Over the past few weeks, our political debate has centered on the intersection of race and gender in American politics. Clinton claims to be “
proud” of Obama’s transcendence of racial discrimination, and Obama claims to be proud of Clinton’s success in shattering the glass ceiling. And both campaigns have instrumentally used race and gender, both publicly and deceitfully, to smear their opponents.
Journalists, commentators, and public figures have contributed to this debate, at times stirring feminist or African-American solidarity and, at other times, commending a nation that seems, perhaps, finally colorblind and egalitarian. “
Women Are Never Front-Runners,” wrote Gloria Steinem, in
an attempt to explain the importance of female support for Hillary Clinton. Chris Rock, opening for Obama at Harlem’s Apollo Theater, warned the audience not to waste their votes on “
that white lady.” Others still use this contest between a black man and a female front-runner as evidence of our progress as a nation.
Are we left with the realization that we are still racist? Still sexist? Or are we left with the warm feeling that we are somehow less sexist and less racist than ever before? Perhaps this is the most dangerous of all the assumptions. Noticeably absent from the Race/Gender debate over the past few weeks has been a discussion of the anti-Muslim, anti-Arab sentiment that has played a significant role in the formation of our voters’ choices.
BOSTON — A federal judge in Boston has issued a ruling allowing an interlocutory appeal of a lawsuit challenging a Massachusetts state constitutional amendment and a state law banning imprisoned felons from voting in state and federal elections.
The three plaintiffs suing Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin claim the rules’ disproportionate impact on African-American and Hispanic-American voters in Massachusetts violate the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965. The 2000 Massachusetts constitutional change prohibits incarcerated felons from voting in certain election categories. The 2001 law expanded the bar to all elections held in the state. Simmons v. Galvin, No. 01-11040 (D. Mass.)
Michael Powell and Sarah Wheaton offer
some incredible coverage in today’s New York Times. This stuff is too good to be true:
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. —
Mitt Romney, whose 1950s manner and celebratory drink of choice call to mind a milkshake man more than a rap singer, gave a shout out Monday that left no doubt that he had spent little time listening to hip-hop.
Mr. Romney, the Republican candidate from Massachusetts by way of Michigan and Utah who enjoys a milkshake at the end of a long day, stopped by a staging area for a
Martin Luther King Birthday parade here. In his dress shirt and tie, and with his unwavering smile, he walked over and posed for photographs with a group of black youngsters. Putting his arm around a teenage girl, he waved to the cameras and offered, “Who let the dogs out?” He added a tepid “woof woof.”
This week, I am reminded of an obvious truth: our problems as a society from Iraq to incarceration are interconnected, and we continue to make the same mistakes across the board. On Thursday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced radical budget cuts in most State departments, including Corrections.
Jesse McKinley writes in the New York Times:
Perhaps the most controversial plan would reduce the crowded prisons by 22,000, a move that would involve early release and relaxed parole requirements to take effect as soon as this summer. State prison officials said those releases, which would require approval by the Legislature, would not include anyone convicted of serious, violent or sex crimes or anyone who had been violent in prison. Echoing the concerns of many lawmakers, Speaker Fabian Núñez of the Assembly said releasing prisoners could “put the public at risk.”
Last Spring, officials in Rhode Island, facing similar fiscal limitations, sought to
reduce the State’s inmate population.
Ashbel T. Wall, Director of the RI Department of Corrections, worked with the
Council of State Governments and the Governor’s office to produce a plan for the release of 500 prisoners. When this proposal came before the House Finance Committee, its members seemed to agree on the immediate importance of decreasing the inmate population and the DOC budget, but they did not agree on whether or not the proposal set forth by the DOC and CSG would endanger the public. Ultimately, the proposal fell off the radar, and the Finance Committee chose instead to
try all 17-year-olds as adults. Originally designed to save $3.6 million/year, the General Assembly voted to overturn this decision and return juveniles to the Family Court and Rhode Island Training School when they reconvened in the Fall.
Since the topic has been weighing heavily on my mind (and, clearly, the rest of the blogosphere), here’s more on the issue of race in the Obama/Clinton battle. Carl Hulse has an interesting piece in
today’s New York Times that discusses Hillary’s tone during her mention of civil rights over the past week in her attempts to invalidate Obama’s invocation of JFK and MLK. Hulse writes:
Representative James E. Clyburn of
South Carolina, the highest-ranking African-American in Congress, said he was rethinking his neutral stance in his state’s presidential primary out of disappointment at comments by Bill and
Hillary Rodham Clinton that he saw as diminishing the historic role of civil rights activists.
Yesterday, in the New York Times, you published an op-ed, “
Women Are Never Front-Runners,” in which you claim that a woman with Barack Obama’s record, experience, and biography would not be considered a viable candidate for the presidency of the United States, and you call for a feminist movement in support of Hillary Clinton. You declare, “What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system.” As one of the countless younger women inspired by and active in Barack Obama’s movement for change, I feel compelled to respond.
UPDATE: NYTimes confirms addition of Kristol to its merry band of columnists. Andy Rosenthal, editorial page editor, calls
the public response “intolerant.” And Kristol tells
Politico.com, “I was flattered watching blogosphere heads explode. […] It was kind of amusing.” Touché, Bill, touché.
The bad news: a lethal, fungal infection has bombarded inmates in the California state prisons. The good news: Missouri is working to rehabilitate its teen offenders in home-like therapeutic settings, rather than juvenile or adult prisons.
The New York Times reports today that over 900 inmates at California’s Pleasant Valley State Prison have been infected with “valley fever” over the past three years. Jesse McKinley writes:
Endemic to parts of the Southwest, valley fever has been reported in recent years in a widening belt from South Texas to Northern California. The disease has infected archaeologists digging at the Dinosaur National Monument in Utah and dogs that have inhaled the spores while sniffing for illegal drugs along the Mexican border. In most cases, the infection starts in the lungs and is usually handled by the body without permanent damage. But serious complications can arise, including
meningitis; and, at Pleasant Valley, the scope of the outbreak has left some inmates permanently disabled, confined to wheelchairs and interned in expensive long-term hospital stays.
One in ten Pleasant Valley inmates contracted valley fever in 2006, and at least a dozen Central California inmates died from the disease. Other Western states have reported epidemics; the Arizona health department reported more than 5,500 cases and 33 deaths from the fever in 2006 alone. California state prison officials blame the spread of valley fever on the construction of a nearby hospital, but doctors are still struggling to understand and curb the disease.
Meanwhile,
Todd Lewan of the AP brings us a more encouraging story: Unlike
states like Rhode Island, where fiscal and political pressure have led lawmakers to enforce tough-on-crime policies for juvenile offenders, Missouri is working to rehabilitate its teen offenders in therapeutic settings.
Perhaps this is old news to you, or no news to some, but did y’all know that Duke, in response to the
Lacrosse Scandal, is forming a
Center for Criminal Justice that will focus on wrongful accusations??? The Center,
set to open Fall 2008, will be a part of the Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic. “Three of our students suffered a grave injustice at the hands of the legal system,” Duke President Brodhead declared in a written statement, “I am determined that we will make some good come out of the grave injustice that took place.” The
Duke Law website does not, at present, mention any clinical focus on wrongful accusations. Meanwhile, an Innocence Project that began at the University of North Carolina law school in 1999
has been poorly received by state law enforcement and prosecution.
Most of our clients are poor, forgotten, and have used up all legal avenues for relief. The hope they all have is that biological evidence from their cases still exists and can be subjected to DNA testing. All Innocence Project clients go through an extensive screening process to determine whether or not DNA testing of evidence could prove their claims of innocence. Thousands currently await our evaluation of their cases.
The Cardozo Innocence Project was created to help communities without access to legal recourse prove their innocence. It took Duke until 2007–when the innocence of wealthy, white students came into question–to deliberate on the foundation of a similar project. Nauseating. Hopefully the Center will serve the local community as well as those privileged students who clash with the law every now and drunken again.
Being at the center of attention clearly bothers Paul. “I like to be unnoticed,” he says, a claim not typically made by presidential candidates. “That’s my personality. I see all the excitement and sometimes I say to myself, ‘Why do they do that?’ I don’t see myself as a big deal.”
WHHHATTT?? When your followers, dubbed “
Paultards” by the blog-demons of
Wonkette, are
minting their own coins with your likeness, you’re kind of a big deal. Here is Paul’s new campaign ad:
Ron Paul–Defender of Freedom. More importantly, though, is this video of Ron Paul defeating Adolf Hitler in combat.
Today, in Ron Paul Quote of the Day, we bring you footage of our favorite boobs at the McLaughlin Group (sharpest mind, best sources, hardest talk!) discussing why RP deserves to be a runner-up to Oprah and Obama for Most Charismatic Person of the Year on their dippy lil’ awards show. Okay, more importantly, we are using the RPQOTD feature to bring you this footage of John McLaughlin’s most incredible outfit, ever. I guess this raises the question: why don’t I always watch this show?
Remember how Mitt Romney said he watched his Pa, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, march with Martin Luther King Jr. during the Civil Rights Era? On Wednesday, his campaign clarified that the remark was meant figuratively.
The Detroit Free Press has the shcoop:
“He was speaking figuratively, not literally,” Eric Fehrnstrom, spokesman for the Romney campaign, said of the candidate. The campaign was responding to questions raised by the Free Press and other media after a Boston publication challenged the accuracy of Mitt Romney’s account. In a major speech on faith and politics earlier this month in Texas, Mitt Romney said: “I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.”
He made a similar statement Sunday during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” He said, “You can see what I believed and what my family believed by looking at our lives. My dad marched with Martin Luther King. My mom was a tireless crusader for civil rights.”
Jack and Jill Politics adds, “Romney’s campaign is also saying that reports of Romney being with Salt-and-Pepa and Heavy D up in the Limousine were also not meant to be taken literally.”
Entries
Over the past few weeks, our political debate has centered on the intersection of race and gender in American politics. Clinton claims to be “
proud” of Obama’s transcendence of racial discrimination, and Obama claims to be proud of Clinton’s success in shattering the glass ceiling. And both campaigns have instrumentally used race and gender, both publicly and deceitfully, to smear their opponents.
