Many folks have commented on the disturbing and surreal nature of a former Ku Klux Klan Kleagle interrogating a black woman on her qualifications for Secretary of State. Is this something to cheer about? Yes!
As Robert "KKK" Byrd, and Barbara "Hey, I'm the victim here!" Boxer, and Ted "<brahminaccent>Quagmire! Quagmire!!</brahminaccent>" Kennedy continue to make utter buffoons of themselves (and by association the whole Democratic Party), what hot-button issue is quite explicitly missing in the confirmation proceedings? Racism (not questions about racism, actual racism).
Condoleeza Rice is being attacked for the powerful, capable, brilliant, accomplished person that she is, and more importantly, for the conservative views that she holds.
Completely absent is the treatment of Dr. Rice as a fragile, protected-class, affirmative-action candidate, present only because the advancement of unqualified victims is the American way. Also completely absent is any explicit (or implicit) display of racially motivated hostility or hatred. That Byrd may be a closet racist is immaterial. That there are quite a few more uncloseted racists out there is also immaterial.
The fact of the matter is that Byrd and all the other Dhimmocrats are scared shitless of Dr. Rice's poise, intellect, and most importantly, her political future. What they see seated across from them is not a black woman, but the continuing decline of the Democratic Party. The color of her skin is absolutely, utterly unimportant, and is the last thing on their minds. As it should be.
Isn't this something to be cheered? Isn't the primary goal of a racism-free society one where the system of advancement is essentially a meritocracy?
Here's a quiz. The goal is to guess what color Bob is:
Scenario #1:
"Bob, your numbers are down. You're fired." "Shit."
Scenario #2:
"Bob, your numbers are up. You're our new Vice President!" "Great!"
Kenneth Greenlee
Posted by nopundit at January 26, 2005 11:20 AM