The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

President Clinton?

Maybe, if Democratic voters have their way. While the Republican faithful are split between a number of contenders and not particularly enthusiastic about any of them, a new poll finds Democrats overwhelmingly united behind a Hillary Clinton candidacy for 2016. A commanding 82 percent of the party, according to the CBS News/New York Times poll, wants to see her run.

It is, of course, way too early to be taking polls seriously. But perhaps an observer can nevertheless be forgiven for being heartened at the prospect of a Clinton campaign, much less a Clinton victory. Either would send a much-needed message to those who are still waiting for America to get back to normal.

You know the definition of “normal,” right? A world wherein straight, white Christian men still call all the shots. That world has been under assault for the last 50 years and the pressure has only increased in the last 10 as gay people roll back restrictions of their human rights, as a black man with an exotic name makes an improbable ascent to the presidency, as a woman positions herself to make the same climb.

The political right has responded with apoplexy, a temper tantrum of epic proportions:

On gay rights, for instance, we are seeing attempts to reinstitute honest-to-Bull Connor Jim Crow, laws legalizing discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Meantime, the aforementioned black president has endured a nearly unprecedented barrage of resistance and name-calling from right-wingers who long ago decided to render the country ungovernable rather than let him govern it. Indeed, just the other day, GOP spokesman Ted Nugent called the president a “subhuman mongrel” and one was only surprised that one was not surprised.

Which brings us to the woman who would be president. Given what we’ve seen thus far, you have to wonder, albeit with sickened fascination, what they will do to her — especially since she’s already one of the more polarizing political figures of the last quarter-century.

If she sheds a tear, will they say she is too emotional for such a tough job? Or that she’s using femininity for political gain? Will she be allowed to have an opinion on reproductive rights, domestic violence or income inequality or will they say she’s playing the “gender card”? Who will be the first pundit to use the “B-word,” comment upon her figure or crack a rape joke?

Not to reduce Clinton to the sum of her chromosomes. If she runs, she ought to be subjected to adversarial questions about her politics, plans and programs just as anybody else would be, and elected, if at all, because voters decide she is the best person for the job, period.

No, the point is only that if it does happen, if Democrats run her and if she wins, it would provide a useful lesson for a part of the electorate badly in need of same. This temper tantrum, this screaming and crying and stamping of feet that now passes for dialogue on the political right, springs from nothing more or less than a denial of change, a refusal to accept the fact that you cannot squeeze the paste back into the tube, and that those who were once stuck in the closet, relegated to the back of the bus or kept in the kitchen have freed themselves from those constraints and will not go back again.

There could be no better way to make the point than to follow the first African-American president with the first woman president. And who knows? Maybe the president after that will be gay — and a Republican.

And maybe then, finally, this temper tantrum against social change would end with the belated recognition that change comes, regardless. We are forging a new American paradigm, and there will be no “getting back” to normal.

We’re already there.

(Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald, 1 Herald Plaza, Miami, Fla., 33132. Readers may contact him via email at lpitts@miamiherald.com.)

Photo via Wikimedia Commons

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Rep. Tony Gonzales

Photo by CQ/Roll Call

The Republican House member who represents Uvalde, Texas, where 19 kids and 2 adults were shot to death in an elementary school on Tuesday, has said in the past that he will vote against any gun safety legislation in Congress.

In September 2021, Rep. Tony Gonzales tweeted in response to a provision on firearms included in that year's annual defense spending bill, "I will fight against any attempt to restrict our 2nd Amendment right, which is why I joined in urging the stripping of red flag laws from the final version of the bill." Gonzales was one of 161 Republican House members who signed a letter to the leadership of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees in October of that year urging that the provision be removed.

Keep reading... Show less

Beto O'Rourke, back to camera, confronts state officials over Uvalde school shooting at press conference

Not long after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and his entourage showed up on a stage in Uvalde, Texas, to offer the usual thoughts and prayers that follow a gun massacre, Democratic rival Beto O'Rourke suddenly strode up to confront him.

Pointing a finger at the governor, he yelled: "You're offering us nothing!"

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}