MADISON, Wis. – A legislative candidate from Wisconsin can't use a profane, racially charged phrase to describe herself on the ballot, an election oversight board decided Wednesday.
Ieshuh Griffin, an independent running for a downtown Milwaukee seat in the state Assembly, wants to use the phrase, "NOT the 'whiteman's b----.'"
But the state's Government Accountability Board voted to bar that wording, agreeing with a staff recommendation that it is pejorative and therefore not allowed. State law allows independent candidates to have five words describing themselves placed after their names on the ballot as long as it's not pejorative, profane, discriminatory or includes an obscene word or phrase.
Griffin, who is black, argued her case to the five white, retired judges on the board that regulates elections. She said the phrase was protected free speech.
But the state's Government Accountability Board voted to bar that wording, agreeing with a staff recommendation that it is pejorative and therefore not allowed. State law allows independent candidates to have five words describing themselves placed after their names on the ballot as long as it's not pejorative, profane, discriminatory or includes an obscene word or phrase.
Griffin, who is black, argued her case to the five white, retired judges on the board that regulates elections. She said the phrase was protected free speech.
"It's a freedom of expression," she said. "It's not racial. It's not a slur."
She convinced three of the judges that the wording should be allowed, but two said it should not. One judge was absent, and Griffin needed four votes to succeed. Griffin said she intends to seek an injunction in federal court.
Board member Thomas Cane, a retired state appeals court judge, said he didn't find the wording to be "particularly offensive."
Fellow board member Thomas Barland, who spent 33 years as a circuit court judge in Eau Claire, agreed.
"She says a lot in five words," he said. "It wasn't pornographic, it wasn't obscene and I didn't interpret it as racial."
Judge Gordon Myse, the board chairman, cast the third vote in favor of Griffin."Isn't she saying, 'I'm not under the white man's direction? I'm independent of that.' Isn't that what she's saying?" Myse said.
Roxanne Dunlap, a white woman from Sussex, felt compelled to speak up in the middle of the meeting, saying she was offended by the statement. She said if a white candidate wanted to have the statement "not the black man's b----" put on the ballot, it would be soundly rejected.
Griffin said her statement wasn't directed at any one individual but the government as a whole. The b-word was referring to a female dog that rolls over, she said.
Griffin said her statement wasn't directed at any one individual but the government as a whole. The b-word was referring to a female dog that rolls over, she said.
"I'm not making a derogatory statement to a group of people or an ethnic group," she told the board. "I'm saying what I am not. Everyone I spoke with, elderly and young, understand my point of view."
The phrase was included on nomination papers Griffin circulated to get the 200 signatures needed to be on the Nov. 2 ballot. Griffin, who described herself as a "30ish" community activist, will still appear as an independent candidate.
The Assembly district she hopes to represent covers the east side of Milwaukee and parts of Glendale. It's currently represented by Democrat Annette Polly Williams, who is retiring. Three Democrats and Griffin are seeking to replace her.
Source: http://www.bet.com/News/WisCandidateControversy?cid=idnb
My thoughts when you read the rest.
There are several factors going on here:
1. She's a black woman
2. She's living in a majority white state
3. Its Wisconsin
4. She's seeking to replace a woman
Let me get this straight. She is running in Wisconsin and has decided to set herself apart from her competition by calling herself a b***h. Not a b***h as in a mean female but as in a female dog who refuses to roll over. To a certain extent I can understand where she is coming from, but that does not soften the blow. She could be using the term to signify that she is not being controlled by the "white man" or that she isnt anyone's flunkie or b***h.
I'm not sure she or her team understands the way politics works. You dont get people to vote for you by offending them. What you will get is national attention that takes away from your platform and ruins the chances of you getting elected elsewhere. I think her campaign is a wasted one because we really do need more African American women in positions of power but I would be shocked if she got elected. Its not because of any of the factors listed above but it is because I think she has terrible judgment. As a constituent, I would think if her judgment was this terrible when coming up with her ballot description I would assume her terrible judgment would carry over into matters concerning my area. I am not a citizen of Wisconsin, but as a black woman I am offended by this. Women continue to fight for the right to be respected by the powers that be in areas where we were not previously welcome. This includes the political arena. There must be a level of accountability and responsibility for all women. As a woman seeking to replace another woman, I think Ieshuh Griffin owes it to the constituents who signed her nomination papers to be more responsible. There are ways to say you are not a white man's b***h without actually saying it. Its called "cursing without cursing." While I understand there are other factors at work besides what she is letting on, I think her decision was ill-advised.
What do you think? Do you understand her reasons for wanting to use the description? Do you agree? Share your thoughts.
No comments:
Post a Comment