Missing the Point

In a column by Kimberley Strassel in Wall Street Journal Online (I can't link because unless you subscribe, for money, it's only a temporary, timed-out link), she claims that it is the Democrats, not the Republicans that are split down the middle, fractured by dissension, division and disunity.

Ah, another Rainbow Republican. I wonder if she sprinkles pixie dust, too.

Apparently she can't see the Grand Canyon size chasm between Hack Republicans and Conservative Republicans looming as a result of a McCain annointing.

But actually, that's beside my point. There's going to be a lot of that in the next 10 months. Party Aparatchik Republicans pretending all is well, nuzzling McCain, pretending he's acceptable, urging unity.

Here's the real point. A paragraph that is so telling on so many levels. And yet the writer clearly misses the significance. I included the first paragraph just for clarity:

"On the Democratic side, you couldn't fit a piece of paper between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama on most issues. The fight is instead over who has more charisma, who has more experience, who is a woman, who is a minority. It's also a debate about the direction of the party, and whether Democrats (in contrast to Republicans) are about to end an era. Will they continue a 16-year Clinton dynasty, or cast the duo out in favor of the hopeful liberal?

Through this lens, the divisions make more sense. ...Mrs. Clinton gets women because she is a woman; older voters because she is of, or near, their generation; blue-collar workers because they remember the boom Clinton years; Hispanics, ditto. Mr. Obama gets men because he is a man; younger voters because he is youthful and hopeful; wealthier liberals because they are bored with the Clintons; blacks because he is black. This is admittedly a very crude breakdown, but it contains kernels of truth."

What's wrong with this picture? And more to the point, what's wrong with her painting it without comment?

Content of character? NOT.

Ms. Strassel sees people choosing candidates because of skin color, gender, age, level of wealth... the need for excitement. And to her, this identity politics of the worst and most divisive kind, is not an outrage but "make perfect sense. This from a Republican.

I don't know whether to shit or go blind.

I've made the point before that people like to stick to "there own kind", which is my argument for a majority White America, and the end of multiculturalism...on the grounds that it is divisive and dangerous to have too many different "identities" in a single country. It always results in conflict, and sometimes even war. So I "get" the idea of voting for "someone like you."

But "someone like you" doesn't mean your very own sex, your very own exact skin tone, your very own exact age, your very own exact physical mirror reflection, for God's sake! It means someone who shares your values, your history, your language, your culture and your hopes for the future!

Well, this is certainly what the Democrats have been working for for years: Women only voting for women, blacks only voting for blacks, young people only voting for young people, old people only voting for old people. Well they have it, now. Isn't it precious? They must be very pleased. And our Ms. Strassel, ostensible Republican, doesn't seem to think it odd or dangerous.

Multiculturalism and Identity Politics will be the end of America as we know it. And when any Republican can describe such antics without comment, or apparently without noticing the dark, ugly and inevitable implications of it, we're doomed, people, we're doomed.

Time for that armed compound in Idaho.

The Gunslinger