Wednesday, February 04, 2004
The New York Times has a pretty good lead editorial today outlining the primaries. I pretty much agree with it, as it talks mainly about how both Edwards and Kerry have some solid selling points. And as I am now an undecided voter (assuming Dean doesn't rise up, Phoenix-like), it makes a lot of sense to me. However, the editorial contains this statement:|
The most logical alternative at this point appears to be Senator John Edwards, who won the South Carolina primary last night and had a strong finish in Oklahoma. Mr. Edwards is an attractive candidate, heir to the old tradition of turn-of-the-century Southern populism before it became infected with racism.As I said, Collins, who's written books on the women's movement and therefore should know her history, needs to read some Richard Hofstadter. Populism, of the William Jennings Bryan kind, was always infected with racism. It wasn't necessarily a racist movement, but that element was very much a part of it. Silly New York Times.
Comments: Post a Comment