While the Boston Globe offers the expected simpering praise of President Obama’s speech to Congress last night—for example, the reporter speaks of his 60% approval rating as a strength against Republicans when the rating really has seen a precipitous decline since his inauguration; a Republican would not get the benefit of that doubt—the coverage of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s Republican response ended with an astonishingly biased attack on Republicans with no concomitant alternative view. This is how the article ends:
“What makes him so appealing to Republicans is he’s an Indian-American representing a Southern state,” said Louisiana State University professor Robert Mann, who evoked the party’s recent election of its first African-American leader. “A lot of it is the same reason they elected Michael Steele their chair: They’re looking to push out in front any bit of diversity they can dredge up.”
Because, of course, non-white people are just figureheads in our party, pushed forward by those fat cat, white men in backrooms to hide the real ugly bigotry of the GOP. Could you imagine a Republican academic getting away with saying that Obama was dredged up by the Democrats to burnish their claims of being the party of diversity? No, there would at least be another sentence offering a rebuttal from the sympathetic point of view.
We’re 36 days into the official transformation of the Fourth Estate into an arm of the White House press office. And the umpteenth day of the mainstream media being unabashedly biased toward liberalism.
Isn’t the difference that the Democratic Party actually is the party of diversity, and the Republican Party is not? That’s what I think the point of the article is. The Republican Party is overwhelmingly a party that consists of white Americans. There is nothing wrong with that per se, but it certainly is a fact. So it strikes some as strange to see Jindal and Steele being pushed as leaders in the Party. Sure, it could be a coincidence, but most people are connecting dots. No one bats an eye when a prominent Democrat is black because 90+% of blacks vote for Democrats. I don’t understand your point.
1. The word “dredge” is unnecessarily pejorative.
2. The reporter didn’t offer another viewpoint.
3. It’s the same old use of the race card.
4. Diversity is not about percentages.