A touchy topic

[Guest J*ingus]

Something's really been bugging me lately, and I thought I'd come here and ask you guys for your opinions. It's the 21st Century. We live in a country that gives us all equal rights, regardless of who or what we are. We're supposed to be the most free society on earth.

 

So, in this atmosphere, why have we not yet elected a President who isn't a white Christian man? (And at least 80% of them were heterosexual, married, and independently wealthy as well.) For all the claims of social progress, this seems like a pretty glaring example that even here in the Land of the Free, all are not created equal. Furthermore, I can't remember any time that either the Reps or the Dems ever even nominated a Presidential candidate who was female, or of dark skin tone, or who professed belief in any deity other than the Judeo-Christian God. Quite frankly, what gives?

[Guest Some Guy]

I bet Powell would have gotten the GOP nomination over Dole in 96 if he wanted it.

 

Jingus the reason is simple, there have been no electable minoritirs or women who have run for Pres. Jesse jackson is far too racist to be elected, Geraldine Ferrara is a Commie, and who else has run?

Name me a minority or a woman who is electable and willing to run. Then talk about this not being the land of the free.

 

BTW what's wrong with being married, straight, and independently weathy? The latter is admirable IMO, it shows that the person has brains and is capable of doing something productive.

[Guest J*ingus]

I'm just saying that it's awful strange that maybe about 1% of this country's population is made up of wealthy white Christian married men, while nearly 100% of our presidents have come from that demographic.

 

As to electable, that doesn't answer anything, it merely extends my original question: why have there been no electable women or minorities?

[Guest The Czech Republic]

The Onion said it best when they said "A woman President? What if she menstruates on some important legislature?" Sorry, sorry.

 

And as for minorities, Jesse Jackson is the reason why.

[Guest Some Guy]

There just aren't that many female or minority politicians who's views would be welcome on the national stage.

Jesse Jackson might get elected in a poor, black community but his anti-white man rhetoric wouldn't fly in Iowa, why would you vote for someone who hates you?

 

As I said I think Powell is electable, he is a moderate Republican who would draw more black votes than, say George Bush. But he chose not to run and from what I've seen recently he might choose not to be Sec. of State when Bush is reelected.

 

When I go to vote I don't think about the race or gender of a candidate, unless they run on that basis ("I am women hear me roar" or whatever). That shit doesn't matter to me. I would never, ever vote for Hillary or Jackson, not because or what they are, but because of who they are and what they stand for. And I think much of the country feels the same way. Although you so run into far more women and minorities who vote for someone because they are of the same gender or race than you do white guys.

Why are some minorities and women so boastful about voting that way and not called racist or sexist when a white male who did it would be?

[Guest J*ingus]

There just aren't that many female or minority politicians who's views would be welcome on the national stage.

But you're proving my own point here. That statement is nonsense. Women and male minorities make up the vast majority of the population in this country. Yet somehow every single person who has had welcome views and is electable just happened to be a white Christian man? That doesn't fly.

[Guest Some Guy]

Woman and minorities may make up the majority of the population but the politicians from those groups don't necessarilly have to reflect those of the the people.

David Duke's views on race relations don't fly with me, nor do almost any of Tom Dascle's and OMG They're white and so am I!

Hillary is probably the most prominant female politician in the country, but the problem is she is a Socialist and that does not reflect the majority of the country's views.

[Guest J*ingus]

So where are the women and minorities who reflect the majority of the country's views? There have got to be a whole lot of them out there. Why haven't we heard from them?

[Guest Some Guy]

Don't know, it's not like they're being held back by a massive conspirisy. Maybe they just have something better to do with their time then running for office.

 

Jingus, why does it matter to you what the skin color or gender of our officials are? Just curious.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

why have we not yet elected a President who isn't a white Christian man?

All right kids, look away now if you're a sensitive little liberal sissy-boy, because this recurring subject always manages to get under my skin.

 

The Office of the President of the United States of America is not representational. We don't fill it every four years with people who reflect nationwide demographics. We fill it with those who are the best. Full stop. In terms of qualifications and in terms of electability, our Presidents are the best our political parties and our country have to offer. As they should be.

Because if we discount electability in our holier-than-thou crusades for tolerance, we make ourselves and our philosophies of governance irrelevant: if our first priority isn't credible strength, it doesn't matter what our second priority is.

 

And it's never any group's "turn" to be President. That's the worst argument for this contemptible cause. Quotas are a terrible idea even in schools, and I think the Oval Office is just a little bit more important than the pot-filled halls of some mawkish community college in California. If wealthy heterosexual white Christian males are the best we have (and I think they are), then more power to them.

 

Personally, I'd love to see someone like Dr Condoleezza Rice as President. I think she'd be superb. But it would demean her exceptional talents, her outstanding accomplishments, and the highest office in the land if she were elected because a dumbfuck liberal wanted to prove he was tolerant and enlightened. I would vote for her in spite of the fact that she's a black woman (and thus less electable than a white male), not because of it.

 

We fight the fights we can win. There's nothing dishonourable or bigoted or misogynistic about that. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans nominate non-white non-Christian females? Cry me a river. That just proves they're smart. I'm white, but I'm also an agnostic, a homosexual, and a girl. Even if I had been born in America, there would be no chance - NONE - that I could ever be a Presidential candidate.

Am I bitter? No. That's the way it should be. Am I disappointed? Again, no. Societal attitudes take time to change, and we've come a very long way already in a very short time. I'm quite happy no one's trying to stone me to death.

So if you want a black female President (or, for that matter, a white lesbian President), go change racial and sexual attitudes in this country, and then look back in 50 years. Yes, we're the freest society in the civilised world. Yes, in theory, we all have equal rights.

 

But while being the President is many things - a privilege, the highest of honours, a great burden, and a duty that supercedes all others - there is one thing it is not.

 

It is not a right.

[Guest J*ingus]

Jingus, why does it matter to you what the skin color or gender of our officials are? Just curious.

 

Because I am an upper-class white Christian-raised man. I've lived most of my life in the company of white Christian males. I know the beast, as it were. And it seems much of the time, the white male elected officials in this country aren't even speaking for me, much less for people who're much different from themselves.

 

If wealthy heterosexual white Christian males are the best we have (and I think they are), then more power to them.

 

Why are they the best? Really, I'm serious, why? Why can the best be found only there, and not among other demographics?

 

there would be no chance - NONE - that I could ever be a Presidential candidate.

Am I bitter? No. That's the way it should be.

 

Even if you were the best candidate for the job?

 

But while being the President is many things - a privilege, the highest of honours, a great burden, and a duty that supercedes all others - there is one thing it is not.

It is not a right.

 

But by God, it is a right for every American-born citizen (above a certain age, aside from convicted felons and the mentally retarded or insane) to have a chance of running for and obtaining that office. The Constitution says so.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Why are they the best? No, really I'm serious, why?

Read more carefully. I answered this already. They are the most electable because of the colour of their skin, their religion, their gender, and their sexual orientation. I could never be the best candidate because I am not electable. That is reality. Hypothesising about what could happen if I were is worse than useless.

 

 

it is a right for every American-born citizen (aside from convicted felons and the mentally retarded or insane) to have a chance of running for and obtaining that office.  The Constitution says so.

The Constitution says nothing of the sort. Article II, Section 1:

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

This extends to the Vice President as well. Amendment XII:

"But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

 

This is not a statement of rights. It is a statement of eligibility. There is a difference.

Everyone has the right to run. No one has the right to win. No one has the right to have a chance of winning, either. That's a socialist credo, and this is not yet a socialist country, despite the Democrats' best efforts.

[Guest danielisthor]

Just off the top of my head, i can say that neither Lincoln nor Truman were rich white men. I believe that by the time Truman left office, he was broke.

[Guest Some Guy]

Lincoln was not born into a weathy family but he became a lawyer and made pretty good money prior to his election in 1860. I don'r know too much about him, I didn't write 2 papers and give a 15 minute speech about him last semester.

[Guest danielisthor]

I think (unless i comprehended it wrong) was that they were born into their wealth. There is a difference if they are self made.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Yeah, that's how I read "wealthy" in the original post too.

[Guest danielisthor]

i think we can also add that neither Clinton or Reagan were "wealthy". Grant probably not, Eisenhower, career military man, can't see it. but this will take alot of research.

[Guest Slapnuts00]

Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer! Hey Marney, I didn't realize you weren't born here, where were you born? I'm just curious because you're so partiotic, it's a suprise that you weren't born in the USA.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"The reason is simple, there have been no electable minoritirs or women who have run for Pres."

 

Agreed. It get me sick sometimes to hear the "we-need-a-black/woman/chinese/gay/etc." president.

 

Personally, I have a feeling in my gut that Powell will be Bush's VP in '04, thus setting up the stage for a presidental run in '08. Of course, Big Media will probably say he's not "black" enough...

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Hey Marney, I didn't realize you weren't born here, where were you born?

Copenhagen, Denmark. My mother was attending a psychiatry conference at the time. I'm an American, but I wasn't born on American soil, so I can't be elected to the Presidency, and I can't succeed to it either.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Big Media will probably say [Powell's] not "black" enough...

Al Gore's campaign manager did just that 2 years ago, calling the general an "Uncle Tom," among other things.

[Guest Dr. Wrestlingphysics]

I don't know what the big hang-up is.

As someone who lives in Britain, we have had, in living memory, a Woman Prime Minister, and although many disagreed with her policies, it wasn't because she was a woman, it was because they disagreed with her policies!

What I mean is that if a woman had appropriate policies and was elected leader/candidate of a party, the party supporters would/should vote for her, same if were a black/other minority race male.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"Al Gore's campaign manager did just that 2 years ago, calling the general an "Uncle Tom," among other things."

 

I know -- I was just commenting on how Big Media would treat a Powell presidency.

 

BTW: How about all the Uncle Tom bs surrounding Justice Thomas during his confirmation? I have an old William F. Buckley column talking about it, and it's pure gold...

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I was just commenting on how Big Media would treat a Powell presidency.

"He speaks so well!"

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

LOL -- I loved Chris Rock's bit saying "He's an educated man -- how the "f" did you expect him to sound? I'm gonna be Prez-O-Dent!"

[Guest Cancer Marney]

That was a great, great skit. <g> "Ah'm a drop me a bomb today!"

[Guest treble charged]

In Canada, we experimented with a female Prime Minister. It didn't work out so well, so we don't like to talk about it much anymore. Wasn't her fault, really, though, as she was basically put in charge of a party that was going down the shitter, anyway. She was basically a sacrificial lamb, or sorts.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

If/when the US ever elects a woman or minority for the top spot, I'm going to hate, especially if the person is a Dem, the fact that any opponent of theirs will be called a gender/race-hater because they disagree with them, or that the opposing voice doesn't want to hear the opinions of a strong woman/minority. I had a taste of this w/ Hillary when she was First Lady; I'd hate to see this full-blown over a 4-year stint. (Hill at least got to hide in her It Takes A Village book and countless Save The Children campaigns when things got rough...)

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

I would pack my bags and leave this country if the wife of ANY washington personality acheives high office. Going by the template of what our presidents' racial and economic demographic has been so far, to elect a female version of one of them...dear god.

 

President Tipper.

 

Hillary is Abe Fucking Lincoln compared to her. Tipper Gore is one of the only people on earth I despise more than Jerry Falwell.

[Guest Slapnuts00]

President Tipper.

Man, if she became president before her husband, poor Al just might end it all!