Monday, September 24, 2007
Republicans and race
Paul Krugman's column this morning is about Republicans and race. Yes, it is full of the usual offensive tone and sweeping generalizations, but when you scrape off those barnacles it is, unfortunately, substantially true. Republicans have not found it in themselves to appeal to any American ethnic group that is not rooted in Europe, and that is going to cost them.
33 Comments:
By 
Redneck Texan, at
Mon Sep 24, 08:53:00 AM:
I think it says as much about the ethnic groups that dont vote Republican as it does about Republicans not embracing them.
How exactly does a conservative group go about coveting the ethnic minority vote, without abandoning their principles?
Democrats have little problem telling whatever crowd they're in front of that day whatever that crowd wants to hear....Conservative's conscience wont always allow them to do that.
And yes, when you look at it simply from a future demographic point of view, the Republicans are screwed long-term, but keep in mind the long-term consequences of prolonged Democratic rule.
After a long-period of them enacting the socialistic legislation their ethnic minority supporters wanted them too, the inevitable economic crisis' they will cause will make conservatives out of the most ardent white male haters.
How many starving Zimbabweans do you figure would vote for a white farmer for president today?
By Redneck Texan, at
Mon Sep 24, 09:24:00 AM:
I think it also says a lot about the white males that continue to support a Democratic party that vilifies them and attempts to disenfranchise them everytime they get in front of an ethnic minority crowd.
That unquestioning partisan support is going to bite them in the arse eventually.
By Thanks4theadd, at
Mon Sep 24, 09:41:00 AM:
redneck texan living in fantasy world where "the Democratic party" "vilifies" white males all day long - GIGO, man, if you start from a false premise your conclusions are also going to be off
By 
, at
Mon Sep 24, 09:52:00 AM:
hey RT, you forgot about the part where the Dems hate America and want us all to be subject to Dhimmi laws. Don't leave that out, or you wouldn't be a real Republican!
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 09:54:00 AM:
One of the elements of Krugmans article is that many of the social programs that are pushed forward by the so-called "progressive Left" are opposed by the right and therefore they are showing their racist tendencies. That leap unfortunately is tied nicely by every lefty on the globe. However, as a white Northeastern male who has had liberalism shoved down his throat at almost every turn, I cannot look at any of these social programs as successes. Part of my conversion to conservatism is the belief in the individual especially those arriving here from distant shores (as my grandparents did)and how much many of the programs the left creates, albeit well-intended, would never allow these new American's to get out of their current caste. Just look at how much the African American race has benefited from these wonderful programs. You would be very hard pressed to tell me that the average black family is better off today then they were 40 years ago when our social lagresse decided to "help" them? As a matter of fact, it should be "Exhibit A" in the case study of social programs and their often times destructive impact.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 09:56:00 AM:
Same old garbage about white America IMHO. The GOP doesn't chase the black or hispanic vote that aggressively because it's not marketed as the freebee party. So the disenfranchised vote Dem no matter what. And the black vote was lost to the Dems back in the days of Goldwater, independent of the fact that the GOP beat the block of the likes of Fulbright and Gore Sr. who sought to block civil rights.
As for Jena, I haven't followed it that closely, OTHER than to observe that Fat Al and Jesse Mumble have been down there, and were CURIOUSLY absent while the "Old South" of Krugman sought to hang three white boys for a "crime" of raping a black crack whore, er drinking underage. Together with the angry blacks who wanted them hung (out to dry), death threats in Court, and the elitists who sought to have them Castrated.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 10:04:00 AM:
Wouldn't we all be better off if neither party had to "cater" to interest groups?Maybe we could then select our leaders based on their character,vision,knowledge.Seems to the "catering" is leading to more class seperation the less.Not a god thing in mho.
Matt
By Redneck Texan, at
Mon Sep 24, 10:15:00 AM:
hey RT, you forgot about the part where the Dems hate America and want us all to be subject to Dhimmi laws. Don't leave that out, or you wouldn't be a real Republican!
Well to be honest with you phrizz.... I hate the Republican's platform, and I'm not really a Conservative. Or if I am I'm a pro-abortion, pro-legalization, agnostic Conservative. ;-)
The Conservatives dont really want my kind in their tent either.
But even though I dont agree with hardly any aspect of the Republican platform.....the Dem's are so cowardly on foreign policy issues, and yes, actively promoting my disenfranchisement, that I dont really have no sane choice but vote Republican.
What planet are you living on thanks4theadd? Democrats vilify white males daily.
By Purple Avenger, at
Mon Sep 24, 11:08:00 AM:
Well, the democrats have had a firm grip on Louisiana for oh...150 years, so obviously this incident reflects badly on the republicans.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 12:46:00 PM:
Redneck Texan: you write:
"How exactly does a conservative group go about coveting the ethnic minority vote, without abandoning their principles?"
I reply:
How exactly does an ethnic minority vote for a conservative group without abandoning _their_ principles? And their interests?
And as for the Republican party, I wonder what its priciples might be. Not limited government; nor balanced budgets; nor competent governance.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 01:31:00 PM:
Re: "But even though I dont agree with hardly any aspect of the Republican platform.....the Dem's are so cowardly on foreign policy issues, and yes, actively promoting my disenfranchisement, that I dont really have no sane choice but vote Republican."
Can you document that with something from a source other than Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter or NewsMax?
By AmPowerBlog, at
Mon Sep 24, 01:48:00 PM:
Thanks for posting on this, but...
I wouldn't give Krugman that much credit - he ought to stick to economics, his original profession.
The GOP does need to reach out more to minorities, but those that do support the Republicans are a silent force, who have rejected defeatism in the war on terror and victimology in race relations.
The GOP needs to stick to its values. If I were a candidate I probably wouldn't attend NAACP conferences that refuse to address the crisis of black on black crime, poverty and nihilist murders in the inner cities, and the complete anti-intellectualism among the lower black third.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 02:00:00 PM:
I must be deeply ashamed of myself.
Even after 7 years of Bush, even after 'Abu Ghraib', even after 'Katrina', even after 'Attorney firings' I still failed to make a connection between 'Jena 6' affair and the GOP. That certainly shows how hopelessly I am detached from reality and how everything needs to be explained to me, again and again.
By Cassandra, at
Mon Sep 24, 03:00:00 PM:
Just ask Paul Krugman. He'll be happy to oblige you....
Again. And again. And again :p
By Cassandra, at
Mon Sep 24, 03:09:00 PM:
How exactly does an ethnic minority vote for a conservative group without abandoning _their_ principles? And their interests?
I would be extremely interested in hearing you expound upon which "principles" go with with ethnic minorities. Heretofore I'd rather thought that individuals decided on their principles, but now it seems that principles are to be conflated with self-interest and ethnic identity.
As my husband always likes to say, that's an approach.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 03:17:00 PM:
There may be ‘Great Truth’ somewhere in that impenetrable morass….or maybe not….well then again it could be the obverse. Isn’t it interesting how there can be the barely observable thread of undying optimism that some people express when referring to Republicans that maybe they’ll pull their collective heads out of their asses, when the reality is.. who can tell them apart anymore. The experience of existence is not unlike the rapier-like shaft of sunlight sneaking under the shade, stabbing into the Chinese squint of one’s consciousness, bringing up some sour mash acidity from last nights frivolities along with the Southern Comfort and Crème’ de Menthe highballs, and you know how high yer balls can get with them things. Was that Bush, their great hero, showing the hostess how a blind man counts his change? It’s all pseudo-intellectual lack of clarity and terminal hangovers, hanging over dangling participles, hanging ten on the edge of a Niagara-like precipice of pedantic verbiage and Vedic arbitrage. That said, I intone words to live by, “Loose Lips Sink Ships”
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 05:40:00 PM:
By Dawnfire82, at
Mon Sep 24, 06:03:00 PM:
I think that racial politics in any form is un-American.
'Don't judge me by my race! We're all Americans here, and we're all equal! We should be judged by the content of our character, not by the color of our skin! Unless you're giving me special perks, then it's ok.'
Screw that.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 06:38:00 PM:
Time for a little humor, courtesy of bob Dylan's 115th dream. (I do not recall hearing the final line when I heard the song in the 1960s.)
Now, the man on the stand he wants my vote,
He's a-runnin' for office on the ballot note.
He's out there preachin' in front of the steeple,
Tellin' me he loves all kinds-a people.
(He's eatin' bagels
He's eatin' pizza
He's eatin' chitlins
He's eatin' bullshit!)
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 06:39:00 PM:
Correction, not Dylan's 115th dream, but from "I Shall Be Free."
By Cassandra, at
Mon Sep 24, 06:51:00 PM:
That was truly special, Carl.
Next time, stay away from the little worm at the bottom of the bottle :p
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 08:20:00 PM:
Things like stock market prices, miniature golf scores, post-drugged semen levels, and chronic back pain and flatulence can fluctuate naturally and may regress towards the mean and uncalled for. The logical flaw is to make predictions that expect exceptional results to continue as if they were the average, a representativeness heuristic if I ever saw one! People are most likely to take action when dissent, like morning wood, is at its peak. Then after results become more normal or less turgid, they believe that their action was the cause of the change when in fact it was not causal, wherein cohesion between objects of similar silly appearance is assumed. While often very useful in everyday life, it can also result in neglect of relevant base rates and volumes, an inability to play funk, and other errors. Another snag you may encounter involves describing some occurrence in vivid detail, even if it is an exceptional occurrence, to convince someone that it is a problem, when, throughout my garbled history, it’s been commonly identified again and again that, if the nuns of the order of Sisters of Saint Joseph are to be believed, I am the one with the “problem”. Though misleading vividness does nothing to support an argument logically, it can have a very strong psychological effect because of a cognitive forceful brainwashing called the availability heuristic. Another area that needs to be dealt with in a timely and thorough manner is several references in my late Elementary/Junior-high phase of mutational development, otherwise known as the "Parade of horribles", originally referred to as a literal parade of people wearing comic and grotesque costumes, rather like the Philadelphia Mummers Parade or my yearly family reunion. It was a traditional feature of Fourth-of-July parades in dismal parts of the U. S. in the nineteenth century without indoor plumbing. A 1926 newspaper article about July Fourth celebrations in the White Mountains of New Hampshire notes “Old-time celebrations are to be held tomorrow at Littleton, Lancaster, Colebrook, and Conway, with all the usual features of street parades of horribles and grotesques, brass balls bands, decorated automobiles and vehicles, dance exhibitions by fire departments, basket picnics in convenient small groves, finger-sniffing contest sponsored by the local Catholic diocese, and the regional dwarf tossing semi-finals...”. And to further enlighten and confuse, in Hesse’s “Steppenwolf”, the protagonist affirms that the men of the Dark Ages (see “Living at Virginia’s house”) did not suffer more than those of the Classical Antiquity (see “Attending Catholic school in the 60’s”), and vice-versa. It is rather those who live between two times, those who do not know what to follow, that suffer the most. In this token, a man from Virginia’s house attending Catholic school, or the opposite, would undergo a gulping sadness and agony.
By , at
Mon Sep 24, 09:38:00 PM:
I'd turn that around completely Tigerhawk.
More like the Democratic Party (Salon had an article saying "So Long White Boy" about Dems "winning" without white male votes) can't and won't be attractive to white males.
Politics is about POWER. Who wins and who loses.
White males who are not wealthy elitist liberals or wanna-bes LOSE with Dem policies.
Affirmative Action discriminates against them in College Admission, grades, financial aid, etc., corporate hiring and promotion, government contracting, and of course the legal system.
Look at the Jena 6. Apparently there is a Civil Right to stomp six-on-on a white boy into unconsciousness (or punch a 17 year old girl in the face, one of four prior juvenile felonies Mychal Bell was convicted of).
Dems have caucuses for: gays, lesbians, transgendered, feminists, women, blacks, latinos, asians, etc. White men? Please. It's "So Long White Boy." White men vote AGAINST Dems because they understand Dems aim to replace them: insourcing H1-B Visas and outsourcing, plus illegal alien labor in the blue collar labor union jobs.
Look at everything Liberals/Dems do, ESPECIALLY how Hollywood treats non-elite white men: "racist" low-class "rednecks' who are worthy only of derision. Or obvious efforts to block upward mobility, a threat, with Affirmative Action or replacing white men workers with cheap Indians in Bangalore, etc.
The better question is why can't Dems attract white men? Because they are captive to groups that irrevocably hostile to them. Gay men's interests for example are directly hostile and mutually exclusive to straight white men's interests.
By Steve M. Galbraith, at
Mon Sep 24, 11:12:00 PM:
any American ethnic group that is not rooted in Europe,
What about Cuban-Americans?
SMG
By , at
Tue Sep 25, 02:58:00 AM:
Cassandra:
You say:
<<
I would be extremely interested in hearing you expound upon which "principles" go with with ethnic minorities.
>>
Equal protection before the law.
No discrimination on basis of creed or color.
Impartial administration of justice.
The right to trial by jury of one's peers, and the right to confront one's accusers.
Separation of church and state.
Freedom of religion, the press, and the right to assemble peaceably to petition the government for redress of grievancees.
And so on. All these and other basic civic rights are definitely for the benefit of minorities, ethnic or otherwise.
The whole point, as the Founders insisted, is to put limits on the excesses of democracy. Each of us is in some sort of minority; therefore minorities must be protected, if society is to be possible at all.
Take for instance the Jena 6, and the broken promise of equal protection before the law. The issue here is the contrast between 20 years for a fight, and no charges for brandishing a shotgun. The latter is, technically, assault with a deadly weapon; a felony.
I for one would be fine with the brawlers and Kid Shotgun all getting roughly the same amount of trouble - and roughly the same amount of forgiveness. They're adolescent males, without a speck of sense in their heads; they all need firm, caring and consistent guidance.
But they didn't get it. For boys to act badly is unsurprising; but the adults acted badly too. The adults of Jena, by their neglect, cluelessness, callous indifference, and blatant favoritism, have cultivated chaos.
They failed to administer justice impartially, and they also failed as mentors. Shame on them!
By Dawnfire82, at
Tue Sep 25, 08:34:00 AM:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/jena6.asp
No one was charged with murder.
And I keep seeing a double standard undercurrent, like these black kids were wholly justified in striking someone from behind and then beating the crap out of them in a cafeteria. But they're the victims.
The only person who has been hurt in this entire series of events was white, and was beaten by the said kids! They freakin' deserve punishment!
This whole silly incident has assumed a level of artificially inflated importance.
By Dawnfire82, at
Tue Sep 25, 08:35:00 AM:
By , at
Tue Sep 25, 10:56:00 AM:
Can anyone ever expect anything less from the NEW YORK SLIMES and its liberal vile columists
By , at
Tue Sep 25, 11:34:00 AM:
Right on birdofparadise,
Don't forget the NYT rah-rahed us into the Iraq War too.
How's that working out for us?
Robert
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Tue Sep 25, 08:31:00 PM:
paradoctor, if those are your values, I'd say that you're a conservative but just don't know it yet. A lot of folks on this thread have moved off the left side of the political spectrum, where we might feel culturally more at home, for exactly those reasons.
Beware confirmation bias.
By , at
Wed Sep 26, 01:11:00 AM:
Assistant Village Idiot:
Oh yes I am well aware that I am a conservative; which is why I am a Democrat. Certainly the Republicans are conservative only in the Orwellian sense. When given a choice of policies, they routinely choose the more destructive one. The Democrats tend to conserve things like the environment, or constitutional law, or foreign peace, or civil peace, or the middle class.
I call my political philosophy the Conservative Left; its premise is that public policy should favor the poor and the powerless over the rich and the powerful, and that it should do so in order to preserve the civil peace.
By Cassandra, at
Thu Sep 27, 07:06:00 AM:
Public policy ought to be fair and evenhanded. Period.
It shouldn't "favor" anyone. Injustice is injustice - the law ought to be applied evenly and fairly whether the person accused is rich, poor, white, black, brown, male, female, transgendered, or Dennis Kucinich. That is what is so loony tunes about Progressyves - you want to rectify the many unfairnesses inherent in nature: that some are swifter, richer, whiter, smarter, or just luckier; and codify them by enshrining countervaling unfairnesses into the law, often aimed at people who have done absolutely NOTHING wrong (just like the unswift, unrich, unsmart, or unlucky). It's bad enough that life can be crappy and trip people up on the road of life, but now you want the federal or state government to throw even more road blocks in their paths.
None of the 'principles' you cite have ANYTHING to do with color or ethnicity. They are values any person should support and you did not answer my question, which was "Which principles go with WHICH ETHNICITY"?
Answer: There are none. They are race/ethnicity neutral. Unless you are into identity politics and want to grab resources based on some sort of grievance politics, which I doubt you want to admit. Otherwise, the general principles you cited ought to apply to EVERYONE if the law is fairly applied. EVERYONE has an interest in seeing those principles applied, because without them there is no justice for any of us.
Sorry. I'm not buying it. Just make fair laws and then enforce them.
By , at
Fri Sep 28, 02:34:00 AM:
Cassandra:
"Just make fair laws and then enforce them."
That's an excellent idea. As you say, this principle is ethnically neutral; yet an ethnic (or other) group could value this shared ideal, to their advantage.
And that is why ethnic groups would violate their principles, and interests, if they voted for the fake conservatism of the present Republican party. It has demonstrated that it cannot or will not make fair laws, nor enforce fair laws.
