I am not a citizen of Virginia, so Northam's War has seemed somewhat remote--maybe filling in the hysteria vacuum left by the complexifiction of the Covington Boys Scandale.
So...here's a piece of thinking that gives some bones to my disquiet over how the Northam War has gone: "How Society Uses Politics to Decides What's Racist."
Theodore Johnson of the Brennan Center, asks: "The reaction to Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s past use of blackface
shows how racism gets defined by politics, not morality. Is that a good
thing?"
Some points: "Northam’s decades-old racist behavior does not inherently suggest he
lacks the moral acuity to govern now. If he is to be taken at his
word—that he is not racist, ardently supports civil rights and is
genuinely horrified by his past attitudes and actions—then his growth
and maturation could be seen as evidence of his fitness for office.
"This distinction, however, is immaterial because his moral failing in
the past is a political liability today. And, especially on matters of
racism, politics—and the defining of what is and is not a
liability—polices the boundaries of what we’re willing to accept as a
society."
As Tom Blackburn said on his post, impeachment is the proper disposal method. Johnson takes that up. He also observes, "bipartisan agreement that Northam should leave the executive mansion is
not a public punishment for a decades-old moral failing, but a political
reaction by those with vested interests in his resignation." An obvious point but none of the hyperventlaters have said so.
It now takes a week for the tortoise of reason to begin the race against the hysteria bunny.
And now, supposedly, they found Warren's Texas Bar Registration Card with her race written in as Native American. I could care less, but in Bedlam America, this makes a difference. With enough effort, can't any progressive politician be brought down by something in his or her past?
ReplyDeleteThat's pretty interesting about Warren.
DeleteRemember when the uncrossable line in politics was the extramarital affair? Where would Gary Harte and John Edwards be in today's politics?
I guess this says something about shifting mores in American culture, but I'm not sure exactly what.
"Uncrossable lines.." Yet we have a POTUS who crossed every. single. one of them, past or present. It can ruin a political career, except when it doesn't. Maybe Warren, et al, need to take a leaf from Trump's book; don't deny, don't apologize, just say "so what!" and brazen it out.
Delete"It now takes a week for the tortoise of reason to begin the race against the hysteria bunny.'
ReplyDeleteAn apt analogy. I find that withdrawing from the consumption of news coverage, which is getting more difficult to distinguish from social media freak-outs, really helps with the mental sanity.
The sacrament of penance requires contrition and a firm purpose of amendment. It recognizes that the firm purpose may not hold and that future confession may be necessary. The Catholic approach, istm, shows more understanding of human nature than other religious forms in which you get one and done, sin-wise, except, in practice, you don't, and there is no philosophical or theological explanation for the exception. So it seems to me that those of us who have left the confessional saying something like, "See you next week, padre" ought to be cutting the accused on social media more slack than we do. I am not talking about violations of the law, which should be handled by the legal system; I am talking about violations of community standards, which is the petard currently hoisting Warren and the top three Virginians in order of succession.
ReplyDeleteTom, I agree.
DeleteSo now we have a big, bold print headline saying that three people found Amy Klobuchar hard to work for. It seems like the media is trying to weed down the candidate list in a hurry, and eliminate the flawed ones. What if there aren't any unflawed ones?
ReplyDeleteAnother thought occurs to me, are any male candidates hard to work for, or is that only a drawback for women?
"What if there aren't any unflawed ones?"
DeleteI started with Washington, who was hard to work for. I am almost up to the present and I still haven't found any unflawed ones.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am reminded of Gore Vidal's play, "The Best Man," in which Henry Fonda and Cliff Robertson blackmail each other with scandals from their past, and the party nomination gets thrown to a third candidate whom no one knows.
ReplyDeleteThe title begs the question: Is there a best man? Or only men whose sins are better hidden?
I honestly don't get Johnson's premise exactly--that Northam should have resigned because what he did was morally reprehensible? If that's so, Northam ought not to have run in the first place, should he? And, by extension, anyone who has ever done anything that is insensitive ought never to run, correct?
Do such sensitive and inoffensive creatures exist? Do they want to run for office? And would they make good elected officials?
We are so fixated on personality And virtue, that we forget it would be a step up just to find a candidate who can make a logical argument backed up with provable facts.
And now Amy Klobuchar is a bitch because some former employees said she was mean to them. Geez Louise.
Maybe Democrats deserve Trump because they're too busy vetting everyone's purity and making it impossible for their own best people to run.
Jean: "I honestly don't get Johnson's premise exactly--that Northam should have resigned because what he did was morally reprehensible?"
ReplyDeleteBut Johnson said this: "Northam’s decades-old racist behavior does not inherently suggest he lacks the moral acuity to govern now. If he is to be taken at his word—that he is not racist, ardently supports civil rights and is genuinely horrified by his past attitudes and actions—then his growth and maturation could be seen as evidence of his fitness for office."
Yes, but he also seems to think that if Northampton were acting morally, he would have resigned:
Delete"If this was really the beginning of the ever-elusive national conversation on race, the focus would not have immediately gone to Northam’s elected office. Instead, it would’ve centered on why blackface is hurtful, an exploration of why white Americans continue to engage in it, an understanding of how such racist depictions have real socioeconomic consequences, and a commitment to social education and change enacted through a concrete policy agenda.
In such a scenario, Northam would’ve resigned out of respect for the 20 percent of Virginians who are black and the black voters who were essential to his election win, and who have lost confidence in him. For a state that’s engaged in a fierce debate about its Confederate legacy, this sort of moral courage would’ve gone a long way toward healing and reconciliation. Northam’s moral leadership would be more respected than the office he held."
So Johnson's point eludes me.
"Northampton" thank you autocorrect ... NOT.
DeleteLet's agree to disagree.
DeleteI take that "IF..." to mean this is NOT "really the beginning of the ever-elusive nation conversation on race,.... This is partisan politics, not moral reckoning.
I'm not arguing with you. I tend to think that Northam should stay if he can start some type of larger discussion on race, but he seems flummoxed every time he stands behind a podium. His wife had to intervene when he appeared poised to demonstrate his moon walk in response to a reporter's question.
DeleteSo...the governor, the lieutenant governor, the attorney general!
ReplyDeleteWho's left to govern Virginia?
I have to believe Republicans are having a field day digging this stuff up and then demanding that Democrats prove their zero-tolerance-to-anything-offensive creds by demanding that they fire each other.
DeleteWho is left to govern if all three resign? Perhaps it's sheer coincidence, but the next in line would be the Speaker of the House of Delegates - who is a republican.
DeleteI think Jean is right - this stuff is being uncovered by "conservatives" in Virginia who are angry that they lost so many congressional seats and also the governorship.
Now, if the GOP speaker also has racist or sexual harrassment ghosts in his closet, will the Republicans cry for him to resign too?
Re: Republicans having a field day: I read somewhere - I think; I was ill yesterday and it may have been a fever-dream - that it was more likely Democrats releasing the tidbits from their opposition research to submarine one another's careers. Allegedly the motivation is that the Virginia governorship is term-limited so there is always a queue of hopefuls waiting for the next election.
DeleteThat sounds pretty fevered to me, Jim, but not sure I am underestimating either party's ability to implode these days. Spaetzle and.chicken to you, too. Feel better!
DeleteJean, many thanks for the well wishes, but in fact whatever I had, I couldn't keep anything down; as we used to say in my college days, I was riding the porcelain express all night. So Spaetzle and chicken, while wonderful in its medicinal qualities, may not have been the right prescription in this case.
DeleteOh, dear. It's ice chips for you, Jim!
DeleteSqueaky clean Teapublicans.
DeleteImpeachment? Would that work? And how?
ReplyDeleteThe process for impeachment in Virginia is pretty much the same as the national Constitution -- House impeaches, Senate tries. The order of succession, in another section of the Va. constitution, is governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general. Then comes the Speaker of the House of Delegates. So, for two blackfaces and an allegation of sexual assault, one could purge the executive branch of Democrats and install a Republican.
DeleteAs of now.
It appears that the Republican Majority Leader of the Senate has a shoe polish problem, too. But he is not in the line of succession. If the House Speaker can't do it, the House has to go into session and find someone to take the job. And why might the House Speaker be unable to do it? We await the next news blockbuster from the Commonwealth of Virginia.
What is with the blackface down there?! I thought minstrel shows died about 100 years ago. Why did all these people smear their faces, and why did they feel compelled to have themselves photographed?
DeleteExtramarital affairs, I kind of understand. But blackface? It's just bizarre.
Jim: What is with the blackface down there?!
DeleteI guess you haven't spent much time in southern states. The deeper south states are worse than Virginia.
Virginia is now a transitioning state - Northern Virginia, the counties that include the suburbs of DC as far out as an hour drive - is not really "southern" as so many people who live there came to DC from other parts of the country to work. It is the economic engine of Virginia and it has become quite blue. Their votes and the votes of the city dwellers in Richmond and the Norfolk areas (urban, including a large African American population) are what put Hillary over the top. However, once you get south of the greater DC/NOVA area, and outside the city limits south of Fredericksburg and Manassas, you are back in the south (even many in those towns are still white southern in their mindset), and those who grew up there, absorbed the racism, even if it was subconscious. The enlightenment has been slow to come in southern Virginia outside the big cities and whites like Northam, who grew up there a few decades ago were mostly not enlightened. He grew up on Virginia's eastern shore (of the Chesapeake Bay). That was, and still is, mostly farming and watermen (fishermen to people in other parts of the country). It is still very rural - we were on the eastern shore about a year ago, driving north to Maryland's eastern shore. We saw lots and lots of Trump signs there. He went to VMI (Virginia Military Institute) which is sort of the West Point of the south. It used to be very proud of all the Confederate officers who graduated from there. VMI now works hard to seem not to discriminate. I'm not sure if that is the reality though, as it still attracts a lot of young men from the parts of Virginia that are not in NOVA. Apparently Northam did at some point become aware of racism. He goes to a predominantly black church and its members don't want him to step down.
So ... as I write this, Northam still is in office. Now he has struck a deal with state Republican lawmakers on tax reduction and rebate legislation opposed by his own party. One suggestion is that, inasmuch as his own party is calling on him to resign, he's sending a message to them: you don't have my back, I won't have yours. It seems he's also considering leaving the Democratic Party and governing as an independent.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thought, Jim. I suppose that if the party of FDR and LBJ has morphed into the Holy Office of the Inquisition, it has to expect heretics to find another home. And there isn't much doubt about the "if." I am keeping a list of cardinals and monsignorinis who want to run other people's lives.
DeleteNortham is there to stay...in the governor's office at least for this elected term:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/10/us/ralph-northam-childhood-race.html
His friends and neighbors want him to stay and many of them are African-Americans...according to this story in today's NYT. Maybe they don't care so much about black face with someone who went to school with them, played ball, and when he became a pediatrician took care of their children.
AND, we still aren't sure about that picture..who's who? and who put it in the year book....