CLARITY ISN'T US: Blow isn't calling DeSantis a racist!

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2022

Complexity isn't us: It's important to restate a basic fact about Charles Blow's recent column.

In that recent column, Charles Blow wasn't calling Ron DeSantis a racist. We know that because Blow specifically stated that fact, right at the end of the column.

As we noted two days ago, Blow's column ended like this:

BLOW (9/28/22): DeSantis may pretend to be oblivious to the racial acts and statements of the people he associates with and appoints, but eliminating Black power and representation was a conscious act.

Now, I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist, I’m simply saying this: He has targeted Black people, Black power and Black history.

Blow wasn't calling DeSantis a racist. The columnist made that perfectly clear in his closing paragraph.

Blow wasn't calling DeSantis a racist. He was merely saying this

Blow was merely saying that the Florida governor—and no, we wouldn't vote for DeSantis—had consciously taken steps to eliminate black representation. Also, that he had targeted black people, in some ways which Blow described.

That said, Blow wasn't calling DeSantis a racist. Midway through his column, he drove the point home with a reference to a debate in Florida's 2018 gubernatorial race:

BLOW: It was in that debate that his Democratic opponent, Andrew Gillum, said, “Now, I’m not calling Mr. DeSantis a racist. I’m simply saying the racists believe he’s a racist.”

The problem, of course, is that DeSantis’s unfortunate associations keep stacking up.

Gillum hadn't been calling DeSantis a racist either! He was simply saying that that's what the racists believe!

Today, Gillum's promising political career lies in shambles. Earlier this year, he was indicted, at age 43, on 22 felony counts, most of which stem from that 2018 campaign.

We don't know where the justice lies, but he certainly wasn't calling DeSantis a racist! Gillum made that point perfectly clear, just as Blow did last month.

We wouldn't vote for DeSantis ourselves, but on one point we can all be clear—Blow wasn't calling him a racist in his recent column! In fairness, Blow can be said to have come fairly close. We direct you to this part of his column:

BLOW: I have always thought of DeSantis as reading the rules of villainy from a coloring book and acting them out. Nothing about him says clever and tactical. He seems to me the kind of man who must conjure confidence, who is fragile and feisty because of it, a beta male trying desperately to convince the world that he’s an alpha.

But there is a way in which race policy reaches far beyond being merely racist-adjacent. DeSantis, for instance, has actually tried to strip Black Floridians of their power and voice.

Blow wasn't calling DeSantis a racist! He was merely saying that the governor's conduct has "reache[d] far beyond being merely racist-adjacent," in at least one way. 

Blow is referring to the way DeSantis has "actually tried to strip Black Floridians of their power and voice." This helps explain why Blow has always thought of DeSantis "as reading the rules of villainy from a coloring book." 

At this point, let's be perfectly clear. DeSantis may be a villain whose policies reach far beyond being merely racist-adjacent. But no one was calling him a racist! Blow wanted to make that point clear!

As we may have mentioned earlier, we would never vote for DeSantis. On the other hand, we would never publish work as phony as this column by Blow.

That brings us to the part of the column we began exploring yesterday. It's the part of the column which describes the alleged gerrymandering which produced the state of Florida's current congressional map.

Let's be clear! In none of this is Blow attempting to call DeSantis a racist. He's merely saying that DeSantis "has actually tried to strip Black Floridians of their power and voice"—and that, in this way, the governor's behavior "reaches far beyond being merely racist-adjacent."

As told by Blow, the story begins in 2010. As we showed you yesterday, here's how Blow's account of this matter starts: 

BLOW: I have always thought of DeSantis as reading the rules of villainy from a coloring book and acting them out. Nothing about him says clever and tactical. He seems to me the kind of man who must conjure confidence, who is fragile and feisty because of it, a beta male trying desperately to convince the world that he’s an alpha.

But there is a way in which race policy reaches far beyond being merely racist-adjacent. DeSantis, for instance, has actually tried to strip Black Floridians of their power and voice.

In 2010, Florida voters, by a strong majority, approved a constitutional amendment rejecting gerrymandering. The amendment made clear that “districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or to diminish their ability to elect representatives of their choice.”

Yet Florida’s Republican-led Legislature produced a gerrymandered map anyway. In 2015, the state Supreme Court struck down much of the Legislature’s proposed map, and demanded that eight House districts be redrawn. Among them was the Fifth District, which at the time snaked up the state from Orlando to Jacksonville. The redrawn map allowed Black voters to elect four Black representatives.

In 2010, Florida voters "approved a constitutional amendment rejecting gerrymandering." 

Yesterday, we noted that the language in the amendment was perhaps a bit fuzzy. But that was where the story began, as told by Blow in his column.

Let's review:

In 2010, Florida voters "approved a constitutional amendment rejecting gerrymandering." Five years later, Florida's Republican legislature produced a gerrymandered map anyway.

The State Supreme Court ruled that eight of those new congressional districts had to be be redrawn. "Among them was the Fifth District, which at the time snaked up the state from Orlando to Jacksonville."

Readers, listen up:

According to Blow, the state Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth District had to be redrawn. At the time, that district "snaked up the state from Orlando to Jacksonville."

It sounds like that snake-shaped district was one of the districts which had been "gerrymandered" for some political reason. At any rate, the reworked congressional map "allowed Black voters to elect four Black representatives," Blow somewhat oddly reports.

Presumably, that's Blow's way of saying that the redrawn map included four majority-black or majority-minority districts. But uh-oh! Five years later, with Governor DeSantis now playing a role, the districts were redrawn again.

Tomorrow, we'll look at how that latest redistricting worked, at least as described by Blow. The key point to remember is this:

Charles Blow wasn't calling Ron DeSantis a racist!

Spoiler alert: In the new congressional map, there are now only two districts which are majority black. That leaves us with these questions:

 Should there be any such districts at all? Should there be more such districts? On what basis should these districts be drawn? To what extent should "race" be a factor in the shaping of these districts?

Questions like those are quite complex. That said, experts say this about our highly imperfect, highly war-inclined species:

Complexity isn't us, these major top experts all claim. Given the way our brains are wired, Otherfication is!

Tomorrow: Especially at times like these, No Dumbness Left Behind


26 comments:


  1. "and no, we wouldn't vote for DeSantis"

    And why not, dear Bob? Is it because of the letter R next to his name?

    Seriously, is that the reason, dear Bob? Are you a specimen of dembotus vulgaris?

    If you are -- and it appears that you very well might be indeed -- why are we reading this shit?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There would be no reason for a sane person to rule out voting for DeSantis. Democrats appear to understand this hence the constant attacks that fall as flat as his opponent passed out at a gay orgy.

      Delete
    2. Is Crist gay or gay-adjacent? You realize that being gay may help him among Democratic voters. You might want to try a different slur.

      Delete
    3. Dimbot "Mao," should you really be questioning anyone's political judgments, given that you believe such absurd things as that the election was stolen? There would be no reason for Bob to vote for DeSantis, of course. Bob likely disagrees with nearly everything DeSantis stands for. If that "R" next to his name is an accurate indicator of policy positions, then OF COURSE a liberal Democrat would have no reason to vote for him.

      Delete
    4. FYI aside from being a laughable troll, Mao also happens to be gay.

      Not that there is anything wrong with that.

      Delete
  2. "Today, Gillum's promising political career lies in shambles. Earlier this year, he was indicted, at age 43, on 22 felony counts, most of which stem from that 2018 campaign."

    This was in June. Gillum plead not-guilty as was released until trial, which has not occurred yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby used to defend the right of accused people to be treated as innocent until convicted in court. Not today, for some reason. Maybe that's racist?

      Delete
    2. What did he say that was incorrect?

      Delete
    3. The problem is what he didn't say. When Republicans are indicted, Somerby writes reams about how they should be considered innocent until convicted. Today, Somerby raises Gillum's problems as if they could clear DeSantis of racist intent. There is no reason to mention Gillum otherwise, since he wasn't elected governor and has nothing to do with redistricting. He is a black person who can be besmirched, but why should that make anything DeSantis has said or done OK?

      This is classic "whataboutism". DeSantis may be a racist. Oh yeah, what about Gillum who might be a felon? Except he hasn't been tried or convicted yet.

      Delete
    4. That is a wholly idiotic take.

      Delete
    5. Exactly, Somerby is a complete idiot.

      Delete
  3. Somerby quite obviously doesn't care whether black Florida voters were being disenfranchised. He only cares whether Blow called DeSantis a racist for trying to disenfranchise them.

    Here is the obvious. Black voters tend to vote for Democrats. It is therefore difficult to tell whether DeSantis was attempting to suppress their votes because they are Democrats or because they are black. One would make DeSantis partisan. The other would make him racist. Or it could be true that he is both, a Republican partisan and a racist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It takes a real cynic to believe candidates belonging to a party and adopting its platform are partisan.

      Delete
    2. Did you think it was OK when Trump used his office as president to only give federal disaster aid to red states? That is what partisan looks like when Republicans do it.

      Delete
    3. I'll take "he could be both" for fifty, Alex.

      Delete
  4. "Should there be any such districts at all? Should there be more such districts? On what basis should these districts be drawn? To what extent should "race" be a factor in the shaping of these districts?"

    Somerby might discuss these questions himself. He might talk about how race is "a factor" in the Voting Rights Act. He might even repeat the things Ketanji Brown Jackson said about race and the VRA. He might talk about the importance of the Alabama Supreme Court case. But that might leave his readers better informed -- and for some reason he doesn't want to do that. That's why he didn't point out that Gillum was charged with paying himself and staff out of campaign funds, hasn't yet been found guilty (or even tried) and is not in jail. It used to matter to Somerby whether accused people were actually determined to be guilty or not -- at least when defending Republicans. Note that Gillum is charged with the same thing as Boebert, when she inflated her travel reimbursement to pay person debts from her campaign funds. She paid part of the money back -- so that's OK then, since she is a Republican.

    Meanwhile, Blow points out the possibility that DeSantis is racist, which is true, and Somerby is upset because he doesn't full on call DeSantis something Blow cannot prove. Almost as if Somerby were slavering to call Blow some name, such as woke liberal throwing r-bombs. But he is obviously frustrated that Blow pointedly DIDN'T call DeSantis racist, since he behaves as if Blow DID call him that.

    Meanwhile, Somerby asks rhetorically how many districts black people ought to get. Doesn't that depend on how racist one is? Is one too few, is two too many? Somerby strongly implies that any number is suspect -- which makes him kind of racist-adjacent too, in my opinion. Somerby, being a slippery kind of guy, doesn't say whether he is opposed to reapportionment (even though it is in our constitution) or just black people voting.

    ReplyDelete
  5. How can Somerby be so sure DeSantis isn't racist?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "This helps explain why Blow has always thought of DeSantis "as reading the rules of villainy from a coloring book."

    This, and the stupid stunt he played by sending immigrants from Texas to Martha's Vineyard.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Otherfication is!"

    Aside from there being no such word, why isn't what DeSantis has been doing an example of otherfication, especially given it is much more blatant than Blow's opinion piece about the racist impact of DeSantis's gerrymandering? Isn't denying a vote worse than NOT calling someone a name in a newspaper?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Why didn't Bow call DeSantis a "piece of shit"?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Somerby is worrying about whether Blow called DeSantis a racist or not. Meanwhile, here is what it is like to be black when things like this are still happening in our country:

    "According to prosecutors in Ocean County, New Jersey, an Amazon delivery driver was threatened by someone with a gun, asking the driver if he knew he was in a racist neighborhood, News 12 reports.

    John Vincentini, 62, followed the driver to a dead-end street and blocked the driver with his car, then asking him if he understood he was in a racist neighborhood. He then threatened to go back to his car, get his rifle, and shoot the driver in the head.

    "It is against the law to intimidate someone based upon their race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, national origin, disability, or gender identity/expression. Individuals that employ hatred, intolerance, and prejudice with a purpose to intimidate will be investigated and if warranted - prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law," prosecutor Bradley D.Billhimer said.

    Vincentini surrendered himself Wednesday to police and was charged with bias intimidation and terroristic threats."

    ReplyDelete
  10. As the young folks say, "Get a room!"

    ReplyDelete
  11. Somerby has always cribbed his work from others; Al Franken for example and he became a Senator (and did nothing wrong when he was forced to leave).

    Somerby was a Bill Clinton acolyte; Clinton was a neoliberal, basically Reagan minus the corruption. But Somerby started to turn hardcore right wing way back when W gave his State of the Union where he falsely claimed Iraq was developing nuclear weapons; Somerby vociferously defended Bush's claim and his soul has only gotten darker and more lost since then.

    Somerby is a nasty piece of work, an angry and bitter person that spews hate on a daily basis.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Poor Somerby thinks it is too complex to deal with racial oppression.

    Ironically Somerby is white but has a black heart.

    ReplyDelete
  13. As satire goes, [chef's kiss].

    ReplyDelete