirror your own, you are now considered to be racist. Entire states have been labeled racist and therefore not needed. Just citing electability, can bring forth screams of racism. In a Nation article, Richard Kim writes:
In order to convince superdelegates to buck the will of the majority of Democratic primary voters, Hillary Clinton is arguing that she’s the more “electable” candidate, and some of her surrogates are suggesting that Obama is not “electable” against John McCain. But just what is it about Hillary that makes her more “electable” than Barack? From reading the Clinton campaign’s material, you’d never know it has anything to do with her race. Instead, they talk in euphemisms and codes. In a memo titled “HRC Strongest Against McCain,” Clinton strategist Harold Ickes points to her superior polling in “swing states” and among “swing voting blocs” like “Catholics,” as well as Obama’s rising “unfavorables.” Departed advisor Mark Penn has said that the working class is “a critical vote” that superdelegates should consider because “these are voters who in the past have gone either way in the general election.
Kim argues that there are code words in the memo and that Hillary is stating white racists will vote for her. He also wonders in this article if she should denounce these voters and if these groups decided to stay true to the democratic party would they be suddenly enlightened? Amd should Barack Obama cast them aside as well.
Now let me get this straight, “swing voting blocs,” “Catholics,” and “working class” are now code words for white racists. Get your pencils out and write these words down, we do not want to be politically incorrect.
In yet another statement, Hillary Clinton uttered two words, “white voters” and the media gasped in stunned amazement. However, in a recent LA Times article Obama was said to be targeting African American Voters and not one word was uttered regarding his choice to target this demographic. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-blackvote23-2008jun23,0,7490838.story)
If a WASP minister uttered the words, “We are Christians who are unashamedly white” would he/she be allowed to continue his/her ministry?
Is it okay for Obama to target black voters and an abomination for Hillary Clinton to utter the words “white voters”. If I say that I voted and I am white, am I politically incorrect? Or am I only politically correct if I vote for Obama? This is getting terribly confusing. Should I just stay home and make it easier on everyone?
Can we as a people be open minded enough to know that if I consider you to be my friend and my equal in every way, I should not be forced to monitor everything I say. If I have to guard my every word to insure nothing can be construed as negative, will I shy away from being around you, thus ending the friendship?
And most of all, if you say something to me that is in no way harmful, my saying the same to you should not be construed as harfmul either. Just try to play it in reverse.
2 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Kirafa's Revolt 
Excellent post.
Comment by nomobama June 26, 2008 @ 6:30 amI’d be willing to bet that 92% of the 92% of AA who voted for Obama know Bill and Hillary are as far from racist as any white person can be. I’ll bet Richard Kim knows it too. He needs to climb back under his rock.
Comment by GAgal July 6, 2008 @ 9:14 pmGreat post!