Sorry to those who think I’m making too much of this. But it seems to me that the G.O.P. has zero credibility on racial matters until they get rid of this man as Senate Majority Leader. When I’m in agreement with the Family Research Council, a virulently anti-gay group, you know something’s got to give. Last night’s revelation – that Lott had said almost identical things over twenty years ago – clinches in my mind that this was not a poor choice of words. It was a classic political gaffe – where the politician in question accidentally says what he truly believes. And no, I don’t think bringing up Robert Byrd, another old bigot, is a satisfactory response. It’s a sign that you cannot defend someone when you respond by attacking someone else. Lott had a chance to repudiate his words and he chose to side-step the issue. He’s flirted with racists before. He’s said the same things before. It seems to me that president Bush now has his Sister Souljah opportunity. Just as Clinton secured centrist backing when he repudiated the anti-white racism of Sister Souljah, so Bush needs to repudiate the anti-black racism of Lott publicly, clearly and irrevocably. If he doesn’t, then I’m afraid he will lose any black support indefinitely and the respect of many decent voters who aren’t black as well. Lott’s remarks are, in fact, a direct insult to black members of the administration and the Republican Party. Mr. President, we’re waiting for you to say something.
RAINES AWARD NOMINEE: This is how the Washington Times spins the Trent Lott story today: “Black lawmakers upset with Daschle.” At least Howell Raines has some sophistication.
PAY-UP WEEK UPDATE:Alas, we’re still in the dark about a truly accurate up-to-the-moment tally. Amex reports things late and the mailbag won’t reveal its truths for a while yet. But the good news is: yesterday looks almost as good as Monday. We’re close to 3,000 paid-up subscribers to the site, which represents a stunning step forward for the blogosphere, and for this blog. I’m really, really grateful. But we’re still short of our goal. If you’ve paid up already, my eternal thanks. If you read this blog regularly, and haven’t paid yet, please do your part in keeping it alive. We’re asking $20 for the year (including the past two years, if you’re counting), which is about as good a media deal as you’re likely to find anywhere. The money will pay me a decent salary, allow me to hire help, and spend more time on the blog. So please, make Paul Krugman’s day. Click here to give a little back to the site.
THE AXIS OF EVIL I: Remember all those people who derided president Bush’s inclusion of North Korea in his “axis of evil?” Remember all those who said there was no logical connection between them? I wonder what they’ll say about the interception of North Korean scuds bound for some party in the Middle East? Particularly appropriate on the day when the uber-appeaser Jimmy Carter got the Nobel “Peace” Prize, don’t you think?
THE AXIS OF EVIL II: Have you been following the news from Iran? It’s a little hard since the major media seems intent on burying news from this country that could be on the brink of a world-changing revolution. But this story in yesterday’s Times caught my eye. Why, I wonder, wasn’t it on the front page?
HOW TOUGH IS THIS FORD? Plenty, it seems. I enjoyed this piece by Time’s Jack E. White. I was unaware of the racist, Uncle Tom rhetoric used against Congressman Harold Ford by the Congressional Black Caucus. But given the state of racial rhetoric on the left these days, I’m not surprised. If he plays his cards right, Ford could become a post-racial politician for the next generation. I certainly hope so.
THE TIMES’ MATH: Jacob Levy does a simple math job on a recent, completely bogus story in the New York Times on an alleged collapse in the advancement of minorities in higher education. As usual, the Times doesn’t let the facts get in the way of a purely ideological piece.
THE TIMES’ CLUELESSNESS: A while back, the New York Times ran a glowing profile of an Indian guru, Sai Baba. Check out MSNBC’s cursory investigation into the story. The guru is an alleged serial pedophile, with complaints against him for abusing children well-reported in the Daily Telegraph and India Today. UNESCO dropped participation in a conference with Baba for the same reason. But nowhere in the Times piece is there even a reference to the charges. Why? Don’t they have Google over there?
MY GAY PASSION: Just a word in response to some emails that have been telling me I’m all reason when it comes to most subjects but all emotion when it comes to homosexuality. I think you’ll find, if you read my work on the gay topic over the years, that I have done more than most to channel my natural emotions on this subject into reasonable discourse. Many who disagree with me on this topic have been kind enough to concede this. But undoubtedly my feelings run high on the topic; it’s close to home; it affects my loved ones – living and dead. It affects my own life directly every day. So when I hear arguments that essentially assume that gay people are somehow depraved or sick or vile or embarrassing, it’s hard not to respond with passion. I’m actually proud of that. Maintaining my liberal principles – on issues like hate crime laws – has led me to become a pariah in some gay circles, an object of scorn and hatred. Equally, maintaining my Catholic – yes, Catholic – principles about the inherent dignity and equality of gay people – on issues like marriage and military service – has alienated many on the other side. All I can say is that I have learned to do without much support on this issue but try daily to balance reason with emotion, to make sure I don’t confuse feelings for an argument. Most of the time I succeed. Sometimes, I don’t. I’m only human. But when your own identity is being raised as something up for discussion, it’s hard to stay cool. And at times, I think anger is thoroughly justified. It’s obviously not my only passion – on terrorism, on the Church, on the nihilist left, I can be just as energized. But it is one passion, for which I do not apologize. All I can say in defense is this: imagine if you had to defend your heterosexual marriage from charges that it will debase civilization and is one step away from child abuse. Imagine that it had no standing in law. Imagine that some civilized people you respect and who otherwise respect you nonetheless feel contempt for the love you have for another human being, and believe deep down that you are mentally or psychologically disordered. Now try not to be angry and hurt. It’s difficult. I’m not playing the victim card here. I’m just trying to explain.
The Dish 