Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> Bush support from blacks at 2%, Exactly why is this???
post Nov 18 2005, 04:39 PM
Post #1

Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 1,931
Member No.: 3,607
Joined: September-13-04

From: Plano, TX. Sweater vest and Volvo hell.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: None

Does the American black population know the true history of the Democratic Party??

How many blacks know that following the Civil War, 23 blacks -- 13 of them ex-slaves—were elected to Congress, all as Republicans? The first black Democrat was not elected to Congress until 1935, from the state of Illinois. The first black congressional Democrat from a Southern state was not elected until 1973.

How many blacks know that blacks founded the Texas Republican Party? On July 4, 1867, in Houston, Texas, 150 blacks and 20 whites formed the party. No, not the Black Texas Republican Party, they founded the Texas Republican Party. Blacks across Southern states also founded the Republican parties in their states.

Emancipation? Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War. In 1865, the 13th Amendment emancipating the slaves was passed with 100 percent of Republicans (88 of 88 in the House, 30 of 30 in the Senate) voting for it. Only 23% of Democrats (16 of 66 in the House, three of eight in the Senate) voted for it.

Most importantly, Ku Klux Klan? In 1872 congressional investigations, Democrats admitted beginning the Klan as an effort to stop the spread of the Republican Party and to re-establish Democratic control in Southern states. As PBS’ “American Experience” notes, “In outright defiance of the Republican-led federal government, Southern Democrats formed organizations that violently intimidated blacks and Republicans who tried to win political power. The most prominent of these, the Ku Klux Klan, was formed in Pulaski, Tenn., in 1865.” Blacks, who were all Republican at that time, became the primary targets of violence.

Civil rights in the ‘60s? Only 64% of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80% of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, six against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.

What about the reviled, allegedly anti-black, Republican “Southern strategy”? Pat Buchanan, writing for Richard Nixon (who became the Republican Party candidate two years later) coined the term “Southern strategy.” They expected the “strategy” to ultimately result in the complete marginalization of racist Southern Democrats. “We would build our Republican Party on a foundation of states’ rights, human rights, small government, and a strong national defense,” said Buchanan, “and leave it to the ‘party of [Democratic Georgia Gov. Lester] Maddox, [1966 Democratic challenger against Spiro Agnew for Maryland governor George] Mahoney, and [Democratic Alabama Gov. George] Wallace to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.’” And President Richard Nixon, Republican, implemented the first federal affirmative action (race-based preference) laws with goals and timetables.

Questions for Debate:

1. Where did the distaste for the Republican party start in Black America?

2. How much of the sentiment is based purely on rhetoric as opposed to truth? How much is imbedded in actual history?

3. If the media, pop culture, or cultural differences divide republicans from black majorities, what can bridge the gap? (Realistically, we're not talking about music , clothing, or other rhetorical rants...)

4. Is the disdain for Mr. Bush, and the current administration a manifestation of the black community's disdain for the GOP? (edited to add...)

This post has been edited by aevans176: Nov 18 2005, 05:25 PM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 22)
post Dec 3 2005, 05:54 PM
Post #21

Group Icon

I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian

QUOTE(nighttimer @ Dec 3 2005, 10:10 AM)
That doesn't make them "functional Uncle Toms" (your phrase, not mine). It does mean they are typically beholden to the White conservatives that provide them both patronage and a podium.

That makes them part of the problem instead of part of the solution in achieving racial justice in this country.   

I have to take issue with this portion of your post NT. To believe this, one has to believe that no part of conservative idealogy can enhance the lives of minorities or help to bring about racial justice. True racial equality and harmony cannot come about unless all sides are heard and have a place at the table. I think it can be argued that there are at least as many liberal black activists who are typically beholden to the White liberals that provide them both patronage and a podium.

When you assume only the left to be allowed legitimacy in this issue, it disenfranchises the sizable number of minorities who do believe in less intrusive government, a pro-life stance, traditional family values, lower taxes and school choice, just to name a few issues.

You may not agree with the screeds of the 'usual suspects' of black conservatives, just as I don't agree with the rantings of the 'usual suspects' of black liberals. But denying legitimacy to either point of view will never, ever........let me repeat.....never bring about any semblance of racial peace. It will simply retain the divide and status quo.
Unfortunately I believe there are similar numbers on both sides that are more than comfortable with the status quo
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 3 2005, 07:30 PM
Post #22

Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,834
Member No.: 715
Joined: May-8-03

Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed

QUOTE(nighttimer @ Dec 3 2005, 11:10 AM)
QUOTE(Bikerdad @ Dec 3 2005, 12:11 AM)
Nighttimer, 2+2 isn't an original idea, and there are thousands of teachers who have been repeating it every single year.  They do so because establishing the basics is critical, which is what those who you indict as functional Uncle Tom's strive to do.

Whoa. Was it really necessary to quote my entire post, Bikerdad, just to make a point? Edit, man, edit!

Sorry, my bad. I'm using an I-Book without a mouse, a configuration I'm not comfortable with. (Of course, Julian has probably, and rightly, castigated me in another thread because I didna quote enough. sigh...)

I'm not sure what basic mathematics have to do with my previous post or your response---such as it is since you didn't address or refute any of my points---but I will have to correct you on the one salient issue you did raise.
In addition to being basic mathematics, "2+2" is rhetorical shorthand for basic concepts. I'm sure you can string the rest of it together....

At no time in my post did I "indict" ANYONE as "functional Uncle Toms."  Those are your words and descriptions.  Not mine.
Certainly, they're my words, but they are your descriptions.
First, a definition of "Uncle Tom" :
Uncle Tom is a pejorative term for a black person who is perceived by other blacks to be obsequiously servile to white authority, eager to win the approval of white people, or who rubber stamps white supremacist notions about the inherent superority of whites and its corollary, the inherent inferiority of blacks. "Uncle Toms" are perceived to take the side of whites when there is an injustice against blacks.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom

Now, what you've written:

Bikerdad's list of Black conservatives excludes individuals who bring more to the table than the racial apologists he so admires. Sowell, Williams, Connerly, Elder and Star Parker have been all too happy to provide cover for an antiblack agenda advanced both by some conservatives and Republicans. The primary purpose in life for these Black conservatives is to villify Black liberals (a task even many White conservatives are afraid to do less they be accused of racism). The strange thing is while they smile and reassure other conservatives they are the true voice of mainstream Black thought, their sphere of influence is conspicously limited to right-wing radio, television, think tanks and websites.

But don't take my word for it. Read for yourself how certain Black conservatives are livin' large on the largesse of their White patrons.

Any questions? The only thing you didn't do was use the actual term "Uncle Tom", which is why I said "functional."

btw, if you actually read the folks I've identified, you'd know that they never identify themselves as the voice of "mainstream Black thought."

Oh, and I'm happy to see you found the links to John McWhorter useful.  Always happy to expand the scope of someone's reading list.  However, I already said that I don't always agree with McWhorter and the link you included was one such example of that disagreement.


I've read McWhorter before, in fact I believe I've quoted or referenced him here at AD in the past. His name simply didna pop to the top of my mind as I haven't recently read him.

Grace and peace,
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A left Handed pe...
post Dec 3 2005, 08:41 PM
Post #23

Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 333
Member No.: 4,459
Joined: February-3-05

From: Southwest Conneticut
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat

1. Where did the distaste for the Republican party start in Black America?

Way back when, the US political partys which still exist today, had a lot less philosophical centralization. There were many conservative democrats, and many liberal republicans. I think it would be best, if we throw partys out of the picture when considering that period of time, as the partys of that era, had different platfroms then era, then they do now.

Instead, lets look at things, in a liberal conservative perspective.

Liberals are for change, and Conservatives are against it. Conservatives seek to hold things in place (and often pull things backward), and liberals seek to push things forward. Forward is not always good, as change can be precarious. At the same time, society is not perfect as it is, and therefore has room for improvement. In instituting change, you attempt to perfect society, via use of methods that often have not been properly tested, and as such, you risk just making things worse. On the otherhand, if traditions were always maintained in all situations, we would preside in a much bleaker world then we currently live in.

As conservatives are for the upholdence of the status quo, during the equal rights movement, they were against racial equality. If proof for this assertion needs to be provided, then just look how of the politicians, spoke about "protecting our society" when making racist speeches. Just look how devout racist organizations such as the KKK are, and how the KKK in particular uses the Holy Cross as its rallying symbol.

Liberals on the otherhand, were/are for changing the world...Its the 60s were speaking of. The fight for racial equality, was only one of the many radical motifs held by the liberals of that era.

2. How much of the sentiment is based purely on rhetoric as opposed to truth? How much is imbedded in actual history?

Well, i've just explained myself already. Rhetoric and ignorance, certainly have a great deal to do with explaining how people see history as far as partys go, but I think how people see history, as far as convervative and liberals go, is accurate.

3. If the media, pop culture, or cultural differences divide republicans from black majorities, what can bridge the gap?

Blacks feel victimized, their economics status is very small compared that of the rest of the country. They want change, and conservatives don't.

Blacks are poor. Democrats have an advantage with the poor, because the poor don't have next to no taxes, no matter who is charge, and the poor also rely heavily on social services. In short, economic wealth distribution offered by big government aids them greatly. All this bad PR the republicans get about cutting taxes only from those in top 1%, doesnt help much help much eitheir

When Clinton was president, he ensured that an enormous portion of his administration was made up of those with color. Bush on the otherhand, rolled that back. His central cabinet is diverse, but his administration as a whole is very white.

Most of our countries blacks, have been here since the 1800s. Immigration issues aren't particularly important to them. In courting blacks, Republicans lack the primary playing card they use on hispanics.

Democrats are for affirmative action, Republicans aren't.

Message is only part of the problem the Republicans have here. If they truly want to get the black vote, then they need to change their platform.

4. Is the disdain for Mr. Bush, and the current administration a manifestation of the black community's disdain for the GOP? (edited to add...)

Partially yes. Bush seems to be recieving (justifiably or not)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: April 8th, 2020 - 08:28 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.