Michael Steele has discovered a new tool for recruiting more blacks to the Republican Party: chicken and potato salad. Seriously! When I initially heard about Steele’s remarks, I laughed in disbelief and told the person explaining it to me: “No, way.” Well… then I watched the clip on YouTube.
A Hoosier Access reporter asked the RNC Chairman the following question at the Young Republicans convention in Indianapolis in July:
“I wanted to ask you regarding your inclusion of diverse populations in the Republican party. What is your plan moving forward?”
Steele responds: “My plan is to say y’all come. Cause a lot of you are already here.”
Unidentified person shouts: “I’ll bring the collard greens.”
Steele adds: “There you go. I got the fried chicken and the potato salad.”
I’m surprised someone didn’t say they’d bring the watermelons. The assumption in this food banter is all black people are the same, they love to sop up collard greens, fried chicken and potato salad. What’s ironic is moments after making these comments, Steele says the Republican party “welcomes and embraces” people of different backgrounds. Not with comments like that you won’t.
In fact, the person who told me about the remarks is a young, white Republican who found the comments “off-putting” at best. She went on to explain that she thinks it demonstrates Steele’s struggle with being a black Republican while at the same time acting as the voice of a party most uncomfortable with discussing issues of race and diversity. If Steele, as the first black chairman of the RNC can’t be effective in recruiting more black voters, then who can?
Numerous opportunities have arisen over the summer for Steele to recast the GOP as a more tolerant, dare I suggest, compassionate party of diversity. But he has remained strangely silent this summer on such topics as the racist comments uttered by various GOP folks and most recently the Gates arrest.
Steele’s remarks and the outcome of the Young Republicans Convention, where racist Audra Shay was elected its new chairman, doesn’t bode well for the GOP’s future. Someone commented to me that sadly the state of the Young Republicans is just a mirror image of what’s going on in the Grand Old Party. This person even said recently, while attending an event at the Heritage Foundation with a woman in her fifties, that the woman glanced around the room, shaking her head and remarked, “I guess we’re just going to have to wait until all these old people die off for the party to change.”
The party’s outward image doesn’t look like the welcome mat for diversity. Just for kicks I visited the Young Republican National Federation website. Its leadership is almost exclusively white and its promotional video “This is my party” is pure vanilla, no chocolate or strawberry in sight.
The GOP needs to move into the MODERN world: stop viewing ethnic groups through stereotypes, tune into what’s really important to voters and identify issues where the GOP shares common ground with groups. Leave the finger licking good comments to Colonel Sanders and get the PARTY started, y’all hear?
55 responses so far
1 R.E. Munn // Jul 30, 2009 at 7:35 am
This is some of the most un-thoughtful commentary yet to be seen in NM. In her behalf, it can be said that consistency counts for something.
2 barker13 // Jul 30, 2009 at 8:00 am
Yep. Crystal Wright is the WORST commenter in Frum’s stable.
BILL
3 balconesfault // Jul 30, 2009 at 8:42 am
Come on Crystal – those young Republicans are doing their best to reach out to their young black counterparts, even adopting black culture as a way to increase communication:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkeZ2P4SiY8&feature=player_embedded
4 sinz54 // Jul 30, 2009 at 9:21 am
“I’ll bring the collard greens.”
Steele should have slapped down whoever said that. He should have made that point about stereotyping, right there.
There are other kinds of blacks, you know:
“Deals are made everywhere.
So make YOUR Deal at the Black Enterprise Golf and Tennis Challenge
“Join us for golf and tennis at the luxurious Marriott Hotel….
“What are the best leather handbags for black women….”
http://www.blackenterprise.com/
5 sinz54 // Jul 30, 2009 at 9:38 am
Crystal Wright: Right now, according to the polls, Obama enjoys an amazing 95% approval rating from blacks. That means he must be popular even among more affluent blacks, suggesting that identity is trumping economic issues.
No matter how much the GOP commits to “diversity,” it’s going to be next to impossible for them to pull black voters away from Obama. The GOP had a better opportunity with Jack Kemp’s efforts in the 1990s, but they didn’t follow through. And after Obama leaves office (hopefully in 2013), the GOP may have an opportunity again.
But right now, Obama has locked the GOP out of the black vote.
6 balconesfault // Jul 30, 2009 at 11:47 am
sinz: “That means he must be popular even among more affluent blacks, suggesting that identity is trumping economic issues.”
Wrong. For example, I have a 6 figure income, a net worth above 7 figures, work in private industry, and saved a ton of money in taxes during the Bush years thanks to his tax cuts. I know a lot of people like me … who supported Obama in the last election.
Many of us did so because we viewed our political and economic model over the last 8 years to have been greatly flawed.
I do have one thing in common with blacks, however – my money is not inherited. My grandfather was an immigrant coal miner, my dad a career Army officer who taught at a Catholic HS after he retired. Just as many successful blacks may have been able to attend top tier universities out of affirmative action, the Ivy League deciding during the second half of the last century to expand their admissions past the ranks of the eastern monied elite families via more national recruiting and expansion of financial aid to middle class families made my matriculation from an Ivy institution – something that would have been unthinkable to the children of my granddad’s fellow mine workers – possible.
In short – very successful blacks understand that without major changes in the playing field over the last 50 years their successes would likely be a fraction of what they are. And the vast majority of them are still more focussed on programs that will enable others to follow them to prosperity, rather than locking in their own gains. Which is what Obama represents.
The ideological question these days is whether government exists only to protect the wealth and physical well being of its citizens … or if it has a greater role in expanding the public welfare. There is no way to be a majority party over the long term with the attitude that government action to expand the public welfare is a path to communism. And in dealing with historically poor communities like blacks, that attitude is a direct path to failure.
7 barker13 // Jul 30, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Re: Balconesfault // Jul 30, 2009 at 11:47 am –
“I have a 6 figure income, a net worth above 7 figures…”
(*A BLINDING BRIGHT LIGHT APPEARS*)
I’ve had an epiphany! Obama and the Democrats are RIGHT! We must redistribute income!!!
Balc,
Please send me a check at:
William R. Barker
C/O: Harriman, NY 10926-3030
(*WINK*)
(And I promise… I’ll spend whatever you send on AMERICAN products or AMERICAN provided services!)
(No Ukrainian call girls for me!)
(*WINK*)
BILL
8 balconesfault // Jul 30, 2009 at 12:30 pm
“(No Ukrainian call girls for me!)”
How about Argentinian divorcees?
Meanwhile, I am happy to have some of my tax dollars used to pay for keeping your air and water clean, for keeping US 87 in good repair, and even for keeping the Port Jervis line of the MTA operating. Don’t mind if it helps you out when you’ve hit a bad patch, and I’d be fine with it paying for your healthcare even before you reach 65. Even for national defense, although I do resent it being used for rebuilding bridges and highways and airports that we blew up in Iraq and Afghanistan.
9 Observer // Jul 30, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Racist attitudes and platitudes don’t just lose black votes or latino votes, they lose moderate white votes, too. By the millions.
10 barker13 // Jul 30, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Re: Balconesfault // Jul 30, 2009 at 12:30 pm –
“How about Argentinian divorcees?”
Is she a woman “of means…???”
(*GRIN*)
What’s she look like?
(*CHUCKLE*)
BTW… no check coming my way, I gather? (*SIGH*) (*FROWN*)
Oh, well… I tried.
Re: Observer // Jul 30, 2009 at 12:31 pm –
“Racist attitudes…”
(???)
“…and platitudes…”
(???)
Any… er… specifics you’d care to offer?
BILL
11 ottovbvs // Jul 30, 2009 at 5:51 pm
……..Crystal’s right but it doesn’t seem to affect her support for the GOP……one moment she’s complaining about overt Republican racism, the next minute she’s extolling conservative policies that will hurt the black community……there’s a disconnect here somewhere which she doesn’t seem to comprehend……..As for Steele, god is this guy dumb, he’s as thick as a post
12 dragonlady // Jul 30, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Is it me, or was Steele clearly joking in this video? Was the person who said bring the collard greens a black or white person? Anyway, I have to defer to people of color on whether they found these remarks tone deaf. If a white RNC chairmen said it, I can see why folks would be upset but are we so hyper-sensitive we can’t even inject humor in the debate? Steele went on in the video to defend the Republican historical legacy on race.
What does the author want Steele to say about the Gates controversy? The rule in politics is if someone is about to hang themselves, give them enough rope. Anything he said would have detracted from Obama stepping in it, and would have given Obama an opportunity to deflect the criticism.
I want as much diversity in the GOP as the author does, but I don’t think political correctness is the way to get there.
13 ottovbvs // Jul 30, 2009 at 6:51 pm
dragonlady // Jul 30, 2009 at 6:47 pm
” I want as much diversity in the GOP as the author does, but I don’t think political correctness is the way to get there.”
…………Naturally not……we must not get to steamed up about the magic negroes, coons, et al must we…..that would never do
14 dragonlady // Jul 30, 2009 at 7:04 pm
balconesfault, I’m pretty sure lot of white folks do not inherit huge amounts of money either. Both my parents were immigrants to this country who left their countries in the midst of war with not much more than the clothes on their back, and became middle class through hard work like everyone else. My mother isn’t white; she’s Asian. No one asked for any special breaks in my family. As far as “leveling the playing field,” Obama was supposed to be a post racial president. When is it enough for affirmative action? Shouldn’t blacks be insulted when Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggested in the CT firefighter reverse discrimination case that relying on pencil and paper exams is a dubious pratice? As far as promoting the public welfare, well the War on Poverty really helped blacks, didn’t it? Welfare completely destroyed the black family. The attitude that government is in the best position to promote the general welfare and knows better over individuals and their families ultimately is a statist policy. Govt promotion of welfare should be limited to enabling the general public in opportunities–to include minorities. I’m fine with some providing of the general welfare for vulnerable populations (kids, elderly, and the poor). But leveling the playing field is social engineering.
15 ottovbvs // Jul 30, 2009 at 7:15 pm
dragonlady // Jul 30, 2009 at 7:04 pm
“But leveling the playing field is social engineering.”
……..Hell no we don’t want a level playing field……let’s get back to 1900 when they kept blacks, jews, chinks, dagos and other undesirables out of decent universities…..and of course for domestic situations “no Irish need apply.”…………It would be hard to make up idiots like you dragonlady….it really would
16 aDude // Jul 30, 2009 at 10:38 pm
At least Steele has latched on to Step 1 of 12 Step – admit you have a problem.
I once heard a radio commentary bemoaning the fact that John McCain couldn’t put the Reagan coalition of 1980 together. But the fact is – he did. Reagan got 55% of the white vote. McCain got 55% of the white vote. If you go right down the line of men, women, white, black, hispanic, etc, you’ll see that they both got very similar percentages.
The problem is that the goal posts have moved.
In 1980, whites were 88% of the vote. By 2008 that was down to 74%. Men were 53% of the vote, now down to 47%. In fact, white men went from 46% of the vote in 1980 to 34% in 2008. The traditional base is shrinking fast.
Meanwhile, the African American vote went from 10% to 13%. That might not seem like much, but when you have a block that is voting 90+% for Democrats, that can mean the difference between winning with 51% of the vote and losing with 48%. I know 6 figure income blacks who would be receptive to traditional conservative ideals, but they view the Republican party as the “barak the magic Negro” gang. And that doesn’t even begin to measure what is happening with the Hispanic vote. Obama won in Indiana and North Carolina on the strength of the Hispanic vote.
Steele knows if the Republican party doesn’t branch out from its shrinking base, then it does not have much of a future. On the other hand, he seems clueless as to how to accomplish this.
17 SFTor1 // Jul 30, 2009 at 11:57 pm
That YouTube clip didn’t seem particularly problematic to me. Michael Steele is clearly making the comment in the half-mocking tone it calls for.
No foul.
18 dmalone1 // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:41 am
Okay Mr. Frum, (and Miss Wright of course):
I’m joining the conversation. It’s clear to me that Mr. Steele’s jestful comments, as distasteful (if you’ll pardon the pun) as they may have been, were simply an attempt at a kind hearted welcoming, on behalf of a minority party, to attract voters who have long been unreachable to Republicans. The entire controversy, if there is one, strikes me as the equivalent of Democratic party chairman Howard Dean saying that he wanted the votes of men “with Confederate flags on the backs of their pick up trucks” which was arguably a stereotype of a kind as well. I think what he really meant was that he wanted the party to be more inclusive of southern white males, who had long been a monolitihic voting bloc for the Republican Party, as African Americans have been for the Democrats. At other times he said that he wanted the Democratic party to persue a “fifty state strategy”. Perhaps in both instances he was saying the same thing. As the leader of a party in opposition, he was reaching for additional votes to augment his party’s base, which is exactly what Mr. Steele, as the first African American chairman of the Republican party, was chosen to do.
The problem here, a serious problem for Republicans, and perhaps an insurmountable one, is the fact that only Democratic party affliliation can confer legitimacy on one’s race, gender, or minority status. As Shelby Steele has said repeatedly, to be black and conservative is “to enter a kind of exile” and to be black and not be a Democrat is to be, in a powerful symbolic sense, “not really black”. Thus, figures such as Condi Rice or Clarence Thomas, and even Mr. Steele himself, far from being the pride of the black community, are in fact perceived as it’s pariahs: sell-outs, race traitors, and uncle toms—it’s as if by virtue of their Republican party affiliation they’ve chosen to align themselves with racism itself in the eyes of most black and liberal white voters—and for that they pay a price. Their very legitimacy as blacks is stripped from them. It’s very possible that O.J. Simpson, at least during his murder trial, enjoyed more love and support from the black community during his murder trial, than any black conservative politician, or intellectual ever will. Of course, these same figures are inspiring to white conservatives for seeming to ask (in code) to be judged “not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” but in reality, when it comes to minority votes, such lofty concepts pale next to the powerful allure of identity politics. Identity politics win votes, and in the case of the African American community, a majority of them.
Who can blame Michael Steele for a little condenscenion and stereotyping of black voters in his awkwardly folksy comments when such tropes have always been a total success for Democrats? We’ve all seen Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and even our president, on the pulpit of numerous black churches affecting (terribly I might add) the soulful cadences of a Baptist preacher in pursuit of votes. As tasteless, and laughable, as such pandering was, it never provoked the slightest protest from the black communtity as a whole. Nor did the fact that not long ago, Bill Clinton was dubbed “the first black president”. John Kerry, while campaigning in 2004, noted in his patrician accent, without the slightest sense of irony, that he would like to be the second. The tragedy of all of this is that in the eyes of minority voters, even these condescending and phony white Democrats have more legitimacy in the eyes of black voters than any black Republicans, and any black voters who accept Michael Steele’s invitation to join his party must enter Shelby Steele’s “kind of exile”. An admirable road to travel, and the hardest one. How many will take it?
Similarly, Alberto Gonzales was anything but the pride of American Latinos, and Sarah Palin can never hope to be the hero to millions of American women in the way that Hillary Clinton is. My biggest question, and don’t I think that any of the brightest pundits on the right have the answer, is how can the Republican party adapt to the increasingly minority-majority demographics of this changing country without embracing the culture of identity politics, as Mr. Steele was doing, albeit in a minor way, with his fried chicken and potato salad comments? Condescending yes, but boy does it work in convincing what is perhaps a majority of minority voters that you empathize, care about, and are indeed, in spirit at least, one of them.
19 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 8:42 am
Re: Dmalone1 // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:41 am –
(*CLAP-CLAP-CLAP*) (*THUMBS UP*)
Wow… while I have a few quibbles with your post… just… er… wow.
I’ve gotta give Wright one backhand compliment: Your post – while as usual more so than not a waste of bits and bytes – elicited Dmalone1’s comment, so… good job in that regard.
BILL
20 balconesfault // Jul 31, 2009 at 9:05 am
dmalone wrote: “Similarly, Alberto Gonzales was anything but the pride of American Latinos, and Sarah Palin can never hope to be the hero to millions of American women in the way that Hillary Clinton is.”
Well, competence does count for something.
21 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 10:04 am
dmalone1 // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:41 am
“Condescending yes, but boy does it work in convincing what is perhaps a majority of minority voters that you empathize, care about, and are indeed, in spirit at least, one of them.”
……….The new Mr Collins speaks……..such affability, such condescension……..I’m sure black minority voters will be just as appreciative as were those on whom Lady Catherine de Burgh bestowed her attentions……..dmalone you’re almost as funny as Collins
22 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 10:04 am
Re: Balconesfault // Jul 31, 2009 at 9:05 am –
What the hell is Hillary Clinton “competent” in…???
Seriously!? I ask this as a NON-partisan question.
Balc… you’re a successful guy… you make a six figure income… have over a million bucks in savings… imagine if your spouse was POTUS – you could have been “made” a Senator too!
Hey… all the props in the world to good ‘ol Bill… but HRC? No. Without being married to the Attorney General and then Governor of Arkansas and then POTUS…
(*SHRUG*)
One hears (and from the likes of the McCain’s and Hatch’s of the GOP no less!) that HRC was a fine Senator… that she worked hard… that she knew her stuff…
What did she do…???
(I mean, com’on… imagine yourself suddenly filling the shoes of a United States Senator… do you think you’d do better, worse, or about the same as HRC? I’m guessing you’d do as well, perhaps better.)
Palin ran a state! HRC ran… a failed presidential nomination campaign. Failed against a formerly unknown black first term Senator from Illinois. Recall… back in say 2006, certainly 2007… Clinton “machine” vs. er… the “Obama machine…?” (The Chicago machine…???)
HRC “ran” her husband’s healthcare project. That didn’t work out too well, did it?
Hey… when HRC sat on the board of WAL-MART what were her contributions to their corporate strategies…???
Senior partner in a law firm…??? Hmm… what ever happened to that law firm…??? (What ever happened to Web Hubbell…???)
AGAIN… NON-PARTISAN… I give Pelosi props! (Her husband’s wealth and influence aside, she fought and clawed her way to the top under her own power.)
Yes… unfortunately Dmalone1 is correct that millions of American women look up to HRC as some sort of hero. (*SHRUG*) Well… millions of American women also put their lives on hold for Princess Di’s funeral. (*SMIRK*)
No… seriously… as a role model HRC basically serves to show how far nepotism can take you. Hell… at least JFK had PT 109!
BILL
23 franco 2 // Jul 31, 2009 at 10:30 am
I think Steele is a lightweight – even on race. The answer is not to talk about Abraham Lincoln. That isn’t a very convincing argument even though it is a valid point. Better to focus on the fact that the Republican Party is for (or should be for) individual rights and seeks to downplay group rights. If you are an African American and you are looking for a payout from the government, stay voting Democrat. If you are the same and paying taxes, consider joining Republicans who want everyone to succeed. Republicans aren’t going to win over many blacks who are aggrieved and already dependent on government. They can make some headway on the larger majority of blacks who aren’t dependent on government handouts and phony affirmative action.
But Steele and Republicans should avoid wasting too much time courting African American votes. The demographic has proven itself pretty closed-minded and insular, and they are quite attached to the idea that Republicans are suspect racially. And the party should stop playing defense on this issue, it just makes them appear guilty. Play offense and challenge black folk, don’t pander and grovel.
We don’t need their votes anymore anyway SAY IT! I know this will get y’all going (How stupid is that?) It is a perfectly valid opening gambit. Let them scream. Republican chair says “I don’t know why they care so much, they aren’t voting for us. A party has a duty to listen to their own voters first and blacks have taken themselves out of the game when it comes to Republican party politics. We invite them to our party and they don’t come. They would have you all believe that is because of our policies and attitudes, but really it is about their need to keep our party as white as possible so as to make the case that there is something wrong with our party racially. We are fine with black coming into our party and joining the fight, but there is only so much we can do because we are an individual rights party . We can’t and won’t attempt to pander to group rights – if that’s what blacks really want (and we don’t think the majority of blacks really do) then DON’T vote Republican.”
This will piss some of them off (but they are already pissed off, so what?) but it’s true.
Then we can have a dialog. We don’t care what they think anymore because they won’t change their (voting) behavior no matter what. If they want to have a say then they have to vote for some Republicans, otherwise ignore them.
We should likewise take Crystals admonitions with a grain of salt (hope salt isn’t something blacks eat, otherwise I’m stereotyping) since she also voted for Obama. She calls herself a conservative but voted for the black leftist.
5% is truly pathetic, I bet the party could get more black vote merely by using reverse psychology. Republicans would get more than 5% by saying ” We forbid black people to vote for us” “Voting for Republicans will help blacks, and racists that we are, we don’t want blacks to succeed, therefore keep voting for Democrats!”
Also it would be useful if someone would provide us with a list of things black people eat, or are supposed to eat but don’t, so we make sure we don’t mention those foods when referring to black people lest we appear racist.
I’ll start;
Watermelon (probably #1)
Fried Chicken (#2)
Ribs and anything BBQ
Collard Greens
Potato Salad (?)
BTW Obama obviously stereotyped Irishman Crowley by proposing they all get together for a “beer”.
How insensitive is that?
24 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 10:40 am
franco-2 // Jul 31, 2009 at 10:30 am
” But Steele and Republicans should avoid wasting too much time courting African American votes. The demographic has proven itself pretty closed-minded and insular, and they are quite attached to the idea that Republicans are suspect racially”
…….I wonder where they got that strange idea?………Maybe it’s from the completely open minded and non insular comments of right wing conservatives like:
franco-2 // Jul 31, 2009 at 10:30 am
25 franco 2 // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:18 am
ottobvs,
You have a history of voting Republican, I guess you are a racist too!
26 balconesfault // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:53 am
“Palin ran a state!”
Good you used the past tense there. Although there’s considerable evidence that she didn’t do much running of the state even when she occupied the Governor’s chair, if you listen even to critics from both sides of the aisle up in Alaska. She did manage to dole out more money from the Alaska Permanent Fund to the state’s residents, and she was successful at continuing Alaska’s record of getting back $1.84 from the Federal Government for every $1 sent to Washington from the state. But aside from that – it seems her greatest success was simply in getting elected governor of a state whose population would rank about 75th among Metropolitan Statistical Areas in the US.
Yes, I know … Palin’s reputation would be much better, if it weren’t for a vast left wing conspiracy against her, right?
27 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:56 am
franco-2 // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:18 am
“You have a history of voting Republican, I guess you are a racist too!”
………Sorry Franco I forgot irony wasn’t your thing………As ever you miss the point which is that the Republican party has become “increasingly” racist as it’s southern component has become more important and all those more tolerant NE/west coast type RINO’s like myself have left…….this is has all coincided with the electorate becoming more minority dominated…….and more bad news for you this morning…….We’re coming out of the Bush/Republican recession….
WASHINGTON – The economy sank at a pace of just 1 percent in the second quarter of the year, a new government report shows. It was a better-than-expected showing that provided the strongest signal yet that the longest recession since World War II is finally winding down.
The dip in gross domestic product for the April-to-June period, reported by the Commerce Department on Friday, comes after the economy was in a free fall, tumbling at an annual rate of 6.4 percent in the first three months of this year. That was the sharpest downhill slide in nearly three decades.
The economy has now contracted for a record four straight quarters for the first time on records dating to 1947. That underscores the grim toll of the recession on consumers and companies.
28 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Re: Balconesfault // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:53 am –
“Good you used the past tense there.”
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
Balc. Address the point.
“Although there’s considerable evidence that she didn’t do much running of the state even when she occupied the Governor’s chair, if you listen even to critics from both sides of the aisle up in Alaska.”
(*SNORT*) “…if you listen even to CRITICS…”
Balc. Again. Address the point. Make your own using evidence if you can… but sideline the snark and step up to the plate.
“She did manage to dole out more money from the Alaska Permanent Fund to the state’s residents…”
Well that kinda makes MY point… (*SMIRK*)
“…she was successful at continuing Alaska’s record of getting back $1.84 from the Federal Government for every $1 sent to Washington…”
Again. This shows success, not failure. (*SIGH*) Contrast this with New York’s situation. (*SHRUG*)
Listen. Balc. I get personal. I make no apologies. (*SHRUG*) So in a personal vein… I truly wish you weren’t such a lightweight.
Spart… now there’s a poster I respect.
Sinz… yeah, he drives me to drink (cheers!) at times, but also a poster I generally respect for being able to make a reasonable argument and support his case.
Mid? Obviously I have great respect for Mid.
You… (*SHRUG*)… in all seriousness, I truly do WANT to be able to respect you in the sense enjoying a spirited and two-way informational back and forth. I gotta say, though… you make it hard.
BILL
29 sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:18 pm
dmalone1 asks: “My biggest question, … is how can the Republican party adapt to the increasingly minority-majority demographics of this changing country without embracing the culture of identity politics, as Mr. Steele was doing”
I keep telling my fellow conservatives that they should emulate, not ignore, the example set by the late Jack Kemp. How many times have I mentioned Kemp’s name on New Majority already?
Jack Kemp was a thorough conservative. But he made real proposals, not sloganeering, on ways government at various levels could help the black community, particularly in the inner city. He worked constantly with black leaders on these proposals, not just showing up at election time with the inevitable speech to the NAACP.
And Kemp had a kind of open-minded, even cosmopolitan outlook: He never gave wink-wink, nudge-nudge code language to white Southerners; he was an advocate of immigration reform to give Hispanics a path to citizenship; and he even supported affirmative action as a temporary measure till conservative anti-poverty efforts took hold.
But the GOP base doesn’t want to hear that. They continue to do the virtual opposite of what Kemp was trying to do. And on American Prospect, a liberal blog, they breathed a sigh of relief that the GOP didn’t embrace Kemp’s ideas for helping minorities.
30 Observer // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Franco, I liked it when you said this…
“Better to focus on the fact that the Republican Party is for (or should be for) individual rights and seeks to downplay group rights. If you are an African American and you are looking for a payout from the government, stay voting Democrat. If you are the same and paying taxes, consider joining Republicans who want everyone to succeed.”
…making the point that if Republicans set themselves apart as a party that truly cared about individual people and judged everyone individually, then they’d have a great case to make for black and white voters alike.
And then you proceeded to make exactly the opposite case. “They, them,” those black folk won’t play in OUR party, etc.
If you want to make the case that the Republican party should be above looking at voters or voting blocs based on color, then it might help to actually do that first.
31 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:32 pm
……..The southern Republican insanity continues
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0709/58_of_GOP_not_suredont_beleive_Obama_born_in_US.html
………58% of Republicans either don’t believe or aren’t sure if the president is a US citizen…….sure no hint of racism in the GOP…….and people wonder why this party is increasingly seen as losing its mind
32 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:37 pm
barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:17 pm
“Listen. Balc. I get personal. I make no apologies. (*SHRUG*) So in a personal vein… I truly wish you weren’t such a lightweight.”
………….Balc…….It’s hard to make to make this brain dead loser up so I wouldn’t lose too much sleep over his stage directions
33 sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:38 pm
franco-2 sez: “African American votes. The demographic has proven itself pretty closed-minded and insular, and they are quite attached to the idea that Republicans are suspect racially”
I come back to my earlier point.
In 1960, Richard Nixon, running as a right-wing anti-Communist, got 40% of the black vote against JFK. That was 25 years after the New Deal.
When Nixon ran for re-election in 1972, he got less than 10% of the black vote; and that’s the percentage that has remained ever since.
What caused this change between 1960 and 1972? What caused the GOP to lose 3/4 of its black support?
Give up?
It’s that the Dem Party helped to end racial discrimination against blacks, with the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. While the GOP candidate for President in 1964, Barry Goldwater, was opposed. (Goldwater was opposed on libertarian rather than racial grounds. But that is too fine a distinction for a minority group who had been waiting for a century for their civil rights.)
That wasn’t a question of “handouts” or “welfare”–it was making sure that blacks had their civil rights, to be treated equally in employment, in housing, and at the voting booth.
34 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 1:00 pm
sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:38 pm
………..A well nigh perfect description of what happened……I congratulate you…….all those racist southerners who used to be a major component of the Democratic party have now switched to their natural conservative home………..this is one of the most significant things that’s happened over the past thirty years which Republicans are largely oblivious of, and that is that in general terms all the conservatives are in the right box and so are all the liberals…….the Democratic box is a bit bigger so they have more trouble holding their somewhat broader coalition together but this is what demographics, cultural shifts, the southern strategy and polarization hath wrought and it’s a hundred times more important electorally than the latest Palin spat over which so much emotion is needlessly exhausted.
35 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Re: Sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:18 pm –
“How many times have I mentioned Kemp’s name on New Majority already?”
You mean the same Jack Kemp you told us the other day you voted AGAINST in ‘96 when you voted FOR Bill Clinton…??? THAT Jack Kemp…???
“I keep telling my fellow conservatives…”
(*BUZZ*) (*CHUCKLE*) What’s this about “fellow…?”
“…white Southerners…”
White Southerners = BAD White Southerners. (That’s using “Sinz Math.”) (*SMIRK*)
“…cosmopolitan…”
Sinz… have you ever BEEN to Buffalo…??? (*ROFLMAO*)
No… seriously… you mean “cosmopolitan” as opposed to all those “hicks” in “fly over country,” right?
(*ROLLING MY EYES*)
“….mmigration reform to give Hispanics a path to citizenship…”
Two points:
1) What Sinz MEANT was “give illegal alien Hispanics who had deliberately broken our laws a virtual amnesty but regardess of any arguing on the definition of “amnesty” we’re definitely talking “path to citizenship.”
2) Once again Sinz the race obsessed rears his ugly head. Why focus on only “Hispanics?” Why the focus on “brown?” What about “Asians” or IRISH for Christ’s sake…?!?!
Again… Sinz isn’t a racist… focused on skin color, ethnicity, and language. (*SHRUG*)
“…the GOP base…”
AKA the people Sinz the “conservative” detests. (*RUEFUL CHUCKLE*)
You are a constant source of amusement for me, Sinz! God bless you and I wish you a long life!
BILL
36 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Re: Observer // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:22 pm –
FRANCO: “…is for (or should be for)…”
Observer. Franco is clearly talking “ideals.”
Nothing he wrote made “the opposite case” with regard to what he (and I) feel our ideals are.
Nice try though… (*SMIRK*)
BILL
37 balconesfault // Jul 31, 2009 at 1:48 pm
otto: “………….Balc…….It’s hard to make to make this brain dead loser up so I wouldn’t lose too much sleep over his stage directions”
Eh. Not brain dead. Just dug in and willing to embrace illogic to hold his ground.
Theoretically, Palin is a small government personal liberty/responsibility conservative. As governor, she used taxes on oil companies to hand money to state residents (rather than saving it for a rainy day or allowing oil companies to reinvest it in economic growth) and she primed the pump to keep money flowing from the pockets of people like you and I and Barker.
And of course, anyone in Alaska who is critical of Sarah – be they Repub or Dem – can be discounted … because they’re critics. And again, that doesn’t just include the vast left wing conspiracy. Her critics are bipartisan, until you start drawing a line that says anyone who criticizes Sarah is by definition a lefty.
The Palin wedge has been driven deeply into the Republican base. The fact that it went in so easy is an indication of underlying rot.
38 sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 2:04 pm
ottovbvs sez: “A well nigh perfect description of what happened……I congratulate you”
Thank you.
Hey, would you believe that Barack Obama might be the AntiChrist as foretold in the Bible?
The shocking discoveries here, on FreeRepublic.com:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2303317/posts?page=1
Open your mind and believe!
Hey, here’s a discussion + video on FreeRepublic.com, as to whether Barack Obama is the AntiChrist as
39 sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 2:05 pm
ottovbvs sez: “58% of Republicans either don’t believe or aren’t sure if the president is a US citizen”
Hey, would you believe that Barack Obama might be the AntiChrist as foretold in the Bible?
The shocking discoveries here, on FreeRepublic.com:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2303317/posts?page=1
Open your mind and believe!
40 Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:25 pm
dmalone1 // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:41 am
Where does one learn the kind of foolishness that you’ve spouted? Please describe the life experiences you’ve had that enable you to form the conclusions about black people that you’ve formed.
What black people are calling Michael Steele and Condi Rice sellouts and race traitors? And why in the world should Michael Steele be considered the pride of the black community? The man has demonstrated that he is not much more intelligent that your garden-variety idiot, which is why so many GOPers have issues with him. Yet you think blacks should take pride in him?
Are you so blinded by the race of those who criticize Steele, Thomas and others that you’re not capable of evaluating their cricisms on the merits? White GOPers have been complaining about Steele almost from the day he became RNC chair. No one alleged that their complaints about him were based on his race, and they weren’t. But when blacks choose not to hold him in high regard it simply has to be because of race?
I really don’t believe you mean any harm, but you should take some time to reconsider your extraordinarily superficial observations and race-based conclusions .
41 Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:38 pm
barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 12:17 pm wrote: “Spart… now there’s a poster I respect.”
Hey, thanks for the shout-out. I’m sure you’ll want to retract it given our differences of opinion on dmalone1’s post.
42 Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:46 pm
dmalone1 // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:41 am
As further evidence of the fact that the criticisms blacks have of Steel are not based on his race, you should consider the fact that blacks, and most non-blacks as well, generally hold Condi Rice and Colin Powell in very high regard. If blacks are so willing to condemn GOP blacks, why do they hold Rice and Powell in high regard while being very critical of Steele and Thomas? Incidentally, I strongly suspect that blacks’ views of these four black GOPers is probably very similar to the general public’s views of them.
43 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 6:37 pm
balconesfault // Jul 31, 2009 at 1:48 pm
“otto: “………….Balc…….It’s hard to make to make this brain dead loser up so I wouldn’t lose too much sleep over his stage directions”
Eh. Not brain dead. Just dug in and willing to embrace illogic to hold his ground.”
……..Naaahh this guy is a shrink’s dream
44 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 6:41 pm
sinz54 // Jul 31, 2009 at 2:05 pm
ottovbvs sez: “58% of Republicans either don’t believe or aren’t sure if the president is a US citizen”
Hey, would you believe that Barack Obama might be the AntiChrist as foretold in the Bible?
………This was literally unbelievable…….and I have a pretty low opinion of what the once great GOP has become in the hands of these southern and ideological zealots(which included Frum until the light bulb came on)
45 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Re: Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:38 pm –
(*GRIN*) We’ll see.
Hey… seriously, Spart… notice the way I “deal” with Dragonlady over on the “Boots on the Ground, Not Jets in the Sky” thread.
I think Dragonlady is right on target probably 90%-95% of the time.
I appreciate her writing – she’s an EXCELLENT writer… clear, intelligible… authoritative without stumbling into “academize”…
(*SHRUG*)
But all this said, the MOMENT she tries to pull a fast one (my perception) I’m on her the same way I’d take on any ideological “foe.”
I don’t play favorites. (*SHRUG*)
Oh, yeah… I’m more polite to Mid… not nearly as snarky as I can be with… say… you…
(*HUGE FRIGG’N GRIN*)
…but the point remains: I have my “standards” and I stick by them come hell or high water. And I hold MYSELF to them just as I hold others – be they intellectual “friend” or “foe.”
Anyway… I digress.
(*WINK*)
BILL
46 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Re: Dmalone1 // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:41 am –
“It’s clear to me that Mr. Steele’s jestful comments, as distasteful (if you’ll pardon the pun) as they may have been, were simply an attempt at a kind hearted welcoming, on behalf of a minority party, to attract voters who have long been unreachable to Republicans.”
Confession. I’m just now watching the actual clip.
So… exactly WHAT is “distasteful…???” Seriously… I’m confused; I’m not getting it.
STEELE: “…Y’All Come…”
That’s… er… “southern,” right? “Southern,” but also kinda midwestern in the “Hee-Haw” country music “broader” sense. Right…??? I mean… the expression isn’t tied to race… is it…???
BLACK WOMAN: “…I’ll bring the collard greens…”
Hmm… “collard greens.” That’s “southern” too – right…??? “Southern” and also kinda “rural,” no…??? Or… are collard greens ONLY “soul food,” only something blacks eat…???
STEELE: “…I got the fried chicken and potato salad…”
Now I frigg’n KNOW that “us white folk” eat fried chicken and potato salad. (*GRIN*) Still, when I think Fried Chicken I think “southern.” No… not “black.” “Southern.”
(*SHRUG*)
So… is it me…??? What’s the problem…??? Two black people fooling around… might have just as easily been two white southerners… might have just as well been any sort of fooling around reference to food choices over a broad swath of rural America!
Nothing offensive. Nothing “racial.” Hell… check out the “Beer Thread.” Talk about stereotyping and typecasting! (*CHUCKLE*)
BILL
47 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Re: Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:25 pm –
Oh… THAT rant.
(*CHUCKLE*)
Nah… doesn’t change my (relatively) (*WINK*) high opinion of you, Spart. I just think of you as a guy in “recovery” who every once in a while falls off the wagon.
Anyway… we can disagree without being disagreeable.
Right…???
BILL
P.S. – DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE!
(*CHUCKLE*)
48 Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 8:19 pm
barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 7:17 pm wrote: “P.S. – DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! (*CHUCKLE*)”
Ah, Barker, there you go . . . There’s no one on this board with whom I agree more than Otto. I often don’t even add a post b/c he’s already said what’s on my mind. We will have to agreeably disagree:)
49 ottovbvs // Jul 31, 2009 at 9:03 pm
barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 7:17 pm
P.S. – DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE!
……..Naaahh this guy is a shrink’s dream
……..Like a I said…..a shrink’s dream……..do you want instructions on how to make the voodoo doll Baarking?
50 barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Re: Spartacus // Jul 31, 2009 at 8:19 pm –
“There’s no one on this board with whom I agree more than Otto.”
(*LAUGHING ALOUD*)
Life’s funny, ain’t it?
(*HANDSHAKE*)
BILL
* Hey, Spart… I notice Otto replied to my post… since I don’t actually read his crap could you just tell me if it sounds like he took my “Die, Otto, Die” in the spirit it was meant or did the purposeful, obvious disconnect between the “disagree without being disagreeable” and “Die, Otto, Die” lines – followed by the (*CHUCKLE*) – fly right over his head?
Be honest! I’m counting on you! (*GRIN*)
51 ottovbvs // Aug 1, 2009 at 4:47 am
barker13 // Jul 31, 2009 at 11:23 pm
“tell me if it sounds like he took my “Die, Otto, Die” in the spirit it was meant or did the purposeful, obvious disconnect between the “disagree without being disagreeable” and “Die, Otto, Die” lines ”
……..Q.E.D.
52 sinz54 // Aug 1, 2009 at 8:30 pm
barker13 sez: “DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE! DIE, OTTO, DIE… DIE, DIE, DIE!”
Yes, we’re well on the way to creating a new conservative majority that can win again.
53 barker13 // Aug 2, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Re: Sinz54 // Aug 1, 2009 at 8:30 pm –
Sinz… are you stupid…??? (Hey… if Obama can throw the “s” word around…) (*SHRUG*)
Seriously?
I expect stuff to fly right over Otto’s head, but you… as much as you can be thick as a frigg’n brick at times I didn’t think you were this oblivious.
AGAIN… my Jul 31, 2009 at 7:17 pm post’s postscript was OBVIOUSLY meant as a wiseass “riff” of:
* Anyway… we can disagree without being disagreeable.
* Right…???
The “chuckle” should have reinforced this.
Hey… I don’t mind people taking me to task for what I clearly mean… but to so nakedly distort my OBVIOUSLY meaning is just… weak.
BILL
54 Political Season // Aug 3, 2009 at 7:46 am
@sinz54
The idea that blacks are so besotted by identity politics they can never be lured from the democratic party is defeatist nonsense and an easy excuse to avoid addressing the poor relationship the GOP has with this political constituency. Further, Obama is simply the easy at hand excuse the GOP makes today, but he just got here. What about all the years before that when the GOP used the same excuse.
As for Steele, for the love of God, why does he trade in this stereotypical language? If anybody ought to be paying attention to the language they use as they try to create a better relationship between blacks and the GOP, its the RNC Chairman. However, Steele, because he is black, clearly believes he gets a pass to play with these types of stereotypes. Didn’t we just get get treated to Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor getting lectured by Cong. Grassly about how his career would be over if he had made a comment akin to her “wise Latina” statement? How is this any different? A white RNC chair would be excoriated for a comment like that, but Steele gets a pass because he’s black? Steele clearly thinks so, because he uses this kind of language frequently.
It betrays the fact that his thinking is as moribund, defeatist and disinterested in blacks as a political constituency as the rank and file and the rest of the GOP leadership. The GOP record with Latinos is no better. They lost that vote this go around by talking out of both sides o f their mouth on the issues. The GOPs political appeal more and more is relying on harsh rhetoric and appeals by red meat commentators coded overtly and covertly with racial undertones. The GOP blows this aspect of their political practice so badly and so unnecessarily that it would be funny if it were not so pathetic.
55 ottovbvs // Aug 3, 2009 at 3:44 pm
political-season // Aug 3, 2009 at 7:46 am
“As for Steele, for the love of God, why does he trade in this stereotypical language?”
………..Steele is a few notches brighter than Palin but that’s not saying much……..For a position that is basically all about communication and organization the guy is a non starter………but who am I to complain…….have at it Mikey
You must log in to post a comment.