Posted on 04/13/2013 10:21:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Rand Paul’s speech at Howard University yielded about what would have been expected. The media focused on the crowd’s tepid reactions. Various liberal pundits dwelled on Paul’s awkward moments: the senator unwisely choosing a “did you know” riff that assumed his audience’s ignorance about certain historical points of reference, while he blanked on the name of Edward Brooke, a Republican who happened to be the only black man in the 20th Century who won a Senate election; and Paul’s tortured effort to contextualize his criticism of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
If Paul was simply showing up as a token of “courage”, the kind of symbolism consultants push on candidates, he deserved the dismissive results he received. After all, at the root of such a strategy is not really bravery, but a cold willingness to use the kids who attended as props whose indifference lets him demonstrate resilience.
Assuming that Paul had a nobler goal, that of actually winning converts among Republicans’ single hardest to crack demographic, African Americans under 29, I would still call it a missed chance, from his perspective as well as theirs, and a reminder of why the gap between blacks and the political right is such a chasm.
First, there was Paul’s fixation on historical alignments that predate his audience’s grandparents. The men and women who heard Paul could have used a primer not on 19th century history or even pre-Voting Rights Act Dixiecrats, but on the GOP’s contemporary pattern of electing blacks, Latinos, and East Asian Indians to governorships or Senate seats. It would have been worthwhile to tell the many southern born black kids at Howard that it is Republicans who put a black man in Strom Thurmond’s old seat.
Paul devoted a lot of time to the dirty hands another generation of Democrats brought to the debate over race. But it would have been much more relevant for Paul to push his audience on why poverty and inadequately funded black school districts stayed so persistent during the decades of Democratic legislative rule in the South, a run that in the states many of Howard’s students return home to every summer, just ended in the last six years.
I wish Paul had given education reform a rationale instead of the catch phrase “civil rights”. I wish he had spoken more bluntly about the black children whose schools are too often promoting them without preparing them, or the middle class black couples who can’t buy their kids into the social capital and better prospects in the elite private schools across town, or even the award winning public school district in a neighborhood outside their price range.
I give Paul points for having the guts to denounce the comparison between voter ID laws and the cruelest tactics of the segregation era. But I wish he had made an additional point that a roomful of young black adults would have understood well: black people trying to navigate the modern commercial world without an ID face a lot more hurt and inconvenience than missing an election, and that pushing them to get the license or ID photo that makes them more functional strengthens a community instead of suppressing it.
I wish that Paul had understood history better himself, at least enough to know why African Americans resist a rhetorical vocabulary that depicts government as a threat to liberty. Howard’s undergraduates know that line from their textbooks, and they know it in the worst morally plausible context, that of segregationists trying to twist the constitution into a line of defense for Jim Crow. Paul would have done well to blast that misuse of the concept of liberty, and to spend time explaining that he knows events have made an absurdity out of it. The admission would have separated his libertarianism from the ugliness that preceded it.
On the subject of federal assistance, Paul rightly held his ground that more is not always better. But his mantra that “I want a government that leaves you alone” had no chance of resonating with students who view government as a source of student loans and Pell Grants, and to whom being left alone might well mean being uninsured during a health crisis. Paul avoided making the case that a conservative agenda might actually outperform liberal goals in the area of poverty or education. And in a university setting that teaches the value of offering evidence for one’s propositions, Paul mentioned no specific policies that would address the interests of people about to enter an uncertain job market while straining to pay down the debt of financing a degree. In other words, a would-be president who has talked forcefully about his party’s need to refashion itself did no more than repeat a narrative that neither black nor white conservatives have managed to sell to black audiences.
Paul had a chance to demonstrate something bolder than the willingness to endure a hostile crowd: that is, if he had the nimbleness to couch his arguments in the interests of the people he was trying to reach; and the empathy to show that economic inequality, entrenched poverty, and the rising numbers of blacks under 35 who aren’t reaching their parents levels of economic performance are the kinds of things he worries about.
Instead, Paul gave Howard what it expected to hear. So, both Paul and the crowd that turned out can say that they both stood the other’s company. The truth is they both left a little bit diminished.
That was JUST what I was thinking.
Come on, Artur...YOU educate those at Howard that automatically put up a defense against anything whitey has to say.
And, while you’re at it, distribute the history test Col. Frances Rice put together and see how well the blacks at Howard do on it:
http://www.nbra.info/DYK-HistoryTest
If the students at Howard flunk THIS test (which they will), at least they will have learned something.
And let's not forget the awarding of lucrative federal contracts to "minority-owned" businesses (or at least businesses that are "officially" owned by suitable minorities.
Blacks feel that, if affirmative-action, minority-preference, equal-employment and welfare laws were repealed, they and their families and friends would be much worse off economically.
And they would be right. This is their primary consideration, and there is NOTHING that Republicans can do about it.
If Paul had read this speech, he would have gotten the same reception. No black organization will appear to be receptive to conservative ideas. It’s naivety to think otherwise.
He gave his speech because he is thinking of running for President, This way he can shoo away the MSM by pointing to this speech as outreach to the black community. Better he gave it now than 6 months before the election, when his ever utterance will be sliced and diced.
Agree, except they really, way down inside, know they cannot compete in a free job market as correctly contemplated by many on this forum.
Not a bad idea. Artur davis is in a unique space. Former dem and more conservative than dems and maybe even some RINOs. Worth at less considering some of his ideas on how to reach the people - if possible. May not even be possible.
Yes, and maybe nothing Paul would have said could have changed the minds of the most of the statist-loving students he was addressing. I doubt he would have done much better with a mostly white student audience. Too many students, of whatever color, in that age group think government is for taking. But it’s still worthwhile that Paul made the attempt. It might have the first time many of those students heard someone tell them government isn’t great.
BWAHAH paully should a takin somebody with him to crack the whip....ANN COULTER comes to mind.....
I’ve been advocating speaking directly to blacks where they live.
It’s a no lose. Either they will learn something, or they will demonstrate intolerance for the truth, which would be instructive for everyone else.
Being so brilliant and in tune with all that actually needs to be said, perhaps Artur Davis should go meet with the black groups and tell the story his way.
Frankly, I do not care what a white politician might say to a group of blacks in todays environment, if the blacks are not conservative (God love them all), all they will hear are the words, “40 acres and a mule”.
The Jim Crow laws were government attacks on liberty.
It is ok to disagree..
But I have never seen an instance to the contrary. Most blacks dont trust “whitey” and will not be “impressionable” by such.
This is my opinion.
Rand Paul’s message to the dim bulbs at Howard University was casting pearls before swine.
It was the perfect example of the old maxim:
Put a teaspoon of sewage in a barrel of wine, get sewage.
Put a teaspoon of wine in a barrel of sewage, get sewage.
Jackie Robinson was an HHH “Republican” in 1968; if King was a registered voter in GA, he must have avoided primaries, as there were no GA Republican primaries to speak of during his lifetime. I don’t think there were any at all until 1970. King referred to “hitleriam” in “Goldwaterism.”
I caught a good part of Paul's appearance unfiltered on C-Span and thought overall it went pretty well - the "tepid" response was at least respectful for the most part and not as hostile as I had expected - Paul stood his ground when he needed and went the "did you know" route only when trying to point out information which helped substantiate his view and might have escaped some in the audience - it is possilble that even a black here or there might have missed out on a bit of material related to the topic at hand - even those with whom he did not completely agree usually thanked him for his reply - it seemed a reasonable exchange to me......
Are you asserting that as a group, "blacks" are so deeply, thoroughly, and subconsciously bigoted regarding race that they will never pay any attention to ideas put forward by "white" people?
I can think of no other interpretation of your comment.
>> But his mantra that “I want a government that leaves you alone” had no chance of resonating with students who view government as a source of student loans and Pell Grants
>> I wish that Paul had understood history better himself, at least enough to know why African Americans resist a rhetorical vocabulary that depicts government as a threat to liberty.
I guess Blacks believe they’re living large in the noose of the Democrat Party.
Entire speech to be repeated Sunday night on C-Span at 7:05 EDT.....
Yes, I am suggesting that may be the case. Especially young black students at a University.
Did you not see the responses he got???????
Prove otherwise...
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.