Blacks, Women, and the Presidency

Not terribly long ago I wrote a column about the dishonesty of liberals who, when making lists of the black presidential candidates that existed B.O. (Before Obama – and isn’t that an appropriate pair of initials?), would very obviously fail to name Alan Keyes.  The reason for this “oversight,” I said, is that the primary determinant of blackness in American politics remains ideology, and not skin color: The more liberal you are, the blacker you can claim to be (to be fair, the standard seems to be applied in a somewhat colorblind fashion, as Bill Clinton was deemed to be America’s first black president, nominated as such by afro-centrist author Toni Morrison and seconded by the Congressional Black Caucus).  On the other hand, if you are at all conservative, not only are you not black, you are, in fact, white…regardless of skin pigment; hence the unmentionability of Dr. Keyes, noted conservative and former African-American.

The same is true when it comes to the matter of gender.  If you find yourself to be a “valued” or “respected” woman in politics, the significant likelihood is that you are a liberal.  This is, again, because liberal values are to be valued and respected, while conservative values are to be spat upon.   

Like many conservative columnists, I’ve been accused of being a racist, bigot, homophobe, Nazi, hatemonger, extremist, etc.  The list of names goes on and on, and frankly, I love it.  The bottom line as a conservative is that you know you’re making sense and striking chords that need to be pounded when you are branded as any of the aforementioned.  That said, let’s get one thing straight:

I have never had a problem with someone other than a white male serving as president, nor does any true conservative that I know and respect.

I honestly don’t care what gender and/or race may characterize a candidate.  To make such elements a material factor in the decision-making process is to be a moron.  What I do care about…a LOT…is both the ideas and values that candidates espouse currently, as well as those they have espoused (and lived) historically.  They shall always serve as the only relevant components to all of this. 

An acquaintance of mine once accused me of being the "type" who would never vote for a woman.  I asked why she said that.  She responded by spewing out an absurd list of female politicians, who, she claimed, would never get my vote.  I fired back, “Well, of course they would never get my vote…they are stark-raving lunatic socialists!”  And therein rests the point.  Don’t use as the litmus test for any perceived candidate gender biases my unwillingness to vote for Hillary Clinton, or expect my disdain for Senator Obama to serve as proof that I would “never” vote for a black presidential candidate.  There are several noted American conservatives who happen to be something other than white males, and if any of them was engaged in the process as a serious candidate, I would be a most enthusiastic voter this year.  Sadly, Dr. Keyes’ candidacy is little more than blip on the radar screen this time around, and Jeane Kirkpatrick, the former Reagan cabinet member and intellectual extraordinaire, who remained a virulent anti-communist to the end of her life and who, incidentally, pondered running for the presidency in 1988, is no longer with us.  If there was a magical way to pair them and run them together, I would be privileged to both vote for a ticket that registers higher on the all-important diversity scale than anything the Democrats have heretofore assembled, and also watch with glee as liberals persist in a state of misery that one can only hope would drive them to suicide.

Agree or disagree, click on comments below.

Robert G. Yetman, Jr. - Contributing Editor www.ChristianMoney.com