Okay. Here’t goes. And I expect it will be controversial. But then, so what? I’ve already been booted from polite GOP company for denying the basic decency of Obama and his academic progressivism early on. What are they going to do next, strenuously not link me?
Writes Ms Parker, in one of her typically strained columns:
Republicans were certain that Obama was all style over substance, but their criticisms quickly were interpreted in some quarters as racial animus. Certainly some who call themselves Republicans also can be called racist. Anyone who spends time on the Internet is aware of the racist content of some political dialogue. It’s out there, and it’s ugly.
Thus Republicans have had to tread carefully to always frame their criticisms in racially sensitive ways. Dog whistles are heard everywhere. Much of this exaggerated sensitivity is just that, but Republicans aren’t helped by the optics of their composition.
Where are the blacks?
“In some quarters.” “Some who call themselves Republicans.” “Some political dialogue.” Wow, Ms Parker, that’s quite the powerful indictment of the secreted racism hidden deep in the (ironically, black!) heart of the GOP!
— Although some might say there’s a reason you avoid specifics, just as some who call themselves Republicans would probably like to ask you where your concern is over the Democrat reaction to Mia Love or Condi Rice, which is right there on the internet for all to see. Some might argue that if you’re sniffing out racial animus like a pig snouting for truffles, you might do well looking closer to home, and not worry about the supposed problems Republicans and conservatives have with blacks, which you’ll go on to say — in a deliberately slippery and largely incoherent manner — isn’t real or fair, but is nevertheless, and simultaneously, a fact. Schrodinger’s racism!
[…]
The impression that Republicans don’t welcome blacks and other minorities is, however, demonstrably false. Note the number of minority Republican governors recently elected: Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Nikki Haley of South Carolina, Brian Sandoval of Nevada and Susana Martinez of New Mexico. Even so, the party is undeniably and overwhelmingly white, and minorities (and increasingly women) don’t feel at home there.
It is not helpful that two convention attendees threw peanuts at an African American camerawoman for CNN and said, “This is how we feed animals.” Disgusting. They were promptly shown the door, but the damage was done. A few bad apples can and do spoil bushels of good intentions.
–Well, unless it’s progressives faking hate crimes. Then it’s not so much “disgusting” as it is emblematic of a deeper, very real problem — the root of which caused this acting out, this manifestation of a refusal to remain powerless in a society so hostile to [insert victimized identity group here] — and so provide us with useful lessons. It’s truthiness, in other words, and needs further explication and analysis. Whereas it is inconceivable to believe that Republicans throwing peanuts at a CNN employee — stupid and wrong though it was — may have been reacting more to what they consider a biased “news” source than to the race of a camera woman. Or else, why not wait and pelt Mia Love or Condi Rice with peanuts?
But be that as it may. It serves Parker’s rhetorical purpose — which as I’m sure you’re already surmising is some iteration of “optics matter” or perception is reality — to cite this example, because Parker wants to leave you with the impression that there is more to the perception than merely the blindingly white optics she and a host of others appear to see (and are “concerned” with), even while she’ll walk that back and note that of course most Republicans aren’t racists. That is, her entire piece relies on her having it both ways. With the upshot being that she’ll provide oblique counsel on how to fix “our” black problem.
African Americans are not a monolithic group, obviously, and many likely would find comfort in the promises of smaller government, lower taxes, balanced budgets, school choice and so on that Mitt Romney put on the table Thursday night. But this isn’t likely to happen. A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found 0?percent support for Romney among African Americans. (Zero doesn’t necessarily mean none but is a statistical null.) Obama also leads Latinos younger than 35 and women. Romney, alas, leads whites.
Appearances matter, and the GOP simply doesn’t look that friendly. Regardless of what is true, when an arena full of white people cheers jabs aimed at the first African American president, it feels wrong. This may not be a conscious recognition, but the subliminal is powerful.
And there it is. Appearances matter, regardless of what is true. How it feels — to those taught to sense every potential offense, and react to it as if it were a real case of hate and intolerance — takes precedence over what actually is, because what we pretend to perceive, however much we are motivated disingenuously to do so and however directed and manufactured is that perception, trumps what truly is.
As a result, it is incumbent upon the GOP to change their message and alter their optics if ever they want certain demographics to accept their message and, as a result, better their optics. That is, they need to become more like Democrats, and more like post structural relativists who strive to bend reality to their political wills, if they wish ever to be seen as non-racist Republicans.
Meaning, for Republicans to become inclusive, they need to embrace progressivism. At which point, elections will become about shades of progressivism, and the speed with which we move left.
Helpful counsel, that.
But — and this will stun Ms Parker — there’s another way to look at this: appearances are an excuse. What is true is what is true — and the refusal of certain demographics to accept what is true is a problem with that demographic, not with the people telling the truth.
The conservative movement is about the autonomy and worth of the individual. Free market capitalism doesn’t care what color you are, what gear you have between your legs, or who you wish to bang once the bedroom door is closed. It pushes individual liberty, growth, the entrepreneurial spirit, and is distrustful of temporary politicians and bureaucrats who consistently attempt to solidfy power in order to manage our lives for us. It rests on idea of equality of opportunity, and a stable and consistent rule of law. It strives for colorblindness.
Where are all the blacks? Well, we know the answer to that, don’t we, Ms Parker? They’re a client demographic of the Democrat Party. Which means they are willing to trade their individual autonomy for the security of the state and the convenience of perpetual grievance narratives. They are, on the whole, where they want to be, politically speaking
That’s their choice — and blacks happen to make that choice at an alarmingly monolithic rate, despite their being “obviously” anything but monolithic. And part of the reason, I believe, is that national Republicans have been trying to woo minorities with forced optics, manufactured appearances, and “us too!”-ism rather than with a substantive discussion of the conservative message.
Many conservatives have always believed that it is in the best interest of blacks — and everyone else, for that matter — to embrace the classical liberal principles and ideals that have made this country so successful and so exceptional. And we’ve long wished our politicians would simply campaign on those principles, rather than trying to match the panders of the Democrat and their Balkanized politicking.
But it is what it is.
The bottom line being, of course blacks are welcome in the Republican party. But (as a statistical group) they’re going to have to do the hard work first of deciding that they’re sick and tired of being a perpetual client to the Democrat party, who stokes the grievance culture and, as a result, draws to them those identity groups who have decided that feeling aggrieved is more rewarding than being truly free. Which tends to provide power to the identity group leadership, but does nothing for those they pretend to advocate for.
There’s the truth. The optics may be bad, but so it goes: when the mindset of certain reliably Democratic-voting identity groups shift toward liberty and away from grievance and entitlement, the GOP’s optics will change.
Until then, Ms Parker may as well be writing a column asking why the optics suggest that only white people appear to care about liberty, fiscal sanity, free market capitalism, and individual autonomy.
nothing or nobody in my whole life has more viciously raped black people than obama
he’s a right bastard
The fact that blacks and hispanics were placed front in center is mere tokenism, proving
that there are in fact no blacks and hispanics to speak of in the overly white Republican party.
If there were, Republicans could take them for granted, keeping them on the intellectual plantation as it were, except when they trot them out to gin up some “exotic other>” criticism of the Democrats.
“African Americans are not a monolithic group, obviously, ”
Well if they don’t vote then their voice does not count, so let’s look at the voters. Around 90% of black votes going towards the democrats in most elections isn’t monotlithic. There is clearly a second tiny lith. And they catch hell for being on the wrong lith if they let on which lith they prefer.
So lecture me some more.
I thought Parker’s rhetorical purpose was to beg admission to and acceptance by the culture shaping, opinion making, intellectual elites, which she so obviously craves.
Better a token consevative in polite socieal cirles than a token negro in lowly conservative ones I guess.
Is Ms. Parker trying to suggest that blacks, not being a monolithic group that votes 90% D, need to be schooled? Or is she saying that is too harsh and they need to be led gently to the cool waters of Repulicanism? The Republican blacks who are on the ticket are tokens whereas Obama is not?
Either way, she’s saying the monolithic group that is not monolithic, it just votes that way, is kinda stupid.
Hispanics is a made up political category. Yeah the word has a meaning that checks out but not in a unifying way. Cubans, Panamanians, Guatemalans, Columbians, Peruvians, Mexicans, ect. don’t really have the same culture in any sense, and from my experience they don’t like each other that much, which is not to say that they hate each other, or feel a part of some vast spanish speaking mostly catholic brotherhood of like minds.
This ungainly hypothetical amalgum of spanish speaking ( or descended from spanish speaking) was ginned up Mexican descended activists in the US wanted to be seen as steering a much larger group. Why look like 25% when you can look like a little more than 50% if you just blur a lot of groups together into one? So they claimed to be hispanics and then implied that all hispanics are behind them thus they are a HUGE demographic instead of a large one. From what I’ve seen this has won them lots of influence with stupid racially obsessed politicians and lobbying concerns but not much in the way of a dominating wave of hispanic votes for leftist causes. The hispanic vote still seems to split along pretty philosophical lines. There is no de facto block of assured “latino” votes despite all the silly herding efforts.
I have noticed that American blacks often don’t get along very well with immigrant blacks. Again that is not say that they hate each other but they have trouble communicating and seem to dislike each others points of view. Much of this is due to a lack of assimilation in the immigrant black population. The two groups stand apart in how they think and do things.
Honestly I feel the same way about white (which means European descended) though the “whites” have been heavily assimilated and mixed since WW1 or so when trains and urbanization made it easy to bring them all together. I suppose that listening to the same radio shows, watching the same movies, and later TV shows is a homogenizing force too. But Irish were not Italians were not German, were not Swedes were not French, were not Russians, were not Greeks, were not Romany, were not ostro-slavs, were not Ashkenazim etc.
That they all just got lumped together as “the same” is more than a bit artificial and bullshit. That all all became more similar due to the melting pot IS something of a reality though one that is a bit overstated. Also, hispanics used to be considered whites, and many of them ARE white in terms of appearance and ancestry. Some are black. Not everybody has native american ancestors.
There are german speaking farming communities in Mexico right now called “Gunthers” and there were communities/enclaves just like them in Central Texas who learned to speak English so they could get along with their neighbors as tensions arose around WW1. A big part of why my Mom spoke English was that she was born in 33 after WW1. A big part of why she moved to Austin was that learning English broke those farming enclaves open and the lessons of the depression made the kids very keen to go out and look for work at the tail end of the 40’s and the early 50’s. The 50’s was to my mother what the 90’s were to me.
George Orwell had a useful shorthand for balkanized politicking by means of perpetuating convenient grievance narratives:
Love is Hate
Most blacks who traitorously entertain “incorrect” anti-Obama thoughts largely keep quiet about it out of self-preservation. If polled, they’ll (quite prudently) lie and profess allegiance to Obama.
In conversation, they’ll stay reserved until they can figure out the landscape. Only when they feel they’re among people who aren’t going to key their car, burn their house down, or make death threats do they open up.
My neighborhood is about 80% black, but I’ve not seen a single Obama bumper sticker or lawn sign yet, where they were legion in 08′. Take that for what its worth – a single data point, but my gut says its not an outlier. I’m smack in the middle of the deep blue Democrat bastion of Palm Beach County, and I’m just not seeing any O-thusiasm at all.
My neighborhood is about 80% black, but I’ve not seen a single Obama bumper sticker or lawn sign yet, where they were legion in 08?. Take that for what its worth – a single data point,
Here’s another (which I believe I’ve mentioned before). I work with a melanin-enriched attorney who lives in Los Angeles and has been a Democrat party figure (as in worker bee, not in the hierarchy) for years. He had a few reservations in 08 over Obama, but still worked on the campaign because fellow Dems really wanted his Conservative Dem face as part of winning over other reluctant conservative blacks.
This time, he’s quietly withdrawn from doing anything for the O! campaign and while he is not working the R side of the aisle, he is going to vote for Romney.
The attorney is prudent. If he came out of the closet against Obama his life would be ruined.
Ask him if he’d lie to a pollster and say he was voting for Obama.
Hispanic used to mean that you were from or descended from Hispania, aka the Iberian Peninsula. Like me. But now I apparently hate them all. Which is weird.
Well, you’re Portuguese*. You don’t hate hispanics, they just aren’t authentico. And you don’t speak Spanish.
*Several of my cousins are married to Portuguese men
As a “white Hispanic” myself, I know the feeling well.
– Ths agitprop masquerading as political analysis will just grow even more rediculous as the Demoratic Progressives feel their grip on the Black community slipping away.
– No surprises here, since it was always about manipulation, and no one hates exposure like a manipulator.
– I’m sure that for many blacks Obama is about as far as you could get from what they were hoping for in the first black American president, but what are they to do.
“Hispanics is a made up political category.”
POLITICAL category. I’m not claiming that the word was made up. I’m claiming that the political entity it has been fairly recently appended to was.
I think “Hispanic” as it is used in politics is a scam. Those defined as ‘Hispanics’ just don’t think or vote the same way on many issues. Now they are being told to anyway in exchange for membership in a minority complex with a portfolio of rightful grievances to profit from. And it is implied that not playing ball is a bad move that will have serious consequences when the revolution come or say when you want a job in academia, the press, entertainment, a nonprofit, etc.
Breitbart also forecast the tactics the media would use:
We’re watching you to play the race card MSNBC. We saw how you cynically placed the Reverend Sharpton in a position of absurdist power. This is Dadaism, I learned that in college, that they would allow for this guy to have a show. This is Dadaism. It’s freaky. It’s Andy Kaufman. It doesn’t make sense unless you understand what they’re doing.
This is going to be the dog whistle election cycle. They tested them in 2011, so he and his pal Toure and that punk Tim Jacob Wise and Ed and Maddow can sit there and call everyone who’s Caucasian racist. “I heard it. He used ‘is’ instead of ‘are.’ He’s a racist. That’s a dog whistle.’”
Ignore it when Congressman [Carson] does it against Allen West. No more. We’re going to go after you. I bought a dog whistle. I bought a dog whistle factory, and I’m giving you dog whistles. And we’re going to listen to every word that comes out of your mouth, and we’re going to hold you to the same standard that you hold us which is an impossible one, and you’re going to have a hell of a time in 2012 because America’s finally woken to your Saul Alinsky bullshit tactics, and we’re coming to get you.
Watch the video:
link
I no longer care if democrats think I am racist. I used to worry that they were some kind of esoteric racism experts and that they could convince me that I was racist the way that an alcoholic is an alcoholic, that society has made me permanently damaged goods. Eventually I figured out that democrats call things racist in an automated fashion, the same way that 12″ tall GI JOE shouted “All for one and one for all!” in a tinny voice back when I pulled the string in his arm-pit back in 1974.
“and many likely would find comfort in the promises of smaller government, lower taxes, balanced budgets, school choice and so on…”
– Which, you know, to any right thinking nanny-statist is just crazy talk.
– You have to wonder how anyone is so afarid of failure they come to the point where no sacrifice of personal liberties is too great to offset the terror of losing the suckle on the governmental teat.
I no longer care if democrats think I am racist.
Good. There are a whole bunch of us who feel that way after the last four years. I enjoy pointing out to them that they’re racists in many different ways. They don’t seem to like it too well.
Too bad, I say.
– First photo’s of this mornings march in Charlotte. An earlier gathering of a small group of protesters that sat down blocking a street was ignored by police, so after about 15 minutes the protesters moved on.
– The groups in these shots appear to be mostly locals.
That’s a whole lotta looney tunes, BBH. Much more than Tampa, from the looks of it.
The groups in these shots appear to be mostly locals.
Call me old fashioned, but it’s just not a protest unless there’s a swollen pink oversized vagina or two.
I hope that’s a pretty long march. Most of them look like they could use a little exercise.
There is a whole lot of looney tunes in that area, Pablo. Lot of colleges and moonbats.
– Looks like the outsider groups are partying and keeping their powder dry until the convention gets under way.
– That sand sculpture of Candyman is the quintesential “flag in front of the bull”. Be surprised if it survives the week.
#occupysand
Lookit!
Squirrel? Where!
[…] It all comes down to this: The conservative movement is about the autonomy and worth of the individual. Free market capitalism doesn’t care what color you are, what gear you have between your legs, or who you wish to bang once the bedroom door is closed. It pushes individual liberty, growth, the entrepreneurial spirit, and is distrustful of temporary politicians and bureaucrats who consistently attempt to solidfy power in order to manage our lives for us. It rests on idea of equality of opportunity, and a stable and consistent rule of law. It strives for colorblindness. […]
Did you guys know that Kathleen Parker is one quarter… sentient?
Something I heard anyway. Not sure that I believe it.
And so it begins: Bounced – One drunken Dem delegate hospitalized, another causes disturbance
What exactly are these mooks protesting?
I doubt they know what they’re protesting. I’m sure they are quite adamant about it, though.
Obama: GOP Convention Was from Era of Black-and-White TV
Wasn’t MLK from the era of black and white TV?
Those black and white TVs were made in America…
Yes he was. Say, isn’t that where Obama’s parents met? At the march on Selma?
When he was three or four years old.
gossip dept.
Who Is Funding the Purchase of the $35 million Beachfront Hawaiian Estate for Barack and Michelle Obama to Move into Come January 2013?
“Why do you uncaring Conservatives want to disenfranchise dead voters?
I hope Obama makes sure he pays the taxes on the $35M property. That’s way beyond a gift.
Do you think he’ll have it deeded to some shady overseas company, maybe in the Bahamas?
– Bain will probably hold the papers for him ’til after he’s out of office. I’d like to see some group in the protests in Charlotte hold up signs saying “Obama is part of the 1%”.
– I wonder how long it will be before the Left starts to admit that, if ever.
Don’t tell him he’s not at home in Selma.
akin update
Supposedly, making a mistake saying something about rape was unforgivable in the GOP. Then Karl Rove spoke to a group of wealthy donors in Tampa and not realizing a reporter was in the room, said, “We have to sink Akin. If he’s found mysteriously murdered, don’t look for my whereabouts.” His comments were made public, and he called Todd Akin to apologize. Despite the treatment given to him, Todd Akin accepted the apology and expressed his forgiveness to Karl.
If making a foolish remark about rape is bad, then making a joke about a United States Congressman being murdered is as bad or worse since Akin didn’t wish anyone to be raped, just spoke awkwardly and incorrectly about the likelihood of pregnancy in the event of a rape. In light of the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the remark was disturbing…
link
I don’t remember the details exactly, but I do seem to remember something about our moral betters on the left, caretakers of public virtue that they are, having kittens over friends of Ron and Nancy doing something similiar —for a whole lot less— back in ’88.
Sometimes I honestly wonder if liberals are aware that blacks are only 13% of the population.
The only thing funnier than Rove hoisted on his own petard is Hot Air doing it.
Live by appearances and what others might think, die by same.
– Soooooo then, with 67 days to go til the election the Democratic positions are:
– Drive up abortion on demand
– Tax payer funded birth control for everyone
– The war and everything else that has kappened the past 4 years is Bushes fault
– Of course that mantra is getting a bit difficult to sell these days.
“Bush is not on the ballot” says it all, and well, Obama has been golfing, don’cha know.
If we cede the language war to them we cede them this argument.
In response, vulgar language is totally acceptable; violence may well be.
If you can’t boo a shitty president at a partisan convention then you have no rights whatsoever.
She’s a preposterously lazy hack and this is the kind of easy, one-off 500 word column she can file before brunch that she knows she won’t take crap for from editors.
It’s unfortunate Bush sucked. You don’t get Obama’s traveling medicine show unless you have a Bush pushing the boundaries of what was fiscally possible.
Iraq, the multiple entitlement orgasms, the spending mania, the TSA, bailouts et al, begets more of the same., only much more and much worse, because there’s an academic leftist in charge.
When confronting liberals, I discuss Bush from the right and explain that whatever disappointment they feel, I can trump thrice over. They are universally unprepared for this gambit and more productive conversations generally emerge.
crime fighter
link
oops Rahm Emanuel defensive over Chicago shooting sprees: “We’re containing it”; 2 killed, 15 others shot in Chicago this weekend
– They’ve narrowed it down to just the burrows south of Forest Park in a tiny 49 square mile area.
You may say tiny, but that’s one big sheep pen.
They outta pass a law saying it’s mandatory for all property owners to be weapons certified, armed, and responsible for protecting their own property.
See what happens.
LBascom, if they did that the Democrats would refuse to seat delegates from that area.
Well said.
Outstanding commentary and exactly on point.
[…] Sunday, Jeff Goldstein delivered an all-encompassing Fisking to all of the those in the GOP and on the Right [the two do not necessarily include the same […]
Reporters and Kate Parkers.
Distinctions without differences.