Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jjmcgo
Your history is open to question, as it accepts the Democratic Narrative that posits the Republicans want to Bring Back Slavery.

Barry Goldwater was the standard-bearer in 1964. He received only five percent of the black vote. His stand on the Civil Rights Bill was the reason he got so little from black America that year. Consider that in 1960, Richard Nixon, Richard Milhous Nixon received somewhere in the neighborhood of forty percent of the black vote.

If any Republican in this era received forty percent of the black vote, there is no way a Democrat could be elected.

Nixon's "Southern Strategy" was not based on an appeal to racism. Even in the Spring of '68, before such a strategy began to take hold, it was clear that black voters were going all out for Bobby Kennedy. Nixon and the Republicans correctly wrote off black voters that year.

The Southern Strategy was based on an appeal to southern voters who were dissatisfied with the conduct of the Vietnam War. The Democratic Party was the author of the stalemate in that war, and Nixon offered to "cut bait", which suited Southern sensibilities just fine. Democrats do not like to recall their incompetence during those years; their tomfoolery grated on the sensibilities of the South. Given the fact that a whole lot of Southerners had volunteered for combat duty during that war (we Johnnies are like that, you know), this should come as no surprise. The sheer stupidity of the Democratic administration of the day led to the revolt by Wallace. It is hard for me to see how Wallace could have developed an insurgency against Johnson/Humphrey were it not for Southern anger over the fact that we weren't winning the war.

By 1970, the Republican Party recognized that black voters were irretrievably lost to the Democrats for some time to come. You are correct in this regard: Johnson's reputation from the Civil Right's struggle and the "War on Poverty" (which, in Reagan's famous phrase, was won by Poverty) helped cement the bond between black voters and the Donkey Party. There was very little that could be done to remedy this.

I have been in and out of Republican campaigns for 25 years. I haven't seen the disdain for black folks that you describe. Probably because it doesn't exist. The Klan, you will recall, was an organization made up primarily of Southern Yellow Dog Democrats. Yes, we lay down with a few dogs (David Duke latched his ass onto our party for a while) and got up with some fleas, but that happens to everyone in politics.

We Republicans are practical, pragmatic people. If no one wants to play in our sandlot because they think we burn crosses there, even if you insist that no crosses have ever been burned in your sandlot, then why waste your time asking them to come and play? Why not go after Hispanics, Asians, and Indian immigrants? Why go address the NAACP Convention if all they're going to do is accuse you of murdering James Byrd again?

We have better, and higher, things to do than appeal to people based on their skin color. Eventually, conservative arguments will carry the day. They usually do. Conservatism as an ideology doesn't posit nonsense about Man as a Fallen Angel who only needs the next marginal dollar from the taxpayer to bring the Millenium to pass.

Conservatism works because Conservatism makes sense. No matter what color you are.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

681 posted on 08/03/2004 4:07:49 PM PDT by section9 (Major Motoko Kusanagi says, "Jesus is Coming. Everybody look busy...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 618 | View Replies ]


To: section9

Friggin' brilliant.


687 posted on 08/03/2004 4:10:15 PM PDT by Vigilantcitizen (Have a burger and a beer and enjoy your liquid vegetables.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies ]

To: section9

Thank you for taking the time to more fully express your opinion and thank you for your service to our country and the Republican Party.
I don't think that I accept the Democratic Party view of things but I do believe blacks were aware Nixon felt this way about them while at the same time he presided over the greatest transfer of wealth from earners to idlers by signing every welfare bill Carl Albert put in front of him:
From a May 13, 1971, conversation among President Richard Nixon, John D. Ehrlichman, and H. R. Haldeman. On October 5, 1999, the National Archives made available to the public 445 hours of previously unreleased Oval Office tapes. The following dialogue was transcribed by Chicago Tribune reporter James Warren.

RICHARD NIXON: We're going to [put] more of these little Negro bastards on the welfare rolls at $2,400 a family--let people like Pat Moynihan and [special consultant] Leonard Garment and others believe in all that crap. But I don't believe in it. Work, work--throw 'em off the rolls. That's the key.

JOHN D. EHRLICHMAN: The key is Reagan's neutrality. If Reagan blasts this thing and says it's not strong enough on the work-requirement end, that will be very bad.

NIXON: I have the greatest affection for them [blacks], but I know they're not going to make it for 500 years. They aren't. You know it, too. The Mexicans are a different cup of tea. They have a heritage. At the present time they steal, they're dishonest, but they do have some concept of family life. They don't live like a bunch of dogs, which the Negroes do live like.

At another point on the tapes, Nixon tells Rumsfeld that blacks are recently "out of the trees."

Blacks gave Goldwater only 5 percent of the vote because EVERYBODY voted against Goldwater. It was a landslide and don't think he lost because of conservative principles. The primary reason was fear of the (now forgotten) right-wing John Birch Society which seemed at the time a combination of Klanners, Nazis and McCarthyites. The second reason was the embrace of what seemed like a kooky idea at the time: conservative opposition to flouridating drinking supplies. Better dental health was a national goal and cancer warnings weren't given much attention.
The third-biggest reason was that the election followed the Kennedy assassination by less than a year and the nation sought stability over a clarion call for change.
I think we should go back and look at water flouridation, given evidence of decreased human and other animal sterility. What other problems has it caused? Off on a tangent again, I guess. Nice talking to you and I did learn a few things. Thanks.


1,046 posted on 08/05/2004 7:49:14 AM PDT by jjmcgo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson