Upon reading Nolan Finley’s column this past weekend in the Detroit News, I couldn’t help but become a bit irritated with the topic being discussed. Finley, of course, was talking about the upcoming gubernatorial election this fall here in Michigan; no doubt a crucial election for the state at a pivotal time where economic recovery and sustainability will be key to a successful turnaround.
In the wake of this most crucial election, the Michigan Democrats have unanimously decided that their ticket must have diversity in order to have a good shot at winning. So what exactly will they do to tackle this dilemma? The decision has been made that the ticket’s second spot will ultimately go to an African-American. According to a Democratic official who was recently interviewed, “the only way to fix [the problem] is by nominating a minority for lieutenant governor.” Well, that’s all fine and dandy, but tell me again why the color of someone’s skin is a determining factor for choosing a qualified candidate in an election?
With everything that the state of Michigan has endured over the past couple of years, we need, or rather we MUST have a competent leader in Lansing with a clear plan for success in order for Michigan to fully recover. The last time I checked skin color had nothing to do with determining someone’s aptitude and/or their leadership abilities. I must also admit that it seemed to me like a real slap in the face and perhaps an insult to Michigan’s black voters for the Democrats to simply assume that because a black candidate is on the ballot he or she will automatically get the black vote. In other words, the majority of African-Americans blindly vote for candidates who are also black and base their decision on nothing else? What a sad state of affairs if that is really the case.
Further reading of Finley’s column provided me with another point that subsequently caught me off guard. Michigan Supreme Court Justice, Robert Young, was being discussed, whom by the way is the highest black elected official currently serving in the state who also happens to be a Republican. The quote in question read like this: “Young is a prime target of Democrats this year, as Republican justices always are, and Democrats might find tearing him apart awkward if he’s the only black on the ballot.” They must be joking. The Dems would feel the need to walk on eggshells around Young instead of treating him like any other political opponent simply because of the color of his skin? As an experienced and accomplished individual, I think that is absolutely insulting to Young.
In the end the Democrat’s quest for “diversity” should really be looked at more as a quest to meet a quota. Why can’t the Dems simply put someone on the ticket who is experienced and capable and who, just by chance, also happens to be black? Why is everything so ass-backwards? And for that matter, why is it that racism like this is acceptable when it is applied to only certain situations? Perhaps it’s just me, but I’m a fan of voting for candidates based on character, abilities and competence not the pigmentation of his or her skin. And, if you ask me, this is no better than when the Republicans dubbed Michael Steele their party leader because he was black or when they nominated Sarah Palin for V.P. because she was a woman. But then again, as they say, that’s a whole ‘nother issue.
Read the full column here:
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100425/OPINION03/4250304/Dems-desperately-seek-diversity
