Midterms Provide New African-American Political Firsts

William Haskins said:

will be interesting to see if they are regarded as trailblazers the way obama was, or merely as aunt and uncle toms.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much inevitably going to depend on who you ask. Just like opinion about Obama.

I don't see them as Uncle Toms, no. I think this is a great historical occurrence (along with the number of women in politics this election who were voted in).

But, the republicans can't rest on their laurels and think, "Okay, we're diverse now. We aren't the racist, misogynistic asshats that half the nation thinks we are." There is still a gross disconnect with the history of civil justice, gender studies and whatnot. And so much attempt to justify poor behavior and lack of consideration for human rights (marriage, etc.).

It's a step in the right direction, though, which I am happy for. Human rights should not be something that has anything to do with party affiliation. Either you are part of the same human race I am, or you're not.

Yeah, I'm happy they were elected. Though I managed to refrain from commenting on a friend's FB post that said election proved that her party wasn't the ones who were racist

Love gave a speech at the last convention on her feelings on immigrant aspirations and self-reliance - if the Republicans had more like her, that would be a very good thing

Cool!

I got to vote for Alma Adams, who became the 100th woman in congress last night. She's Black, too.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...4/alma-adams-becomes-100th-woman-in-congress/

CrastersBabies said:

I don't see them as Uncle Toms, no. I think this is a great historical occurrence (along with the number of women in politics this election who were voted in).

But, the republicans can't rest on their laurels and think, "Okay, we're diverse now. We aren't the racist, misogynistic asshats that half the nation thinks we are." There is still a gross disconnect with the history of civil justice, gender studies and whatnot. And so much attempt to justify poor behavior and lack of consideration for human rights (marriage, etc.).

It's a step in the right direction, though, which I am happy for. Human rights should not be something that has anything to do with party affiliation. Either you are part of the same human race I am, or you're not.

Click to expand...

Republicans are racists? Diverse now? What??? Lincoln was Republican. Republicans were at the center of the civil rights movement in the fifties and sixties. In fact, more Democrats fought the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and tried to filibuster. And let's not forget that Bush had two African American Secretaries of State, Rice and Powell, both firsts for the nation.

Here's an interesting history quiz:

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/DYK-HistoryTest

And here's an in-depth article with more information:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300432/party-civil-rights-kevin-d-williamson

^^^I should mention that Alma Adams was running against a Black man, so the Republican candidate was Black, too.

I'm taking sides here but CE Lawson, parties to change over time.

Yes, parties do change over time. But I still don't see when the Republicans were/are the party of racism. I gave examples from Lincoln to Bush that dispute this. Maybe accusations of racism or being against civil rights legislation could be better argued in terms of geography or conservative/liberal, but I don't see it clearly as a Republican problem. (Though that's what a lot of people seem to think, unfortunately.)

William Haskins said:

i'm afraid i can't divulge that until you tell me if your avatar is an actual photo of you.

Click to expand...

I will never tell.

c.e.lawson said:

Republicans are racists? Diverse now? What??? Lincoln was Republican. Republicans were at the center of the civil rights movement in the fifties and sixties. In fact, more Democrats fought the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and tried to filibuster. And let's not forget that Bush had two African American Secretaries of State, Rice and Powell, both firsts for the nation.

Here's an interesting history quiz:

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/DYK-HistoryTest

And here's an in-depth article with more information:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300432/party-civil-rights-kevin-d-williamson

Click to expand...

I didn't say they WERE racists, no. Just that a good number of the nation pretty much associates the republican party with racism. Sexism. Homophobia. Misogynistic ass-hattery. Intolerance toward other cultures and religions. (Probably because many Christians tend to be republicans and must therefore impose those religious ignorances upon the party as well.)

This is not to say that all republicans say stupid crap about vaginas being able to magically stop rape-babies, for example. But rarely do I see them step back, facepalm and say, "Holy cow, my fine republican politicians that I voted into office. WHY? What in flaming Odin's bunghole are you saying?"

I certainly don't think that all republicans are racists (though I think Lincoln would absolutely crap his pants if he saw how republicans were behaving today). I think many are NOT racists. And you know what? It would wholly suck to be associated with that as a republican. I used to be a republican, but it became too much when I simply couldn't handle the lack of thoughtfulness toward human rights.

The best thing the republican party could do is to hone in on the complete ass-clowns in office who are so out of touch with modern cultural thinking, call them out on their BS, and find a way to blaze that trail toward a more understanding future. Demographics will not "hold" for the republican party for long. My grand-pops who thinks that gay people are like "Two dogs getting married" will eventually pass on. There goes another vote. And the younger generation will be more mindful. Unless we show them that there really are two options in this country--not just the "hippie party" and the "culturally ignorant party"--then chances are, they'll opt for the more compassionate side of things. Most will, anyway. Which right now? That's the left.

Anyway, bad soapbox. Sorry.

I definitely don't think all republicans are racists, but some are. And they're vocal enough about it that the "other half" of the country will absolutely associate them all with this poor behavior.

(I've felt it on the left as well. Everyone thinks I'm want to go house-to-house and collect all the guns, or, that I want to see half of the nation on welfare.)

I probably made no sense. Sorry.

William Haskins said:

six years after election of our first black president:

• mia love will be the first black female republican to ever serve in congress.

• south carolina's tim scott is first black senator to win election in the south since reconstruction.

will be interesting to see if they are regarded as trailblazers the way obama was, or merely as aunt and uncle toms.

Click to expand...

Mia Love and Tim Scott's triumphs are very nice and all that, but I'm long past getting psyched over putting Black faces in formerly White places. What a Black politician does once they are elected matters more than being the first whatever-the-hell-they-are. Don't present, represent.

Mia Love had her high-profile moment at the 2012 Republican National Convention but it didn't spark an exodus from the Democratic Party by African-Americans.

Remarks like these won't either.

She told the Desert News in 2012 that if elected, she would join the Congressional Black Caucus and “try to take that thing apart from the inside out.” She accused black Democrats of “demagoguery,” saying, “They sit there and ignite emotions and ignite racism when there isn’t [any]. They use their positions to instill fear. Hope and change is turned into fear and blame.”

Racism is only a problem today, she told Newsweek, as long as people allow themselves to be victims. “I’m no victim. I’m perfectly comfortable in my skin. My parents always told me, In order for people to see you as an equal, you need to act as an equal and be an equal, not make excuses for what you look like. I’m proud of having the skin color I have. It’s a feature I’m not ashamed of.”

Click to expand...

Going by The World According to Mia the only reason a Michael Brown or Eric Gardner or Trayvon Martin became victims isn't because they were Black but because they allowed themselves to be victims. If only they had realized that before they were killed they might still be alive!

I'm sure Love will be a credit to the race she doesn't believe matters and to all the Republicans who will trot her out, squeeze in tight, cheese for camera, point to her as the only Black Congressional representative and squeal with glee, "See! We got one! Look at how diverse we are"

Forget Love's race. Forget her gender. Close your eyes and listen to her words and she sounds the same as Allen West, Tim Scott, Gary Franks and J.C. Watts did when it was their turn to be the Black Special Friend of the White Republican Party.

I won't say Love is an Aunt Jemina yet, but it's clear she's no Angela Davis.

c.e.lawson said:

Republicans are racists? Diverse now? What??? Lincoln was Republican. Republicans were at the center of the civil rights movement in the fifties and sixties. In fact, more Democrats fought the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and tried to filibuster. And let's not forget that Bush had two African American Secretaries of State, Rice and Powell, both firsts for the nation.

Here's an interesting history quiz:

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/DYK-HistoryTest

And here's an in-depth article with more information:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300432/party-civil-rights-kevin-d-williamson

Click to expand...

Here's the problem the republican party back then and the current republican party are two very different things. During the Civil Rights movement many of the southern democrats (which was the social conservative party of the time) flipped sides due to their national leaders supporting the movement, and were brought into the folds of the republicans by Nixon, who thought they could give him an edge in the national election.

The old republican party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt was the socially progressive party, the environmentalist party, and the ones that fought against businesses becoming monopolies. The modern party -- the party of Eric Canter, Rick Perry, and Rush Limbaugh -- is one that would have cheered on the confederates, supported Carnegie's right to use of pinkerton mercs to break up unions, and have a less than stellar track record when dealing with minorities (whether it be due to race, gender, sexuality, religion, or culture).

CrastersBabies said:

I didn't say they WERE racists, no. Just that a good number of the nation pretty much associates the republican party with racism. Sexism. Homophobia. Misogynistic ass-hattery.

Click to expand...

which is interesting as my exiting democratic senator Braley was notorious for paying his female employees way less than his male employees even for ranking female employees! Yet everyone seems to gloss over this as being ok because he's a democrat.

FWIW it's NOT that us republicans don't want equal pay/rights. We do! What we want is an equal pay/rights bill to go through without any other bills/wants/dreams/fantasies attached to said bill that do NOT pertain to said bill!

Another words don't put an equal pay/rights bill in front of me to sign off on when there's a bridge to nowhere, or some other horrendous pork project attached to it.

I still contend to this day the only reason Bill Clinton was able to do as well as he did as a president was because of the line item veto that gave him power to veto garbage attached to IMPORTANT bills like equal pay/rights!

nighttimer said:

Mia Love and Tim Scott's triumphs are very nice and all that, but I'm long past getting psyched over putting Black faces in formerly White places. What a Black politician does once they are elected matters more than being the first whatever-the-hell-they-are. Don't present, represent.

Mia Love had her high-profile moment at the 2012 Republican National Convention but it didn't spark an exodus from the Democratic Party by African-Americans.

Remarks like these won't either.



Going by The World According to Mia the only reason a Michael Brown or Eric Gardner or Trayvon Martin became victims isn't because they were Black but because they allowed themselves to be victims. If only they had realized that before they were killed they might still be alive!

I'm sure Love will be a credit to the race she doesn't believe matters and to all the Republicans who will trot her out, squeeze in tight, cheese for camera, point to her as the only Black Congressional representative and squeal with glee, "See! We got one! Look at how diverse we are"

Forget Love's race. Forget her gender. Close your eyes and listen to her words and she sounds the same as Allen West, Tim Scott, Gary Franks and J.C. Watts did when it was their turn to be Black Special Friend of the White Republican Party.

I won't say Love is an Aunt Jemina yet, but it's clear she's no Angela Davis.

Click to expand...

It seems a pattern lately of just every now and again the Republican party pulls this shit. Finds an African American person, but one who says the same shit the rest of them say about race, so the party at large can act like they're all on the same side despite doing nothing substantive to ever show that besides randomly propping a black person up on a temporary pedestal.

This is why the GOP was gushing over Dr. Ben Carson, or why Herman Cain was at one point the bloody front-runner for the Republican nomination in 2012. Because they're African Americans who look good for the shallow demographics breakdown, but can still be relied upon to spout the same crap so that the rest of the GOP can feel comfortable saying it themselves because "well this black member agrees with us, so we can't be racist when we say blacks victimise themselves or just don't want to work hard and succeed."

It's basically the same reason they put up with the Log Cabin Republicans or GOProud despite having a history of virulent homophobia. Because it makes them look better on the surface.

And unfortunately, looking good on the surface is all that matters to a frankly worrying amount of voters.

Shadow Dragon said:

Here's the problem the republican party back then and the current republican party are two very different things. During the Civil Rights movement many of the southern democrats (which was the social conservative party of the time) flipped sides due to their national leaders supporting the movement, and were brought into the folds of the republicans by Nixon, who thought they could give him an edge in the national election.

The old republican party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt was the socially progressive party, the environmentalist party, and the ones that fought against businesses becoming monopolies. The modern party -- the party of Eric Canter, Rick Perry, and Rush Limbaugh -- is one that would have cheered on the confederates, supported Carnegie's right to use of pinkerton mercs to break up unions, and have a less than stellar track record when dealing with minorities (whether it be due to race, gender, sexuality, religion, or culture).

Click to expand...

Wow, just wow! Talk about painting with a broad brush!!! you don't know me or my party at all!

You have definitely confused corporate republicans (which are the same as corporate democrats) who use any means by which to build their kingdoms with regular republicans, ie joe six pack who hates Monsanto, huge corporate farms that gobble up the little farmers, and the corporate mercenaries just as much as you do!

Oh and I'm half white, which I guess technically makes me a minority but I've never identified as being a minority, I simply see myself as an American.

Reservoir Angel said:

It seems a pattern lately of just every now and again the Republican party pulls this shit. Finds an African American person, but one who says the same shit the rest of them say about race, so the party at large can act like they're all on the same side despite doing nothing substantive to ever show that besides randomly propping a black person up on a temporary pedestal.

Click to expand...

The fact that you think like this... well there are no words other than you haven't a clue, and maybe should move out of the UK and to central Iowa, or maybe even Utah, where you will find tons of conservative (republican) minorities.

milkweed said:

Wow, just wow! Talk about painting with a broad brush!!! you don't know me or my party at all!

You have definitely confused corporate republicans (which are the same as corporate democrats) who use any means by which to build their kingdoms with regular republicans, ie joe six pack who hates Monsanto, huge corporate farms that gobble up the little farmers, and the corporate mercenaries just as much as you do!

Click to expand...

Uh, nope. She was refering to Nixon and the targeting of white men with grievances that he is responsible for as well as the successors of the leadership in the Republican Party. You are in one wing of the Republican Party, and you may be excluded from this political machinery but that is what you are in the party. Excluded.

milkweed said:

The fact that you think like this... well there are no words other than you haven't a clue, and maybe should move out of the UK and to central Iowa, or maybe even Utah, where you will find tons of conservative (republican) minorities.

Click to expand...

I will admit to my view of all of this being very much removed from the 'boots on the ground' view and being overly focused on national profile, so yes my view is skewed. But even a conservative has to admit that the Republican party as an overall entity has at the very least a pretty noticeable national imaging problem when it comes to issues like race.

I never said there weren't any minority Republicans, my point was entirely with how the GOP tends to image itself in relation to such issues.