When then-Congressman Barbara Boxer and a handful of her Democratic female colleagues heard uncorroborated allegations that a Republican nominee for the Supreme Court had talked about pubic hairs on a soft drink can with a female co-worker, they marched across Capitol Hill, protesting the Senate’s treatment of that woman (who could not back up her allegations). Seven years later, when a female nurse accused a Democratic president of rape, Mrs. Boxer showed no interest in the accusation–or the media’s treatment of Mrs. Broaddrick or any other woman leveling accusations against Bill Clinton (the aforementioned Democrat).
She didn’t raise a ruckus when her fellow partisans trashed those women, even though each and every one of them (unlike Ms. Hill) could corroborate their allegations.
No wonder Democrats, who urged Republicans to “drive out Trent Lott” as Senate GOP Leader in 2002 for his racially insensitive praise of Strom Thurmond at the latter’s 100th birthday party, do not ask their party to drive Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (D-Mr. Crumpit) for his bizarre and patronizing comment about Obama’s skin color. The reason they’re not so concerned: “but Lott was a Republican. Reid is a Democrat.”
Guess they just hold Republicans to higher standards.
Some might say that given his history with the segregationist group “Council of Conservative Citizens,” Lott’s statement had been part of pattern. Well, Reid too has a pattern of denigrating intelligent African-Americans, having disparaged the writing skills of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
Nowadays, more often than not Democrats (and their allies in the media) bring up racism, sexual harassment and “homophobia” not so much out of concern for the supposed victims, but as a means to attack Republicans as intolerant. Note how often Republicans are tarred as “anti-gay” for holding the same position on gay marriage as the Democratic President of the United States.
Michelle Malkin asks:
Many conservatives (myself included) put pressure on him to resign. Where are the “progressive” Democrats who will apply the same standards to Reid?
Michelle, they’re few and far between because for many of them, it wasn’t about race, but about politics. They just wanted to show how much better Democrats are than Republicans.
And that’s the subterfuge. They claim it’s about treatment of minority groups so that can show how much better Democrats are than Republicans. But, if it were really about such treatment, Obama would be leading the calls for Reid’s ouster while Barbara Boxer would have been at the forefront of efforts to impeach Bill Clinton. Gay groups have refused to back Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential contest.
When evidence surfaces showing Democrats engaging in behavior which would have earned them excoriation if they belonged to the opposing party, it’s is just dismissed understandable and forgivable human imperfection. For Republicans, however, it’s a sign of serious moral failing worthy of ongoing opprobrium, forgivable only by a change in partisan affiliation (see e.g, David Brock and John Dean).