Sexism Rife within the Democratic Party
By: Carey Roberts
â€œI would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach better conclusion than a white male who hasnâ€™t lived that life. Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.â€
That sexist remark, made by Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in a 2001 speech, should have triggered a round of red-faced apologies and promises to do endless hours of community service.
But instead of denouncing the comment, this past weekend Democratic pols rushed to the nomineeâ€™s defense. Sen. Arlen Specter invoked the diversity mantra, remarking somewhat ungrammatically, â€œThe diversity and the point of view of Latina women is significant.â€ Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California claimed to enjoy preternatural mind-reading abilities, saying â€œI understand what she meant by it.â€
And all the media commentators oozed about the juristâ€™s â€œcompelling personal story.â€ (Funny, I donâ€™t remember Dan Rather raving about nominee Clarence Thomasâ€™ compelling life story.)
Even President Obama came to Sotomayorâ€™s rescue, saying â€œIâ€™m sure she would have restated it.â€ But that clarification only opened another can of worms, because Obama didnâ€™t choose to explain why she would have wanted to say it differently.
Was it because her intemperate remark would become the flashpoint for public outcry following decades of judicial activism? Or was it because the case would underscore the fact that all four finalists for the Supreme Court nomination were women, exposing a plan to conform to an artificial sex quota?
The reason, of course, for all the semantic two-steps is that sexism has become endemic in the Democratic Party. Under the guise of promoting female empowerment, Democratic meetings routinely feature programs with chauvinistic titles like â€œWomen Taking Charge,â€ â€œWomen in Power,â€ or â€œPutting Dead White Males out to Pasture.â€
Sadly, Democrats have become sold on the use of anti-male cliches as their short-sighted strategy to ballot-box success.
Hereâ€™s Hillary Clinton in 2005: â€œResearch shows the presence of women raises the standards of ethical behavior and lowers corruption.â€ Remember the quip she made about â€œevil and bad menâ€ made at an Iowa campaign stop? And in New Hampshire, she commented, â€œI donâ€™t know about you, but I like seeing women in charge.â€ (Just imagine the ruckus if candidate John McCain had proclaimed, â€œI donâ€™t know about you, but I like seeing white men in charge.â€)
Consider Democratic pols like Nancy Pelosi who express misandrist put-downs that range from the haughty (â€œI didnâ€™t come to Congress to change the attitudes of men.â€) to the imperious (â€œBy electing a woman Speaker, my colleagues turned the old system upside down.â€)
Letâ€™s call to mind former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers who tried to resuscitate a stalled career with her book, Why Women Should Rule the World. In the book Myers recalls an incident involving Alexis Herman, former Secretary of Labor, who once grabbed a labor negotiator by the lapels and threated him, â€œDonâ€™t f_ck with me.â€ Myers highlights that episode to prove how peace-minded women surpass men in forging sensible compromise.
Thereâ€™s the famous quip by former Democratic Congresswoman Barbara Jordan of Texas, who claimed, â€œI believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which a man structurally does not have. Heâ€™s just incapable of it.â€
And then the gazillions of liberal womenâ€™s organizations that pound the feminist tom-tom, making logic-defying claims like this one from Womenâ€™s Action for New Directions: â€œchange will come when women take the lead.â€
The reason for all this, of course, is the Democratic Party has morphed into the political arm of the National Organization for Women. Democratic candidates casually make sham claims that paint men as ogres and tyrants: â€œwomen in the workplace are victims of wage discrimination,â€ â€œwives suffer from an epidemic of domestic violence,â€ â€œfemales were routinely excluded from medical research,â€ and so forth.
Across the pond in England, Labor Partyâ€™s deputy leader Harriet Harman recently ridiculed her nationâ€™s financial institutions as â€œtestosterone-fueled.â€ Then she vowed to mandate that banks appoint more women on their boards, admitting â€œSometimes we have to take scary methods in order to achieve worthwhile results.â€
For years, such gender-baiting claims suited the grievance agenda of the feminists to a ‘T’. But now, the liberal orgy of new-school sexism disguised as female empowerment has come back to haunt the Democrats as they work to reshape the High Court.