Last July, Irwin A. Tang made an argument on how words matter -- at least sometimes -- in Gook, John McCain's Racism And Why It Matters. Tang falls back to winter 2000 to note (page 82):
On February 23, Mai Van On, then 82 years old, said that he wanted John McCain to apologize for McCain's "gook" comments. Mai Van On was the North Vietnamese soldier who rescued John McCain. According to Mai Van On, he dragged the unconscious McCain from the lake and prevented an angry mob of Vietnamese civilians (apparently angry at the U.S. dropping bombs on them) from killing him. "I cannot believe that John McCain would say such things," On said in response to McCain's slurs. "I am sure it was just a mistake, but if he said these words I think he should apologize."
At least sometimes? Homophobes, racists, and more get called out . . . from the right. Search in vain for sexism, by the way. Apparently sexism doesn't exist on the right -- who knew? Of course it exists, it's just not anything 'manly Irwin Tang is going to take on. He's also not going to take on racism. To do that, he'd have to move beyond his Fright Mare Cast and include a lot of his 'friends'.
Take Robert Gibbs.
In 2007, Gibbs almost became the first (and only) person Barack Obama ever fired from his presidential campaign. "Pu**ab" -- a derogatory word against those born in India -- had created a media storm. Ava, C.I. and Kat were present (Ava and C.I. were visiting a friend with the Barack Obama campaign) when a closed door session demonstrated some doors weren't think enough. What was going on?
Barack was balling out Robert Gibbs, his campaign manager, for the memo. The loud exchange ended with Barack exiting and stating if it ever happened again, Gibbs was gone. (The words were a bit saltier but we won't crush the delusions of the Cult of St. Barack . . . yet.)
What had happened?
Ava, C.I. and Kat really had to ask because they were addressing Iraq every day. They weren't following the political developments among rivals in the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.
Robert Gibbs authored a memo. It was racist. It was leaked intentionally and then The New York Times, which the Barack campaign maintained had agreed to keep the memo private, went public with the memo and which campaign produced it.
It was a racist memo.
And Barack should have fired him but the maddening diva never fired anyone, he just screamed loudly (and, yes, sometimes threw things). How could they not fire the man, wondered Kat. Well, it was explained, a firing would look back. A firing would have the press dig some more and keep the story alive.
That was campaign politics.
But that man, the one whose ears should have been covered with blisters from the screaming match, Robert Gibbs is the same man that Barack Obama, once he became president, elected to make White House spokesperson.
He is the administration's spokesperson.
He speaks for the administration.
The man who used racial slurs.
What does that say?
Both about Barack and about the nation?
And what does it say that some words offend 'scholars' like Irwin A. Tang and some don't? It appears that the words aren't the issue -- the political party identification of the speaker is.