One Question for Senator Clinton

Understand, I see differences in the Democratic candidates, but I’ve come to embrace Senator Clinton’s ongoing campaign despite the increasingly common, sometimes strident, calls for her to concede, to “stop damaging the Democratic party.” I respect her supporters, who fervently cite the Senator’s accomplishments and offer us their perspective on why she should win the nomination. Neither the Senator, her campaign staff, her surrogates, nor the volunteers and supporters have raised any issue(s) that the stalwarts in the GOP would (will?) avoid in the upcoming general election.

In fact, the process is fostering the development of the Obama campaign to become not merely battle-tested, but battle-hardened. Make no mistake, some of Obama’s organization brought useful experience to the fracas, but many are (or were) unaware of what they would face along the path to election day. Yet the Clinton contribution goes beyond this service to Obama’s campaign juggernaut, for the longer she has fought for delegates the more the media has watched the Democrats. Indeed, Obama’s campaign thrives on the attention, he has nowhere near the name-recognition that the Clintons do, and before they are willing to accept his candor and potential as a politician the voters need to learn about Barack the man. Ali Eteraz characterized the duration of the Clinton campaign as her indirect, unspoken endorsement of Barack Obama.

Yet there is a lingering elephant in the room, which David Gergen has just dragged with typical incisive perspective into the discussion on CNN:

She’s raised the issue of sexism in this race and she’s complained some about it the in the last 24 hours? Race is playing … it’s an increasing issue. That raises the question in my judgement, whether she shouldn’t say, “You know, if you want to vote against him because he’s black, then I don’t want your vote.”

Gergen’s comments form the basis of my question, which I hope her supporters and staff will raise with Senator Clinton.

Senator, are you comfortable denouncing sexism while accepting (some would say “exploiting”) racism?

Constitutionally neither is acceptable in the United States of America, and I cannot support any politician who even tacitly accepts any form of discrimination. I was raised to accept people without regard to skin color, religious beliefs, gender, or age. Silence on such matters may seem expedient, but our elected leaders should not – must not – sway to the breeze of political expedience.

Curiously enough, it’s been hard to find evidence of Gergen’s conversation even though it happened on CNN. Fortunately, Liza Sabater added the clip in a piece at CultureKitchen. She expresses some surprise that a former Reagan staffer would bring this to light as Gergen did, but David Gergen has been a soldier in the war on disinformation and talking points for decades. I strongly urge you to read her article and watch the clip – it may be the only place you’ll find it.

So, to Senator Clinton’s supporters I offer encouragement. You’re backing a great campaigner in a historic effort. The country is long overdue to shatter the elitism that has kept the U.S. Presidency in the hands of men of pallor for over two centuries. The campaigns of both Democrats are encouraging dialog on topics we collectively tend to skip past because they don’t reduce readily to sound-bites. Please join me in asking her to complete the picture, calling for and working toward the unambiguous rejection of any “ism-based” voting.

DIGG this story!