September 27, 2005

Democratic Leaders Descend Further Into Racial Demogoguery

Democratic leaders descend further into racial demogoguery:

Responding to statements made last week by Rep. Charles Rangel, the Republican National Committee urged Democratic leaders yesterday to denounce the New York congressman's comparison of President Bush to the late Theophilus "Bull" Connor, the Birmingham, Ala., police commissioner who came to symbolize Southern racism in the 1960s.

The Republican request for repudiation, however, met with expressions of support for Mr. Rangel's statement, particularly from black Democratic leaders in New York. The Reverend Al Sharpton came out in support of Mr. Rangel's analysis, and another member of the city's congressional delegation, Major Owens, a Democrat of Brooklyn, denounced Mr. Bush as "even more diabolical" than Connor...

...A Democrat who represents Brooklyn on New York's City Council, Charles Barron, concurred with that sentiment. "I think that's an insult to Connor," he said of Mr. Rangel's statement. "George Bush is worse, because he has more power and he's more destructive to our people than Bull Connor will ever be."For example, Mr. Barron said, "A KKK without power is not as bad as a George Bush with power."... "To be a racist in the richest, most powerful country in the world is lethal," Mr. Barron added. "Look what he's doing to communities of color all over the world," the council member said of Mr. Bush. "He's a lethal racist."

"What he did in New Orleans - I mean, that's worse than what Bull Connor did in his entire career as a racist in the South," Mr. Barron said. "Look at these neighborhoods before Katrina hit. Bush made that community what it is. Katrina did the rest, in partnership with Bush, to deliver the final blow."

Absolutely amazing. Are these people serious?

There is no evidence that President Bush is racist. Let's think about this one:
  • President Bush has never advocated or expressed support for lynchings or violence against African-Americans.
  • President Bush has never advocated or expressed support for racial segregation.
  • President Bush has never advocated or expressed support for racial discrimination.
  • President Bush has never expressed support for the slavery of African-Americans.
  • President Bush supports the Voting Rights Act.
  • President Bush has appointed more African-Americans and other minorities to top cabinet-level posts than any other president in U.S. including President Clinton.
  • President Bush has never interefered with the rights of blacks to protest.
  • President Bush has never interfered or ordered the interference with African-American's rights to exercise their civil liberties - including voting.
  • President Bush has tripled the funds that U.S. provides to relieve AIDS in Africa
  • President Bush has pledged to help create 5,500,000 minority home owners by 2010. The President's plan has already created 2,300,000 minority home owners.
  • President Bush requested $299 million in funding for historically black colleges and universities in the 2006 budget (a 30% increase in fuding since 2001).

Yet, he is worse than Bull Connor, an admitted racist who ordered the hosing down of and arrest of protesters fighting for black civil rights? How so? Of course, none of these Democrats offer any concrete examples as to why President Bush is a racist or worse than Bull Connor. Have these Democrats lost their perspective entirely?

No. Not entirely. The Democrats strategy for winning the African-American vote has been to demonize President Bush and to label the Republicans as racist. The Democrats' strategy is to blame all African-American problems on a Republican Congress and Republican administration - never, of course, discussing the Democrats shameful role in the Jim Crow South or the fact that these same problems existed during under the watch of Democratic Congresses and administrations. Think about it. For example, is poverty among African-Americans a new occurence? No, of course, not... the African-American community faced this same problem during the Carter and Clinton administrations.

Here is something to think about. There is a reason that Jewish people are adamant that the terms "Nazi" and "Holocaust" not be carelessly used. Each word carries important historical signifigance to remind the world of one of its greatest tragedies - the persecution and mass murder of 6 million Jews. If we allow the term "Nazi" to be used carelessly to describe our political enemies or we allow every tragedy to be the equivalent of the "Holocaust", then those terms will lose their historical signifigance and will no longer serve as a reminder to the world that the Holocaust must never happen again. One would think that African-Americans would feel the same way about slavery and their own civil rights struggles.

If you continue to call your political opponents "racists" and those political opponents are not, in fact, racists, then don't you risk diminishing the term? Similarly, the parable about the boy who cried wolf is applicable. If you call all of your political opponents racists, will people believe you when you have legitimate concerns that a particular person is a racist??

Let me ask African-American voters one thing. You have historically given Democrats 90% or more of the African-American votes. Are you satisfied with the results? Have the Democrats adequately addressed your needs? The Republicans have lately been courting African-American voters and appear to be working hard to win the African-American vote. Why not put your vote in play? In other words, whether you end up voting Democratic or Republican, why not make the political party earn it? The Republicans appear to be willing to bend over backwards to do just that - are the Democrats? Or, will the African-American vote for Democrats continue to be ignored by the Democrats as a given.

| |

<< Home