(Yes, that headline is a horrible, horrible pun, which must be taken out back and shot.)

Via Instapundit, I ran across an article on Pajamas Media titled, “The “Golda” Standard of Female Leadership“. From the article, these two paragraphs immediately stood out:

As I watched the life of the former prime minister unfold onscreen, I chuckled at the thought of how our 2008 obsession with identity politics seems to forget the great leaders — who just happened to be women — who have long had the attention of the rest of the world. After all, Oprah is not the most powerful woman in the world; that woman is, as ranked by Forbes, German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

But Merkel is a conservative. Meir fought for Israel’s survival in the Yom Kippur War. Even Condoleezza Rice’s term as secretary of state has not been hailed as a great advance for women and/or African-Americans. So is a leader who happens to be a women only hailed as advancement if she pursues a feminist agenda outlined by NOW or the Code Pink sisters?

The answer, of course, is yes, provided you’re either a member of NOW or Code Pink or at least a sympathetic follower. If you’re not, the bigger advancement is that we now have twice the number of people to find great leaders from. What is also interesting, however, is that most identity groups in this country lean to our left. This is not to say there aren’t right-leaning conservative groups - most white supremacist groups would sooner “mix blood with the darkies” than vote Democrat, I’m sure. However, groups like NOW, Code Pink, Muslim Brotherhood, and countless others are all left-leaning groups, and powerful ones at that. Code Pink is so powerful, in fact, that they have their own parking spot according to city edict. How many other interest groups can say that?

Here’s the catch, though - if you’re motivated enough to fight your city for a parking spot in front of a Marine recruiting center, don’t you think you’re showing up for the primaries? If you’re leaning left, whose primaries are you going to attend?

This, more than anything, explains why, even though Bush is almost historically unpopular, we may yet end up with yet another Republican President when all is said and done. Why? Because Hillary and Obama have to make all of these one-issue interest groups happy so they’ll get past the primaries, which means not only being a woman or being black but pushing “women” issues and “black” issues. The end result is that, though people aren’t happy with Bush in particular and the Republican Party in general, they’re going to be much more inclined to vote for “Maverick” McCain than they would be if the Democrats didn’t insist on overplaying their hand.

I will say this - if the Democrats can’t get a President elected this year, they’re going to be in deep, deep trouble…

Trackback URI | Comments RSS