ALEXANDRIA, VA — As the presidential campaign gets under way,
it is in the interest of all Americans that it be about what is the
best path to ensure a peaceful and prosperous future for our country.
Unfortunately, early indications suggest that appeals on the basis
of race will be a key ingredient in the contest.
In May, House Democrats were tutored by a George Soros-funded pressure
group, the Center for Social Inclusion, to “address the issue
of race to defend government progress,” reported the Washington
Examiner.
According to the Examiner, “The prepared content of a... presentation
to the House Democratic Caucus and staff indicates that Democrats will
seek to portray apparently neutral free-market rhetoric as being tinged
with racial bias, conscious or unconscious.”
Maya Wiley of the Center for Social Inclusion told the lawmakers that “conservative
messages” are “racially coded” and suggested ways
to combat them. In Ms. Wiley's estimation, the facts of matters in
question are not important. Rather, she said, “It’s emotional
connection, nor rational connection, that we need.”
She argued, for example, that Newt Gingrich’s labeling of President
Obama as a “food stamp president” cannot be “a race
neutral statement, even if Newt Gingrich did not intend racism.” Thus,
even though the food stamp program has grown dramatically in recent
years, and despite the fact that most recipients are white, to discuss
the question is somehow to engage in “racism.”
This same line of argument has been promoted by members of the Congressional
Black Caucus for some time. Rep. Andre Carson (D-Indiana) has said
that members of the Tea Party movement “would love to see us
(black Americans) as second class citizens…. Some of them would
love to see us hanging on a tree.”
Sadly, it is black spokesmen who bring race into the presidential
campaign far more than anyone else. Washington
Times columnist Wesley
Pruden notes, “The most pronounced... race-based voting, in fact,
was (in the 2008 presidential election) in predominantly black precincts.
One such precinct voted 100 per cent for Mr. Obama, percentages in
the high 90s were commonplace in black neighborhoods.... Maybe these
voters just can’t vote for someone of another race. Or, maybe
they're just taking pride in helping a black man do well. Maybe the
white vote against Mr. Obama isn’t about race, but reflects rage
against... [a] president who promised to change the old ways and now
reveals himself to be just another pol... with a scheme to divide and
conquer with the race card. We’ve heard this sad song before.”
One need not share Mr. Pruden’s assessment of the record of
the Obama administration to lament the injection of a racial component
to the current campaign.
The campaign team of Mitt Romney, it has been reported, is laying
plans for an outreach effort to black voters. According to The
Washington Post, “That plan, still in the early stages, ran into the harsh
political realities on the ground in Philadelphia... when Romney was
treated to a hostile welcome on his first campaign swing through a
poor black neighborhood this year. A few dozen protestors met him with
chants of ‘Get out, Romney, get out.’”
The Post reports that during Romney’s late-May visit, one Philadelphia
resident, Madaline G. Dunn, 78, told reporters that she has lived there
for 50 years and she is “personally offended” that he would
visit her neighborhood. “It is not appreciated here,” she
said. “It is absolutely denigrating for him to come here and
speak his garbage.”
Among those heckling Romney from a distance were some of Philadelphia's
most prominent officials, all of the Democrats. Mayor Michael Nutter
quipped that Romney had “suddenly somehow found west Philadelphia....
I don’t
know that a one-day experience in the heart of west Philadelphia is
enough to get you ready to run the United States of America.”
Tara Wall, a former Bush administration official, is a senior Romney
communications adviser and the most senior African-American on his
team. Recently, she said, “Yes, it’s a bit harder this
time. We have a black president. But we can’t go in with the
mindset that we aren’t going to win any people over to our side.
From a messaging standpoint, we need to be able to communicate and
relate to these communities about how they are being impacted by Obama’s
policies.... It’s not a ploy, it’s not a tactic, it’s
part of who we are. We have to show up.”
The latest Post-ABC News poll shows Romney receiving 5 percent of
the African-American vote to Obama’s 92 percent. The Post reports
that, “... there are signs that some of the support may have
eroded, as blacks have faced record high unemployment — according
to the Quinnipiac poll in Florida, Obama gets 85 percent of the black
vote, down from 95 percent in 2008.”
President Obama’s decision to back same-sex marriage has reframed
some of the conversation with the black community, especially among
pastors. Tara Wall says that Obama’s position on same-sex marriage
could give African-Americans with strong religious beliefs a reason
to look at Romney or to stay home. But Romney’s core message,
she said, will be about black businesses and the 13 percent unemployment
rate among blacks.
“The biggest factor is the economic situation that we, as black
folks, find ourselves in. It’s been horrendous,” Wall said. “All
we’re asking is that people at least give Romney a listen.”
Conservative commentator Star Parker, who is black, notes that, “It’s
not hard to understand why black Americans were happy that a black
man was elected president of the United States. It was kind of a final
and most grand announcement that racism has finally been purged from
America. But for the highly politicized parts of black America, this
was certainly not the only message. Because for the highly politicized
parts of black America, the point has always been to keep race in American
politics.... the point was not just equal treatment under the law,
but special treatment under the law.... The post-civil rights movement
black political culture embraced an agenda exactly the opposite of
what the civil rights movement was about.”
In her view, “Its agenda was to get laws and policies that
were not neutral but racially slanted and to put individuals in power
based on their race and not on their character and capability.”
Identity politics — voting for candidates for public office on the
basis of race, religion, gender, or ethnicity rather than on the basis
of their individual merit as candidates and the programs they advocate
for the country's future — is a challenge both to the very idea of
representative democracy and to the goal of men and women of good will
for a genuinely color-blind society. It is unfortunate that just as
white Americans have shown their willingness to vote for black candidates,
many black spokesmen reject the same color-blind approach to politics.
In the end, when voters decide whether to vote for Barack Obama or
his opponent, that choice should be made on the basis of whom the individual
voter believes would be best for our country — not on the basis of
the race, religion, or ethnicity of the candidate. Black Americans
want white Americans to adhere to that standard. They are right to
do so — but it is important that they adhere as well.
The Conservative Curmudgeon archives
The Conservative Curmudgeon is copyright © 2012
by Allan C. Brownfeld and the Fitzgerald
Griffin Foundation.
All rights reserved. Editors may use this column if this copyright information
is included.
Allan C. Brownfeld is the author of five books, the latest of which
is The Revolution Lobby (Council for Inter-American Security). He has
been a staff aide to a U.S. Vice President, Members of Congress, and
the U.S. Senate Internal Subcommittee.
He is associate editor of The Lincoln Reveiw and a contributing
editor to such publications as Human Events,
The St. Croix Review, and The Washington Report on Middle
East Affairs.
The Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation needs your help to continue making
these columns available. To make a tax-deductible donation, click
here.