Few Minorities present at GOP Convention…

As I reported earlier this week, there is a severe paucity of Blacks attending the 2008 Republican National Convention. Many pundits have suggested that the Republican Party is in need of some serious soul searching to determine its role in a nation that is becoming more black and brown each day.

Pardon the pun, but what makes the blackout all the more baffling is that significant portions of so-called conservative thought are palatable to individuals of all races. Blacks and other minorities are strong believers in God, country and the notion that faith and works lead to success in America. Why, then, are so few people of color involved in a party that touts itself as the purveyor of such ideals?

Historians have long noted that President Lyndon B. Johnson remarked to then aide Bill Moyers that by signing the Civil Rights Act in 1964, that he had “just delivered the South to the Republican Party.”

Statistics have certainly proved LBJ to be prescient as the GOP has had a strangle hold on Southern politics since 1968. Additionally, many of the staunch Democratic segregationists, like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, took their warped views with them to the GOP.

This is not to suggest that all modern Republicans share the outdated thinking of Thurmond and Helms. But it is certainly true that the GOP has been, and continues to remain, comfortable with the use of race as a wedge issue when politically expedient. (N.B.--this is not absolve Bill Clinton for doing the same this year…but that is another column for another time).

The earliest example of such behavior was Richard Nixon’s promise to establish “law and order” in the wake of the protest movements and riots that occurred following Dr. Martin Luther King’s death in 1968.

In 1980, conservative icon Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy in Philadelphia, Mississippi, a small town that was only famous because it was where the bodies of slain civil rights workers James Chaney, Michael Shwerner and Andrew Goodman were found brutally lynched in 1964. Why would Reagan announce in such a place, being that he was born in Illinois and rose to prominence as a Hollywood actor and Governor of California, unless he was sending a subtle racial signal to white southern voters to reject fellow Southerner Jimmy Carter, who was certainly a champion of civil rights?

Similarly, Reagan’s “welfare queen” comments were precursors to the continuing stereotypes of Blacks being the main beneficiaries of government handouts, a lie that fails to acknowledge that far more whites participate in government assistance programs.

In 1988, Republicans thought that the Willie Horton ad was a masterpiece because it showed that Dukakis, who supported a program that allowed Horton a furlough that ended in his robbing a white man and raping his girlfriend, was soft on crime. To blacks, it was subtle code that blacks were criminals to be feared.

Lest we forget earlier this decade when then GOP Senator Trent Lott extended his famous toast to Strom Thurmond, where he stated that had Thurmond won the presidency as a Dixiecrat in 1968 that “we would not have had all of these problems.” What problems, Senator Lott? Are you referring to the “problem” of blacks being afforded their Constitutional rights to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?” Or are you talking about the faux problems that blacks and minorities are taking away scholarships, contracts and money from the good old boys?

Which brings me to my all time favorite example of political race baiting, which is Jesse Helms’ 1990 ad in his Senate race against then Charlotte mayor Harvey Gantt, a black man. The ad depicted a white hand crumbling a rejection letter while the voice over remarked “You needed that job and they just had to give it to a minority.” Such an insidious classic is worthy of induction in the “Race Card Hall of Fame” if one is ever established.

With such a history of coded messages, one has to ask what exactly is meant by the “Put the Country First” slogans that have been prominently featured at this week’s GOP convention. Last time I checked, I did not know that Democrats were placing America second. Is such a slogan benign, like God Bless America? Or is it code, like our America, the one from fifty years ago that certainly did not look the one we inhabit today.

It is not just black journalists noticing he lack of diversity this week either. Yesterday I had the fortune of attending a forum entitled “Bridging the Political Divide in the 2008 Presidential Election” that was sponsored by the University of Southern California Annenberg School of Communication and Politico.com. The panelists included MSNBC pundit Roger Simon and Fox News contributor Nina Easton, among others.

After the program, Tom Helin, a journalist from Saint Paul, Minnesota posed a question to me and my friend Sharon Toomer, founder and editor of blackandbrownnews.com. Helin asked “why doesn’t the GOP engage Blacks and Hispanics more openly.”

Ah yes, such a short, yet profound question.

While the Party often promotes its endeavors to reach out to minority communities to create a “Big Tent”, the truth is that the message gets lost when images of an almost all-white convention are beamed from Minnesota this week. Dr. David Bositis of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies has reported that there are only 36 Black delegates in attendance out of a total of 2,380 delegates. That number is down from the 167 Blacks that attended in 2004.

CNN analyst Jeff Toobin described it as the GOP being a “Party of Old White guys” with no apparent “diversity.” In analyzing former Senator Fred Thompson’s speech last night, Republican David Gergen, also a CNN contributor, lamented that there is “so much hatred.” Gergen also suggested that the eventual winner may have “difficulty uniting the country because of the rampant partisanship.”

It remains to be seen whether Gergen’s prediction will ultimately ring true.

With respect to blacks, what is amazing is that Republican leaders have not been successful at tapping into the fact that many of the perceived strengths of the Republican Party, including the belief in lower taxes and faith based initiatives, is attractive to an overwhelming majority of Blacks.

The reason these same Blacks refuse to join, however, is because of the perception that there is a hint of hypocrisy in the GOP message.

For example, while I continue to argue strenuously that Bristol Palin’s pregnancy should not be politicized; many of my closest Black colleagues have argued that it most certainly is an issue because of the Republican Party’s “holier than thou” attitude with respect to “family values.” These friends argue that if the Governor is so family oriented, then why is she choosing her personal ambition over her duties to her 5 month old son and her 17 year old child that is soon to give birth.

That is a tough question because at the root of such analysis is whether a woman’s role is in the home or in the workplace. To me, that decision must be made by the individual alone, free from any second guessing by others. However, I certainly get the point that is being made, which is that some conservative leaders have made questionable decisions or lived outright sordid lives and yet continue to proselytize through ideology that they personally ignore.

I have met several wonderful Black Republicans this week that are deeply committed to improving the conditions of the less fortunate. It is interesting to note that some of the black delegates that I have approached have been either skeptical, or outright reticent to speak to me. Among these, there are three general types that I have observed or met this week.

The first type is the rank opportunist, the individual that candidly states that his or her business deals hinge upon their GOP contacts.

Then there are the overly jovial types, the one’s speaking and laughing loudly as they walk the streets of Saint Paul, overcompensating for their insecurities by acting as if they just won the Lottery.

The third group consists of individuals wearing a perpetual scowl, those who see the pen and pad in my hand and run away as if I am a liberal demagogue sent to “out” them.

This would almost be amusing if it wasn’t so tragic. Since I am here as a freelance journalist, not as a lawyer or former member of the GOP, I have rarely revealed that I know all about the feeling of swimming upstream, which is the feeling that some Black Republicans get when they realize that they are only a tangential portion of the greater milieu.

Blacks are not the only minorities feeling slighted either. Luis Ruiz, a young Latino journalist from El Paso, Texas who also attended last week’s Democratic Convention, called the lack of minority participation “ominous.” Ruiz described the Democratic Convention as a “celebration where people from different background were excited.”

Another minority who also weighed in was Darrell Paulsen, a vivacious yet physically challenged Saint Paul native who owns Paulsen & Company, Incorporated, a group that raises funds for individuals suffering from physical disabilities. Paulsen, who is a registered Independent, noted that it is “difficult living with the knowledge that millions of people remain uninsured.” Paulsen also questioned whether his and “his client’s quality of life would improve under another four years of Republican rule.”

The question that begs asking is why is there so much disconnect between the GOP and a significant portion of the American electorate? Yesterday, I posed a similar question to Roger Simon, the award winning pundit for Politico.com and MSNBC. Simon suggested that to determine if the GOP is paying “mere lip service” to diversity, one needs to look at “who the party slates for office on all levels.”

Good question.

In Florida, where GOP Governor Charlie Crist enjoys enormous popularity in the minority community, there are very few black Republicans holding office statewide. While it is easy to understand why blacks in majority black districts do not fare well as Republican candidates, why doesn’t the party do more to support black candidates in non-minority districts?

In Tallahassee, former NFL star Peter Boulware, a Republican, has garnered tremendous support in his run for the state house in a majority white district. Other than Boulware, where are the so called “black rising stars” that will emerge to take leadership roles in the state party? The same could definitely be said for the national party as well, as only one black, Renee Amoore, is scheduled to be a featured speaker at this week’s convention.

In the party’s defense, it can be concluded that more minority participation will ultimately yield more minority prominence within the party. This hints strongly at the proverbial “chicken or the egg theory” and I am uncertain as to which comes first in this instance.

What I do sense is that the GOP must take a serious look at is brand because there is a generation emerging that has no conscious memories of either Jim Crow or the early days of integration where race relations remained tense. This generation will not be interested in the divide and conquer tactics that have worked for the past three decades and will be hesitant to support a party that does not include a place at the table for all Americans.

GOP Platform is lacking…

Contributing to the minority disconnect is the Republican Party Platform, a 60 page document that serves as a roadmap for GOP policy consideration fro the next four years.

In a year in which the overwhelming majority of Americans are most concerned about economic issues including the high costs of gas, food and the foreclosure crisis, the first seven pages of this Platform are dedicated to the war, terrorism and illegal immigration. Each of these issues is important, but they highlight fundamental differences in concerns.

Most minorities support the idea of destroying Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden to justice, but remain skeptical about the unnecessary war in Iraq. While the troop surge that McCain touts most certainly worked, many minorities remain convinced that a surge would not have been needed had we not invaded Iraq in the first place.

As to the standard GOP counter-argument that Saddam was a dangerous leader that needed to be removed, so too is Chavez in Venezuela, Putin in Russia and Kim in North Korea. We have yet to mobilize and invade those nations.

Regarding Immigration, the platform bluntly states that “We oppose amnesty.” It also suggests tighter border security which includes “completing the border fence quickly.” This, in particular, will almost certainly deliver a sizeable number of Latino votes to Obama as the GOP, much like Nixon’s “law and order” ranting against Blacks, is pandering to the fear of illegal Latinos running amok in our cities and towns.

With respect to the War on Terror, it easy for minorities to support such a war as long as the president is honest about the goals and objectives. There is little evidence to suggest that McCain would be mendacious like the current regime with respect to Terror. The question is whether McCain would eliminate many of the executive orders that the current administration has used to tacitly support torture in Guantanamo and Iraq, which remains a great concern among minority voters.

Noticeably absent from the GOP platform is any language addressing the poor, the educational and achievement gaps among minorities or the revitalization of urban areas. Of course there is a substantial section beginning at page 47 that describes in great detail how the Republicans will “fight crime” and build more prisons to house more “gang members.” Few politically active minorities would argue that those who break the law and hold our communities hostage should remain free.

However, minorities are concerned about how the government would help ameliorate the conditions that lead to criminal behavior in the first place. What level of commitment will be provided to church and philanthropic groups that work to improve the lots of the poor and dispossessed that ultimately turn to crime because they have not developed a moral center to establish hope?

While silent to other minorities the Platform does provide for the “support of Native American Communities”, albeit with little specifics. The pertinent parts read:

“Republicans believe that economic self sufficiency is the ultimate answer to the challenges in Indian country and that tribal communities, not Washington bureaucracies, are better situated to craft local solutions.”

There you have it, beautiful prose that essentially repeats the age old GOP mantra of “less government” and “pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.” What troubles minorities is not the idea of self sufficiency---as it is patronizing to not recognize that minorities that have achieved have done so because of sheer will power and determination. One of the greatest lies that have been propagated over the past 30 years by Republicans and Democrats alike is that minority achievement is the result of government programs and handouts.

Yet minorities also understand that as taxpayers, the government does have a responsibility to provide financial assistance to build neighborhoods ravaged by storms (Katrina) or abject poverty. The basis of this belief is that the Federal government uses taxpayer dollars to bail out businesses (Chrysler in the 80’s, Mortgage companies now), to provide dollars to major contractors (Halliburton) and to provide billions to build other nations (Marshall Plan, Japan, and Iraq). Such hypocrisy is so ripe that it leads to minority skepticism and apathy to the Republican Party.

Join BBN for free to post a comment on this page.
If you already have an account, please login here to post a comment on this page.