Connect with us
Political correctness cannot be allowed to limit debate in a presidential campaign.

archive

Presidential Politics Must Defy Political Correctness

Political correctness cannot be allowed to limit debate in a presidential campaign.

Did Lil’ Billy — our “first black president” — commit a racist act? Or is it the greatest irony of our new century to hear our former Apologist-in-Chief again humble himself to multi-culti dogma?

Republicans are paying a lot of attention to the Democrats’ primary contest, but not the most important aspect of it.  It matters not which of the top three Dems — Nurse Ratched, Obambi, or the Hairhead — wins their nomination because they are fungible liberals.  Oh, dear.  Did I give Aunt Pittypat a case of the vapors by using those not-so-affectionate nicknames? Good. 

This is called free speech, and part of it is ridicule, sarcasm and parody.  If Republicans don’t join my Sarcasm Caucus, they will lose this fall. 

Because that’s the biggest issue in this campaign debate: can the issues that comprise each of the candidates’ character — not just their records (and, in the case of the three liberal stooges, lack of qualifications) — be debated openly? Or will the political correctness cowards win the day and bar what should be said in the race to November? 

I never thought I would ever write these words:  what Bill Clinton said was correct.  Obama’s campaign is a fairy tale: a series of fantasies about Obama that prop him up as a candidate with a plausible claim to the presidency.  Obama is a young, charming and highly intelligent man. But he has done nothing on which to base his candidacy.  Bambi — the baby deer — is the basis of a good nickname for Obama because he will, if faced with the reality of governing in time of war, slip and slide and belly-flop on the ice of tough decisions on fast-moving global events.

A couple of months ago, on Alan Colmes’ radio show, I called Obama “Obambi.”  He, and the other guest (whose name I happily forgot) harrumphed loudly, asking if I’d have called a white candidate by that name and saying it was a racist remark. That was a slander on my character.  I called Alan’s producer and said that if I didn’t get an apology from Alan, I’d never be on the show again. To his credit, Alan called the following morning and apologized.  But after Lil’ Billy said Obama’s campaign was the biggest fairy tale he’d ever seen, it was Clinton who apologized.

Last week, Billy called Al Sharpton’s radio show and said, “First of all, it’s not true.  It’s not a fairy tale. He might win. I think he’s a very impressive man…”  Why Al Sharpton is the designated apology-receiver for the black community is a puzzle.  The man is a fraud. (See? Free speech can be grammatically correct, stated bluntly and factual all at the same time.)  But the apology was not justified: it was, like every Clinton apology that came before it and those that will follow, sheer pandering.

Hillary is basing her candidacy on fictional experience. Talking to Chinese leaders about women’s rights is a far cry from having to weigh intelligence matters and decide if US special forces should try to seize Pakistani nuclear weapons if it looks like that nation will fall into the hands of a Talibanista regime.  But Hillary is also campaigning on the fact that she would break the “highest glass ceiling” that is barring American women from ultimate success.  If she wants to play the estrogen card, why isn’t it fair to parody her ashtray-tossing temper, her utter lack of accomplishment and play — over and over in campaign commercials — her “I have a million ideas. The country can’t afford them all” quote? 

It’s not only fair, it’s essential.  No Republican candidate can shy away from making those points and hope to beat her in the fall.  Hillary once said, “I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.” Why not combine her contempt for stay-at-home moms with Harry Truman’s “If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen” description of presidential politics?  There’s no reason not to, other than political correctness.  As Finley Peter Dunne said long ago, “politics ain’t beanbag.”  Nor should it be.

As to Obama, Republicans had better decide right now: you can’t let him off the hook or he will beat you.  In his memoir (a 45-year old pol writing a “memoir” is beyond parody) he admits to drug use: “Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though.” Well, that’s comforting.  Booze, marijuana and cocaine, but not heroin. 

In New Hampshire last November, Obambi told a group of high school students, “You know, I made some bad decisions…. You know, got into drinking and experimenting with drugs. There was a whole stretch of time where I didn’t apply myself. It wasn’t until I got out of … high school, and went to college that I started realizing, man, I wasted a lot of time.”  So drug use isn’t harmful, corrupting or indicative of a character flaw.  It says a lot about Obama that he believes those things.

It’s entirely proper — because American voters need to know — just how much did Obama “experiment” with drugs?  From the list in his memoir, “experimenting” with drugs sounds like it may have been on a Timothy Learyesque scale. What other drugs, Senator Obama?  How often did you use them?  Did you go into drug rehab as a youth? Did you ever sell any to anyone?  What did you do to get the money to buy them? 

In any debate — maybe every debate — those questions should be posed.  But they may not be because the media will condemn anyone who does so.  Clinton’s New Hampshire campaign chairman Bill Shaheen was forced to resign because he raised some of those questions.  Hillary was cowed by the backlash, and folded like a cheap tent.  And does her fear of the black vote indicate a political cowardice that will allow radical Muslims to control what she says and does?

Why shouldn’t a Republican candidate put together a tv commercial that superimposes Obama in a Cheech and Chong movie? Outrageous? Maybe. But funny, and legitimate political speech. 

What about this “change” campaign Obambi is running?  Substitute Obama’s meaningless mantra for “Help” in the Beatles song, and you may have one hugely funny — and effective — campaign commercial. 

Hillary’s panderfest on yesterday’s “Meet the Press” was a characteristically humorless retreat from what her husband and Bill Shaheen said. And she took the most cowardly path. When host Tim Russert pressed her repeatedly to say that Obambi wasn’t ready to be president, she would only say that it was for the voters to decide. 

The Democrats have surrendered to political correctness.  It controls their speech, their actions and their nomination process. If Republicans also surrender, they, and the November election, are lost.

“CHANGE, I need somebody’s CHANGE, not just anybody’s CHANGE…CHANGE me if you can, I’m feeling down. And I do appreciate you’re being ‘round.  CHANGE me, get my feet back on the ground. Won’t you please, please CHANGE me? OooOooOoo.”

Written By

Mr. Babbin is the former editor of Human Events and HumanEvents.com (Jan 2007-Mar 2010) and served as a deputy undersecretary of defense in President George H.W. Bush's administration. He is the author of "In the Words of our Enemies"(Regnery,2007) and (with Edward Timperlake) of "Showdown: Why China Wants War with the United States" (Regnery, 2006) and "Inside the Asylum: Why the UN and Old Europe are Worse than You Think" (Regnery, 2004).

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Advertisement
Advertisement

TRENDING NOW:

Connect