If either's a "token", it's Barack Obama, not Tim Scott

Unqualified failure is the surest sign of a “token”, which precisely defines the Obama Economy

Cries of “Uncle Tom” and “race trait” issued from liberal Democrats’ lips, attacking S.C. Governor Nikki Haley’s choice to fill the U.S. Senate seat of Jim DeMint, before the press conference announcing the choice of Rep. Tim Scott was over. Consider, for example, The New Yorker’s take on the decision of the Palmetto State’s Indian-American chief executive to appoint an African-American to a position never held by those similarly situated in the Empire State:

…political scientist Adolph L. Reed, Jr., explained why he wasn’t celebrating. Reed, who is black, has written about himself as a member of “the left,” and he is deeply critical of the conservative movement; in his essay, he made passing reference to what he called “thinly veiled racism” among Tea Party Republicans.

And he argued that while Scott’s elevation “seemed like another milestone for African-Americans,” that perception was misleading. He cautioned against “cheerleading over racial symbolism” and suggested that Scott was merely the latest in a long line of “cynical tokens” put forward by Republicans.

Penn Professor Reed and the magazine’s Kelefa Sanneh went on to disparage the choice of a Black candidate that twice won his 83% congressional district with more than 65% of the vote because his conservative political agenda was “utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans”, with the test of supposed tokenism supposedly being dependent upon the percentage of the black vote Scott gets if he runs for the right to serve the remaining two years of the DeMint-seat term in 2014.

So much for Democrats’ supposed preferences for tolerance and diversity. They are only tolerant of diverse skin pigmentation if the human being that happens to be inside varying skin colors are intolerant of conservative views.

But isn’t the sine qua non of tokenism that the person filling a slot is not qualified to perform the task assigned? Isn’t that why there is deemed to be a stigma by many blacks due to affirmative action hires or college admissions? Obviously, and on that score, how does Tim Scott compare with our African-American president?

Before he was first nominated by the Democrats in 2008, his only legislative “achievement” was his opposition to a bill in the Illinois state legislature that would have required doctors to treat babies that survive abortions the same as other human beings outside the womb with the same Hippocratic Oath-inspired “first do no harm”, up to and including life-saving techniques, rather than finishing them off in soiled utility rooms. The bill failed. Obama won a victory over babies.

As a U.S. Senator, he and his future Secretary of State voted twice to de-fund U.S. armed forces in the Iraqi and Afghanistan war theaters. The troops continued to be funded. Obama failed in his attempt to aid and abet our terrorist enemies abroad.

The Democratic Party nominated Barack Obama because he was an ideological black liberal that could give a good speech and organize caucus states; but even a picture of President Obama with his closest advisers suggests tokenism. At least former Democrat nominees named Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton had competently governed states. But beginning with Al Gore and continuing through John Kerry and Obama, the Democrats defined competency down to a new low; only exceeded when they re-nominated a president presiding over the worst economy since the Great Depression.

It appears that the Democrats avoid the “token” label for their nominee because of his electoral success, unless one applies the same standard to their candidates that they impose on Republicans. By their own standard, Obama is a “cynical token” unless majorities of whites agree with Obama and the Democrats’ liberal agenda. Whites don’t.

But of course, the Democrats and their Media’s agenda never apply the same standards to Republicans. Witness Sanneh’s suggestion that:

“…Haley, who is Indian-American, wisely declined to provide a brief history of race and Republicanism.”

Why so, unless one conveniently forgets that Democrats supported slavery, the Civil War, Jim Crow and the defeat of every Civil Rights bill before 1964; and that the Republican Party was founded to abolish slavery, introduced every Civil Rights bill before 1964, and voted in higher numbers for the one that Democrats finally helped pass in 1964.

The actual history of race and the GOP shames the Democrats before and after 1964; but Democrats define success by their own self-defined “pure” intentions, not results. Sadly, the results of the Election of 2012 indicate that an electoral majority of Americans define success more in terms of more easily qualified for welfare than a robust economy that provides more opportunity for wealth creation.

But to suggest that a man who built two successful businesses is a token and that a tea party that backed him is racist are outrages that shouldn’t be tolerated by any people, no matter their “diversity”.

Mike DeVine

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Editor – Hillbilly Politics

Co-Founder and Editor – Political Daily

Atlanta Law & Politics columnist – Examiner.com