We've seen it before. The horrible, sexist, misogynistic insults leveled at Sarah Palin. Heck, leveled at Sarah Palins daughter. Sex jokes by David Letterman leveled at Palin's underage daughter. Mocking Palin's special needs child. Saying Palin should stay home and take care of her child like a woman should. Sexist and personal insults aimed at Michele Bachmann. Antisemitic attacks at Joe Lieberman when he left the Democrat party. Sexist and racist slams at Condoleezza Rice. Racist digs, insults and stereotypes fired at Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain, Ben Carson. The attacks on women who accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault and rape. Why the list goes on and on! Yes, the Times piece is an opinion, but at least it acknowledges it. That's something.
A big reason the Left had difficulty getting traction in the 'Trump is Scum' line of attacks in 2016 is that most people have memories. Something the dear readers at Patheos just couldn't, or wouldn't, grasp. Despite all attempts by our modern Leftist culture to the contrary, many people still believe there should be some consistency in morals. If Conservative Evangelicals could be accused of hypocrisy for turning a blind eye to Trump's sins and wrongdoing, the Left (which told the world such things don't matter anyway) had a difficulty time convincing the world that all the things it had recently done, advocated, excused, defended and even endorsed were suddenly horrible and unforgivable.
But the larger issue is that nagging question: Does the Left really care about minorities and women?
When Matt Lauer subjected Hillary Clinton to a harsh interview, within 24 hours it was common knowledge that it was evidence of misogyny. But when Nikki Haley is smeared with the most base, sexist lie, it’s met with little more than a collective shrug.A huge, massive, gargantuan part of the Left's selling strategy is its eternal care about minorities, Blacks, Muslims, Women, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, Jewish Americans, and any other designated minority.
Yet, does it really care? Or does it see these groups as useful tools - useful fools - for its political designs; fools that are easily, and even gleefully, thrown under the bus (or sent to the back of the bus?) when their worth to the Left's political machinations no longer makes the grade? Given the ups and downs and inconsistencies over the last 20 years, it's an argument without anything near a clear and obvious answer. Unless you want to go with the more obvious "No, it doesn't care." Then it makes perfect sense.