Mistress Dowd

Maureen Dowd implies (never argues) in her ugly piece today that if the "beneficiaries" of affirmative action feel cheated or cheapened by their success or accomplishments and want to end the practice, they must be understood as "pulling the ladder up with them," thereby preventing others from succeeding.

It is not clear why those "beneficiaries" should be viewed this way. It is much more reasonable to assume that they are speaking honestly about the ambivalence they feel as a result of the policies that have eased their way. Heaping indignity upon indignity, Dowd wants to lower standards for blacks and then refuses to believe blacks when they say they are troubled by lower standards.

Dowd not only remarks that Clarence Thomas is where he is because of his race, but appallingly and crudely claims that he should be satisfied with that situation rather than condemning affirmative action policies. Apparently, in the liberal world, people aren't allowed to express their feelings, especially if they are ambivalent about a liberal policy. Here we have the white mistress telling the dissatisfied black to shut up and go along with the program. Remind you of anything?

However much one may favor affirmative action as a remedy for past injustice, it is impossible to sanction Dowd's rhetoric. Her piece is so harsh, shrill, hateful, insensitive, and, yes, racist (strange coming from a liberal, no?) that it should be used as exhibit A by the GOP for courting black voters back to the party.

No conservative pundit could ever get away with writing the things Dowd wrote today. The good news is that no conservative pundit would want to.