Back before identity politics, and the notion that "the personal is political," the idea of a rich guy representing poor people was entirely plausible. He could be rich, but still have ideas about poverty, and care about them. But now that we have identity politics and the like, that's impossible: If only a woman can represent women, only a black person can represent blacks, etc. -- Barbara Boxer even suggested that Condi Rice couldn't understand mothers because she was childless -- then obviously only a poor person can represent poor people.
Did she? Of course she didn't. Let's take a look at what Boxer actually said about sending 20,000 more men and women to
Sen. Barbara Boxer of California took the opportunity to point out that Rice, with no children of her own, will not feel the loss of a son or daughter in Iraq."Who pays the price?" Boxer asked Rice. "I'm not going to pay a personal price. My kids are too old and my grandchild is too young. You're not going to pay a personal price, as I understand it, with an immediate family. So who pays the price? The American military and their families ... not me, not you."
Putz's slant is clearly nonsense -- Boxer merely explained why she and Rice would and could not appreciate the real cost of war -- and confirms my theory that Glenn Reynolds is nothing more than Rush Limbaugh with tenure.
No comments:
Post a Comment