The Washington Post's "conservative" opinion writer, Jennifer Rubin, went to bat for failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, saying the right is "racist" for believing Abrams is unqualified to be vice president. According to Rubin, Abrams has a list of accomplishments that make her more than qualified to be Joe Biden's running mate (assuming he gets the Democratic nomination, which we all know is only a matter of time).
"Why all the venom? Let’s begin with the assumption that it is perfectly reasonable to argue she is not the best VP choice or that her lack of national experience would weaken the ticket. But the anger, the determination to ignore her accomplishments (she did found a voting rights group, deliver a response to the State of the Union and hold the minority leader position in her state for more than half a decade), the resentment over her insistence on calling out voter suppression as the reason for her loss and feigned offense at her ambition (horrors!) smack of racism," Rubin wrote. "I suggest the tone of these voices — How dare she?! — would be far different if, say, Pete Buttigieg or Beto O’Rourke were promoting themselves for the job."
Abrams has committed the cardinal sin for an African American woman in the eyes of the right: She will not accept the legitimacy of elections won through voter suppression, and she will not be appropriately docile and humble. https://t.co/xfBGqLojYn
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) May 20, 2020
National Review's Rich Lowry slammed Rubin for failing to hold any kind of consistent values, especially on the "experience" front.
So @JRubinBlogger says that it’s racist to point out the Stacey Abrams doesn’t have much political experience, hasn’t done much, and is being presumptuous in her push to be Biden’s VP https://t.co/t5fBNcEBDS
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
Recommended
At this point, it’d be shocking—and surely, purely an accident—if Rubin has been consistent on any political matter. But let’s see how she fares under her own standard, shall we?
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
Inexperience was one of her main attacks against Barack Obama. Here is one example https://t.co/W8INu3wcHM
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
And another https://t.co/T2POCwJNq0
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
One of Rubin's biggest gripes with Obama was his lack of accomplishments.
"His greatest triumphs have been writing books, giving speeches, and running for office," Rubin once wrote.
Obama never accomplished anything, she complained pic.twitter.com/hxucvAc1W4
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
Maybe you’re thinking, well, at least she never called him arrogant!
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
But there’s this pic.twitter.com/Bhn4RD48Y1
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
OK, OK, but there’s no way she called him both inexperienced and arrogant in the same sentence
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
Then there's the fact that she said Obama had "no substance."
"One big criticism of Obama (for those away in a media-free zone this entire summer) has been that he is an arrogant, presumptuous lightweight–all fanfare and no substance," Rubin said. "So the counterweight to that is to stick him in august settings, suggesting he is the Zeus of American politics."
Welp pic.twitter.com/sALQMcRR5n
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
...and welp pic.twitter.com/vY5DW91rzy
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
Alright, all the above notwithstanding, it’s inconceivable that she’d suggest that the inexperienced, arrogant Barack Obama somehow wasn’t one of us? Right?
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
Of course she did pic.twitter.com/yZAf2ZxOVR
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
By Rubin’s standard, she wasn’t just wrong about Barack Obama, she was a racist in 2008
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
It’s amazing how she and @MaxBoot didn’t just switch sides, but instantly adopted the laziest and dumbest tropes of their new compatriots
— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) May 20, 2020
What has Stacey Abrams done that makes her highly qualified to be vice president? The lady couldn't accept the fact that she lost fair and square to Brian Kemp. She talked about voter suppression simply because voter rolls were purged in accordance with state law. She's clearly taking a page out of Hillary's playbook.
Just because she delivered a response to one of Trump's State of the Union addresses and served as minority leader for the Georgia legislature for a few years doesn't suddenly give her enough experience to help run the free world.
Jennifer Rubin is quick to claim she's a "conservative," but she's also the first one to take Democrats' side, even when they're very clearly wrong. This notion that it's racist to question someone's experience is stupid. And it's hypocritical for her to chide Obama but hit back at those who question Abrams' qualifications. Newsflash: Both of them are black. Both of them are Democrats. How is criticizing one of them racist but criticizing the other is okay?
At least if you're going to apply those standards, Jennifer, be consistent in what you say. If you want to defend Abrams, then do it on actual merits and not resort to the "racism!" card.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member