A Deck of 51 Race Cards
January 15th 2008 14:57
Or maybe that's 53 race cards... Bill (the Zipper) Clinton was lauded as the first "black" president. Something to do with his inauspicious beginnings, I think. You know, the poor southern boy from a broken home... not an honest race card to play, but that never stopped the Zipper. Now it's Hillary's turn to try the racial gamble. I mean, besides the embarrassingly phony drawl she puts on for southern black churches...
She doesn't appear to have the flare for "card playing" that the Zipper does, though. Her foray into the "game" consisted of comparing the contribution of Martin Luther King Jr. to Lyndon Baines Johnson. While praising LBJ for signing the Civil Rights Act, she didn't say enough about Dr. King and what he did to further civil rights. Enter Barak Obama. It seems that he didn't speak up quickly enough on the subject of race and Hillary grabbed the proverbial ball to run with it.
Honestly, folks... LBJ was in a position to sign the Civil Rights Act and did so. Dr. King spent his life in the fight for equality, and ultimately gave his life for the Cause. They were both responsible for the progress that was made during the 1960's.
There seem to be some people who think the Civil Rights movement was strictly a product of the 60's and want to rest on their "laurels" rather than continue forward to make "equality" something more than a political race card to play in the "election game."
Does anybody remember the term "token?" It was quite popular back in the 70's. Television producers suddenly discovered that part of their audience was black! So almost every popular program of the time suddenly had at least one black cast member. "Julia" was the first program to have a black woman as the lead character (Diahann Carroll). "I Spy" was a great adventure series with Bill Cosby. Nowadays, most of the sit coms are black oriented. I'm not rambling without reason, just bear with me...
In politics there is still a form of "Tokenism" that really ticks me off. In the Zipper's administration there were remarkably few black faces appointed by the "first black president." One minor secretary (Labor) was black. There's your "token" folks, in a Democrat administration. What else would you expect?
The race cards are flying all over the table right now. Obama being the first "real" black candidate is playing his cards very carefully and letting Hillary throw hers all over the table hoping one of them will be a winner.
Just a thought... how about if the libs/dems actually meant all their blather about racial equality? Wouldn't that be a novel approach! You know what I mean, I'm sure. Look at the difference between the Democrat blacks and the Republican blacks. Just a couple of examples should do it. How about the difference between J.C. Watts and Al Sharpton? How about the differences between Sheila Jackson Lee and Condoleeza Rice? Are you starting to see where I'm going with this?
When a Democrat acknowledges a "person of color", it's usually not the very best example available. It seems to me that they want to show off their generosity by including people who are a little "less" than sterling examples of their race or country.
When a Republican appoints someone to an office, it usually has far more to do with the abilities and qualifications of the appointee and very little to do with skin color. Pres. Bush has done far more for race relations in the USA than any previous president (with the possible exceptions of Lincoln and LBJ).
In the game of politics, of course, as in the game of crime and punishment, the race card is always playable. Just the size of the deck seems to change slightly. All we can do is sit back, watch the game, and see if the stakes (the future of America) depend on a deck of 51, or 53, or if the game will be cancelled before it's too late.
She doesn't appear to have the flare for "card playing" that the Zipper does, though. Her foray into the "game" consisted of comparing the contribution of Martin Luther King Jr. to Lyndon Baines Johnson. While praising LBJ for signing the Civil Rights Act, she didn't say enough about Dr. King and what he did to further civil rights. Enter Barak Obama. It seems that he didn't speak up quickly enough on the subject of race and Hillary grabbed the proverbial ball to run with it.
Honestly, folks... LBJ was in a position to sign the Civil Rights Act and did so. Dr. King spent his life in the fight for equality, and ultimately gave his life for the Cause. They were both responsible for the progress that was made during the 1960's.
There seem to be some people who think the Civil Rights movement was strictly a product of the 60's and want to rest on their "laurels" rather than continue forward to make "equality" something more than a political race card to play in the "election game."
Does anybody remember the term "token?" It was quite popular back in the 70's. Television producers suddenly discovered that part of their audience was black! So almost every popular program of the time suddenly had at least one black cast member. "Julia" was the first program to have a black woman as the lead character (Diahann Carroll). "I Spy" was a great adventure series with Bill Cosby. Nowadays, most of the sit coms are black oriented. I'm not rambling without reason, just bear with me...
In politics there is still a form of "Tokenism" that really ticks me off. In the Zipper's administration there were remarkably few black faces appointed by the "first black president." One minor secretary (Labor) was black. There's your "token" folks, in a Democrat administration. What else would you expect?
The race cards are flying all over the table right now. Obama being the first "real" black candidate is playing his cards very carefully and letting Hillary throw hers all over the table hoping one of them will be a winner.
Just a thought... how about if the libs/dems actually meant all their blather about racial equality? Wouldn't that be a novel approach! You know what I mean, I'm sure. Look at the difference between the Democrat blacks and the Republican blacks. Just a couple of examples should do it. How about the difference between J.C. Watts and Al Sharpton? How about the differences between Sheila Jackson Lee and Condoleeza Rice? Are you starting to see where I'm going with this?
When a Democrat acknowledges a "person of color", it's usually not the very best example available. It seems to me that they want to show off their generosity by including people who are a little "less" than sterling examples of their race or country.
When a Republican appoints someone to an office, it usually has far more to do with the abilities and qualifications of the appointee and very little to do with skin color. Pres. Bush has done far more for race relations in the USA than any previous president (with the possible exceptions of Lincoln and LBJ).
In the game of politics, of course, as in the game of crime and punishment, the race card is always playable. Just the size of the deck seems to change slightly. All we can do is sit back, watch the game, and see if the stakes (the future of America) depend on a deck of 51, or 53, or if the game will be cancelled before it's too late.
| 60 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous
Comment by S.L. Bradish