In an interview on Friday, Representative Rangel was asked why the Democratic Party is so afraid of Sarah Palin. Wheelchair Dancer has a good post, as well as a link to video of the interview. "You got to be kind to the disabled," Rangel said. Later, he apologized: "Governor Palin is an obviously healthy person who in no way fits the description of disabled. I meant to say then, and I am saying now, that she entered the campaign with a disadvantage in the area of foreign policy."

I've been watching since then, looking for coverage in the media, and all the usual suspects online. No one seems to have noticed this. Sure, it's been posted all over the place - it is part of the election cycle, after all - but the reactions have been limited to a few different types.

The right has responded by declaring that this is just another left-wing smear against a fine vice presidential candidate - that it's just more misogyny. Some of them are also making the connection to Trig Palin, Sarah Palin's 4 month old son with Down Syndrome. "We should be sensitive to her or any woman who has a child or family member who has any affliction at all," according to Peter King, co-chair of the McCain-Palin campaign in New York. (Why family members? Why are disabled people always "disabled children", and not adults worthy of being considered outside of their relationships with others?)

The left, on the other hand, has mostly tried to dismiss it as a harmless gaffe - an overly inflammatory choice of words, perhaps, but no big deal. In a few cases, it's been taken further, with comments along the lines of, "Hey, yeah, poor choice of words, probably not politically wise. Oops. But, hey, she is mentally disabled. Hee hee!"

What nobody outside of disabled bloggers seems to be paying any attention to is that this is more than just another ad hominem attack. Rangel's use of "disabled" clearly implies a view of disability as unhealthy; inherently disadvantaging (see Wheelchair Dancer's post for a good analysis of this); and of disabled people as incapable of holding public office and in need of patronization, condescension, and other forms of "kind[ness]". You got to be kind to the disabled! It is this kind of attitude that continues to marginalize disabled people; it is this kind of attitude that prevents us from being accepted as full and equal participants, not just in the political process, but in society as a whole. It is kindness, and not acceptance, that continues to drive such failures of our society as a lack of physical access to buildings that our abled friends take for granted. It is kindness, and not acceptance, that makes the occasional retrofit of those buildings "a favor", rather than "too little too late". It is kindness, and not acceptance, that keeps us separate (but equal, I'm sure ...). Rangel owes an apology not to our parents - but to us.