If a group of students on the campus of Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey were to protest against a commencement address by a black, female former Secretary of State & National Security Advisor who happened to be a Democrat, how long do you think it would have been before M.S.N.B.C. & The New York Times cried, "Racism! Sexism! Once again we see the racist, sexist ghosts in the right-wing machine!" So why is it, since the protests were against a black, female former Secretary of State & National Security Advisor who happened to be a Republican, that we aren't seeing M.S.N.B.C. & The New York Times cry, "Racism! Sexism! Once again, we see the racist, sexist ghosts in the left-wing machine!"? It would be libelous to besmirch even the filthy name of yellow journalism with this parade of double standards & naked partisanship. For shame!
The Rebel Black Dot Song of the Day
The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, "Sister Mary" from Pin Points and Gin Joints (T.L.A.M.)
Commentary:
"Can you remember the school in the slums?
Can you hear the trombone, the guitar, and the drums?
Sure you remember, and you know which one,
You went to the one, my son, that's run by the nun…"
2 comments:
Obviously, such topics are controversial, but am I the only one who is offended by everyone's gut reaction to claiming something is sexist or racist simply because it involves one's color or gender? Isn't that in itself sexist or racist? Why is that okay for those journalists to claim those are the intentions, and the protestors aren't allowed to simply protest someone based on... ya know, her as person.
That's the substance of my point Steeze. Nobody is claiming the Rutgers protesters are racists or sexists; they say they object to former Secretary Rice's service in the Bush administration &, absent contrary evidence, that claim is taken at face value. This is right & proper. But when criticism is leveled at former Secretary Clinton, those critics are immediately slandered & libeled as sexists; they are never given the benefit of the doubt, their stated objections to Mrs. Clinton are never taken at face value. When criticism is leveled at President Obama, those critics are immediately slandered & libeled as racists; they are never given the benefit or the doubt, their stated objections to Mr. Obama are never taken at face value. This is the very double standard to which I am objecting.
As to why those on the left are so swift to see racism & sexism on the right, while never acknowledging its prevalence amongst their own ranks, that is a subject that literally fills several books. The short answer is that the modern left is deeply intolerant & anti-democratic. Instead of debating with their fellow citizens who dare to disagree with the left's policy proscriptions, the left prefers to delegitimize through smears & insults. It is classic ad hominem argumentation; if you cannot beat the proposition, attack the man voicing it.
Post a Comment