Do Democrats support or oppose “race-based decisions”? I think that’s a good question (or I wouldn’t have asked).
I assume that Hillary Clinton, at least at the moment, opposes voting for candidates based on their race. She probably believes that qualifications, experience, etc., are more important than pigmentation in picking the next president. But if she believes that, if she believes “diversity” in the Oval Office is not important enough to trump more traditional qualifications, why does she support qualification-trumping “diversity” everywhere else in American life?
On Sunday the Rev. Calvin Butts, influential pastor of the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, came out in support of Hillary. His decision was unpopular among many of his parishioners, and he, some curiously, tried to reassure them by asserting that “his move was not ‘a race-based decision.’”
Is the good reverend really afraid that anyone is his overwhelmingly black flock would think he opposes a black (well, arguably) man because he’s black or supports a white woman because she’s white? More to the point, or at least my point, does he really think “race-based decision[s]” are wrong? If so, why? Why has he not opposed “race-based decisions” in government employment and contracting and college admissions?
Perhaps I am being unfair to Rev. Butts. Perhaps he opposed “race-based decisions” wherever racial preference policies exist. A quick Google search, however, failed to turn up any examples.
And let us not forget Obama. I assume he, at least at the moment, opposes voting for candidates based on their gender. He probably believes that qualifications, experience, vision, etc., are more important than gender in picking the next president. But if he believes that, if he believes “diversity” in the Oval Office is not important enough to trump more traditional qualifications, why does he support qualification-trumping “diversity” everywhere else in American life? If he believes gender should be irrelevant in choosing a president, he should have the courage to say that it should be irrelevant in picking anyone for anything.
Obama and Hillary seem to have arrived at a truce, at least for the moment. Both have agreed to say publicly that race and gender should play no role in voters’ choice between them. Do either of them have the courage to apply the principle lurking unacknowledged under that agreement to everyone else, i.e., to assert that no one should receive any benefit or suffer any burden based on race or sex?
Don’t hold your breath.
