The Neville Awards
Home | The Liberals' Corner | Hypocrisy Watch | Recommended Media | The Butcher's Bill |
Obama's Daily March To Socialism & Surrender | The Obama Gallery | Videos

The Race/Gender Card and the Great Liberal Coalition Crackup

By The Neville Awards
Posted January 17, 2008
Updated March 7, 2008

For forty years the game was played like this:

A conservative makes a legitimate criticism of a minority, Hispanic, feminist, gay etc. The immediate reaction among the race hustlers (Sharpton, Jackson), among the feminists (Steinem, Hillary), among Hispanics (La Raza, MeCha) was, instead of actually having a conversation, was to loudly feign indignation (the sound and photo-op), brand the conservative a racist or a fascist and pettifog the issue. This effectively shut down all discourse and left the issue in a politically correct stasis.

This tactic was enabled by a biased media in the tank for the left and the democrats. The most recent example of this was the Duke rape case. Everyone, from the media, to the DA, to the Duke faculty, to the NY intelligentsia convicted the coach and the students in the court of public opinion prior to any trial. On the surface, the case fit the liberal criteria: evil white students oppressing the poor helpless black girl. Of course, when the case fell apart everyone crawled back under their liberal rocks never to be heard from again. No apologies, no shame.

Consider this excerpt from the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page:

Democrats never miss an opportunity to play the race card against Republicans and even black conservatives like Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas who dare to dissent from liberal orthodoxy. So it's tempting to enjoy the political entertainment value of a race-based dust up between Senators Clinton and Obama.

But there's also a cautionary tale here in how identity politics can come back to bite. The left's color-by-numbers approach to attracting votes has essentially painted the Democrats into a corner, making it very difficult for them to prevail in national elections without winning nearly every black vote. The result is the very antithesis of what King fought for-an over-reliance on blunt racial appeals instead of issues and ideas.

Read the entire article

...or this excerpt from the Charles Krauthammer article 'Black Dreams, White Liberals':

The analogy Clinton was implying was obvious: I'm Lyndon Johnson, unlovely doer; he's Martin Luther King, charismatic dreamer. Vote for me if you want results.

Forty years ago, that arrangement -- white president enacting African-American dreams -- was necessary because discrimination denied blacks their own autonomous political options. Today, that arrangement -- white liberals acting as tribune for blacks in return for their political loyalty -- is a demeaning anachronism. That's what the fury at Hillary was all about, although no one was willing to say so explicitly.

The King-Johnson analogy is dead because the times are radically different. Today an African-American can be in a position to wield the emancipation pen -- and everything else that goes along with the presidency: from making foreign policy to renting out the Lincoln Bedroom (if one is so inclined). Why should African-American dreams still have to go through white liberals?

Clinton is no doubt shocked that a simple argument about experience versus inspiration becomes the basis for a charge of racial insensitivity. She is surprised that the very use of "fairy tale" in reference to Obama's position on Iraq is taken as a sign of insensitivity, or that any reference to his self-confessed teenage drug use is immediately given racial overtones.

But where, I ask you, do such studied and/or sincere expressions of racial offense come from? From a decades-long campaign of enforced political correctness by an alliance of white liberals and the black civil rights establishment intended to delegitimize and marginalize as racist any criticism of their post-civil rights-era agenda.

Read the entire article

As long as the Democrats ran white guys for president the coalition held together with the party doling out a few goodies to the minorities…the occasional win in the House or the Senate. But the structure held as long as the status quo was maintained.

Well, along comes Barack Obama and Hillary and the fissures in the Democratic Party are now wide open. The benevolent white candidate (Bill and Hillary) made some comments about Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement, and Obama's lack of scrutiny by the press on his war record being a "fairy tale" and the racist/fascist label is now being aimed squarely at them. Billary is shell-shocked and he/she doesn't know how to handle it. They spent their entire political lives posing as the tolerant sensitive "I feel your pain" liberal. The system that they and the PC police set up over the last forty years is coming back to bite them in the butt.

"Sez" (God help us!) Maureen Dowd from her NY Times article 'Duel of Historical Guilts ':

Some women in their 30s, 40s and early-50s who favor Barack Obama have a phrase to describe what they don't like about Hillary Clinton: Shoulder-pad feminism.

They feel that women have moved past that men-are-pigs, woe-is-me, sisters-must-stick-together, pantsuits-are-powerful era that Hillary's campaign has lately revived with a vengeance.

And they don't like Gloria Steinem and other old-school feminists trying to impose gender discipline and a call to order on the sisters.

As a woman I know put it: "Hillary doesn't make it look like fun to be a woman. And her 'I-have-been-victimized' campaign is depressing."

"For those of us that are part of 'a woman need not apply' generation that goes back to the time I went out to get my first job following college and a year of graduate work, this is an extraordinarily critical race," the senator said.

With Obama saying the hour is upon us to elect a black man and Hillary saying the hour is upon us to elect a woman, the Democratic primary has become the ultimate nightmare of liberal identity politics. All the victimizations go tripping over each other and colliding, a competition of historical guilts.

People will have to choose which of America's sins are greater, and which stain will have to be removed first. Is misogyny worse than racism, or is racism worse than misogyny?

As Ali Gallagher, a white Hillary volunteer in Austin told The Washington Post's Krissah Williams: "A friend of mine, a black man, said to me, 'My ancestors came to this country in chains; I'm voting for Barack.' I told him, 'Well, my sisters came here in chains and on their periods; I'm voting for Hillary.' "

And meanwhile, the conventional white man sits on the Republican side and enjoys the spectacle of the Democrats' identity pileup and victim lock.

Consider the sad, pathetic case of Chris Matthews. The "tolerant and free thinking" entitlement, diversity and pro-victim crowd, most recently, has skewered the liberal "Hardball" yakker.

During a guest appearance on Joe Scarborough's MSNBC show "Morning Joe", after the New Hampshire presidential primary -- in which Clinton prevailed over Democratic competitor Sen. Barack Obama -- Matthews made a comment that the victim establishment interpreted as attributing Clinton's political success to her husband's infidelity.

"I think the Hillary appeal has always been about the mix of toughness and sympathy. Let's not forget, and I'll be brutal, the reason she's a US Senator, the reason she's a candidate for President, the reason she may be a front runner, is that her husband messed around...That's how she got to be a Senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win it on her merit, she won because everybody felt, 'My God, this woman stood up under humiliation,' right? That's what happened. That's how it happened. In 1998, she went to NY and campaigned for Chuck Schumer as almost like the grieving widow of absurdity, and she did it so well and courageously. But it was about the humilation of Bill Clinton." Matthews said.

Oh the humanity!!! Get out the violins. Begin the self-flagellation, rending of clothes and tearing of hair. In the following days, the ususal suspects including the National Organization for Women and the National Women's Political Caucus decided to speak out, saying that the statement was the latest in what they believe to be a string of sexist comments Matthews has made about the Clinton candidacy and other female politicians.

"There was a movement building with all of our groups about the way that Chris Matthews has been treating Hillary Clinton," said Claire Giessen, executive director of the National Women's Political caucus, one of the four groups to sign the letter that was sent to Steve Capus, president of NBC News.

"We'd been writing about [Matthews] as far back as last March in regard to his sexist comments about female politicians," said Kim Gandy, president of NOW. "Finally it came to a head in the days leading up to New Hampshire and then afterward."

Of course, these same "womens groups" never condemned Bill Clinton for his behavior towards Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky, both employees, or for sexual harassment against Katherine Wiley, or sexual assault against Juanita Broderick...Bill was their guy. And, of course, no mention of the treatment of Muslim women worldwide...hypocrites all.

On "Hardball" Matthews pulled an Imus and, bowing to pressure, blubbered for four and one half minutes admitting that what he said wasn't right and emphasized his "good heart." He also emphasized how proud he was that his show and his commentary remain both "blunt" and "tough."

"Was it fair to imply that Hillary's whole career depended on being a victim of an unfaithful husband? No," continued Matthews. "And that's what it sounded like I was saying, and it hurt people who I'd like to think normally like what I say; in fact, like me."

"If I'd said that the only reason John McCain has come so far is that he got shot down over North Vietnam and captured by the enemy, I'd be brutally ignoring the courage and guts he showed in bearing up under his captivity," said Matthews. "Saying Sen. Clinton got where she is simply because her husband did what he did to her is just as callous, and, I can see now, came across just as nasty -- worse yet, just as dismissive."

What a profile in courage. He's truly throwing the high hard ones now. Hardball indeed.

In truth the only reason Hillary is the front-runner is because she was married to a president and she is a women (last time we checked). And Barack is a factor because he is black and he gives a good speech. If these two were a couple of garden variety white libs no one would care.

This is fascism pure and simple. If you don't like what is being said shut it down and get the perp fired. Barring that make the perp genuflect and beg endlessly for forgiveness before you allow him back in to the temple. It's been happening for too long….we at the Neville Awards say enough!!

Matthews should have stood his ground and stood by his comments. He is a liberal wussy-boy, girly-man. After several weeks of tinkling all over Barack after his Iowa victory he probably realizes that Hillary will still get the nomination. Better make sure he still has access and hedges those bets.

This politically correct tyranny would be broken if someone, anyone, right or left, with a pair of cojones would simply say to the victocrat industry, "No, I'm not going to apologize. Screw you, sue me, picket me, boycott me. Bring on NOW , AL, Jesse and every other Victocrat loser identity group. I don't care...we'll let the marketplace decide."

Live by the identity politics smear tactic, die by the identity politics smear tactic. It is obvious that the liberal coalition was always a mile wide but an inch deep. It didn't take much to shake it up.

What we are witnessing is, finally and hopefully, the beginning of the end of the Great Society coalition and all of the corruption that goes with it. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will become bit players, reduced to playing N-word wack-a-mole. If a woman or a black is elected to the highest office in the land minorities can no longer say that nothing has changed in forty years.

The only caveat, for now, is that the minority candidate will still have to be the right kind of minority, i.e., a liberal. Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice and Justice Thomas are black and to the right of the liberal elites and have paid the price by having the worst kind of racist vitriol hurled at them. Joe Lieberman, right on the war but liberal on almost everything else, was drummed out of the Democrat Party to a chorus of anti-semitic rhetoric. Michael Steele ran for the Senate in Maryland and was called an Uncle Tom by his liberal black opponent.

The dirty little secret in the media is that it is the left that is racist, fascistic and intolerant. Conservative speakers invited to campus are routinely shouted down or prevented from appearing by radical leftist groups aided by a sympathetic administration.

That too will change as the crackup continues.

Consider these racist gems from the party of tolerance and diversity...posted last year on Neville's Hypocrisy watch:

Liberal Racism or "The Content of Their Character?"

After years of lambasting Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice the Democrats have been, of late, swooning over the possible presidential candidacy of Sen. Barak Obama. The aforementioned are all black...but there is a problem. Powell and Rice are the wrong kind of black because they have strayed off the liberal plantation...they are conservatives. Neville Award winner Harry Belafonte referred to Powell as a 'House Negro'...there have been cartoons of Rice in the mainstream press denigrating her racial ethnicity.

So what do we get when we get the "right kind of African American" in politics? We get Cynthia McKinney, Sheila Jackson Lee, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters, racial preferences (affirmative action), the race card, hate crimes and all of the other idiotic aspects of racial political correctness that paralyzes our country.

On Halloween Night, 2006 in Long Beach, CA, 30 black kids taunted and attacked three white girls on their way to a party. The three girls were beaten within an inch of their lives. Arrests have been made and the case is going to trial. However, the prosecutor has been reluctant to charge the "yewts" with a hate crime because of a lack of proof that the attacks were racially motivated. Imagine if the situation were reversed. The usual collection of race hustlers would be having marches, sit-ins and preparing lawsuits against the police force and the city. This story was barely a blip in the mainstream media...completely unlike the story currently unfolding in New York involving the cops shooting the three black gang members. Ironically two of the cops were black. Recently eight of the assailants were convicted of a hate crime with receiving only probation and community service. Outrageous!

Whenever a conservative comes out and says that the media has a liberal bias, they are usually labeled as paranoid. In reality, however, such a bias does exist, and the best proof of that is the Trent Lott/Strom Thurmond fiasco. The media launched into an uproar over Sen. Trent Lott's racially insensitive remarks at Sen. Strom Thurmond's 100th birthday party, even to the point of one major news publication announcing that the Republican Party has not yet shed its "racist" past. Within weeks, Lott had resigned as Senate Majority Leader over the controversy.

On Aug. 11, 2006 Sen. Allen twice referred to a 20-year-old of Indian ancestry as "macaca." The individual was Shekar Ramanuja Sidarth, a volunteer for Jim Webb, Allen's democratic political opponent. Quickly word hit the street about the remarks and the blogosphere went wild. The late-night talk shows had a field day and columnists everywhere began calling for Allen's removal...or at least for his defeat in the mid-term elections.

What Senator Allen said was dumb. It was a bad attempt at trying to be funny while taking a shot at his political opponent. But there is something else at play here that hits to the true angle of this story. You see, George Allen is a Republican. And what is deemed "dismissible" for Democrats is rarely the same for members of the GOP.

Here is a collection of some dismissable remarks by some of our "finest" liberals over the years and ignored by the media:
  • The Chairman of the Democrat National Committee (DNC), Howard Dean, said at a recent meeting of the Democrat Black Caucus, "You think the Republicans could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here."
  • Donna Brazile, during her tenure as Al Gore's campaign manager, referred to the Republican Party as the 'party of the white boys'
  • Al Sharpton referred to jews and "diamond merchants"
  • Hillary Clinton - Jerry Oppenheimer's book State of the Union: Inside the Complex Marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton (2000) quotes former campaign aide Mary Lee Fray, who says that Hillary exploded in a rage after Bill lost his first bid for elective office, a run for Congress in Arkansas's Third Congressional District against John Paul Hammerschmidt. Hillary blamed Fray's husband, Paul, for the campaign's bungled political strategy. The slur was uttered at a heated, finger-pointing session at Bill Clinton's Fayetteville, Ark., campaign headquarters on election night in 1974, following his defeat. "You fucking Jew bastard!" Hillary yelled at Paul, Mary Lee confirmed -- even though Paul Fray is not Jewish. [From a 2005 article by Reinhold Aman]
  • Jesse Jackson, running for President in 1984, referred to NY as "hymie-town"
  • During a campaign event for Senate candidate Nancy Farmer, Sen. Hillary Clinton introduced a quote from Gandhi by saying, "He ran a gas station down in St. Louis."
  • Sen. Joe Biden: "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking."
  • The media never seems to mention the fact that Sen. Robert Byrd is a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, or that he led a filibuster against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or that in 1946 he stated, "The Ku Klux Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth in West Virginia."

Liberal Racism or "The Content of Their Character? Part 2"

Well, Joe Biden stepped in it again. Coming on the heels of his 7-11 remark: "You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking." he handed the following backhanded compliment to Sen. Barak Obama"

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy, I mean, that's a storybook, man."

So in one instant he managed to insult Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Michael Steele and all Republican African Americans. He also insulted (dare we say) Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. But will he pay the price as did Trent Lott? Probably not. No "bad word rehab" for him.

Interestingly enough the remark reveals an amazingly paternalistic attitude toward blacks by whites in the Democratic Party. Blacks seem to be tolerated and used for the liberal agenda. As long as the black person is a liberal he is the "right kind" of black. If a Republican had spoken this way of Obama there would have been the inevitable calls for resignation, endless apologies, tearing of hair and rending of clothes. The double standard is now so obvious one can only laugh.

Reading List