Saturday, October 20, 2012
I love reading Politic365 (shout out to Kristal and Lauren) and in the spirit of true disclosure I am a sometime contributor to the site.
Anyway, I saw an interesting and provocative article over there that I wanted to share with you. It was written by a man named Raynard Jackson, and he is clearly no fan of his Oness.
"With the presidential election right around the corner and most of the pundits saying the race is Obama’s to lose, I have begun to ponder the possibility that Romney might win and the impact that would have on the Black community.
Romney has been polling around zero percent of the Black vote. We all know that the usual Black liberal groups have sold out to Obama years ago – Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, Urban League, etc.
Romney, like Bush in 2000, will owe absolutely nothing to Blacks should he win the election. But, unlike Bush, I have no allusions that Romney will surround himself with the number of Blacks that Bush did. Romney will feel compelled to make some token hires, but not much beyond that.
This will lead to the above-named liberals to complain that Romney is ignoring Blacks and not being inclusive. But these same groups have yet to raise their voices to criticize Obama on the same issue. Bush had more Blacks in his administration than Obama or Bill Clinton. How’s that for a White supposed racist Republican?
So, how can they, credibly, hold Romney to a standard that they refused to hold Obama to?
Let’s assume that Romney agrees to meet with these liberals and they make their typical left-wing demands: higher minimum wage, amnesty for illegals, homosexual rights, input on hiring decisions, etc. If the current incarnation of Romney shows up, he will not agree to their demands.
So, how will they respond if Romney says to them, “Why should I do these things when Obama didn’t do them for you? Congressman Cleaver, will you promise not to march on the White House during my administration like you did for Obama? Mr. Jealous, if I don’t address your annual conference, like Obama, will you give me a pass because my schedule is supposedly full? Members of the CBC, if I tell you to stop complaining like Obama did, will you label me a racist, even though you didn’t call Obama a racist?”
If the first Black president ignores the Black community, how can we then make demands on the next White president, regardless of party? This is why having Blacks put all their votes in one party is so dangerous. We have absolutely no leverage if Romney wins the White House.
What’s amazing about the groups that claim to represent all Blacks is they all claim to be non-partisan. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.
On election night, should Romney win, he will say all the right things about wanting to be president for all of America, even those who did not vote for him.
But, in raw political terms, why should Romney engage with these liberals? They don’t represent the Black mainstream. They have been bought and paid for by the Democratic Party and the likes of George Soros." [More here]
Great questions from Mr. Jackson, but I have a couple for him:
What makes you think that Mitt Romney's policies would be any better for black people? Tax cuts for the uber rich so that they can build more companies and hire more people has been tried before, and it didn't work for the country at large. Trust me; it sure as hell won't work for black people.
Mr. Jackson takes simplistic view of politics in Washington and fails to factor in other issues which contributed to our current state of affairs: The senate minority leader vowed to make Obama a "one term president".
And these liberal progressive groups didn't go looking for black folks; black folks came looking for them. Why? Because most black people who work and struggle in these divided states of America realize that their (the progressive groups) policies serve their interests in a more practical way.
And why does the hiring of minorities have to be "token" hires?
Surely there must be qualified black (conservative republicans included) who would be able to contribute to Mitt's administration on issues from education and health to crime and other urban issues.
Sounds like Mr. Jackson is worried about his own political handouts from Mitt and company. He is saying that politics is all about giving to those who support you. OK, I can ride with that, but groups who are committed to a particular political ideology can't just pick a candidate and ride with him in hopes of getting handouts, later. Obama didn't give them all that they wanted, but would they have really gotten more under Romney?
That is the million dollar question, and only time will tell what the answer is.