| Which alternative, I
wonder, could Bush be referring to? That provided
by his Republican Party after it disenfranchised black
voters in 2000? Or the Republican alternative that
continues to disenfranchise black voters in 2004?
(In 2000, thousands of black voters were included
erroneously on lists of felons, who are not allowed
to vote in Florida, and thus were not allowed to vote.
Recently, another spate of revelations emerged about
similarly incorrect lists that were intended to be
used by Republican state elections officials this
November. Yet for all of the incorrect names included,
the vast majority were black, with very few Hispanic
names — and Hispanics, especially Floridian
Cubans, are much more likely to vote Republican than
blacks are.) Or perhaps I should focus more on Republican
policy and its appeal to blacks; policy such as efforts
to cut after-school programs that keep minority children
off the streets, or an unbending opposition to affirmative
action of any kind, or the "state's rights"
reasoning to support the Confederate flag, an emblem
of slavery still flying over state Capitols in the
21st century. But again, I think my favorite black-friendly
Republican alternative is an old campaign trick: Bush
watched Sen. John McCain win a string of primaries
and was more than willing to prey on racist attitudes
and prejudices when it served the Bush election machine.
Yes, the Party of Lincoln is definitely providing
an alternative for black voters: an alternative to
the Ku Klux Klan in its calculating exploitation of
race hatred.
Bush's attempt to win the black vote by saying "Democrats
are only half a loaf of bread" (pointedly ignoring
the fact that the Republican Party, especially as
represented by Bush, is a tiny scrap of crust at best)
looked especially out of place immediately before
the Democratic National Convention, where a number
of the speakers dealt with race explicitly.
Vice presidential nominee, Sen. John Edwards, made
a strong statement about the difference between the
Democratic and Republican positions, saying that race
"is not an African-American issue, not a Latino
issue, not an Asian-American issue. This is an American
issue. It's about who we are, what our values are,
what kind of country we want to live in."
The Rev. Al Sharpton made an even stronger statement,
saying "Mr. President, you said would we have
more leverage if both parties got our votes, but we
didn't come this far playing political games. It was
those that earned our vote that got our vote. We got
the Civil Rights Act under a Democrat. We got the
Voting Rights Act under a Democrat. We got the right
to organize under Democrats."
And of course, he's right. Democrats deal with race
in America because they rightly see it as one of the
fundamental issues in society that responsible leaders
must face on a daily basis. Race relations and racial
equality do not simply become a topic of debate when
the occasional Rodney King or affirmative-action court
case appears in the headlines; it is an intrinsic
part of American society. Republicans, on the other
hand, see racial issues as the one nagging, minor
hang-up that keeps American blacks from voting for
Republicans. If only, they say, those silly blacks
would stop listening to the bleeding-heart liberals
who have the temerity to want to address discrimination.
This bizarre belief that blacks are being led around
by white liberals saw its flip side in one of the
funniest moments C-SPAN ever has aired, when a representative
from Project 21 (an organization of black conservatives)
came to defend the group against charges that it was
a front for the same old white conservatives that
normally espouse opposition to affirmative action
and other socially conservative views. This accusation
is bolstered by the fact that Project 21 is a subsidiary
of the National Center for Public Policy Research,
an association of those same old white conservatives
formed at the height of Reagan-mania. The clear and
concrete link between the NCPPR and the very creation
of Project 21 led prominent blacks like Kweisi Mfume,
president of the NAACP, to say that the group is a
"make-believe black organization."
The key to the hilarity of the interview was due
to a simple traffic mishap: The representative who
was scheduled to appear got a flat tire on the freeway
on his way to the C-SPAN studios. So Project 21's
director had to fill in.
Project 21's director is, in perfect irony, white.
Robb Harlston, the host of the show, barely clung
to his professional demeanor as he issued what is
now my favorite introduction to an interview of all
time: "The director of Project 21, a program
for conservative African-Americans … you're
not African-American?"
The director, David Almasi, immediately issued a
stream of defensive remarks that only added to the
surreal humor. First he explained the tire blowout,
and said he called another member of the group trying
to get someone else to appear, but nobody was available
(guess the flat and the one phone call exhausted the
ranks of conservative blacks in the metropolitan Washington,
D.C., area). Then he gave a tortured explanation that
he was only an employee of the group; he took his
marching orders from all of these mysterious black
conservatives suffering from flat tires and broken
phone lines. He didn't actually "direct"
the organization; he was just the director. (As a
bonus, this means that the difference between the
group of black conservatives and the white guy working
for the group of black conservatives is that the white
guy gets paid to do it. You really have to love that
as an affirmative defense!) Frankly, it was the best
real-world re-enactment of "pay no attention
to the man behind the curtain — I am the BLACK
CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT!" that I've ever seen.
Luckily, such chimeras of black Republicanism don't
seem to be having any effect on the larger community.
A recent poll by BET and CBS news showed that support
for John Kerry is almost at the same level as support
for Al Gore in 2000. And despite what Bush and other
Republicans would have you believe, blacks are not
being led astray by white liberals — the views
of black Democrats on most issues are generally in
line with those of the Democratic Party. Nine out
of 10 (roughly the proportion of blacks that voted
for Gore in 2000) believe that the country is headed
in the wrong direction, and that the Iraq war was
a mistake. The same poll found that black voters,
much like white voters, consider jobs and the economy
to be "the most important issue," followed
by education, health care and the war in Iraq.
Furthermore, there was a slight increase in the percentage
of those surveyed planning to vote in November over
August 2000.
In short, Bush is wrong to ask blacks what the Democratic
Party has "done for them lately," to borrow
a phrase from Janet Jackson, a black woman who recently
raised the ire of social conservatives for another
reason. Blacks do not vote for Democrats simply because
Democrats (unlike Bush) work to create a more racially
just society — although that is most certainly
one of the reasons. Blacks vote for Democrats because
the Democratic program reflects their views on almost
all issues: the economy, health care, education, social
programs, the justice system, and every other plank
in the party platform. Issues that might engage blacks
more strongly are not carrots to be dangled to entice
black voters toward the grand old elephant waiting
to stomp on them; they are integral parts of a larger
Democratic philosophy that favors inclusion over divisiveness,
fair treatment over prejudice, and one society versus
the haves trumping the have-nots.
| |