Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Chimes in On Rendell's "Insensitivity"

Props to Colin McNickle of the Tibune-Review:

Fast Eddie Falls Flat

By Colin McNickle
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Sunday, February 17, 2008

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell should have quit while he was behind.

The Hillary Clinton-supporting governor found his tootsies dipped into the frying oil last week when he said some conservative white Pennsylvania voters are not ready to vote for a black candidate.

It was a direct reference to Barack Obama, the Democrats' front-running (but in the Keystone State, poll-trailing) presidential candidate.

Now, in a pure technical sense, Mr. Rendell's assessment -- with the qualifier "some" -- isn't any great shocker. Heck, while touring rural Pennsylvania in advance of Mr. Rendell's 2002 gubernatorial run against Republican Mike Fisher, I witnessed some very anti-black sentiment.

Some of the vilest remarks -- volunteered in the course of pretty mundane small talk -- came in small communities in the right-hand portion of Pennsylvania's conservative "T," not far from the New York border.

The comments were so stunningly racist and so effortlessly delivered that the worst interpretation of the phrase "there's Pittsburgh, there's Philadelphia and then there's Alabama in between" is quite believable. Rendell has recounted similar anecdotes.

Had Rendell left it at that -- and perhaps added, "it's like that still in a lot of places in America" -- it's hard to imagine anyone would have batted an eye. But Rendell, perhaps sensing his qualifying "some" would be lost in the media's sound-bite world, then attempted to buttress his contention with the results of his election win over Lynn Swann in 2006.

Why, had Mr. Swann been white instead of black, Rendell said, his victory margin might have been trimmed from 22 to 17 points.

Patronizing arrogance aside, Rendell later attempted to defend himself against charges that he's a race-baiter by suggesting he was misinterpreted -- the first refuge of a dissembling pol caught saying stupid things -- and that he's being demonized for being a straight talker.

Straight talker? Ed Rendell?

And Rendell adding that he's no "shucker and jiver" certainly didn't help his defense.

But as CNN exit polls from the Rendell-Swann race show, Swann didn't lose the election because of conservative white voters. Swann lost because of black and liberal voters.

Indeed, Rendell edged Swann among white voters, 57-43 percent, a 14-point spread. But black voters rejected Swann 87-13 percent, a 74-point difference.

Among self-described conservative voters, Swann trounced Rendell 73-27 percent (a 46 percentage point difference). And liberals rejected Swann by the same 87-13 percent ratio that black voters went for Rendell.

Furthermore, Republicans voted for Swann 79-21 percent, a 58-point difference; Democrats voted for Rendell 90-10 percent, an 80-point spread.

Oh, and another thing: Swann fared better in many white conservative voting enclaves than Rick Santorum.

Ed Rendell insists he's not a race-baiter. But the very statistics he points to in his own defense will suggest to many he's just that. And yet again, the fella who considers himself the consummate pol is exposed as a political novitiate who, just in time for Pennsylvania's now-meaningful April 22 primary, may have become Hillary Clinton's greatest liability.

Colin McNickle is the Trib's director of editorial pages. Ring him at 412-320-7836. E-mail him at: cmcnickle@tribweb.com.