Sherrod Brown and the Senator Who Cried Sexism

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)

This past week, Sen. Sherrod Brown called out President Barack Obama over what he deemed to be sexism, referring to the President's comments about Sen. Elizabeth Warren's, referring to her by her first name and stating that she was a politician like everybody else.  When he said this, my first reaction was a raised eyebrow, for multiple reasons.  For starters, Sen. Brown's reasoning that this was sexism was a bit ridiculous, and also highly un-pragmatic.  While generally it's the Republicans over the past seven years who have had their tiffs in public, with high-ranking officials like Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Michele Bachmann airing dirty laundry in public much to the chagrin of leadership, the Democrats have by-and-large kept this sort of complaining in private, with few of these arguments coming to the forefront, and if it did come out, I expected it to be from either a well-known rabble-rouser like Rep. Alan Grayson (who has gone off-the-deep end and while I wish he'd skip the Senate race, at this point I think he may be too much damaged goods to actually hurt the Democrats in Florida in the primary) or a conservative member of the caucus like Sen. Joe Manchin.  Sen. Sherrod Brown is a long-time ally of the administration and a pretty innocuous member of the caucus on most fronts, so it was surprising to see him calling out the President's comments as sexist.  It was also surprising because the comments weren't remotely sexist.

Yes, the President didn't call Sen. Warren by her last name, but he does this all the time.  You might call the President univerally informal but sexist is a stretch, as he frequently refers to senators, governors, and other high-ranking officials by their first names.  John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have both gotten this treatment before, despite what Sen. Brown mentioned in his off-the-cuff remarks, and while I want to believe that perhaps Sen. Brown started a string of comments that he regretted mid-sentence, this was a decidedly strong lapse in judgment on the part of a pretty practiced politician.

It's also worth acknowledging that over-playing the sexism card, particularly when there are countless acts of discrimination and marginalization in American politics and all across the American experience, is a horrible idea, both pragmatically and from winning people to the cause.  We saw this last year in the way that Sen. Mark Udall conducted his campaign, gaining the nickname Mark Uterus in his battle against Cory Gardner.  It's not something that you can pull out at every moment just to create an uncomfortable media moment.  It's much like when the right-wing media dubs everything Obama's "Katrina"-eventually this loses all meaning.  You have to stick to instances that actually involve discrimination of some kind so that this doesn't lose water with sympathetic voters, but ones who might not have the issue at the top of their priorities list.

And it's worth noting that the Democrats have got to think of a different way to handle trade and labor disputes.  Unlike a number of issues, such as gay marriage and immigration which have swung our way in public opinion, unions are not an issue that the Democrats are winning right now, not even close.  Opting into unions, particularly into private sector unions, is on the wane.  This is an issue that the Democrats simply aren't articulating their stance on strongly enough-many people view unions as being ineffective and a protection system that protects sloth, not against age discrimination and sustainable wages, and the Democrats don't do themselves any favors by trying to hold back progress, which is what blocking the trade deal seems to be. In many ways it's similar to Republicans trying to block the inevitable with gay marriage.  Increased globalization is the future, and finding your niche and ability to sell goods overseas is critical in that juncture.  As a result, the Democrats and unions need to find a better way to fight for stronger wages, lower unemployment, and American manufacturing.  The left still does well in pitching something like, say, a minimum wage hike, so there's still an appetite for better conditions for workers and increasing the number of middle income workers.  The better way to do this, though, would be to invest more in education and infrastructure, as well as incentivizing through corporate tax codes and trying to drive industries (such as technology, tourism, and scientific research) that Americans still have a strong leg-up with across the planet.  Sen. Warren's and Sen. Brown's hearts may be in the right place on this issue, but this sort of hard-line throw against trade sends an anti-economic message that doesn't resonate with the larger populace, and calling the President sexist isn't the way to change the conversation.