[Marxism] From The Washington Post: "Wanted: token spic"

Joaquin Bustelo jbustelo at bellsouth.net
Mon Dec 11 01:07:06 MST 2006


	Washington Post Ombudsman (sic!) Deborah Howell has a column in
Sunday's paper documenting the systematic discrimination against Black and
female voices among the columnists for that paper. 

	Now, normally when people think of columnists, they think of the
Op-Ed page, but Howell has a broader category in mind since the Op-Ed page
is a completely male-dominated white out. Of 20 columnists that work for the
paper or are carried at least twice a month, 17 are Anglo, 2 are Black, and
1 "was born in India." There are 17 are men and only  3 women (including
Howell herself, despite her "man" title).

	So she throws in everybody from metro columnist "Dr. Gridlock" to
Amy Dickinson of "Ask Amy" to make things seem better than they really are.
This allows her to say that there are, out of 61 columnists, 17 women; and
eight "minorities" all of the Blacks except the one born in India.

	The interesting thing to note is that the proportion of Blacks is
10% of the op-ed columnists and 11% of the "columnists" in the paper as a
whole. Sounds good until you realize that Washington D.C. is a
majority-Black city. 

	On women, though, it makes a real difference: 28% (17 out of 61) is
a lot better than 15% (3 out of 20). 

	You will ALSO notice, of course, that Latinos are completely
excluded. That's not unusual. You don't see the Wall Street Journal or New
York Times stooping so low as to hire a stoop labor columnist, do you? So
why should the WaPo? We start letting them write on the editorial pages, and
pretty soon there's no lettuce in the supermarkets.

	And actually, the WaPo has a Latina columnist, Marcela Sanchez.
Except that she has the double distinction of both being both the only
"Hispanic" Washington Post columnist and the only Washington Post columnist
whose columns the paper doesn't print. It's web-only.

	Her exclusion is really outrageous, especially since half the time
she writes the same imperialist drivel transcribed from State Department
briefings ... like her recent piece saying the OAS observer missions to
Latin American elections were OK, except for the last two ... to Venezuela
and Ecuador, where the wrong guys won.

	And she also writes on domestic issues, and here it's the same old
trite "Latinos are powerless" and similar rich Anglo lies. So commenting on
the elections, she says, "One of the quick and easy conclusions drawn from
the Republican defeat in last week's midterm elections is that immigration
as an issue failed to galvanize voters."

	R-R-R-RIGHT. That's how the Republicans went from having 40% or more
of the Latino vote in 2004 to 30% or less this year (depending on which poll
you believe). EVEN Andres Oppenheimer, who is so INSIGHTFUL he titled his
1992 anti-Cuba tract "Castro's Final HOUR" [available on Amazon.com from
$0.33, yep, 33 cents], got it: 

"ATLANTA--Hispanics said 'adiós' to President Bush's Republican Party in
Tuesday's midterm elections, voting in much greater numbers than expected
for Democratic candidates in an apparent rejection of the ruling party's
efforts to blame much of the nation's problems on undocumented migrants.

"Contrary to experts' predictions that Hispanics would not turn out
massively on Tuesday, exit polls show that Hispanics accounted for 8 percent
of the total vote. That is about equal to the Hispanic vote's record turnout
in the 2004 presidential election, and much more than its turnout in
previous mid-term elections.

"What's more, 73 percent of Hispanics voted for the Democratic Party on
Tuesday, while only 26 percent voted for Republican candidates, CNN exit
poll shows. In the 2004 presidential elections, 55 percent of Hispanics
voted Democrat and about 42 percent voted Republican."

 	The truth is Ms. Sanchez means it didn't galvanize *Anglo* voters.
By all standards of white journalistic objectivity, Sanchez  BELONGS on the
Post's editorial pages just as much as the white guys who say the same
things as she does. But of course, she ain't white, and she ain't a guy
either. 

	As to whether she's a clever enough writer -- have you ever read a
Michael Novak column?

	But I digress.

	Ombudsman Deborah Howell has a solution to the Post's spic-less
roster of calumnists, I mean columnists.

	"The Metro section needs a female columnist, and it also needs a
columnist attuned to the region's burgeoning Latino communities. A Latino
columnist could appear in the Extras since they are oriented toward counties
and neighborhoods. Not all new voices have to be on the staff; they could be
regular contributors. Metro's new Page Three could be used to bring in more
female and minority voices."

	Got that: let's get a spic columnist and do the next best thing to
not printing them, like Sanchez, by putting them in the local section the
advertising department forced us to start to get more revenue. And, hey,
let's make them "independent contractors," not real employees, which means
no benefits or retirement plan. 

	"The point is not to toss excellent white male columnists," Howell
says. Of course not. Heaven forbid. 

	"The point is to add more and lively voices to The Post."

	Especially where most people won't see them.








More information about the Marxism mailing list