« Kerry Clueless | Main | New Blogging Tool »

Friday, July 23, 2004


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Let us consider some of the top issues on which Americans might cast votes or chose party preference: Low taxes, pro-gun rights, pro school vouchers, tough on law breakers, pro-life, anti gay marriage and pro defense. These are largely the positions that Republicans hold. Am I to believe that the 90% of Blacks who routinely vote Democratic do not share any or some of the Republican positions? Am I to believe that Blacks are of a single view on these issues? Am I to believe that there are not a significant number of Blacks who are single-issue voters and who are passionate about one of the Republicans’ positions? If I am correct, there is a serious political pathology that is afflicting Blacks.


I think there is more than one black community now. In the new community the answer to "who do you want to be" is Powell or Rice.


The NAACP is offended by President Bush's refusal to address them after working all out to get his opponent elected in 2000 and showing a television ad that basically accuses Bush of being soft on racist murderers and that the lynching of James Byrd was somehow Bush's fault. You know, maybe it's just me, but when someone goes out of their way to kick me in the balls, I tend to avoid that person's company. Call me silly if you will, but that's just the way I feel. Nor do I really understand why Senator Kerry bothers talking to the NAACP. He has their votes; the delegates to the NAACP convention would sooner gut their own mothers with a fish knife than vote for someone other than a Democrat, so what's the point of Kerry's pandering? To make Bush look bad? Let's face reality: the Republicans know that they will never get anything more than a token vote from the black community so they dont care if Kerry and the NAACP badmouth them, and what's more, the Democrats know that for all the muttering from some blacks that they are being taken for granted, by and large the black vote is in the Democratic Party's pocket without the Democrats having to do very much to get that vote. That's the price paid by blacks for putting all of their political eggs in one basket; it means that Republicans do not have to address issues of importance to the black community. Why should they? Political parties are in the business of winning elections and groups are judged by their ability to help the parties do just that. Blacks dont help Republicans, so why should Republicans help blacks? Out of the goodness of their hearts? Somehow in today's politics I dont think that message is going to fly.


Oh ... Tony .. I forgot ... I am very lucky W is in office in regards to my student loan. I was able to take advantage the low interest rates ... got rid of my 9+% interest rate student loan, and rolled it into my refinanced mortgage at 5 1/4. THAT BASTARD!

The wife is in on the hunt, now .. in her younger years, (amazing that she is still as beautiful) ... she managed a 3.82 avg, earned 13K a year, had her own apartment ... she didn't complain ... and got squat from Slick Willy ... and guess what, where ever she goes, she teaches people what accounting is all about. That's called hard work and determination ... she's able to take care of herself ... and is exactly why she is great role model for our girls.



"yes, in the first month of the war 20% of the US troops that .." I think the real numbers that need to be compared are: blacks killed/Total # blacks in service and whites killed/Total # whites in service. I'm not good enough yet to find the 2004 break down of the military, but I played this game on 2001 numbers, and guess what, if I were white, I'd hang out with the black guys. I wonder .... but any way, wasn't there a big stink a little while back .. hmmm, I think I was in the Navy then ... about how the military kept blacks out and didn't allow them to take advantage of college deals .. (in fact, its kind of referenced in your article). Second, "but anyway," most of us Americans are upset about this equation: Americans killed/Total Americans. But I guess if I included you in that group, you'd call me a racist.

"wars that most blacks are not in favor of" ...This sounds like a "reservist's" cry baby exuse ... (said in a whiney voice) "nobody told me I might have to go to war if I join the reserves, my recruiter said I would just attend college and get a pay check." And ... try to find anybody who is in favor of war... nobody is, unfortunately, it is necessary (for the U.S.) to put down communisim, socialism, facism, (hey, liberalism stems from these!) ...

Powel et al ... D Limbaugh has a good one .. (http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/072004.htm) .. may be old news on this site. The best part that applies here .. "The determining factor in racism is not how one feels and behaves in his personal life, but whether he passes certain litmus tests on public policy, such as supporting affirmative action and opposing school choice, though those policies may harm minorities and diminish their dignity more than helping them." Sound familiar Tony?

"Whites are in favor of vouchers because then they can be supplimented by the government when they send their kids to private schools away from blacks. " You gotta be kidding me... yea, right, blacks (those who care) wish to keep their kids in failing schools, especially in our major cities. You obviously inhaled when Bill passed the dooby.


President Bush on the money..
Must stay on message and not be shouted down by conspiracy theorists and socialist black leaders who are on the Democrat payroll.Julian and Kwesi, are you listening.You can't stop truth. Blacks are slowly but surely waking up to the fact the we have been lied to, and it''s not the "evil republicans" telling the lies.

To my people...WE can leave the plantation now,


maybe it's because not all blacks think alike.

weird concept, i know.


Then why are the black mayor and the majority of black parents in DC in favor of tuition vouchers? They are fed up with the failing school system in DC and want vouchers to at least have a chance of getting a good education. Eleanor Holmes Norton and the Teachers Union are the ones fighting the vouchers. One would think that the wishes of the parents would trump the NEA but with the dems in there, not a chance.


thanks, DRL, i would love to finish my sentence.

yes, in the first month of the war 20% of the US troops that were killed were black. which is a sticky situation for the president when he enters wars that most blacks are not in favor of, but then finds himself with a disproportionate amount of blacks being killed.

Powell was a no-brainer for Sec't of State because he would have probably beat Bush in the election and he appeased minorites. Rice was a token and the nation has never been more insecure. Probably not her fault, but a sad fact.

And blacks aren't in favor of school vouchers. Blacks are in favor of better public schools. Whites are in favor of vouchers because then they can be supplimented by the government when they send their kids to private schools away from blacks. Thats why the dems are against it.

Bleeding heart conservative

ken, Powell was NSA 87-89.


"Bush has done nothing for blacks...."

Ohhhh, let's see. Colin Powel is the first black Secretary of State. Condi Rice is the first black National Security advisor. Ron Page as Secretary of Education (should I mention school vouchers which are advocated by the black community and blocked by democrats and the teacher's unions?). Those three administration posts along with Rumsfeld are the foundation of Bush's post 9/11 agenda and they're headed by African-Americans. Yep, you're right, he's done "nothing". Try thinking for a change instead of mindlessly parroting the NAACP so-called "leadership". You're smarter than that.


Couldn't wait for the answer concerning the number of blacks killed in Iraq ... doesn't matter, unless you believe that Pres Bush forcefully drafted blacks into our voluntary army to ensure their demise.


Jobs are available .. so I guess Bush needs to buy a newspaper, show them the jobs, walk them to the place of employment. Makes sense. Stay on the plantation.

As far as tuition .. don't believe me, I'm an evil Republican (http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2004-06-28-tuition-burden-cover-usat_x.htm)

Did you finish your sentence on blacks killed in Iraq?


whoops, the link was suppose to be this one



Gregg -- Of course it serves a purpose. The hysteria surrounding "drugs" suggests that people who do them are a drain on the society. Bush (and Rush Limbaugh) have shown that to be hooey.

Meanwhile minorities, including Blacks, are being thrown into jail at a disproportinately high rate over "soft" drugs. And they're being kept in jail.

DRL16 - the percentage of Black and minority deaths in US wars, are always high. Blacks make up 12% of the US population, yet in the first month of the Iraq war

And you're lucky that you finished college before Bush got into office. Students today saw federal financial aid cut while tuition rose in 49 of 50 states.

As for Jobs, please provide the numbers for me to see. What I do see is blacks being unemployed at a rate of 11.5%, which is double the national rate. So how could Bush say that he has helped them regarding employment?


My comments were so nice, I posted them twice. My bad.


David, I agree with you regarding the NAACP, disagree strongly with respect to Title VII (especially that bit about common knowledge in the legal community -- as a member of that community, I can assure you that that's not so), and disagree that the War on Terror has been a smashing success (I think it's smashed a lot of things, but as Bush has made abundantly clear, victory over Islamist terrorism will take decades, not years).

I also think you missed the point about Florida. I agree with you that Bush has nothing to be ashamed of there: in my mind, his reputation survived the recount. But, from polls I've seen, a strong majority of African-Americans don't see it that way. Many have concluded that there was a conspiracy to deprive blacks of their civil rights, and they blame the Bushes for it. Are they right? Not on the facts. But perception is a funny thing. For these reasons, Bush's reputation among black voters is, to put it mildly, poor. He will be lucky to get 10% of their vote in 2004 -- but, in 2008, it may be a completely different story.


'When he's the cokehead who became president.'

And your living proof that you can being stoned out of your mind results in sentence fragments. What a jackass, you contribute nothing to a reasonable discourse. I don't like Bush but that comment serves no purpose whatsoever except to show how little character you possess.


It was indeed an important speech. Bush is certainly 100% right not to attend any hard-left NAACP events. That group does not represent the positions of most blacks, let alone most Americans. And it has done nothing but attack him and/or the GOP for years. For this they deserve a Presidential appearance? 'Course not. Let that group tone down its rhetoric, if they can, and then Bush should consider addressing them .

There are other important areas that must be addressed, such as the need to repeal Title 7, the so called civil rights legisaltion, and repeal it with something more tighly drafted. Right now, as it's commonly known in the legal profession, the law is simply used as a weapon of leverage for blacks or women who are about to get fired. The GOP will have to develop the strength to realize that, despite the shrill cries of the media that would accompany such a repeal, it is in fact what needs to be done.

Tony - your comments are a perfect illustration of why the President ignores the NAACP.

Larry - the President did not get a bad rep, as you claim, following Florida. Those who voted Democrat were unhappy, and those who voted Republican were not. His reputation was affected not at all.
Likewise, the war on terror has been a smashing success, by any reasonable account. I'm sure many will argue, but most of these will be on the left anyway. ( The few republicnas who oppose the war are negated by the democrats who support it.)


If the NAACP is the gateway to the black community .. it's a shame. They're more a gate to keep the black community on the plantation.

"... send them to war, raise the cost of higher education, and put the nation into debt ..." I wasn't aware that only blacks go to war (get out Vietnam out of your head), only pay tuition (darn, my white boy bill is being paid off, 5 years later), debt ... ok, I'm with you there, but that's both sides trying to out spend each other.

There are more jobs .. look at the numbers ... the debate is whether they "bring home the bacon" ... at least you could say he's looking for the immigrant vote.

Drugs are unfortunately legal for the rich, just take a peek at Hollywood.


I think what we see here is part of Pres. Bush's Sept. 10 strategy: reposition the GOP as an attractive alternative for conservative minorities. To be sure, I really believe that he wants African-Americans to be part of the party -- it is, as he pointed out in his speech, the original home of Frederick Douglass and Abe Lincoln.

But this is not just a moral imperative: It's part of the Rovian strategy to remake the GOP as this country's majority party. Bush and Rove are not interested in the support of the NAACP or Jesse Jackson or the leftwing civil rights restablishment. Their appeal is to the millions of blacks who are socially conservative and entrepreneurial and really wonder what in God's green earth they're doing voting for a party that supports unconditional abortion rights, gay marriage, and the teacher unions. Think Harold Cain, not Barack Obama.

Alas, this strategy -- represented so far by his faith-based initiative, education reform policy, and high-profile African-American appointments -- has been just a wee bit backburnered by the War on Terror. Not to mention, of course, the really bad rep his campaign got coming out of Florida. Even so, Bush and Rove no doubt think that they can still get the ball rolling on the strategy -- not enough, though, to make any impression at all in the election.

But watch out for 2008. If even a little successful, Bush and Rove's legacy will be a very powerful, very different national Republican Party: multi-racial, muscularly interventionist and socially conservative, and much more inclined to use the federal government to impose its social preferences on the country. My advice to libertarian Republicans: start organizing now.


The speech deserves coverage, but how on Earth does it deserve posititve coverage by the "mainstream" press?

Bush is the first president since Hoover to refuse to meet with the NAACP, and yet now he is trying to convince blacks that the Democratic party has let them down?

What exactly has Bush done for Blacks in his time in office other than send them to war, raise the cost of higher education, and put the nation into debt?

Bush has no leg to stand on regarding creating jobs, is he serious by even bringing that topic up?

And who does he think he is by asking blacks "Are you satisfied with the same answers on crime, excuses for drugs and blindness to the problem of the family?" When he's the cokehead who became president. He's living proof that you can do drugs and be "successful", and yet is he offering new answers on the war on drugs? Like legalization or a removal of manditory minimums?

No wonder he was chicken to present that crap to the NAACP, they would have thrown it back in his face. Rightfully.


They are good questions. Can agree with the skepticism as to how effective they are. The mainstream will only concentrate on the part where W says the Rep party still has a long way to go and the applause that followed. Had he left that part out, we wouldn't have heard anything.

The comments to this entry are closed.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

September 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30


Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 10/2003