It looks like the trashing of Kinky is not over yet. Clay Robison has just printed an article in the Houston Chronicle, in which he says that a Texas state senator and a Texas state representative are planning to run radio ads in the last week of the campaign. These radio ads will accuse Kinky Friedman of being a racist.
I had hoped these ridiculous charges had died down. But looking at the desperation of the Bell campaign in the last few days, I should have known better.
State Representative Garnet Coleman, a Chris Bell supporter, says he is planning to run ads on selected Houston radio stations to remind voters of Kinky's "racially-charged remarks". State Senator Royse West, another Bell supporter, will be doing the same in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
It looks like some Democrats learned well from the Republican swift-boaters in the 2004 election. Tell a big lie, and tell it often enough, and many people will start to believe it. It's just sad that it's the Democrats now doing it. I guess there's enough room down in the mud for both parties.
When this campaign started, I enthusastically tried to get Kinky voters to vote down-ballot for the Democrats. I no longer feel I can do that. I have made personal commitments to vote for Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, and Moody, and I will honor that commitment. But I can no longer tell a Kinky supporter, that he should vote down-ballot for the party unfairly attacking Kinky. It just doesn't make sense to support those who attack you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hispanic Voters Prefer Harris Over Trump
The charts above are from a Pew Research Center survey that questioned 691 Hispanic registered voters between August 26th and September 2...
-
(Caricature of Donald Trump is by DonkeyHotey .) The following was found at LA Progressive : Someone on Quora asked “Why do some Brit... -
(This image is from kingsportlibrary.org .) I wish all of my readers a very happy and safe Thanksgiving Day -- full of family, friends, ... -
We have a right-wing nut-job here in the Texas Panhandle who has made it his personal goals to pass stupid laws and embarrass Panhandle resi...
Can you tell me why you think Kinky is a good choice for governor?
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry to read that you can't encourage others to vote for qualified candidates because Kinky will not be given an "artistic" pass for the comments he's made about race when he's running as a supposedly serious candidate for a major office.
Though I imagine that it's probably the same way many blacks, latinos, and other ethnicities Kinky's gone out of his way to continue offending feel at the prospect of a governor who dismisses their concerns as an excess of political correctness.
boadicea,
ReplyDeleteVirginia voters are entitled to make their decision based on factors which include George Allen's offensive comments.
Texas voters used to be entitled to make their decision based on factors which included Clayton Williams's offensive comments.
But it's a new day in Texas.
Pointing out that some people of different races don't understand Kinky's satire can only lead to hurt feelings. It would be politically incorrect to make an issue of Kinky's comments on welfare.
In the spirit of political correctness, Garnet Coleman and Royse West should not say what's on their minds because that would run the risk of offending people.
Wait, is your comment intended to be snark, Jenny?
ReplyDeleteBecause I thought the one real cornerstone of the Kinky campaign was throwing out political correctness?
Can't have it both ways. Kinksters can't complain their candidate's being expected to perform with an excess of political correctness, and then expect opponents to lay off of him for the purposes of political correctness.
That's jus' crazy talk...
Jobsanger:
ReplyDeleteI'd like you to consider three requests for a moment. Please.
You say, "When this campaign started, I enthusastically tried to get Kinky voters to vote down-ballot for the Democrats. I no longer feel I can do that. I have made personal commitments to vote for Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, and Moody, and I will honor that commitment. But I can no longer tell a Kinky supporter, that he should vote down-ballot for the party unfairly attacking Kinky. It just doesn't make sense to support those who attack you."
This bothers me for several reasons.
First, I can understand how your personal relationship with Kinky might lead you to conclude that Kinky is not a racist. I also believe that Kinky is not a racist. Yet my view differs from yours in that I do believe he has made comments that could make some people feel like they would not be truly represented by a Friedman administration. If you have read or seen Kinky's more recent controversial comments (not the ones published or recorded in the 1980s but the comments stated by Kinky or republished with Kinky's consent during the campaign), I would have predicted that you would agree that someone who does not know Kinky personally could possibly have a criticism of these comments.
So my first request is please tell me whether you agree that someone, particularly a black person, might reach a different conclusion from you regarding some of Kinky's comments especially if that person didn't have the benefit of a personal relationship with Kinky, like you have.
Second, as I read the Houston Chronicle article which you link, Garnet Coleman said he will purchase commercials on selected Houston radio stations with large black audiences to contrast Bell's views with those of his "three Republican opponents," lumping Friedman and Strayhorn into the same political category as Perry and that these radio spots will remind black voters about Friedman's racially charged comments. The article also says Royce West plans to do radio commercials in Dallas without discussing the content of West’s spots. Nothing in this article says that Kinky's comments will be taken out of context by Coleman or West.
So my second request (recalling the controversy about people condemning Michael Moore for “Fahrenheit 9/11” before they even saw the movie), is please consider if Coleman or West have the right to cut radio spots calling attention to issues they believe are relevant, and please consider whether their conduct in expressing their political views should be condemned in advance before you have heard the radio spots. Please tell me what you think about calling Coleman and West "swift-boaters ... telling a big lie" before you have heard their radio spots.
Third, you say that you can no longer encourage Kinky supporters to vote for Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, and Moody. Assuming that you believe that there is no context where reasonable people could reach different conclusions about Kinky's controversial comments, and further assuming that you believe that there is no possible context where Coleman and West (and I guess you include Bell in that group though Coleman and West are acting independently) should be allowed to make any comment on this topic – even assuming both of those points – how are Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, and Moody to blame for the matter? I could understand you getting upset with candidates who have proposed to run radio ads which you conclude are unfair, and I could see where you could get upset over bloggers who do the same, and I can't see how Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, and Moody are to blame for bloggers or for a proposed radio spot run discussed by Coleman and West "acting independently of the Bell campaign" much less in conjunction with the Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, or Moody campaigns.
So my third request is that you reconsider (and I hope retract) your comments about the downballot races. Please do not think that I am making any effort either to dissuade you if you are switching party affiliation or to suggest that you ought to encourage people to vote for Democrats downballot – that's your business not mine. What I am asking you to reconsider your motivation because I detect a flaw in your reasoning in that Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, Moody and the other downballot Democrats have nothing to do with a radio spot proposed by Coleman and West to promote Bell. So leave the party if you will, I wouldn’t presume to try and talk you out of it, but if you are doing so because of Coleman or West or even Bell, I think your reason is faulty, and I’d rather see you leave the party (if you must) for a good reason and not a bad one.
I know that you are sometimes uncomfortable with Kinky-related topics and that you most often do not respond to posts like mine, but I’d be very grateful to hear your thoughts even if you cannot accede to any of my three requests.
Ellen
Ellen -
ReplyDeleteEverybody has a right to their opinion, and I have the right agree or disagree.
Everyone also has a right to run any ads they want to run. Again, I have the right to disagree and register my complaints.
I did not blame Van Os and the others. I simply said I could no longer encourage Kinky voters to support Democrats.
As for leaving the party, the party left me years ago, by moving to the right and jumping on the corporate bandwagon. I did not vote in the last three primaries, and consider myself to be an independent. I have never identified myself as a Democrat on this blog, and I apologize if I gave you that impression.
I do identify myself as a liberal, a progressive, and a left-winger. This makes some Democrats think they should own my vote - they are wrong.
Jobsanger -
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for responding.
I guess I wasn't clear in my questions or maybe we just got off the same page with the differences between Democrats, liberals, progressives, and left-wingers.
I haven't thought of you as a traditional Democrat since your precinct chairman/convention delegate days long gone by, but I did think that you would support the liberal, progressive, left-wing candidate except where personal relationships might lead you to support another candidate (by the way, I'm also no fan of the two party system; I was a Nader voter).
Also, I know we may not agree which is the liberal, progressive candidate for governor (or maybe we do agree, I'm not sure if your support for Kinky is because you think he's progressive or despite the fact that he's not progressive on some ey issues). Still, I would have thought that between Van Os and Abbott we both know who's the progressive candidate, between Radnofsky and Hutchison we both know who's the progressive candidate, between Gilbert and Staples we both know who's the progressive candidate, between Moody and Willett we both know who's the progressive candidate, and everywhere south of the governor's race on the statewide ballot we would agree that in each case and without exception the Democratic candidate is the more progressive candidate.
So, back to my questions. I think we agree that everyone is entitled to their opinion about Kinky and everyone is entitled to promote their opinion in political discussions - that answers my first two questions.
This leaves my third question. You say "I simply said I could no longer encourage Kinky voters to support Democrats," and I completely respect that. I'm not trying to lead you to a different conclusion; I'm trying to understand your conclusion.
Notwithstanding their party affiliation, Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, Moody, and the other downballot Democrats have nothing whatsoever with any issue concerning Kinky or with Coleman's, West's, Bell's, or any blog's expression of their doubts about Kinky.
If you "no longer encourage Kinky voters to support Democrats," do you still encourage them to support progressive, liberal, or left-wing candidates downballot? If not, I don't understand why. If so, I don't understand why that would not include Van Os, Radnofsky, Gilbert, Moody, and the other statewide Democrats downballot of the governor's race.
Sorry for being a dimwit.
Ellen