I HAVE A DREAM
I went to go get my locs retwisted by the best loctician in Miami! It's the day after the election and black people in Miami, Florida, United States, and the PLANET have many reasons to celebrate.
Unlike most blacks, I didn't vote for Barack Obama because his belief's do not align with mine. Call me crazy, but I thought Martin Luther King's dream was that we judge people NOT by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, and Jeremiah Wright make me question Barack Obama's character.
So, here's my version of this hackneyed but important phrase...
I have a dream, that one day, black people will vote for politicians, not by party affiliation, color, and platitudes, but by their voting records, political affiliations, and platform. I have a dream TODAY!
Just a simple search and you find that black people tend to be politically conservative but vote overwhelmingly democrat. For example, most blacks are in favor of school choice vouchers which would give parents of students in decrepit school systems the chance to place their children in high performing private, public, and charter schools. Democrats, because of their love affair with teacher's unions are opposed to the idea.
Black people are also more socially conservative. The majority of blacks oppose same-sex marriage and abortion. Barack Obama has voted in the state legislature to keep partial birth abortions legal. President Elect-Obama is against a federal ban on Same-Sex Marriage.
I was sitting in the beauty shop today waiting to get my beautiful nappy kinky hair retwisted when politics slipped into the coversation. I know, I know it's taboo, but what better place to plant seeds of conservatism? I am usually liked by most black people until I divulge that I am a Black Republican. I usually get this blank stare or this look of utter bewilderment, and a comment like "Oh! Well!" I have painstakingly grown accustomed to that all too familiar look of contempt. I get it. I wonder who started that lie though, the one that Republicans are racist and Democrats are not? Republicans fought to end slavery, pushed for the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments, AND started the Civil Rights Movement. The list goes on and on.
If I thought a party was racist, enslaved blacks, kept black people psychologically enslaved and dependent on the government, didn't care about getting black people out of poverty and off of government assistance, I'd feel contempt too. Oh, wait, that's the Democrats. That's the reason why I have disavowed the democratic party. Most people are not cognizant of the fact that the KKK was started by Southern Democrats who opposed the Republican's helping Blacks claim their constitutional rights.
Anyways, I attempted to engage in a dialogue about how Mccain's views aligned more with mine. She asked me, "WHY?" in an interrogating way. I simply stated that he believed in less government, deregulation of the markets, the pro-life movement, and supply-side economics which would help our economy fare better. I cordially explained to her that I was sick of Democrats telling black people they can't accomplish anything without government assistance. I also told her that I was sad that there are third generational blacks still on welfare from the Great Society Programs of the 60s. I told her that I believe we can do better. We HAVE done better, especially before those programs that played a hand in destroying the black family.
She didn't care. She actually told me I'm focusing too much on blacks and that I needed to open my mind. I'm sure all she heard was white noise after she found out I was a conservative. I forgive her.
I believe that Martin Luther King's dream of judging someone by the content of their character can be realized one day. Unfortunately, the presidential race of 2008 doesn't prove that his dream has been realized. A large part of Barack Obama's victory has to do with his race. He was a community organizer/junior senator who rose to stardom, virtually overnight. It's not that I can't be celebratory. Part of me is happy we are moving into a new chapter of American politics. I am, however, weary of his economic policy faux-pas and would rather the American people choosing the president who will utilize free-market conservative principles that have historically worked. I'll keep dreaming.
Vanessa,
What a fantastic article! I actually had the very discussion about MLK's "I have a dream speech."
Sadly, substance was not on the table this election cycle. Obama was in fact elected due only to his race.
It's a pity. I think of great black men that would be great Presidents such as J.C. Watts, Thomas Sowell, and Walter E. Willams.
However, despite the damage he and his democrat houses do to this nation, he will be hailed as one of the greatest presidents ever- only because of the color of his skin.
Great luck on your blog and I am thrilled you have chosen to enter the world of blogging. I look forward to watching you grow.
Reply to this
I found your blog quite interesting & selective in the recollection of factual history. The Voting Rights Act was was passed not by a Republican but by a Democrat, Lyndon Johnson. This legislation guaranteed African Americans the right to vote. In fact, The Democrat's support of this legislation created what political scientists called the "Solid South" for almost 40 years to come for Republican Politicans enduring in many Southern States today including Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, & Louisiana. White Democrats flocked into large numbers to the support of The Republican Party. The support of White Republicans has remained to this day excluding Virginia, North Carolina, & Florida. More importantly, the doctrine of separate but equal established by Plessy v Ferguson 1898 was overturned by a variety of Supreme Court Decisions starting with Brown v The Board of Education Topeka 1953 decided by a democratically appointed liberal court headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren. The men who overturned these doctrines of separate but equal & ended segregated lunch counters, segrated bus lines, & segrated hotel accommodations were democrats NOT Republicans. Republicans have consistently catered to White Republicans using code words such as welfare, crime, or voter fraud to disenfranchise minority voters. The Party of Lincoln bears no resemblance to the present day Republican Party. The African American Population broke their ties with the Republican Party during the 1920's over the racist policies of that party regarding recovery from a flood in 1922. Even more odd regarding the behavior of the Republican Party is their appointment of an African American to a Supreme Court Justice Position. Clarence Thomas was best characterized as a "black man who did not like black people." He reached his position of power with the benefits of affirmative action & other programs meant to benefit African Americans but as is said in the UK "he pulled the ladder up behind himself." In other words, he made it harder if not impossible for future African Americans to follow in his foot steps. So, do I see the Republican Party as the Party that seeks out the best interests for African American Citizens ? History speaks differently than their claims of actually favoring or offering help to African Americans. In college, I worked as a staffer in a Republican State Campaign office; The State Director looked at the polling numbers for the number of African Americans who voted for Republican Candidates. He continued to analyze the data; his final observation was that our efforts to make out reach to African American Voters was pointless because they did not vote for Republican Candidates in the first place. I won't repeat the expletive that he used. I think that my analysis sums up the history of the Republican Party's Historical Help and Inclusion of African American & People of Color. Gay & Lesbian people receive similar inclusion.-L-
Reply to this
"I found your blog quite interesting & selective in the recollection of factual history. The Voting Rights Act was was passed not by a Republican but by a Democrat, Lyndon Johnson. This legislation guaranteed African Americans the right to vote. In fact, The Democrat's support of this legislation created what political scientists called the "Solid South" for almost 40 years to come for Republican Politicans enduring in many Southern States today including Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, & Louisiana. White Democrats flocked into large numbers to the support of The Republican Party. The support of White Republicans has remained to this day excluding Virginia, North Carolina, & Florida"
I appreciate your response. But, I don’t think it’s my recollection that’s “selective.” The Voting Rights act of 1965 was not the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement, we know unequivocally that the Republicans started it…. But I’m glad you brought it up. Let’s take a look at the numbers because we can both agree that numbers aren’t subjective---but objective. During that time (1965), the Republicans were the minority in both the house and the senate. According to the conference report, 74% of Senate Democrats, and 96% of Senate Republicans voted for the Voting Rights act of 1965. In the house 80% of Democrats, and 85% of house Republicans voted for the Act----which proves my point that Republicans have always historically been more in favor of helping Blacks. Lyndon B. Johnson signed the bill because of violence to blacks and white republicans who were helping blacks vote . The Voting Rights act of 1965 was an extension of the 15th amendment to the constitution pushed by…Republicans. In no way shape or form was the Voting Rights Act the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement…If one looks at the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the republicans voted in favor of the act at a higher percentage than the democrats also……countless examples in history…just let me know and I’ll list them ALL!
More importantly, the doctrine of separate but equal established by Plessy v Ferguson 1898 was overturned by a variety of Supreme Court Decisions starting with Brown v The Board of Education Topeka 1953 decided by a democratically appointed liberal court headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren. The men who overturned these doctrines of separate but equal & ended segregated lunch counters, segrated bus lines, & segrated hotel accommodations were democrats NOT Republicans.
Brown vs. Board of education ended de juro segregation, but it is well known that we are now living in de facto segregation. My point of bringing up the segregated classrooms was that Blacks were actually learning in those classrooms. The jury is still out on whether desegregation has helped blacks…I have read several studies that actually say desegregation hurt achievement of Black students. The books were outdated, the facilities were sub-par, but there was education actually taking place without the millions and billions of dollars that are currently being wasted on decrepit inner city schools.
"Republicans have consistently catered to White Republicans using code words such as welfare, crime, or voter fraud to disenfranchise minority voters. The Party of Lincoln bears no resemblance to the present day Republican Party. "
How is the party of Lincoln different from the Republican Party today? I’ve read the tenets of Lincoln’s republicanism, and they are quite similar...I’m confused, are you saying that Lincoln republicans were not pro-individual, less government, deregulation, and anti-taxation…like the republicans of today??? I’d like you to elaborate on what’s different about them now…..???
"The African American Population broke their ties with the Republican Party during the 1920's over the racist policies of that party regarding recovery from a flood in 1922. "
My understanding history is that African Americans, though socially conservative like most republicans, began to vote overwhelmingly democrat after the New Deal Programs of FDR. Also, during the 60’s when Goldwater (R) was against the Civil Rights Act --- Kennedy (D) was pro, MLK endorsed Kennedy---85-90%… further split with the republicans and voted democrat…the irony is that most of the Black pioneers of the civil rights movement still vote republican…I wonder why…??? I’m really not sure of what flood you’re talking about……but still interested to read more about it…
"Even more odd regarding the behavior of the Republican Party is their appointment of an African American to a Supreme Court Justice Position. Clarence Thomas was best characterized as a "black man who did not like black people." He reached his position of power with the benefits of affirmative action & other programs meant to benefit African Americans but as is said in the UK "he pulled the ladder up behind himself."
Hm, please give me specific examples of how Clarence Thomas used affirmative action to get to where he is? I here liberals toot that point ad nauseum, but I’d really like some hard facts. I also find it offensive that liberals think that blacks need programs like Affirmative Action to make it. I haven’t quite decided how I feel about Affirmative Action----yet, but I can tell you that that sentiment does turn me off. What I think you’re saying is that blacks can’t reach high positions of government without a ‘program’? So meritocracy is out of the question, right? Before “Affirmative Action” we accomplished a lot…we didn’t emerge into academia, the sciences, healthcare, and education post affirmative action…we did it the same way white people do…What’s funny is that affirmative action is supposed to be for women too, but we never here liberals saying that when it’s a woman in a high ranking position. When Reagan appointed Sandra Day O’Connor, was she appointed due to affirmative action?
The other problem with Affirmative Action is that every black person that “makes” it is now a poster child for Affirmative Action. No one thinks, “Wow!” He/she must have been really smart to get that high up. What people think is well, they only picked him because he was black. As noble as the idea of Affirmative Action is, it denigrates the accomplishments of many blacks. Sadly, most people don’t see how your very idea actually hurts most blacks who made it by pulling their own bootstraps.
Clarence Thomas is against affirmative action because race based preferences are unconstitutional, and unlike many liberals, he believes that black people can “make” it on their own…I wonder how we survived without it???…So I’d like you to elaborate on how he cut the ladder off for blacks when he believes in blacks peoples inherent ability to climb the corporate ladder without these ‘programs’
"In college, I worked as a staffer in a Republican State Campaign office; The State Director looked at the polling numbers for the number of African Americans who voted for Republican Candidates. He continued to analyze the data; his final observation was that our efforts to make out reach to African American Voters was pointless because they did not vote for Republican Candidates in the first place. I won't repeat the expletive that he used. I think that my analysis sums up the history of the Republican Party's Historical Help and Inclusion of African American & People of Color. Gay & Lesbian people receive similar inclusion.-L-"
I don’t know what expletive he used, but that’s not important to me. What is important is the fact that this State Director stated a fact. No matter the facts or how democratic legislation hurts blacks more than it helps blacks, blacks still overwhelmingly vote democrat. I can testify that the majority of black people I know hold conservative beliefs but because they think the republican party is racist, they continue to vote for democrats. As far as the Gay and Lesbians, I and many Blacks don’t like to compare the plight of African Americans to that of the Homosexual Movement. It’s completely and inherently different. But there are definitely Gay Republicans. I’ve read interesting articles by Gay Republicans. One of the groups is called the Log-Cabin Republicans…
Reply to this
You do realize that those people who were Republicans then aren't now and vise versa? Dixiecrat, Jesse Helm and his ilk ring a bell.
Most republicans from that era would have found the religious right vulgar, extreme and dogmatic. Hence the lack of New England and Rockefeller Republicans the days. This happens when people mix conservative and republican up.
Reply to this
So true! People tend to get mixed up with the terms conservative and republican, or even consider then to be the same thing. The old democratic and republican parties are both unrecognizable today from what they were in the early and mid 20th century.
Reply to this
Excellent article Vanessa. Becoming a Conservative is like being Born Again - you finally "get it", and those around you mock you because they just don't understand.
All we can do now is educate ourselves in Conservatism by studying the Bible, Capitalism, free markets, and praying for ourselves and others.
Keep up the good work Vanessa!
Reply to this
Wow, great stuff!
I can't really add anything else to this entry because you nailed everything. But just to reinforce your point about most black people's politics being more to the right than the left, have you seen this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU
It's from the Howard Stern show, which I'm normally not a fan of. He sent a guy out to Harlem to interview people, and of course they were all voting for Obama. But the twist is that he states all of McCain's positions as if they are Obama's... and they all agree that we should stay in Iraq until we finish the war, that abortion is wrong, and that Sarah Palin would make a good VP - when they are told that's what Obama stands for! In my experience, his white supporters (especially the younger ones) are equally as ignorant!
This video is a must-see, and it would be a lot funnier if we weren't electing the most powerful man on Earth. This election was never about the issues, it was a personality contest, and everyone knows it...
Reply to this
Yup personality contest is all this election was. Now we are stuck with The One. Sigh!!!
Reply to this
- "He reached his position of power with the benefits of affirmative action & other programs meant to benefit African Americans but as is said in the UK he pulled the ladder up behind himself."
Maybe Justice Thomas recognizes that there’s a huge difference in the necessity of Affirmative Action programs in 1968 vs. 2008.
Reply to this
I gotta ask, does it really make sense for you to quote King when the man was an AVID and proclaimed socialist? Do you really think his background as a socialist (a hardcore one at that) has no relation to the conviction and effort he had in fighting for Civil Rights?
Reply to this
Are you saying that he was a staunch advocate of civil rights because he espoused socialism? Because, following your logic, what about the conservatives that were active in the civil rights movements...were they then active because of their conservative beliefs?
Reply to this
You're completely entitled to your opinions, but I have to ask...
Don't you think it's a bit strange for you to be quoting and praising a man who was an avid SOCIALIST? You often criticize viewpoints which differ from your own as a result of ignorance, yet here King would (and does in his writings) disagree with a lot of what you say.
So what about the MLK Jr. who said "There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism." Surely you don't think that King's political stances were divorced from his activism?
Maybe instead of wasting your breath calling everyone, particularly those in the black community, ignorant and misguided you should consider that there are benefits in both liberalism and conservatism that should be genuinely weighed out. You have genuinely ignorant and uninformed people on every side of these arguments; you can waste your time focusing on them or actually address the legitimate points the informed opposition has.
Reply to this
I completely disagree with socialism and liberalism--- I don't care who the messenger is...I loathe the message...
With that being said, I am also aware that Martin Luther King's ideas were very much socialistic in nature.
The point of my post was that Black people think that Martin Luther King's dream was actualized by the election of Obama. Again, King's dream was that people should NOT be judged by the color of their skin, but by the CONTENTs of their character....The fact that the media was almost totally fixated on his race--- ALL the time -----made it difficult for many people to fully decipher the man OBAMA , his platform...with the first mainstream BLACK man RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT...
I don't think it's wrong of me to quote King at all. ... King's socialistic ideas isn't what I was debating (that's another topic)...it's this media fixation on Martin Luther King "dream" and Obama that doesn't seem to conflate in my mind---especially because his message was that he hopes, one day, we will be a society that will move past these artificial categories or social constructs....
I also don't think quoting a pioneer of the civil rights movement, who just happens to believe in socialism, is mutually exclusive with my repudiation of socialism & liberalism....
.........In other words, YOU can represent something that is totally contrary to my worldview, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate a valid point that you make and even quote that valid point in a blog....
Telling people to move past a place where they only see color....and they vote the next leader of the free-world because of COLOR is NOT...wasting my breath or time...especially if this person's worldview is completely opposite from theirs...My challenge to Black people is that we inform ourselves of the issues---look at what BOTH sides will present to the table---- and make a decision based on THAT...not color... or party line....I strongly desire for us (Black people) to move past the monolithic vote...
The good thing about me being vocal about conservatism is that many Black people have actually told me how shocked they were about what liberalism REALLY means ----and that from here on in they won't just GIVE their votes away...I'm sorry you think me challenging people to expose themselves to facts is a 'waste of my breath'...I will gladly continue to challenge people, and I will gladly accept challenges back... I welcome the opportunity to learn, share, and express ideas...that's the point of this blog...
Reply to this
You're points are well taken in terms of being allowed to like things and not other things about a person's ideology.
It just seems to me that you often dismiss the entirety of what people (say Obama for instance) based solely on the criticism that they are "socialist".
And as I said before, I think it's foolish to use example about how you've met people who are ignorant and can't explain their liberalism as a sign that somehow their entire political ideology is ignorant. It's a simple fallacy. I guarantee you for every ignorant liberal you find that doesn't have a clue how/why they voted for Obama I can find an equally ignorant conservative who doesn't know why they wanted McCain. It's a fruitless pursuit.
Regardless, I think you also short change black people a lot on this blog. You claim you want to enlighten the community by teaching them the ways of conservatism, but I think it's really unfair to assume that THAT many people are so uninformed. Most of the people I know made their decision for Obama not based on skin color but because they liked his policies better. In fact, I can't recall a single election where so many people I knew were as versed in the policy debates as in this past election.
You also miss something very important about Obama's blackness. While yes there are some people out there who voted for him to either alleviate white guilt or out of blind solidarity, Obama has openly and repeatedly addressed the ideas that problems effecting the black community are not some kind of niche problems that should be an afterthought in policy making, but rather be considered just as important. In other words, Obama is making the essential historic step of addressing what are usual called "black problems" and turning them into "American problems". Regardless of your policy stances, I think you have to see why this is incredibly important to people.
Reply to this
It just seems to me that you often dismiss the entirety of what people (say Obama for instance) based solely on the criticism that they are "socialist".
I don't dismiss what people have to say just because they are labeled "socialist." I dismiss socialism because it doesn't work. Whenever there is an issue, I see what the liberals and conservatives have to say. Then I see which "plan" has worked or failed historically. For example, based on my income bracket, (under Obama's plan) I would be part of the group receiving a tax "break"...(I am a school counselor, so I don't make alot of money). Obama's plan is to penalize high earners in the name of "fairness" "justice" and "equality"....since when was capitolism about making everyone economically homogenous? He wants to raise taxes on the "rich" because that's allegedly equitable. ... He also wants to raise taxes so that the government can get more revenue to expand social welfare programs...(universal healthcare, abortion etc.) Historically when there is an economic downturn it is more beneficial to CUT taxes....not raise them....
The US income tax was not constitutionally permitted until 1913 with the passage of the 16th amendment. In the past 100 or so years there have been four episodes of significant tax rate reductions. These reductions occured in the 1920s under Harding then Coolige (after woodrow wilson raised taxes like crazy because of WWI), 1960s under JKF (LBJ, Nixon, Ford, and Carter raised taxes, regulated, and regulated some more LIKE CRAZY and caused inflation, and unemployment (misery index) to SKYROCKET, SO WHO HAD TO CLEAN UP THEIR ''LET'S GROW GOVERNMENT MORE EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T WORK"????? none other than Reagan in the 1980s...who deregulated, CUT inflation, cut taxes, created MILLIONS and MILLIONS of JOBS and introduced millions of middle class average americans to the world of investing....and cleaned up the last four presidents MESS! (two republicans and two democrats ironically enough) ---no conservatives...
The last tax cut was in the 2000s under Bush jr ( In 03 when Bush cut the income tax, dividend, and capitol gains tax, 8 millions NEW jobs were created and the stock market grew until about 1 year go...when we started to see signs an impending recession)
In each of these instances the tax cuts were projected to cause government revenue loss but in each of these instances the government revenues increased because the economy responded positively to the lower tax rate...My point is that it's not the 'perception' of evil that I criticize--- it is the EVIL of punishing the members of society that produce...(especially because as they go up the economic ladder they pull lots of others with them)when business owners get tax cuts, they can pass those onto consumers by lowering prices of goods/services and create more jobs...when they are taxed up the wazoo the opposite happens...Obama is a handsome, charismatic socialist who I really really wanted to beleive in...until I checked what his keynesian prcinciples mean for EVERYONE...
Regardless, I think you also short change black people a lot on this blog. You claim you want to enlighten the community by teaching them the ways of conservatism, but I think it's really unfair to assume that THAT many people are so uninformed. Most of the people I know made their decision for Obama not based on skin color but because they liked his policies better. In fact, I can't recall a single election where so many people I knew were as versed in the policy debates as in this past election.
I'm happy you've met people that understand the difference between supply side economics and keynesians economics. Unfortunately, I haven't met those people...The people I met said "Bush sucks! I hate him. He is the worst president. He screwed up the economy. He is an idiot! Barack obama will change things! Barack Obama will 'help' poor people by taking money away from greedy rich people!'
Um, by the way, there were white liberals that made the EXACT same statements...The reason why I talk about people that look like me is because those are the people I am most concerned about unbrainwashing...I'm not short changing anyone, i am simply stating my experiences...I'm glad you talk to people that actually understand the issues...
You also miss something very important about Obama's blackness. While yes there are some people out there who voted for him to either alleviate white guilt or out of blind solidarity, Obama has openly and repeatedly addressed the ideas that problems effecting the black community are not some kind of niche problems that should be an afterthought in policy making, but rather be considered just as important. In other words, Obama is making the essential historic step of addressing what are usual called "black problems" and turning them into "American problems". Regardless of your policy stances, I think you have to see why this is incredibly important to people.
Addressing these issues with words, platitudes, and rhetoric is hardly what is going to fix the problems. As far as I'm concerned he is just going to expand the Great Society Programs of LBJ...and those programs did wonders for the black family, right? Moynihan, though labeled a racist was right about what those programs would do...
I'm not going to give Barack Obama credit for stating the obvious....especially because he wants to expand the same programs that failed the Black family...yup...that makes lots of sense...
What you don't realize is that I listened really really really hard to Obama...really hard...
Trust me, I am NOT the one shortchanging people that look like me...I believe in my people, I believe in our resiliency, our ingenuity, and our inherent ability grow out of the worst conditions (slavery, jim crow...etc)....what I don't want is liberals telling people that look like me that we need more'programs' to 'fix' us...we were better off without them...
Reply to this
I too have met so many people who were greatly uninformed. They could not verbalize what the candidate's positions were, they only knoew that they were discontent and they thought we needed "change" and "hope". I am sure there are many uniformed conservative voters also, but I would argue that there are WAY more uniformed liberal voters because of the clear media bias. I think Vanessa is doing a great job in educating people about what the issues are. Focusing on people who are uninformed is not a waste of time. That is like saying that educating the uneducated is a waste of time. As long as she speaks the truth and does not misrepresent facts, it can only be good. Even if people learn the facts and continue to vote liberal, at least they know what they are voting for. I would prefer that to what happened in this election.
Thanks Vanessa for the great posts!
Reply to this