Patrick will get a pass for his corporate ties because the liberals will be too afraid to treat him like your average corporate Republican because they don’t want to appear racist. As we have seen already, they are trying to spin his corporate past into a positive, and when has a liberal (or liberal media, for that matter) ever done that for a Republican? Usually, that’s their first line of attack. I guess Affirmative Action is not just about quotas.
Now look, I could buy the line that liberals are going easy on Patrick because he’s liberal. I don’t happen to think so, but it stands to reason that folks would support someone who thinks like them, after all.
But because he’s black? Wow.
I’m trying hard to disentangle the weird knot of projection, attempted mind-reading, and ad hominem in that post, but it’s just too crazy. I suppose maybe we should be glad that someone’s not afraid to be racist, and is willing to bring up the “affirmative action” canard when a black person runs for office. Feels like the ’80’s again, doesn’t it?
Whats more despicable was the insert in this weeks Time magazine hailing “New Crop of Barack Obamas” and the only thing the seven profiled candidates had in common was the fact that they were black. I am sorry but dont put honorable names like Obama, Patrick, and Ford in the same category as despicable corrupt Bush apologists like Mike Steele and Ken Blackwell.
<
p>
Cant find a link but it shows you the “guilt by association” complex in modern media that all black people deserve comparison with each other.
<
p>
Tim Russert had the gall to ask Obama “What do you make about the crazy statements your fellow African Americans including Kayne West and Harry Belafonte said about Katrina?”
<
p>
He might as well ask Chris Dodd “what do you think about the extreme statements your fellow honkey Jerry Falwell said”
there is a ‘congressional black caucus’ who often issues positions on matters they say are of interest to “african-american voters” so is the the cbc racist for collectivising black folk as some kind of political entity?
<
p>
frankly, i think all of this indignation is a tad juvenile. any mention of race is not an immediate cause for labelling someone a racist. ‘racist’ is an extremely volatile and grave charge. and not always an accurate one.
<
p>
i think there is truth in the statement that charley so vilifies. as a progressive, i say that we sometimes have an affinity towards those we view as representing a disenfranchised group (and nothing wrong with that!).
<
p>
thus the green-rainbow party might be more inclined to nominate a native american to a high profile office over just another white guy. or a gay or lesbian candidate may become some kind of cause celebre in part because of their sexual orientation.
<
p>
and to recognize this and to consider this is no cause to immediately label someone a racist or bigot.
<
p>
look, i’m voting for deval. but on paper, he can sometimes look like a quintessential corporate pig. so, does growing up in the projects exempt him from the hard questions? should it? and why?
The HP post says that we’ll give him a pass we won’t give corporate Republicans because Deval’s black.
<
p>
Whereas, the reason we like Deval despite the companies he’s worked for, that we don’t like, is that once you get past “on paper,” he’s one of us, with our ideals and our desire for a rising tide to lift all boats. Past the “on paper” for most corporate Republicans (and Democrats too – DLC) and you DO see corporate pigs (largely) who not only don’t share our ideals, but want to undermine and destroy them.
<
p>
I don’t know if HP is being racist, but he IS being an idiot.
I was criticizing the idea that Patrick is the beneficiary of “Affirmative Action” on the part of liberals in “looking the other way” on his corporate past — the point being that he doesn’t really deserve to be where he is. I think that was pretty clear in the post, and I do think that’s racist.
Goes back to my comment above where I say whether or not he’s being racist, that he’s overlooking the truth (er, that’s saying it NICEly).
is Hub Politics giving Mitt “tar baby” Romney a pass on his recent racially loaded comments because he’s white? I don’t see them taking him to task for making conservatives look like white supremacists.
is nasty business. The party that brought us Jack Abramoff, Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Katrina, Swift Board Veterans, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, the revengeful disclosure of Valerie Plame Wilson’s covert status, domestic spying, a war based on lies, Focus on the Family, the Teresa Schiavo debacle–the list is much longer still–has its strident supporters in Massachusetts. Hub Politics certainly can be LGF and RedState with a Massachusetts accent. Nothing more and certainly nothing less.
but to people who are trying hard to call it when they see it as part of our collective work to educate in order to eradicate this scourge, this is disturbing stuff. Somewhat surprising, but not all that much, when you consider all the other symptoms around us that are ample evidence of racism in our midst.
<
p>
Thanks for the shout out on this, C MTA and others. Maybe it will serve to discourage similar despicable tactics and at least it will get people to think about the issue.
Deval Patrick is BLACK?!?
Can someone please explain to me why the media props them up as one of the major blogs? They should be shunned, not treated as equals on the table of BMG. There are plenty of other great blogs like .08 and LeftinLowell that have great analysis – not just lefty analysis, but honest, complete with fact analysis… instead of that Hub-bub nonsense.
<
p>
Again, I reiterate, they should be shunned. IF we NEED to have a conservative blog, by god a conservative should make one without looney assessments. With plenty of intelligent conservatives out there, why invite the crazies to the table? (Indeed, I think the new progressive movement has scooped some up: fiscally minded, libertarian types and people who are just sick of the social conservatives taking over the party.)
Thanks, you’re sweet…I do, though, mostly consider my blog (OK, MY posts on it anyway, I will not malign my cobloggers who are of the highest caliber) to be slinging rocks at the establishment more than taking them down with good analysis…
<
p>
Rock-slinging is pretty effective sometimes, however. I’ve got pretty good aim on occasion. 😉
Next week when he is on NECN again. Or why don’t you write a letter to the Editor of NECN complaining about having someone you consider so distasteful appearing on TV. Publish it here, send a copy to HP for their response, and let us see whatever either or both send back to you. Unless you think that would be counter-productive because it is not shunning them. Personally, I think sunlight is the best disinfectant. Leaving them to fester and breed on their own in a dark place is not the best way to get rid of pests.
I have a better idea. (ItÂ’s at the end of this comment)
<
p>
Should I go back and find many of the ridiculous statements people on here say about “conservatives”.
A write-in campaign to NECN to silence this guy to is right on facts and weak on analysis in this particular horse race.
<
p>
Someone said something indicting “liberals”. Is “liberals” a race, religion, ethnicity, or sexual preference?
<
p>
The offending language reiterates the belief that many reasonable people have regarding the far leftsÂ’ treatment of certain issues and politicians based on race and popularity among certain races.
In this case, the fact that Deval is black is not why the far left turns a blind eye towards his private sector background. The do this because they identified him early on as “their guy”. Then they convinced themselves that they have found the best candidate ever. Deval of course plays into this. Then the mutual admiration society within the far left gets going. That is how they do it every time.
<
p>
and NOW….
A campaign to silence anyone who offends “Liberals”.
<
p>
I have an idea. Substitute “liberals” for anything else. Girl Scouts, Shriners, libertarians, anarchists, Nazis.
There’s a huge difference between criticizing a group that is based on ideology and criticizing one based on race. Ideology is something that people choose to believe, so they can choose to stop being part of the group. Race is something you’re born with, so you can’t do anything about it regardless of whether you want to or not.
He’s your guy.
<
p>
Plain and simple.
<
p>
This go-around he happens to be black.
I think this analysis is worth entertaining — although, like I said, I don’t really agree. If libs are “making excuses” for Patrick, it’s because he’s a fellow lib, not because he’s black.
<
p>
Hypothetically: if, for example, Franklin Raines decided to run for MA governor as a conservative Republican, liberals wouldn’t support him. And I doubt they’d support him as a liberal Democrat, either, since his business background actually is sketchy.
<
p>
As I said above, the racist part is implying that because of some “affirmative action”, Patrick doesn’t really deserve his current status.