THAT'S VICE PRESIDENT SHARPTON TO YOU:

Albatross (Peter Beinart, 02.06.03, New Republic)

On "Meet the Press" in January, Tim Russert reminded the freshly reinvented presidential candidate of four episodes in his past: His 1987 conviction for defaming a man he accused of raping Tawana Brawley; his 1993 conviction for tax evasion; his 1995 incitement against a Jewish store owner in Harlem, which culminated in the racially motivated murder of seven of the store's employees; and his 2002 eviction from the Empire State Building for failing to pay his rent. Sharpton responded by implying racism and changing the subject: "I think you've got white candidates with worse backgrounds who--." Russert interrupted to ask whom he meant. Sensing a dead end, Sharpton declared, "I'm not getting into name-calling," and changed the subject once again. "If you want to talk about background, talk about how a white male stabbed me at a nonviolent march. I forgave him, testified for him. That's somebody that brings America together," he declared. Russert doggedly returned to his question, asking Sharpton, "Why not apologize for Tawana Brawley?" "To apologize for believing and standing with a woman--I think all of us need to take women's claims more seriously," Sharpton responded indignantly. "No apology for Tawana Brawley?" Russert tried one last time. "No apology for standing up for civil rights," replied Sharpton.

That last answer is particularly revealing. According to Al Sharpton, the behavior of Al Sharpton is synonymous with the cause of civil rights, and therefore any criticism of Al Sharpton is, by definition, an attack on racial justice. By running for president, Sharpton is effectively asking the Democratic Party to bless that proposition. He knows that, by treating him as a legitimate candidate, the party is ratifying his self-coronation as the leader of black America. And, if the Democratic Party and the media accept him as the leader of black America, the post-Martin Luther King Jr., post-Jesse Jackson civil rights movement will become, in effect, whatever Sharpton says it is.

So far, the five legitimate Democratic candidates are helping Sharpton achieve his goal. Howard Dean, John Kerry, and Joseph Lieberman, for instance, have begun publicly joking about which of them the reverend might pick as his running mate. All involved see this affectionate banter as win-win. Sharpton wants legitimacy; the other candidates grant him legitimacy so he can't accuse them of racism. Were any one Democratic contender to slight Sharpton, he would instantly become the target of the reverend's ire, and the political mud-wrestling match that would ensue would lower his stature while his opponents looked on opportunistically.

The problem is that this strategy of appeasement--while wise for any given presidential candidate--is devastating for the party as a whole.

Though needlessly scatological--who's editing the New Republic this week, Andrew Dice Clay?--this is a reasonably good assessment of why Al Sharpton is going to act as a drag on the Democrats in '04. Unfortunately, Mr. Beinart neither offers a solution nor acknowledges that there isn't one.

Think of it this way: the GOP has a periodic problem with race because every once in a great while some otherwise decent fellow will say something so insensitive that it effectively destroys his career and puts the Party on the defensive for a week. But, because the statement usually doesn't reflect conservative orthodoxy, the offender is easily jettisoned and events move on. The general recidivism makes it difficult for the Party to attract black voters, but then again they're a relatively small and falling percentage of the electorate.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have a constant problem with race, because they are forced to pay at least verbal homage to the political agenda of black leaders and that agenda is off-putting to much of non-black America, as are many of those leaders. But, if they ditch the issues or the leaders they run the risk of alienating their most loyal voters. Thus, they are stuck with Al Sharpton, with the stupid things he says, and with his issues. They're going to have to invite him to debates, their other candidates are going to have to at least nod solemnly when he starts raving about race, and he's probably going to end up with the second most votes in the primaries and a reasonable basis to demand a speaking slot at the convention. In fact, it would not be surprising, when the talk at the debates turns to affirmative action, if he began demanding that Democrats have a "racially balanced" national ticket in '04. And, given the Party's rhetoric on the issue, that's a hard argument to dodge. If Mr. Beinart wanted no part of figuring a way out of this mess, you can imagine how Mr. Sharpton's presidential rivals must be feeling right now. "Albatross" is right.

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 6, 2003 10:18 PM