On Tuesday, July 14, Maureen Dowd posted a rambling piece of hate speech posing as an Op-Ed in the New York Times titled “White Man’s Last Stand.” Not much of a surprise, but I do wonder why this woman holds such a deep revulsion for white men, particularly when she is the product of a white man and woman. The world may never know. Let’s hope she doesn’t follow up with a piece attacking white women, though she did manage to get in a jab at Sarah Palin towards the end of the piece, which had nothing to with the title or topic, so maybe she has it out for white people in general or was simply unable to stay on point. Anyway, the piece was ostensibly about white Republican men, who as a “last stand,” took unwarranted swipes at Sonia Sotomayor during her Supreme Court confirmation hearings this week. In this piece she calls out Republican senators Jon Kyl, Orrin Hatch, and Lindsey Graham as objects of her derision. Apparently Dowd was unhappy with the nature of their questions, which, to Dowd, appeared patronizing and mean-spirited, yet were deftly answered by the wise Latina Sotomayor who drew on the richness of her experiences to thwart this gaggle of white Republican men, “afraid of extinction,” whose only purpose was to trip her up. Interestingly, Dowd wasn’t particularly thrilled with Democratic senator Chuck Schumer’s line of questioning either, but since he’s a Democrat he escaped her deepest hatred since white men who are Democrats are either not afraid of extinction or may not be aware that they too may be headed towards it.
What truly angers me about this piece is that in order to build Sotomayor up, it was not necessary to tear down white men in the process. Indeed, Dowd extends her invective by spouting off a litany of “bad decisions” made by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney that were wholly unrelated to the Sotomayor confirmation. So perhaps Sotomayor was simply the launching point for all of the things Dowd wanted to get off her chest, as the next thing you know she’s informing us of just a small sample of Sarah Palin’s bad qualities, such as being an irrational, volatile, and “country-music queen without the music.” Though I hardly understand what value there is to this bombastic tirade, it’s a good thing to know the thoughts of a true liberal who’s not afraid to make her feelings known. Perhaps it’s a bit of self-loathing, white guilt, or possibly the woman has gone stark raving mad. I simply can’t think of a good reason to use the confirmation hearings as a launching pad to express her contempt for a whole group of people by viciously assailing honorable, upstanding public servants. And what specifically does the title “White Man’s Last Stand” imply? Is Dowd personally ushering in a new era of government by serving notice to white men, particularly of the Republican stripe, that they are no longer welcome? As the only two people deemed rational in the whole piece were Obama and Sotomayor, it appears that is the case.
I have no idea who Dowd is looking to curry favor with, or if she is looking to curry favor at all. What I will tell you, Miss Dowd, is that you have curried none with this black man if that was your intent. Like Sotomayor, you would deny a group of people their constitutional right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, presumably due to the actions of their ancestors and not their own. The very fact that we have a black president who was able to nominate a Hispanic woman is because of the mostly faceless white men and women who risked their reputations and often their lives to stand with blacks during the days of slavery and Jim Crow that ultimately led to us achieving our long-deserved civil rights in 1964. We could not have achieved this without those whites who respected their fellow man and respected the Constitution. Yes, it was a long struggle and many whites oppressed us as for as long as they possibly could. I personally grew up at the tail end of the civil rights period and was all too often called a “nigger,” as well as being denied access to swimming pools that didn’t allow blacks. Vestiges of this still exist in some places, but for the most part those days are over and I believe few whites today would want to go back. The few that mistreated me during my formative years are most likely still alive, yet I have forgiven them because their mistreatment only encouraged me to work hard with the faith that civil rights gains would yield fruit over the coming years. And they did.
So Miss Dowd, whatever has caused you to be so bitter and filled with hatred for white people, I sincerely hope you will come to grips with it. It is wholly unbecoming of a beautiful and talented woman such as yourself, as you are doing no good service in lashing out at a whole segment of fellow Americans for no legitimate reason by making a caricature of a few white politicians who don’t ascribe to your worldview. As a white woman, I can’t say that your life has necessarily been any more privileged than mine, but you have certainly not had to face what any black person has, which is indeed fortunate for you. Yet, even if you were black, there would be no excuse for this piece. I am highly disappointed in you, but even more disappointed in the New York Times for printing such an ugly and divisive article while purportedly positioning itself as a champion for “tolerance” and equal rights (apparently, this courtesy is only extended to those who agree with your worldview, thereby making the position moot). I certainly honor your First Amendment rights, Miss Dowd, but believe you have demonstrated a reckless degree of irresponsibility, as this piece is little more than hate speech directed at white Americans. You owe them, and all Americans, a most sincere apology.
Comments on this entry are closed.