Touche! I agree with your analogy jameseb.jameseb said:Mustang, my friend.....Now surely you realize this would be like Bush going to the DNC looking for votes.
When was the last time a republican candidate had the problems of the disenfranchised truly in mind?Seriously, when is the last time a Republican was endorsed over a Democrat by the NAACP?
2001MustangGT said:Touche! I agree with your analogy jameseb.
I guess that, to me, the coverage in the media about this, including many network and cable stations, and print media, kinda painted it like a negative thing, and thats not good for Bush.
Even if Bush did go and he wasnt well received, if he put out that good faith like that, (and done the good Christian thing), how could it have possibly been as negative or more negative than the attention he got from not going?
Vylo said:When was the last time a republican candidate had the problems of the disenfranchised truly in mind?
jameseb said:So..... I ask again.... when was the last time the NAACP endorsed a Republican for president?
Preach it! Gary Sinise lookalike! (I hope you don't mind me calling you that.)jameseb said:The president was right to turn down the NAACP.
Liberal bellies are aching these days over President George W. Bush's absence from this week's Philadelphia convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Citing scheduling conflicts, the White House recently sent the president's regrets. As journalists have explained in grave and slightly damning tones, Bush is the first president since Warren Harding not to address the NAACP. The insinuation is that Bush's no-show before America's oldest and largest civil-rights group reflects his neglect of, if not disdain for, black Americans.
No one should be surprised, however, to see Bush toss the NAACP's invitation into the trash. That's exactly where the Baltimore-based organization has relegated him since 2000. NAACP chairman Julian Bond and president Kweisi Mfume have played tag team in bashing Bush and the GOP.
"So, we've got...a president that's prepared to take us back to the days of Jim Crow segregation and dominance," Mfume told Washington journalist Hazel Trice Edney just last week. Mfume either is lying through his teeth or is clinically delusional if he believes Bush hopes to reintroduce segregated water fountains and "colored only" waiting rooms. Mfume should try the truth, or see a psychiatrist.
Bond's rhetoric is equally reckless.
Bush and the GOP "preach racial equality but practice racial division," Bond said June 23 in Indianapolis. "Their idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side."
Bond told the NAACP's July 2003 Miami Beach conference: "Republicans appeal to the dark underside of American culture, to that minority of Americans who reject democracy and equality."
President Bush "has selected nominees from the Taliban wing of American politics," Bond informed the NAACP's New Orleans confab on July 8, 2001, as the September 11 hijackers learned to fly. "He has appeased the wretched appetites of the extreme right wing. And he has chosen Cabinet officials whose devotion to the Confederacy is nearly canine in its uncritical affection."
No wonder Bush found a better use of his valuable time than to associate with these racial bomb throwers.
Far from dissing black Americans, Bush has met with them throughout his presidency. He attended the National Urban League's 2001 and 2003 conventions. He hosted a White House celebration of the 1964 Civil Rights Act's 40th anniversary. Urban League president Marc Morial was there, as was civil-rights veteran Dorothy Hite. He has spoken to black churchgoers about his faith-based initiative.
Mfume also whined that "the president has refused to meet with the Congressional Black Caucus."
There he goes again.
Bush, in fact, invited the all-Democratic CBC to the Cabinet Room on January 31, 2001. "They had a warm meeting," White House Assistant Press Secretary Anne Womack told me then. "It was scheduled for 30 minutes and actually lasted nearly an hour."
President Bush even has addressed...the NAACP. The day after Bond's "Taliban" outburst, Bush offered its 2001 convention a video greeting. "I believe that even when disagreements arise," Bush said, "we should treat each other with civility and with respect."
Bush appeared personally before the NAACP as a 2000 presidential contender. In thanks, it telecast an infamous ad that fall which virtually implicated Bush in the 1998 truck-dragging murder of James Byrd in Jasper, Texas. Never mind that two of this black man's three white killers were sentenced to death on Governor Bush's watch.
Yes, Bush should campaign before black Americans, but he should not bother to plead with black leftists who hate his guts. Instead, he should meet with moderate to conservative blacks who are open to and even supportive of his policies. The Congress of Racial Equality, the National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, and Project 21 as well as black business and religious groups would treat Bush respectfully.
Julian Bond, Kweisi Mfume, and their NAACP cronies should stop screaming like infants and learn this simple lesson: Don't expect grown adults to treat hand grenades like engraved invitations.
New York commentator Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a national-advisory-board member of Project 21, a Washington-based organization of black free-marketeers.
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200407130956.asp
'Nuff said.
Oil convention? That's a profession not a racial group.ufonium2 said:When is the last time the NAACP endorsed a Republican for president? Bush knows he can't get their endorsement no matter what, and the demographic that they primarily influence is not one that was ever going to vote for him anyway. So, I can see why he wouldn't think it's a crucial stop on his campaign.
I bet Kerry isn't addressing any Texas oil conventions either, for the same reason.
datan said:hm...
still no one wants to answer why bush decide to visit with them when he was a candidate but has since then refused to visit with them.
I wonder what changed?
HumbleMan said:no matter what your opinion of it is, he is saying he has no interest in hearing what a large part of American society has to say.
jsn112 said:Because hope of hope, Bush thought maybe there is a bridge. But you know what the saying is: Shame on you to do it to me once, shame on me if you do to me twice, right?
So, Bush is doing to the right thing.
datan said:hm...
still no one wants to answer why bush decide to visit with them when he was a candidate but has since then refused to visit with them.
I wonder what changed?
sad astronaut said:Preach it! Gary Sinise lookalike! (I hope you don't mind me calling you that.)
datan said:a 'bridge'?
you start building bridges after you become president, not before.
that doesn't make sense to think about reconciliation before he becomes president?
are you sure you aren't saying he is doing the right thing because well you're going to support him either way?
Larry said:Over 90% of the black community voted for Gore in 2000. Does anyone honestly believe that Bush declining to speak at the NAACP convention makes any difference?
And, to dismiss the notion of some, who think Bush as a racist, he will be speaking at the Urban League.
So..... I ask again.... when was the last time the NAACP endorsed a Republican for president?
Larry said:Over 90% of the black community voted for Gore in 2000. Does anyone honestly believe that Bush declining to speak at the NAACP convention makes any difference?
And, to dismiss the notion of some, who think Bush as a racist, he will be speaking at the Urban League.
jameseb said:And if anyone things Bush was wrong in declining the NAACP's invitation, I refer you back to the article I posted a couple pages back that, thus far, hasn't been challenged.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?