We are now up to five states in which the Democrats have dropped the names of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson from their annual dinners. In fact, the New York Times wrote an article about the trend today. According to the Democrats, Jefferson owned slaves and so did Jackson. As a result, they cannot be used as heroes of the party. It doesn't matter that Jefferson wrote "we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal.." Nope, Jefferson owned slaves and that means that everything else he did was worthless.
So, in today's world of identity politics and with the desire not to offend anyone, how can the Democrats proceed? I've been giving the matter some thought and came up with this analysis:
1. At the time of the Civil War, the Democrats were the pro-slavery party. That means that any Democrat from the period prior to 1860 is ruled out.
2. During the second half of the 19th century, it was the Democrat party the imposed Jim Crow laws and segregation in the South. That pretty much rules out any Southern Democrat from that era. Northern Democrats are okay, but there really weren't many of them as the North was strongly Republican.
3. In the first third of the twentieth century, the only Democrat to hold the White House was Woodrow Wilson. Of course, Wilson imposed segregation in the military and supported the Ku Klux Klan. There's more, but that's enough to rule out old Woodrow.
4. Then we get to Franklin Roosevelt. He gladly took the support of the Southern Democrats who were keeping Jim Crow laws in place. He went all the way through World War II with American blacks being kept in segregated units in the army and being excluded from the navy except as stewards. Oh, and Roosevelt was in charge of placing all the Japanese Americans in camps for the duration of the war. He's out.
5. What about John Kennedy. He spent much of his presidency sleeping with a long list of women in the White House. He treated women like personal playthings rather than people. No matter what else he did, he just won't do for the Democrats.
6. Lyndon Johnson is a possibility except that Johnson led the fight against civil rights legislation during the 1950s when he was Senate Majority Leader. Indeed, when civil rights bills were passed in both the 1950s and 1960s it was the Republicans who offered more support. Johnson is out.
7. That leaves Jimmy Carter. It is true that he was voted out of office after one term and his presidency is usually looked at as a complete flop. Nevertheless, he did not own slaves or discriminate against women, Japanese Americans or blacks. He's a possibility.
8. Bill Clinton could be a choice. He also treated women like they were not really people, and he was impeached. Nevertheless, he got away with his philandering and survived impeachment. Since leaving office he has been busy squeezing cash out of those who might have business with his wife, but he hasn't been indicted.
9. That leaves Barack Obama. My guess is that the Democrats would not want to name their dinner after a sitting president; it just looks too arrogant.
So after all that, the Democrats are down to naming their dinner the Carter Day Dinner. Sure, the man was a total loser, but he didn't offend anyone. What could be better.
So, in today's world of identity politics and with the desire not to offend anyone, how can the Democrats proceed? I've been giving the matter some thought and came up with this analysis:
1. At the time of the Civil War, the Democrats were the pro-slavery party. That means that any Democrat from the period prior to 1860 is ruled out.
2. During the second half of the 19th century, it was the Democrat party the imposed Jim Crow laws and segregation in the South. That pretty much rules out any Southern Democrat from that era. Northern Democrats are okay, but there really weren't many of them as the North was strongly Republican.
3. In the first third of the twentieth century, the only Democrat to hold the White House was Woodrow Wilson. Of course, Wilson imposed segregation in the military and supported the Ku Klux Klan. There's more, but that's enough to rule out old Woodrow.
4. Then we get to Franklin Roosevelt. He gladly took the support of the Southern Democrats who were keeping Jim Crow laws in place. He went all the way through World War II with American blacks being kept in segregated units in the army and being excluded from the navy except as stewards. Oh, and Roosevelt was in charge of placing all the Japanese Americans in camps for the duration of the war. He's out.
5. What about John Kennedy. He spent much of his presidency sleeping with a long list of women in the White House. He treated women like personal playthings rather than people. No matter what else he did, he just won't do for the Democrats.
6. Lyndon Johnson is a possibility except that Johnson led the fight against civil rights legislation during the 1950s when he was Senate Majority Leader. Indeed, when civil rights bills were passed in both the 1950s and 1960s it was the Republicans who offered more support. Johnson is out.
7. That leaves Jimmy Carter. It is true that he was voted out of office after one term and his presidency is usually looked at as a complete flop. Nevertheless, he did not own slaves or discriminate against women, Japanese Americans or blacks. He's a possibility.
8. Bill Clinton could be a choice. He also treated women like they were not really people, and he was impeached. Nevertheless, he got away with his philandering and survived impeachment. Since leaving office he has been busy squeezing cash out of those who might have business with his wife, but he hasn't been indicted.
9. That leaves Barack Obama. My guess is that the Democrats would not want to name their dinner after a sitting president; it just looks too arrogant.
So after all that, the Democrats are down to naming their dinner the Carter Day Dinner. Sure, the man was a total loser, but he didn't offend anyone. What could be better.
No comments:
Post a Comment