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

Skip to comments.

This Is What a Radical Republican Looks Like
National Review Online ^ | 10/1/2010 | Kevin D. Williamson

Posted on 10/01/2010 11:18:34 AM PDT by mojito

Being a former member of the Republican party, I don’t often indulge my occasional desire to offer the GOP messaging advice. But every time I hear Barack Obama say something like this . . .

It took time to free the slaves. It took time for women to get the vote.

. . . I wish the Republicans would response with an ad that says: “Yes, it took time to free the slaves. Time and a Republican president. One who had the courage of his convictions.”

As for women’s suffrage, the debate about the relative timing and importance of enfranchising women versus enfranchising blacks took place almost entirely within the Republican party. You know the famous episode in which Susan B. Anthony was arrested for illegally voting? The evidence against her was a note she sent to Elizabeth Cady Stanton, informing her that she had “positively voted the Republican ticket — straight.” Take that, Rahm.

Frederick Douglass should be as much the face of the Republican party as Reagan and Goldwater.

If the GOP had any brains (I know, I know!) it would spend a fair amount of money reminding the world: This is what a radical Republican looks like:


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: frederickdouglas; gopvsconservatives; obama; republicans
54/40 or fight.
1 posted on 10/01/2010 11:18:38 AM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mojito

2 posted on 10/01/2010 11:21:32 AM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito
Palin is bringing women back to the GOP and breaking up the media's narrative on racial and gender politics, this, and her promotion of black candidates at the same time, will help loosen up some of the black voting block. Palin is tearing open the neat little media boxes.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

3 posted on 10/01/2010 11:29:23 AM PDT by ansel12 ([fear of Islam.] Once you are paralyzed by fear of Mohammedanism...you have lost the battle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mojito
I wish the Republicans would response with an ad that says: “Yes, it took time to free the slaves. Time and a Republican president. One who had the courage of his convictions.”

Response? How about respond? NRO should spring for a proofreader.

4 posted on 10/01/2010 12:02:49 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

The change in voting patterns by women is, IMHO, largely attributable to the fact that a much greater # of women depend on government for their sustenance than ever before. Lower marriage rates and the welfare state account for a lot of this.

Hear that you single guys? Go marry a smelly commie chick. Do it for your country!! :)


5 posted on 10/01/2010 12:13:37 PM PDT by Sparticus (November - no unrung doorbells!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus
The change in voting patterns by women is, IMHO, largely attributable to the fact that a much greater # of women depend on government for their sustenance than ever before. Lower marriage rates and the welfare state account for a lot of this.

White women still vote Republican.

The female vote was traditionally mostly republican, while the Catholic vote was never republican (except for 1956).

Since 1964, the white female vote, is still more republican than the white Catholic vote.

6 posted on 10/01/2010 12:39:45 PM PDT by ansel12 ([fear of Islam.] Once you are paralyzed by fear of Mohammedanism...you have lost the battle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
the Catholic vote was never republican (except for 1956).

52% of voting Catholics voted for Bush in 2004. Against the minimally Catholic Kerry.

A greater percentage of practicing Catholics vote Republican.

7 posted on 10/01/2010 12:49:52 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kidd

I was talking of the period before 1964, when the female vote changed.

Catholics have voted republican 6 times in our history, four of those to reelect an incumbent, and a fifth was the first election for Reagan’s veep.

Catholics voted against Bush in 2000 for instance, but then gave him 52% for his reelection, (Protestant Hispanics gave him 56% of their vote that year), and then the Catholic vote went back to the Democrats for Obama with 54% in 2008. The Catholic vote is not as single party as it used to be, but it has a long way to go, and will probably never leave the democrat party.

The Protestant vote went Democrat in 1932, 1936, and 1964.


8 posted on 10/01/2010 1:02:15 PM PDT by ansel12 ([fear of Islam.] Once you are paralyzed by fear of Mohammedanism...you have lost the battle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

The reason it took years to free the slaves was that we had to fight the democrats to get it done.


9 posted on 10/01/2010 1:21:53 PM PDT by american_ranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sparticus

No, I am sure that it was the legalization of abortion.


10 posted on 10/01/2010 1:44:21 PM PDT by kabumpo (Kabumpo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Interesting...


11 posted on 10/02/2010 9:44:47 AM PDT by Rick_Michael (Have no fear "President Government" is here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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