By De’Von Weatherspoon
Today, Powell’s endorsement of Obama says everything that I was thinking; the Republican Party is controlled by the Religious Right and Social conservatives at the expense of more libertarian and moderate conservatives. Just as the Democratic Party during the 90’s had to grapple with the two competing factions within its party, so too must the GOP. This struggle is sure to be one of the most dynamic things to happen to the GOP since the rise of Regan. Myself, being a moderate black Republican and recently a Democrat, am new to the Republican Party, and I know first hand why the GOP share of voters is slowly diminishing; Social Conservatism. I for a longest time associated the Republican Party with Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. I associated it with anti-intellectualism and social engineering, But I most importantly associated the GOP with people who were “you’re either the same and with us, or you’re different and against us.” So you can just imagine how shocked I was when I found out that I agree more with Republicans than most Democrats on issues. This election season has been a very long and very entertaining season, but the defeat of Hillary Clinton signaled the future problems that the Republicans would have. Contrary to common belief the Clinton Democrat was the Republican’s best friend. The Clinton Democrat was born after the Democrats’ failures during the 70’s; these failures were bought about by Democrats being too liberal.
Clinton Democrats are the product of the Democratic Leadership Council which is an organization that focused primarily on moving the Democratic Party to the Center. In fact I’ll go as far and say that Republicans could’ve survived comfortable a Clinton Presidency, but with the majority that many are predicting that Obama will bring to Congress, we’re in for a tough fight. Just today in the Wall Street Journal’s opinion section, they [the writer] showed just some of the things that a more liberal non-Clinton Democratic Congress could pass.If the Republican Party is to thrive and succeed it needs desperately to recruit more moderate and liberal conservatives.
The stranglehold that the Social Conservatives have held on the GOP for the last few decades must end. Many people that are hesitant about joining the GOP scoff at how many Republicans proclaim to not want government in the bedroom, but jump on the broomstick to define marriage, whether it be between a man and a woman, or between two same sex partners. It seemed to me and many others that Republicans are all about smaller governmental intervention except when it comes to some issues. To me it’s either all or nothing. That is why I will say that I love the John McCain of 2000, but when he chose Sarah Palin over Mitt Romney, it was back to same old thing; Courting the Social Conservatives and Religious Right.Take all of this in, and for moderates like me who want to see a more inclusive Republican Party, a Republican loss in November may not be the worse. Hopefully the Republican Party learns its lesson that it needs a new approach to America, I suggest going back to a Republican Party of Theodore Roosevelt which is inclusive and not exclusive. The Republican Party needs to be able to build coalitions with people who are more than just socially conservative in order to attract these people to the Republican Party and to remain a strong force in America.
~De’Von Weatherspoon-is a high school student and contributor to this blog he is from the great state of Connecticut and describes himself as a "Hamilton Republican".
9 comments:
I can't accept a "social conservative" stranglehold on the policy, either.
However, "Anything goes", coupled with all the entitlement spending, is the way to a very poor U.S.
The best way to strike any kind of deal amongst the denizens of the big tent is to completely recuse government, at any level, from paying anybody for any kind of destitution, save mental/chemical incapacity to live freely.
Your desire for the bigger tent was made manifest when GHW Bush reneged on "no new taxes", and got hornswoggled, then defeated by light Marxist Clinton.
Let same-sex "marriage" commence, when and only when there are no different taxation treatments of the coupling, oh, and my religious affiliation had better have the right to refuse to recognize the coupling.
The livable big tent would allow people to do as they will, provided the doers bear the full brunt of consequence of their actions, at no coerced expense to the non-doer. And when consequence comes calling on the profligate, he/she had better hope the social conservatives set up a hospital that takes care of all or part of the remedy.
I voted for Bush senior, Clinton X2 and Bush X2 I will not vote for a socialist from either party, Ayers is important not because of his terrorist past but because of his communist ideology. In the Sixties THE Soviets through Cuba funneled money and training to THE FALN, Black Panthers, weather underground and many others. Reverend Wright's liberation theology comes from Nicaragua's Sandinista revolution a Marxist revolution. This man Senator Obama has sought out the company and advice of communist and socialist and he now wants me to believe he is not one? Please I was born in the ghetto and I drink Kool-Aid but I’m not drinking this shit. SBM
I am in EXACT agreement with you on this issue. I am more regular Moderate conservative and would gladly toot the horn for the Republican party. But the Religious Right and their ilk scare the daylights out of me.
These people want to keep you from doing what you want to do, just b/c they don't like it. And what happens is that it just drives the behavior underground.
I agree with De'Von. There needs to be new leadership. I still believe that the GOP can have many faces of all people if they start outreaching more now. Get people like Jack Kemp to run the RNC, I guarantee the party will have a better standing.
The GOP badly needs a diversity push.
I feel if the GOP wants to be stronger in 2012, it needs to do stronger outreach to Hispanics (and apologize for Tancredo's statements), Asians, blacks, etc...
We do have Bobby Jindal for 2012 or 2016 if he can help Louisiana.
@ anon (both of them)
ahhhhh stop with the conspiracy theories! PLEASE. It's nutty. ABSOLUTELY nutty. Do either one of you know what real marxism/fascism/communism/socialism/[insert scary leftist ideology here] looks like? Calm down and BREATHE, our country is far from turning into Cuba!
I mean c'mon, if we start falling into degenerate conspiracy theories, we do ourselves NO help. NONE. It's just as easy to devovle into conspiracy theories for the extreme right... hello, Palin's Church? Her husband's membership in an Alaskan secessionist group? McCain and Palin being slapped on the wrist for ethics violations? McCain's connection to Nicaragua? All of this... STUPID.
Willful ignorance does the party NO favors. So to the writer and the other sane Republicans in the world, I completely agree, kick the bums out, revitalize the party, change the character and become an INCLUSIVE and tolerant group. Don't let the fringe element dictate anymore!
Unfortunately, the social conservatives are the base of the party. Liberal Republicans were shoved out of the GOP years ago. Now Moderates are leaving quickly.
The social conservatives are the core of the GOP. How does the GOP win votes? Hate! Hate against blacks, Latinos, gays, liberals, etc.
http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200881020067
There's no such thing as Global Warming! Science? Facts? Puh-leeze. It's all evil libruls.
I'm sorry to be so sarcastic but I think you are seriously misunderstanding the GOP and the architecture of its success for the last 40 years. I strongly suggest that you read up on the Southern Strategy. Did Jerry Falwell have a place in social conservatism? Sure. But the Christian Right were also part of the anti-black racist core.
During the 1960s, Falwell was an anti-segregationist. In the 1980s, Pat Robertson sided against disinvestment in South Africa. In fact, Robertson championed the belief black South Africans simply could not be trusted with democracy in South Africa.
And, the story goes on, and on.
For the Republicans to have any meaning, there needs to be a great flushing to dispose of the bigotry that floats and coats the bowl of the GOP.
Look back to the GOP of 1950s and early 1960s. There you saw people who supported the Civil Rights movement. They cared about equality. But what happened to them? Where could they go in the late 1960s in the Goldwater & Nixon GOP?
Imagine you were a liberal Republican and watched Reagan cheer "States Riots!" near the site where 3 Civil Rights workers were slaughtered.
Some held their noses and focused on their bank accounts. Others left.
When you look at the GOP of the last 8 years, what respect of tolerance is there? According to Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II to be a liberal meant being a traitor. To be a patriot meant what? Blaming all social ills on brown people and liberals?
If you take out Social Conservatives from the Republican Party, whose left?
The GOP was hijacked in the early 80'S by populist "Huckabee" Evangelicals. They all come from the Jimmie Carter "bible belt camp" but switched over when Reagan asked for there vote. They use to hate Republicans but began to hate the social liberal attitudes of the Democrat party even more. As a result they held there nose and slowly took over the GOP. Today they call the original Republicans RHINOS when in fact its them. Proof of this how quickly under the guise of "morality" will using the government to force people to live there view of morality.This is also why Bush and others do not mind big spending because they are Democrats at heart.
Allow me to interject my perspective on this point as a means of expanding the issue a bit more. I will also focus on the "Black community" and that which I ASSUME are the "common goals" and "best interests" that we all are pursing in the process.
The way I see it - you all are focusing on what the "Republican Party must do to CHANGE and attract a more diverse set of people". I believe that you miss the point with such a reference.
I am not a Republican - I should add. I am more focused on holding the Democrats who dominate our community accountable as they grow in power more than I am concerned about helping the Republican party to grow.
That's just it! Today the Democratic Party and the progressives hold more power and more elected districts in Black America than at any other time in history. To many Blacks who have fused their concept of racial progress with their party's progress they believe that "They are winning as so are WE!".
The statistics on the matter prove otherwise. Going on my assumption that the Black community's common interests which initiated our political advocacy are:
* Quality Education for the development of our young people
* Safe Streets so that we can congregate with our own people without fear
* Economic Development so that we can employ and trade with each other
* Healthy Lifestyles so that we can live long, disease free lives
When you enumerate the present state of the Black community on all of these points - our core problems remain DESPITE the domination of the Progressive and the Democrat. In fact the erosion of some of the social order that had allowed us to get through brutal oppression from outside forces have been eroded as today it is internal cancer that threatens the lives and livelihood of more of our people.
I am in an ideological battle with the Progressive-Fundamentalist, NOT in a partisan battle seeking to buttress the Republican party. At the end of the day if we as a people were to shift and place our loyalties to the Republican party above our own interests - just as the case with the "Democrat who is Black" today - we lose as a people none the less.
If your goal is to "spread the mindshare" among the people and thus among the parties then it seems clear to me that the call is to get our people to commit to our common goals as listed above and not the METHODOLOGY (ie: progressivism through a party in the American Political system) to obtain it.
There needs to be an up or down vote as we scrutinize the EFFECTIVENESS of the prevailing course. The question of "Are we EFFECTIVELY obtaining our common goals as we yield the power of our vote to a given movement?"
The smoke surrounding Obama has long time thugs and anarchists who last year were spitting on the American flag to now get people registered to vote in the name of their hope of receiving "justice long denied". Few people make note that THEY THEMSELVES represent the biggest threat to our people and our ability to order ourselves toward prosperity. I believe that the hype will pass and the reality will set back in within a few years.
The question is - What will the Black Conservative to in the way of SPEAKING THE TRUTH about how our people have been manipulated by "fake hope"? The thought of outsources the vital community elements that we should be doing among ourselves to the government only weakens us and makes us more vulnerable in the future as political and ideological tides change. Besides all of that - What are we made beholden to as we receive our basic subsistence from the system in the name of "RIGHTS" rather than expressing them through our own efforts on a more local basis?
The best way for you to reach your goal of political diversity in Black America is to begin to speak the TRUTH to Black America and prevent the operatives from moving the goal posts as they blame the SYSTEM for failing us while obtaining more power within the system yet shifting their blame further out. A hollow shell will always implode.
You can no longer fear being called names for going against the Black Power Structure. Just as the American government and the White Power Structure needed to be rattled before they did right for the people - it is clear to me that the Black Power Structure (which is beholden to the Democrats) are at this same point in their own development.
Call them out as sellouts and have the facts at hand to bear this out.
Today, Powell’s endorsement of Obama says everything that I was thinking; the Republican Party is controlled by the Religious Right and Social conservatives at the expense of more libertarian and moderate conservatives
Ethnicity nor diversity has anything to do with Powell's endorsement of Obama. The evangelicals were worse in the 80's and early 90's when roe v wade was challenged in the Supreme Court. And don't forget it was the DEMOCRAT CLINTONS who supported Don't ask don't tell and the Marriage act
It was race pressure, pure and simple. Obama was a Muslim, but he converted, so why did Powell bring it up? Because he needed an excuse. Let's face it. As black folk, we are extremely internal and exclusive. If Powell promoted Mc or even kept neutral, he would be marked as an Uncle Tom for life.
Why would a former Secretary of State - one who knows the world and its governments are not nice - promote a man who could not even fulfill his promise of decent housing for his people?
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/27/grim_proving_ground_for_obamas_housing_policy/
Post a Comment