Insulting fellow Texans is neither funny nor charming
Richard Friedman is a grown-up who is offering his services for a grown-up job. Yet, he insists on being called Kinky, and he further insists on acting and talking kinky. That’s fine for an entertainer, not so fine for a gubernatorial candidate in a rapidly growing state with all the serious challenges that accompany that growth. It would be easy to dismiss Friedman’s penchant for sticking his boot in his mouth as part of his act, but candidates for high public office ought to make a minimal effort to speak and act responsibly — and that includes showing all citizens respect. We understand that there aren’t always great examples to follow, but real leaders set examples, not follow them. Although crude remarks have come to pockmark political discourse, there is no excuse for them.
One of the most difficult things about making the transition from civilian to politician is the realization that language and nuance take on a completely different meaning. As a civilian, bawdy and/or tasteless jokes or comments might be just a normal part of everyday banter. As a politician, that’s no longer even remotely an option. Every utterance can and probably will be held up to intense scrutiny and dissected to the nth degree. Words can and will take on meanings that you might never have thought possible, and they’ll be interpreted in ways you could never imagine.
In the dog-eat-dog arena of politics, EVERYONE has an agenda. Journalists are looking for an edge while trying to make deadline. Opponents are looking for anything that makes crafting an attack possible. Special interest groups are looking for even the barest hint that you support or oppose their pet cause. It never ends. As a politician, particularly as a candidate, you can never assume that what you say will be taken to have the same meaning it was said with.
Kinky Friedman is learning the hard way that being an eccentric contrarian only makes things worse. Now that the Texas gubernatorial campaign is heading into the home stretch, journalists and opposition researchers are looking for ANYTHING, no matter how old, arcane, or seemingly innocuous, to create a story or controversy out of. It may just be that Friedman, through his words over the years, may have revealed himself to be something that even he might never have though possible: a racist.
In Friedman’s case, he offered up a couple of racially insensitive comments that have attracted attention, both positive and negative.
Friedman’s broad characterization of Hurricane Katrina evacuees as crackheads and thugs raised eyebrows but also won points with the radio talk-show callers who profess to be weary of political correctness.
Whether a civilized society can or should become weary of showing respect to all its members is a philosophical question, but a candidate who embraces generalities for a quick laugh or cheap approbation is not one to be taken seriously.
Friedman has never made much of an effort to portray himself as someone with an abundance of gravitas. That may be fine for an entertainer, author, and/or proprietor of an animal rescue ranch, but it can greatly complicate the life and prospects of a political candidate.
And how about this cute little bon mot from Friedman:
“I don’t eat tamales in the barrio, I don’t eat fried chicken in the ghetto, I don’t eat bagels with the Jews for breakfast,” said Friedman, who is Jewish. “That to me is true racism.”
There might be a point in there somewhere, but what the statement really reveals is that Friedman has some curious notions about barrio and ghetto diets. People who live in barrios and ghettos struggle to scrape together grocery money to feed their families. That’s a lot tougher job than some politician cracking wise to feed stereotypes.
Humor is a good thing in a politician. Lord knows it’s something we could use more of. The problem comes in when politicians go for laughs at the expense of minority groups or other classes that might find such attempts at humor demeaning and insulting should you ever decide to run for office.
Friedman may have some new and/or original ideas, though if he does he’s keeping them well-camouflaged. What he does seem to be doing, though, is demonstrating how poorly he grasps the reality that in politics, every utterance can and will be dissected for hidden meaning or bad intent.
Then there’s this little pearl that Friedman cast before the public during an interview with CNBC last year when asked what to do about sexual predators:
“Throw them in prison and throw away the key, and make them listen to a Negro talking to himself.” He also called Negro a “charming word.”
Although the flip remarks may play well to some audiences, they demean minority citizens for cheap laughs. That may be good show business, but it’s no way to guide public policy or frame conversations about public policy.
Friedman has not offered up anything resembling a serious idea on what to do about prison crowding or what to do with sexual predators once they get out of prison.
And that little reality is exactly why I cannot fathom why so many Texans see Friedman as a legitimate and serious candidate. Next to Rick Perry, of course, a ham sandwich could be seen as a legitimate and serious candidate; it’s not as if the bar’s been set very high. Nonetheless, Friedman’s comments (those that have thus far come to light) can be taken as painting a picture of someone who just doesn’t understand the seriousness of the role he is trying to assume. As Governor, Friedman would be the leader of ALL Texans, and while I don’t necessarily think that Friedman is a racist, there are enough of his words out there that could be taken and rearranged in a manner that certainly wouldn’t paint a flattering picture of him.
No, one doesn’t necessarily need to be a seasoned politician to be taken seriously as a gubernatorial candidate, but it doesn’t hurt. Having the sense to recognize that not everyone views the world through your eyes and your sensibilities should be the bedrock of a candidate’s political persona. I’m not at all certain that Kinky Friedman has the chops to grasp this immutable political reality. And I have a feeling that the revelations of Friedman’s less-than-politics comments are only just beginning.
