the “isms” that queue up voters

Recently, Hillary Clinton wooed black primary voters in various southern states with assertions that we have systemic racism in these United States. Such racism has kept blacks down.  (How she would combat this “systemic” racism was not made very clear.)  These black voters gave Ms. Hillary her primary victories on this past Tuesday.

In this essay, we note various “isms” used to get various groups to queue up and vote for the (politically) correct politicos.


sign post



1.  Racism.  So, we are told that there is institutional or systemic racism in our society.  Can that be right?  I look around and see black men and women in the various professions, being elected to political office, being successful business owners, being appointed as judges to state and federal courts, etc.  I also see a disproportionate amount of violent crime committed by blacks against other blacks and against non blacks.  (Annual FBI statistics show this.) It is also widely known that a very large percentage of black children are born outside of marriage.  That is a main indicator of poverty.

As to systemic societal racism, how are non blacks preventing blacks from: forming stable families?  from finishing high school?  from avoiding out-of-wedlock births?  from avoiding drug addiction and the related crime that goes with such addictions?

Charges of racism are used to absolve blacks for their own failings.  This is not a perfect society, but as for racism, try going to many other countries and see real racism.  Blacks do respond to assertions of racism.  It is a hot button issue for them. Ironically, blacks have supported the Democrat party for the past 50 years, yet that party’s policies have not helped blacks. “Racism” works to get the blacks to the polls.  And, 95 per cent of the blacks vote for the Democrat party candidates.  Blacks might want to consider that they are the margin of victory for Democrats at the local, state and federal levels.  They have more electoral power than they realize.  Perhaps, their beef (complaint) is not truly with systemic racism in society but with the party they keep in power and with themselves for their own personal failings.  We add here that as to racism, one sees a lot of it within the black community.  It is an unpleasant truth that perpetual victims may be guilty of what they so vehemently hate and condemn in others.

2.  Sexism.  “The War on Women”.  This is used to motivate women in the US to vote for the Democrat party candidates.  The fact that there is no war on women in the US is not relevant.  The emotionally charged rhetoric works and women queue up to vote for Democrat nominees in large numbers.  (No need to go further here.  We addressed the real war on women going on outside of the US back in June, 2014.)  If a voter, male or female, disagrees with Hillary Clinton on substantive policy positions and will not vote for her because of these differences, does that make such a voter sexist?  No, but one may still be branded sexist for opposing her.

3.  Anti-Semitism.  This works to get Jews to line up for a candidate that opposes an “anti-Semite”.  This charge of anti-Semitism has been used so often over the years and covers so many things that it has now become almost meaningless.  In fact, some observers have asserted that the charge of “anti-Semitism” no longer really indicates those who hate Jews, but rather signifies those whom the Jews hate.  Be that as it may, Jews respond to the charge whether it is true or baseless.

4.  Others – not yet true “isms” – could include homophobia, and Islamaphobia.  If a candidate opposes “marriage equality” (aka same sex marriage) that candidate is homophobic.  Charges of homophobia motivate gays to vote for those opposing the homophobes.  If you (quite understandably) fear violence from Muslims, and/or if you condemn the violence committed by Muslims, you have Islamaphobia and must be opposed.

Is this not the politics of fear?  Or, of hate (hatred of alleged racists, sexists, anti-Semites, etc.)?

What a country!  Instead of having a real, rational debate on the major problems and challenges facing the country, and how best to address those challenges, we get instead emotionally charged attacks branding candidates as racist, sexist, etc.  Those candidates thus branded spend time denying the charges and not discussing important policy differences.  I am beginning to think that the system the founders envisioned cannot work.  The citizenry is too easily misled and manipulated by base appeals to emotion.  Of course, that is an indictment of the citizenry.  Could the opportunistic politicians get away with what they do get away with if we did not let them?!

A final comment on this politics of division:  Divide and conquer is how the Left continues to progress with its agenda while we, the people, fight amongst ourselves.  (Hillary condemns this “us versus them” mindset in her campaign speeches as she passionately asserts that “the country is for all of us.”  Yet, she perpetuates the divisions by her use of racism, sexism, etc.  Senator Sanders does the same thing.)

copyright 2016 –


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s