what's on my mind grapes?

… aaaaaaaaand the Dems are self-destructing again.

This Don Imus controversy has gone too far. “Nappy-headed ho’s” is so vile that it merits firing a man? Sadly, Barack Obama thinks so. And because of that, he’s lost my vote in the primary. I’m not gonna scream about the First Amendment – Obama’s speaking as a matter of opinion, not advocating government censorship. But isn’t the American idea of free speech about more than the Bill of Rights? Isn’t it – or, given the Patriot Act, the better phrasing is shouldn’t it be – a belief that, with a few exceptions (which I shall touch on), ideas and opinions should be voiced without fear of extreme retribution?

Actions have consequences. Imus’s choice of words was horrible, and I support anyone’s right to be angry about them. Protest, picket, request that he be suspended or donate to an anti-hatred charity. I don’t think he should just issue a token apology and move on without some backlash. As a feminist, I certainly think the “ho” part of things was out of line and deplorable. Of course, one does wonder why there’s so much outcry about women being insulted with words, and yet the possibility remains that conservatives will be able to legally dictate women’s medical decisions. All of the lip service being given to female equality is quite at odds with the platforms of certain politicians.

But “nappy” is now yet another “n” word that white people can’t use? That is utterly ridiculous. It’s a descriptive term for the type of hair that many dark-skinned people have. Of course, maybe I’m being insensitive – by now, describing the skin color of the athletes could be out of line! I get that people were offended and that the context was insulting, and do see justification to take offense. But where does it stop? Imus, like Michael Richards, apologized for offending the black community, but the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world don’t care – they’re out for a pound of flesh and then some, and judgment-challenged white folks better watch out.

I’m not saying that racism against blacks is no longer an issue – since Katrina, I’ve realized just how little some Americans care about their fellow human beings. But if the goal is to stop the spread of hatred – a noble cause that I can get behind – start with the true hatemongers. Go after Bill O’Reilly and Ann Coulter (her biggest problem in Darfur? The genocide is inefficient.), who are actually part of our society’s growing indifference and/or antipathy towards other people. They are extremists with a hate-filled rhetoric that should not be given a voice in the mass media any more than Osama bin Laden’s. But it seems black leaders only want to silence people who have made perceived racist comments – the goal isn’t greater tolerance, but a chilling effect specifically on anti-black speech. I won’t go as far as to call Sharpton et. al. racists, but the mentality of “protecting me and mine” is the sort of fragmentation that does lead to the dehumanization of our fellow man.

Back to party politics, Obama has shot himself in the foot, and I can only hope the Democratic party isn’t dragged down with him. The Republicans have been as formidable as they have by turning American on American – be it evangelical on gay or Caucasian on immigrant – and it is a tactic at which they are experts. Now, the GOP can point to Obama joining extremists like Sharpton (which is even worse than if Biden or Clinton or another white candidate had spoken out first), and turn white on black. They can raise the specter of political correctness being taken to an extreme, of whites losing jobs and college spots to affirmative action, of a minority-pandering thought police state. And unless the Democratic party as a whole distances itself from Obama’s heavy-handed and divisive proposal, I can’t really argue with them.