Citing discomfort with seating any candidate nominated by disgraced Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, the Senate today turned away Ronald Burris, refusing to seat him as the junior senator from Illinois. A prediction: because Burris would replace Obama as the only African-American in the Senate, by end of business today, Republican sources will already be crying racism, with headlines like, “Dems Ensure an All-White Senate,” etc. Don’t believe it.
In most cases, racism is not an act but a motivation. As an employer, it’s not racist to pass up a black employee for a more qualified white employee. As a voter, it wouldn’t have been racist to vote for McCain over Obama, if you legitimately preferred McCain’s policies. And as, say, Harry Reid, it’s not racist to bar Burris from the Senate, provided he has a non-racially motivated, objective reason to do so. Blagojevich’s proven track record for dirty politics is more than enough to cast aspersion on Burris: if the Senate should eventually seat him, Reid is right to wonder whether his appointment is on the level, and race need have nothing to do with it.
Curiously, if and when Republicans do cry “racism” over the Senate’s decision to block Burris – oop, Conservapedia just went there, Fox News can’t be far behind – the talking point will place the GOP in the odd position of arguing for something like affirmative action, the idea that, because of his race, the Democrats should have overlooked potential problems in Burris’ nomination. It will just be more proof that, like its stance on feminism (see, e.g. Sarah Palin), the GOP only cares about race when it helps them.
UPDATE: Actually, a Democratic congressman (Rush, D-Ill) went there first.
I can’t even believe it could be construed this way. Senators said way before that they wouldn’t admit anyone that Blagojevich picked.
I’m sure if they had, the line would have been about “corrupt Democrats” instead.
Posted by Oneiroi | January 6, 2009, 1:18 pmIsn’t the flip side of the arguement just as true then Ames? That the Left only favors affirmative action when it helps them?
Posted by Mike at The Big Stick | January 6, 2009, 1:22 pmI knew that argument would rear its head. The problem with the GOP line is that we never hear about racial justice except in these situations: on the other side, from the DNC, racial justice is actually a prominent theme, making strategic usage seem genuine when it does happen.
Posted by Ames | January 6, 2009, 4:19 pmWe don’t talk about ‘racial justice’ i.e. white guilt because it’s kind of silly. As for this situation, the cracks are already forming in the Democratic front. Feinstein wants him seated. I think more will follow.
Posted by Mike at The Big Stick | January 6, 2009, 7:10 pmReally, though, this should have never happened. My impression from what I’ve heard is that Burris is a fine, respectable appointment, so Blago surely did him a disservice.
Posted by Kris | January 6, 2009, 7:46 pmRacial justice isn’t silly. And, to a certain point, I’m sure the DNC’s racial bona fides could survive on Johnson’s legacy alone. That’s fine by me; it was a brave move and we paid for it.
And as for Burris, you’re right, Kris. I wonder why he accepted unless he thought his chances were otherwise slim. It’s bad politics to begin a national career with an albatross around your neck
Posted by Ames | January 6, 2009, 9:17 pmI have to agree with Mike – this opens a crack in the Democrats that we don’t need right now. It’s bad enough that Mr. Obama’s team didn’t get how serious the investigation was against Gov. Richardson; it’s sad that Leon Panetta is getting hammered by his fellow Dems for being a great manager but not an intelligence professional. Now this. I had so hoped our party would LEARN something from the various Republican implosions (Larry Craig, anyone?). Looks like I’m in to be disappointed – AGAIN.
Posted by Philip H. | January 7, 2009, 9:12 amMaybe if we get 4 years of various Democratic scandals then the public will stop believing that corruption is a particular trait of one side or the other. If they believe that BOTH sides are to the blame then maybe it will force those sides to clean up their act.
It’s also funny that as soon as Democrats get serious power, all these problems creep up on their side. I think we can thank our friends in the media for that. Sounds like selective reporting.
Posted by Mike at The Big Stick | January 7, 2009, 10:04 am#5- eat your words! Burris bought his seat. He “lynched and hung” justice
Posted by jane doe | March 14, 2009, 3:11 pm