Ok, it is true that Joan was quick to point out that Hillary is suffering from sexism. She did notsuggest that Barack is not being affected by racism, only that Hillary is scientifically experiencing more sexism than Barack is racism. I did not agree with her reasoning, but now I have a better understanding of how Joan rationalizes her approach.

It might appear that Joan is reconstituting some of the implicit (and insidious)patterns of racism by not going into the role it is surely playing in this primary, but that is not fair to Joan.

Her justification for ignoring this might not be reasonable, but it at least saves her from the claim of racism:

Joan thinks it is her duty (as a journalist and citizen) to constantly hold up a weakness-based Barack against a strength-only

Hillary because this, in her opinion, is what makes him a stronger candidate against McCain.

It looks racist but it's not. I would only argue that some of what appears sexist to Joan may in fact simply be people who are comparing a strength-only Barack against a weakness-based Hillary. If you don't understand their rationale for doing so, it would be easy to see them as acting/speaking sexistly. I think Joan makes this error fairly easily because she isn't aware of the limitations of her approach.

I don't think Joan's approach makes sense, but I know it isn't inherently racist.

Well, you just wrote my favorite post of the morning. thanks. well said.

i actually think that analyzing the quality of conversations within the democratic party would be a better long term cultural predictor than who eventually gets in office (democrat or republican).

A president can make certain types of mitigations and forward steps, no doubt, but in terms of the long term sustainability of our democracy (if we are looking for reliable gauges of how we are doing), I think you learn more by watching how people within the same parties deal with differences of opinion.

If you get Joan to go into that question, could you tap my shoulder at

itotallycommameanit at ya

But I can give a small amount of help based on what she has said:

Joan focuses the way she does because:

#1. Barack is winning

#2. She believes her type of focus makes him more likely to win in November.

#3. Joan is unsure why but does believe that Barack's awful supporters are significantly different than any other candidate and feels this difference reflects on the kind of person he is and/or president he would be.

In my opinion only #1 can be argued with some substance. Not, however, as justification for the lopsided comparing Joan does. I think #1 can be used to explain why one might place more focus on a given candidate.