GOP FACES LACK OF BLACK HOPEFULS

At 33, Mr. Rogers had just been elected Colorado's lieutenant governor, making him the youngest in the nation and the only black Republican to hold a state's No. 2 post. Republican politicos were soon predicting that Mr. Rogers, a bright, engaging lawyer, could make history as the nation's first black Republican governor.

She won't.

So we're just supposed to give up and lay down with our bellies exposed so we can be gutted? If I follow the logic you come up with here, and earlier in the thread, all of us who happen to be black are all there is - we wouldn't be in our right minds if we even gave any quarter or thought to running for office, simply because hack actors and washed-up singers and chicken-eatin' preachers can get as much press as they want by calling us names.

"Lawdy, Lawdy, I done heard it all now. I been tol' by the smartest man in the world that we oughta give up any hope o' talkin' to anybody 'bout thinkin' for themselves!"

My God, man! No one said this process would be easy! Nothing worth having ever is! But to hear you tell it, since it is such a difficult propsition, conservatives should give up the ghost and not deal with the problem.

Perhaps that young lady may think about it and perhaps she may not. You don't know! A conservative campaign-worker runs the same risk when they talk to a white "potential-voter."

If I understand you correctly, conservatives shouldn't talk to blacks because you don't think they'll think about it!

The fact is, the Republican party has left black churches virtually untapped.

That's what I've been trying to say here for months now! And as long as the party leaves the churches and the black community at large untapped, the Jesse Jacksons get to go into the pulpits unchallenged and get to say whatever they want! You think he's telling those parishioners that conservatives are good, God-fearing people? Of course not!

Get in the communities, get the votes. Is it instant? No. But will it work in time? Absolutely.

If I understand you correctly, conservatives shouldn't talk to blacks because you don't think they'll think about it!

You don't. Given her reverence and fear for her mother, that one particular person may well be a lost cause.

I don't believe that it is anyone's job to lead anyone out of the wilderness. The Conservative movement can give people a place to go and the reasons to go there, it is up to people who just don't think that the RAT party is where they want to be to stand up and do something about it.

And that is why the issue of abortion is key in getting into the mind of black church goers. Most of us who are conservative are pursuaded by our conscience or by an internal voice of reason. , which is also how most Christians come to a point of faith. This is the common ground.

In my interior life, I have more in common with a Christian in Harlem or a Haiti than I do with my unchurched neighbor. That is why, as a middle aged white southern woman, I can speak to the heart of a young black woman about several isssues she cares passionately about...the sanctity of the unborn, the value of her own life and making decisions that are pleasing to God. I mentioned her because in the time I took to talk to her,I did leave her with something to think about. Something bigger than R vs. D.

Point of fact, on these boards you will find vociferous pointing out any and all shortcomings and failures of black people. You can set your watch by it. Then, if someone initiates a thread that talks about a triumph of either a black person or group, it is immediately pilloried by stating that somehow a "handout" or "government program" played a part

Unfortunately I've observed the same thing, and after pointing it out have been accused of being liberal, a Democrat, the thought police, PC, etc. In every stereotype there is at least a grain of truth, there are in fact some (darn few I hope) conservatives who really ARE mean-spirited. So to answer your question "do conservatives really want blacks among them?" the answer for a few is "no" and unfortunately those few will make some noise and post some messages.

For most conservatives, though, I believe the answer is "yes", but there is no cohesive plan to attract blacks to conservatism. Some of that is a financial decision, the belief that blacks are a lost cause and time and money are better spent elsewhere, but more than that is a sense that the conservative message has not yet been presented to the black "community" in a way that rings true and inspires hope instead of sounding hollow. I believe you have proposed the one-on-one, one person at a time approach - maybe that will be the only way.

That was a woefully weak response.

I made a speculation as to whether a certain person described in a post was amenable to changing a lifetime of ingrained political thinking by the mere description of Conservative Concepts (good though they might be). Now I am to defend that speculation vigorously?

Sorry my supply of fire and brimstone is woefully low tonight.

Now I am to defend that speculation vigorously?

Your initial response about what this woman would or would not do was "vigorous," so why not defend it "vigorously?"

You're helping me prove a point I made earlier in the thread. So, make up your mind please.

promised to think about it....She won't.

In Illinois, more significant than this attitude is the ideological split. Since 1968 the Illinois Republican governors have tended liberal and sought to attract liberal Blacks to patronage jobs.

The important thing for all patronage is to kiss the mistletoe of their "sponsor" (in Chicagoese "Chinaman"). The problem was that there were always more, and better jobs with the Dems. So gradually over time, the number of Black Republican patronage declined.

There is a small, articulate group of Black Republicans who are more conservative. But apart from ideology, they don't want to kiss the mistletoe. If they did, they wouldn't be who they are.

So Black Republicans who are inherently Republican are opposed by establishment pubbies, not because they are Black, but because they think for themselves. Example: Charles Wheeler in Glendale Hts IL. Rev Gary and Toni Carter, Rev. Jerome Scott, Rev. Maurice Mooty, Frank Penn.

Even motivational speaker and defensive leader of the best defense in superbowl history, Mike Singletary, is dissed by the establishment when those outside the establishment describe him as the perfect candidate for any office.

This is not much different from whites who are independent of the country club establishment.

...continuing to allow Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cynthia McKinney and Maxine Waters to be the ones to tell black America what the conservative message is and what conservatives want to do.

This is so true. You want a great example, mention Bush, Ashcroft, or Lott to many Black Dems and they are deathly afraid of them. Might as well show pics of the Boogeyman and the 5 worst monsters of all time. (Quite a contrast to how many on FR view Bush, Ashcroft and Lott- it's a hoot to watch sometimes)

This is why Blacks who gravitate toward FR and the right, even those of us who don't necessarily label ourselves "conservatives' need to start telling Black folks what conservatism is and how conservatives are. You'll end up defending leading conservatives but that's what's needed. Of course, the risk is being labeled an "Uncle Tom" in response, but you really have to keep arguing people until they at least see what you're saying.

{"....The chair of the state GOP is Ralph Reed. Now Ralph is a pretty nice guy (at least I thought so from when I met him), but the picture that enters the minds of black America is that of an ultra-right wing Christian conservative who would have no problem with turning back the clock on any gains that black America has made since reconstruction...."}

Interestingly, Ralph Reed has a reputation for being a moderate on the issue of race, by Republican Party standards. On the issues on which he may be regarded as "extreme" by the white liberal mainstream media - e.g. strongly pro-life, in favor of school prayer, pro-voucher, etc., most blacks would actually agree with Reed on those issues.

I do not know if you are aware of this, but the one group in the conservative movement that is most hostile to blacks today, are the so-called neo-conservatives. If you are a regular reader of leading neo-conservative opinion journals, you would be aware of that fact.

It is true that in the 1960s and 1970s, the religious right was the one group in the conservative movement that was most hostile to blacks. But things changed considerably in the 1990s, when the Southern Baptists and white Pentecostal Churches openly admitted that racism was a serious problem in the churches, and started to take steps to rectify that problem. I am sure you have heard of the Promise Keepers, which is one of the many "religious right" organizations working to promote racial harmony.

As things stand now, most of the harsh anti-black rhetoric exists in neo-conservative opinion journals. I suggest you read the 1996 book, "Up From Conservatism" written by a former neo-conservative, Michael Lind. While Mr. Lind unfairly attacks religious conservatives, he does a great job revealing the virulent hostility against blacks that exists in neo-conservative circles.

I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried.

Check it. Look at FR members who throw out the term "neo-con" at the drop of a hat. These are the same ones who will say some of the most outlandishly bigotted things on this site. These would be the so-called "paleo-cons," which I view as nothing more than old Dixiecrats.

FrontPageMag is considered "neo-con." Show me something hostile to blacks on it. Same can be said for National Review.

"Paleo," "neo," whatever. I transcend it all and go "post." So, please, let's leave that stupid argument alone. There are no litmus tests here. I know for a fact that I can't in good conscience take the "help" of another conservative who wishes to divide instead of grow the base. And if I have anything to say about it, the black vote is one area where I will not allow the use of which to further this fantasy intellectual divide among the Right. That's antithetical to what we supposedly believe, and does the work of the Left in the process.

No, thank you.

It is true that in the 1960s and 1970s, the religious right was the one group in the conservative movement that was most hostile to blacks. But things changed considerably in the 1990s, when the Southern Baptists and white Pentecostal Churches openly admitted that racism was a serious problem in the churches, and started to take steps to rectify that problem. I am sure you have heard of the Promise Keepers, which is one of the many "religious right" organizations working to promote racial harmony.

As things stand now, most of the harsh anti-black rhetoric exists in neo-conservative opinion journals. I suggest you read the 1996 book, "Up From Conservatism" written by a former neo-conservative, Michael Lind. While Mr. Lind unfairly attacks religious conservatives, he does a great job revealing the virulent hostility against blacks that exists in neo-conservative circles.

I'm very aware of the situation with both groups - but most of black America is not aware of the healed breach between right wing Christian conservatives and black churches. In the eyes of many, both neo-conservatives and Christian conservatives (both of whom are percieved by many blacks as the bulk of the right) hate blacks.

That is a rift that will take time to heal.

I'm not familiar with Mr. Lind's book - I'll have to look into it (it can go in the pile with all the other books I'm either reading or trying to read now...[g]).

This is daily life for me as a conservative black man in America today. I talk with many, and hope that just a few of them hear me as opposed to calling me "Uncle Tom" and other names. If I can reach just a few in my daily walk, then I've done what I've set out to do.

I've heard more definitions for "paleo-con," "neo-con," and every other kind of con. What it boils down to is that there is a fringe element within the conservative movement that is hostile to blacks in general and to black participation in the conservative movement in particular.

The meaning that I took from jstone's statement was that he was pointing at that fringe element -- who themselves usually call themselves neo-cons. In that regard, I think we are all pointing toward and saying the same thing.

I don't think Front Page is anti-black, and I certainly wouldn't say such for National Review either. Then again, I don't consider them in that fringe element.

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.