September 04, 2010 08:49 PM UTC

The Name on the Ballot That's Not on the Ballot

• 0 Comments
• by: JO

Thanks to Mr. Maes for introducing an element of the absurd into politics; we all need a good laugh now and then, and I suspect there’s more to come. But the angst over whether his name will appear on the ballot has obscured a much more serious debate over a name that will also appear on the ballot.

That name is race.

In musing about this diary, I had thought of going on at length about Tom Tancredo’s well-documented efforts over several years to capitalize on racism in order to advance his career. Perhaps there are a few on this site who will try to argue the point by choosing another term, a more neutral and acceptable term–like “rule of law”–to describe the fears on which Tancredo has built his reputation outside the 6th CD. Save your fingertips.

Since at least 2008, and before that, Tom Tancredo has decided to make a name for himself by playing to fears generated by the sight and sound of people on the street speaking Spanish. Not speaking Russian, or Gaelic, or even Arabic. Never mind that the number of “illegal immigrants” is actually declining as the number of low-paid jobs available to them declines with the Great Recession. Never mind that no one wonders what language was spoken by the people working in the slaughter houses where the ground beef originated that ends up as Good Times, Salmonella Special, or Dead Cow on a Bun for a Buck. Never mind the skin tone and accent of the men and women cleaning the toilet bowl you used at the office during the day. Just like no one remembers whether the trains ran on time in ’30s Germany.

Tancredo–with limited success, be it said–has played to xenophobia-cum-racism, happily flirting with the Ku Klux Klan, Blowhard Mania of the Airways, or any other source of ignorance and hatred he can find in the dark corners of the American psyche. That is who he is.

I do not attribute his attitudes to all conservatives, although I do observe that in 1968 Richard Nixon played on racism in Dixie to convert Southern Democrats to Mainstream Republicans, a strategy that put Nixon in the White House; and I do observe that Ronald Reagan launched his 1980 presidential campaign with an anti-federalism speech in Philadelphia, Mississippi, a place with deep meaning for the civil rights movement–and for opponents of civil rights.

I personally know of only one constituent of the Constitution Party, a participant on this site whom I have found to be sophisticated and knowledgeable about issues pertaining to South-Central Asia in particular and witty in general. I do not know anything about Constitution Party internal politics, or why and how the party’s chairman eagerly ushered Tancredo onto the ballot next to the party’s label. BUT, I do expect the aforementioned member of the Constitution Party to denounce the racism of Tancredo, all other issues notwithstanding. In this case, and on this subject, silence is consent, sir. The same goes for other self-proclaimed conservatives. IF you don’t like Mr. Maes, then you’re outta luck. You need to say so, you need to make it clear that conservatives have principles and that racism is not acceptable, even at the cost of having a DINO in the governor’s office for four years.

IF you see that Maes is a joke (at least you get it!) the main question on the ballot in November has become whether or not the citizens of Colorado will entertain or tolerate racism. Conservatives didn’t want it there, would prefer that it not be so. But with Tancredo’s name, this is the case. This is, after all, a state in whose capital the KKK pretty much ran the show in the 1920s. This is, after all, a year in which Arizona’s governor makes no bones (no skulls, for sure) about playing to xenophobia latina. I find this issue to be much, much more important than the question of who’s going to be the next governor. [Pop quiz: (a) who is governor now? (b) what difference has he made? See, nobody scores more than 50%.]