By now I imagine a fair number of the readers of this blog have seen the foregoing video of Barbara Boxer being accused of racism by the head of the Black Chamber of Commerce. What’s interesting about it is Boxer’s startled reaction, her surprise at something that is totally unsurprising. I think this comes from the obvious – that she has lived a remarkably cosseted life as a Senator, but also from a general lack of basic emotional intelligence enhanced by the insecurity evident in her other recent celebrated appearance at a Congressional hearing, when she berated a general for calling her “ma’am” and not “Senator.”
Boxer reveals herself in this video as being of another era, with the reified views of a consciousness raising group circa 1971 draped in an expensive designer suit. Boxer, an extremely rich woman, dresses well and is well tended. But this race politics, as practiced by Boxer and others, is not only unconscious, tedious and manipulative, it is highly reactionary.
Senator from our most populous state, she has run for all intents and purposes, unopposed in her last couple of elections. She is also the one leading the charge on global warming in the Senate, in essence the Senatorial partner of Henry Waxman . A glance at her educational background yields the information that she has a bachelor’s degree in economics from Brooklyn College after which she worked as a stock broker. As with Waxman, no evidence of any background in science whatsoever. That the Republicans struggle to upend someone like this is evidence of their ineptitude.
The most disturbing part of Sen. Boxer’s performance is her blithe reaction to Mr. Alford’s genuine anger. He is practically drawing her a diagram showing why a black person would be offended by her actions, and she contentedly repeats her same explanation about diversity of opinion. She could not fathom the idea that bringing up the NCAAP report was essentially calling Mr. Alford, at best, a sellout or, at worst, an Uncle Tom.
Boxer may be the worst example of the supercilious, tin-eared politician, but the Democratic administration and congress also reek of the same air of condescension. After all, they are our betters and why shouldn’t old, rich, liberal white woman tell a black man how to think?
Roger,
Moving away from long-held beliefs is tough. Long ago, in an earlier life, I voted for Barbara Boxer. She embodied what I believed in and admired. As you note, like a car stored in a farmer’s barn, she has remained virtually unchanged by the passage of time. She is today, what she always has been and always will be. I imagine she embodies what you once believed in and admired. You were once a Boxer voter, weren’t you?
The problem not only with Barbara Boxer, but with the Democrat controlled Congress and the Obama Administration, is that they all seem to perfectly embody the old views. Day after day I am confronted with page one stories that demonstrate the narcissism and naiveté of my old heroes. I am left wondering if that really is who I once was and if they are truly representative of what our nation has become.
Neobuzz
The NAACP “report” this lying screwball entered into the record was also primarily about “black colleges and universities”, not climate change.
Boxer accomplishes the nearly impossible feat of disgracing the Senate.
First and foremost, this is absolutely must-see TV, just for the sheer pleasure of watching this hideous excuse of a woman receive the upbraiding she so richly deserves. She is an utter disgrace even by DC standards.
This incident is yet another in a long succession of incidents that prove the wicked irony of today’s Democrats and Liberals; that the supposed party and movement of tolerance and inclusion is exactly the opposite – intolerant, inflexible and stridently dogmatic.
But I don’t understand your puzzlement over why California Republicans struggle to get rid of Boxer and the rest of the communists in power. It is one of the central axes of liberalism. And you can always count on ACORN to “get out the vote” come election time.
The most damning indictment of the California GOP I could possibly think of is this: in four elections, they’ve never been able to come up with even one candidate who could beat that shrill airhead.
“That the Republicans struggle to upend someone like this is evidence of their ineptitude.”
The $64,000 question for Republicans is how to be effective at selling the idea of small governement and lower taxes. Maybe they have to start by practicing what they preach. They frittered away their credibility when Bush was in power.
“As with Waxman, no evidence of any background in science whatsoever.”
If Babs Boxer is pushing cap n’ tax, then I’m not seeing evidence of economics in her background either
A very timely reminder of the racism that goes unnoticed. It is accepted that minorities are expected to follow the liberal lead on any issue. It is accepted that condesending racebaiting is ok as long as a liberal is the source. If there is any hope for change Sotomayor must be denied a seat on the Supreme Court.
Roger, your constant harping that a lawmaker must have a degree in the climate sciences in order to have an opinion on global warming is tiresome. (I’m sure you’ve got your 100th post on Al Gore in the queue.)
In the summer of ’03, I don’t believe you ever suggested that Bush ought not consider invading Iraq because he was unschooled in COIN. Why? Because that would have been a foolish argument.
Be honest, at least: you wouldn’t mention Boxer’s resume if you didn’t disagree with her policy position. It’s not about whether she was a stockbroker.
If memory serves, the last two times BB ran for re-election, her ads proclaimed her a “moderate”. The year she ran for the first time was the year I changed my registration to Republican. She was just a bridge too far.
This reminds me of a Jewish friend who disagreed with another Jewish person and was told, by a person who was not Jewish, and who served in a very high post in the Clinton administration, “I am surprised the two of you do not agree and can’t work together better. You’re both Jewish, after all.” I am sad to say that more than anything else, this exchange illustrates BB’s stupidity and denseness. She has many qualities (and a ton of money) that enable her to win votes, but her mind is a dense one, a slow-moving one, and it is not able to discern nuance and subtlety—not to mention what is on view here: an intelligent panelist making a very clear point. This splendid video showed her legislative aide whispering what she should say next, and even that didn’t help. She’s dim, Roger, that’s the problem. Well-dressed, well-groomed, well-preserved— but dense. It is, indeed, a scandal that the GOP cannot mount a candidate able to take her down. Where is Sonny Bono when we need him?
Ed Driscoll has the Breitbart TV daily B-Cast interview with Mr. Alford up right now and it is as illuminating as it is a hoot (he, unlike Babs, has a healthy sense of humor).
Identity politics and race pandering is wrongheaded, insulting, and often the negative consequences are much more serious than what played out at the hearing yesterday. When you break everything down by race and view all issues and individuals through such a prism, you are are limiting your own capacity for critical thought.
You mention Boxer is extremely wealthy. Her husband is an ambulance chaser in Oakland, Ca. I am sure he makes a good living, but not extreme wealth. What bears investigating is Boxer’s relationship to Indian casinos in California through her son’s work at Platinum Partners. Getting casino licenses approved in California – that’s real money.
Senator Boxer would get the tribes recognized federally, then Doug pushes for casino licenses a few years later as a partner with tribes. How does the money flow?
That the Republicans struggle to upend someone like this is evidence of their ineptitude.
I suppose you are joking. Boxer is, last I looked, a Senator from California. There will have to be a huge demographic upheaval, on the order of LA and SF sliding into the Pacific, before CA elects a Republican Senator. You may as well accuse the Republicans of ineptitude because they can’t get more candidates elected in Cuba.
I don’t know Sen. Boxer’s career very well. I agree that her tone was a tad too tutorial for my taste. However, I thought the head of the Black Chamber of Commerce was itching for a fight and came on with well-planned belligerence. To me it was a bad performance. Sorry, of the two, I liked her better.
It seems to me the Senator can’t fathom any minority who would not be on board with the modern left’s definition of racism, and that is, anyone who doesn’t agree with them is a racist.
When Boxer quoted the NAACP letter, Alford should have simply said, “That’s interesting. But, you know, I know some Jewish ladies who don’t like the bill at all. And Jackie Mason hates it.”
Oh, I don’t know if I would blame the ineptitude of the Republicans Roger, it is the voters of California who keep returning Boxer and her ilk to Congress term after term after term.
Steve:
You said:
“The $64,000 question for Republicans is how to be effective at selling the idea of small governement and lower taxes. Maybe they have to start by practicing what they preach. They frittered away their credibility when Bush was in power.”
I do not agree with this. For one thing the voters of California were voting for people like Boxer long before Bush came along. Even when Newt Gingrich was cutting spending, this is the kind of people they voted for.
For another, Bush was downright stingy compared to Barack Obama. There is no comparison in the size and scope of spending or government under these two men. The fact that so many people were willing to overlook that made it all that much easier for someone like Obama to win.
I hope that every conservative who sat out the last couple of elections in the hopes that he could send a message is proud of the government he helped elect. Obama, Pelosi and Reid are grateful I am sure.
“Boxer reveals herself in this video as being of another era, with the reified views of a consciousness raising group circa 1971 draped in an expensive designer suit.”
That was fun. Also true. How regressive the progressives are.
Let’s not forget how we got BB in the first place. Here’s the recap from Wikipedia. Normally I wouldn’t just paste it in intact, but it matches my memory of that election to a tee:
Look how little we have traveled in 17 years! Tom Campbell still around and running. Phil Angelides still around and would be running if he could muster the funds. Still stuck with Boxer. We might have BETTER luck getting some candidates elected in Cuba!
Got your book, Roger, and am enjoying it. Still, I think David Horowitz was one of the first of our generation of Civil Rights stalwarts to see through the thugdom of the left. His “Radical Son” is the original can’t put down tale of how the crazy left hijacked our idealism. Someone should write a book about the second thoughts generation which includes many at “Commentary,” “Weekly Standard,” and even David Brooks at NYT.
Boxer is hideous. She’s the one who dared to wag her finger at Condi Rice, claiming that not having children of her own disqualified her from sending young people off to war.
She is a particularly hideous example of the density and arrogance of the left. It baffles me that so many seem to remain comfortable electing demagogues like her.
What a hideous finger-wagger, indeed. Just listening to her whiny voice sets my teeth on edge.
Whenever I see this repulsive jerk posing as a Senator, my instant reaction is, Moe Howard, where are you now that we need you.
The best on Boxer was Michael Savage saying “she should be back in Brooklyn selling bras in Filene’s Basement.”
“…As with Waxman, no evidence of any background in science whatsoever…”
Ya gotta be kidding, Roger. Be thankful the evidence is available to make your point. Brooklyn College, unlike Harvard and Princeton, isn’t participating in fraud by concealing student records and papers from the public that would ordinarily be readily available to any employer on request.
I don’t know my IQ or that of my wife and kids, but I know how we did in school. How is it that we all know the Climatologist-in-Chief’s IQ but don’t have a clue about his academic performance?
Is what George Bush referred to as the “bigotry of low expectations” not implicit in advertising that Obama is the (implicitly rare) instance of a black with a reasonably high IQ?
This merit-challenged administration is also floating the proposal that science and engineering programs come up to 50% female participation or lose federal funding.
What is new about this? The Democrats have been using African Americans for the past forty years lumping them all together treating them as constituents in a solid voting block that owe the Democrats for any or all of their successes. They ingnore the individual and their personal accomplishments seeing them as just another member of the “Black Community”, to which they seem to think they have special access .
She is Senator Mam from the great state of Brooklyn I mean California.
Boxer is bad for the Jews. She gives Jews a bad name. Just look how she pissed off this black guy. I’m sure he knows she’s a Jew.
If anyone needs to apologize, it’s her.
She should start every sentence with, “Before I begin, I’d like to apologize to all those whom I offend.”
She is bad for Brooklyn too, because people who hate Brooklyn can always say she never really left.
And, who is the fat chick smirking behind her with the terrible shit eating grin?
She is Senator Mam from the great state of Brooklyn I mean California.
Boxer is bad for the Jews. She gives Jews a bad name. Just look how she pissed off this black guy. I’m sure he knows she’s a Jew.
If anyone needs to apologize, it’s her.
She should start every sentence with, “Before I begin, I’d like to apologize to all those whom I offend.”
She is bad for Brooklyn too, because people who hate Brooklyn can always say she never really left.
And, who is the fat chick smirking behind her with the terrible shite eating grin?
This is too funny.
A guy heading up the “Black Chamber of Commerce” sanctimoniously denounces a woman for being “racial”. That would be funny enough by itself, but as it turns out the woman — who indeed is highly “racial” — cannot credibly respond, having herself helped to create the political environment in which the guy feels comfortable enough to be openly “racial” and critical of the woman for being “racial,” knowing the woman can’t point out his hypocrisy because she’s white and he’s black, and it would be racist.
I don’t know how Alford kept a straight face. Bet he fell down laughing after he left the hearing room.
Re: #31, I’ve learned over my years, when dealing with modern liberals, its a safe bet that what ever a liberal deplores, without realizing, that’s exactly what they are.
I participate in a regular email debate with several friends and family members, one libertarian, myself – a libertarian leaning independent – and the rest mostly moon bats.
The moon bats are by far the most racist, sexist, freedom hating group I ever encountered. And they proudly proclaim it with nearly every breath.