On Friday, I linked to thoughts on Hillary playing the sexism card by Peggy Noonan and Brent Brozell, and wrote:

One hopes that the unending alternate cries of racism and sexism by Democrats directed at their own constituents and media have some lasting repercussions. The next time the rhetorical racist or sexist card is played as a cheap debating tool against a Republican, he should consider replying with something along the lines of: Wait a second--all we heard for literally six months in 2008 from your party was how racist and sexist Democratic voters are. Perhaps you should get your own house in order before criticizing others.

Oh--it was just meaningless talking points back then to score points with your constituents? Some things never change, I guess.

And the Boston Globe noted this:

Though the bruising Democratic nomination fight is nearly complete and Clinton has mostly avoided direct attacks on Obama in recent days, she chose yesterday to lodge her strongest complaints of the campaign that she has been the victim of sexist coverage in the media.

"I think that both gender and race have been obviously a part of it because of who we are, and every poll I've seen shows more people would be reluctant to vote for a woman to vote for an African-American, which rarely gets reported on either," Clinton told The Washington Post. "The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable or at least more accepted."

While racism should be equally rejected "when and if it ever raises its ugly head," Clinton said, she believes "the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by comments and reactions of people who are nothing but misogynists."

In the Wall Street Journal, Donald Boudreaux takes Hillary's remarks to their natural conclusion:

Hillary Clinton is now complaining that her candidacy has been harmed by sexism. Interviewed earlier this week by the Washington Post, Sen. Clinton said the polls show that "more people would be reluctant to vote for a woman [than] to vote for an African American." This gender bias, she grumbled, "rarely gets reported on."

So a woman who holds degrees from Wellesley and Yale – who has earned millions in the private sector, won two terms in the U.S. Senate, and gathered many more votes than John Edwards, Bill Richardson and several other middle-aged white guys in their respective bids for the 2008 Democratic nomination – feels cheated because she's a woman.

Seems doubtful. But hey, I'm a guy and perhaps hopelessly insensitive. So let's give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that her campaign has indeed suffered because of sexism.

This fact (if it be a fact) reveals a hitherto unknown, ugly truth about the Democratic Party. The alleged bastion of modern liberalism, toleration and diversity is full of (to use Mrs. Clinton's own phrase) "people who are nothing but misogynists." Large numbers of Democratic voters are sexists. Who knew?

But here's another revelation. If Mrs. Clinton is correct that she is more likely than Barack Obama to defeat John McCain in November, that implies Republicans and independents are less sexist than Democrats.

It must be so. If American voters of all parties are as sexist as the Democrats, Mr. Obama would have a better chance than Mrs. Clinton of defeating Mr. McCain. The same misogyny that thwarted her in the Democratic primaries would thwart her in the general election. Only if registered Republicans and independents are more open-minded than registered Democrats – only if people who lean GOP or who have no party affiliation are more willing than Democrats to overlook a candidate's sex and vote on the issues – could Mrs. Clinton be a stronger candidate.

I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. But if I ever become convinced that Mrs. Clinton is correct that sexism played a role in her disappointing showing in the Democratic primaries – and that she truly is her party's strongest candidate to take on John McCain – I might finally join a party: the GOP. At least it's not infested with sexists.

Exactly. Of course, given the ability of Democrats to pivot their ethics on a dime whenever necessary, I doubt Hillary's complaints will have any impact longer than 30 seconds after she drops out of the race. But it's good to see someone else taking the implications of current rhetoric seriously.