Bush Supporters Here: Why the Left Hates Bush

[Teejay32]

Dan! Bet!

Funny meeting you guys here.

 

[bsnyder]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Actually, I did say "token black". Why I said it would take a very long response but here's the quick version:

When someone complains that Bush doesn't do x, y or z for the black community, Republicans immediately start pointing towards Powell and Rice as though it's some kind of proof that Bush and his party deserve the votes of black people.

President Bush doesn't point towards Powell and Rice as though it's some kind of proof.

Here's an excerpt of what he said in a speech to at the 2004 Urban League Conference, in July.

I believe you've got to earn the vote and seek it. I think you've got to go to people and say, this is my heart, this is what I believe, and I'd like your help. And as I do, I'm going to ask African American voters to consider some questions.

Does the Democrat party take African American voters for granted? (Applause.) It's a fair question. I know plenty of politicians assume they have your vote. But do they earn it and do they deserve it? (Applause.) Is it a good thing for the African American community to be represented mainly by one political party? That's a legitimate question. (Applause.) How is it possible to gain political leverage if the party is never forced to compete? (Applause.) Have the traditional solutions of the Democrat party truly served the African American community?

That's what I hope people ask when they go to the community centers and places, as we all should do our duty and vote. People need to be asking these very serious questions.

Does blocking the faith-based initiative help neighborhoods where the only social service provider could be a church? Does the status quo in education really, really help the children of this country? (Applause.)

Does class warfare -- has class warfare or higher taxes ever created decent jobs in the inner city? Are you satisfied with the same answers on crime, excuses for drugs and blindness to the problem of the family? (Applause.)

Those are legitimate questions that I hope people ask as this election approaches. I'd like to hear those questions debated on talk radio, I'd like it debated in community centers, in the coffee shops. It's worthy of this country for this debate to go forward and these questions to be asked and answered.

 

[Teejay32]

I've seen "token" mentioned, it's not that rare. I think it is a reflection on the administration more than Powell and Rice. People don't normally question whether or not they earned their jobs. On the other hand, I think people assume that the Bush administration needed some color in it - thus a black NSC person and Secretary of State.

I realize that makes little sense so here's a cite: http://www.africana.com/columns/cobb/ht20040719colin.asp
Yes, they're deserving; yes, they're tokens.

 

[Robinrs]

I have absolutely no problem with his wearing his beliefs on his sleeve, Bet...no one wears it more than I do. He even professes to listen to MY pastor on television!

That speech makes me sick. It just adds fuel to the fire about how we haven't put any thought as to who who choose to side with.

What people don't bother to realize is numbers and attitudes are two totally different things. Clinton befriended and made himself available to the Black community, in short, he never looked uncomfortable or unsure of being near or around us. I never felt that from George Bush. He gives us the impression that we don't matter and it comes across very loudly in his demeanor. I guess we're not part of the "haves and the have mores".

An interesting article by my old neighbor from Brooklyn, Juan Williams, points out some problems with that interpretation. http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/vote/26390.php
If he chooses to change, I'd be willing to listen, until then, I'll just see speeches like that as so much "rhetoric."

 

[peachgirl]

President Bush doesn't point towards Powell and Rice as though it's some kind of proof.

Does he make a speech saying those very words? Of course not. But just look at the comment in the piece that was posted:


"Thus the black leadership uses slurs such as "Taliban" and "Confederacy" even though no other president has selected an African-American secretary of Statea and national-security adviser or pledged so many billions for AIDS relief in Africa."


"EVEN THOUGH"??? What does that mean? That blacks shouldn't criticize Bush because he was good enough to select a black man or woman? I guess he's trying to say that blacks are just plain ungrateful for the generosity he has shown by hiring 2 black people. I suppose he's trying to prove that by selecting a black person for an important position it proves that he's in touch with the black community????

If Bush's intent isn't to score points by appointing black people, then why is it even ever mentioned? Of course Bush isn't going to say it in so many words, but that's his hope; that appointing a black person to an important position will show black voters just how "inclusive" he is.

He says this:

Is it a good thing for the African American community to be represented mainly by one political party?

My answer is no, it isn't. But since the Democratic party is the only party that cares to address issues that concern not just blacks, but minorities in general, it's all they've got.


When a party can garner 90% or more of an identifiable group...men, women, black, hispanic....it tells you something that cannot be argued with.

I think it is a reflection on the administration more than Powell and Rice

That was absolutely my intent. I have great respect for Colin Powell and believe both he and Condoleeza Rice are amazingly intelligent, capable people. They absolutely deserved their appointments, but that doesn't mean there weren't other reasons besides their qualifications that caused Bush to choose them.

 

[MikeB63]

Clinton befriended and made himself available to the Black community

It's my belief that Clinton "befriended" anyone he could to get their vote. Apparently it worked whether he was sincere or not. I always believe actions speak louder than words. That's why I point to the college funding. Not everyone's a gifted talker (or should I say bull****er).

As for the Juan Williams column, it was interesting and provoking, however, with respect to the NAACP and the James Byrd tragedy, the NAACP was wrong. Bush did not support further "hate crime" legislation in this case because Texas already had the death penalty. What further penalty could a convicted murderer face? What the NAACP leadership did in the media to George Bush for this issue was ridiculous. This was, in my opinion, a political motive by the NAACP leadership to hurt him. Just as their attempt to squash a black attorney's support for one of his judicial nominations from CA. If respected civil right's groups such as the NAACP choose to distort the truth and wrongly use their influence, it doesn't matter what politicians such as Bush do. Who would expect the black community to believe a white Repubican conservative over the NAACP?

 

[Island_Lauri]

Originally posted by bsnyder
He also openly embraces his religious faith, and I think that seems to rile a lot of people.

And so does Osama Bin Laden.

 

[Samsara]

Originally posted by Island_Lauri
And so does Osama Bin Laden.

Well said, Island Lauri!

 

[Kendra17]

Originally posted by Samsara
Well said, Island Lauri!

I came back to see what had transpired in my absence. . .I was so happy to see some very interesting comments and, then, look.

Do you realize, Samsara and Island Lauri, that you effectively stopped a really intelligent discussion with these ludicrous, offensive, and absolutely inane comments?

 

[peachgirl]

Do you realize, Samsara and Island Lauri, that you effectively stopped a really intelligent discussion with these ludicrous, offensive, and absolutely inane comments?

The only one that stopped the discussion was you.

Do you realize that you started in right where you left off? Telling people what they should and shouldn't say and tossing out insults?

Until you popped back in with your insults and slurs on posters, we were actually discussing at a fairly civil level.

Why don't you just try posting your own thoughts and let others post theirs. This mothering crap is getting real old.

Oh yeah, excellent point Island Lauri. There's a difference between being religious and using your religion.

 

[Teejay32]

Originally posted by Island Lauri
And so does Osama Bin Laden.

And so does the Pope. And Bishop Tutu. And Carmelite nuns. I don't see the point.

I do see the point of the black community supporting whichever candidate best suits them as a group. I just don't appreciate them trying to pass of 'what benefits the black community' as the last word in tolerance, racial equality, or any other PC term...which happens, and which then leads to people thinking you're a bigot if you're against something like hate-crime legislation. Not helpful. I also think clarity is important. It's bad to have an all-white cabinet, and it's bad to include a few members or this race and that race to be inclusive...? Not being a minority, I can't figure that out, so I just ignore it.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by peachgirl
So, you think Bush appointed Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice because they were black? Do you believe that their race played any part in their appointments?




I just love the Republican "token" black tactic as a way to convince blacks to vote for them.

NEWSFLASH!!!! It's.....not.....working!

Do you think that Kerry would appoint any minorities to high level positions?

But in all reality, if I were running the show, I wouldn't care if someone was green as long as they were the best for the job.

Oh, and lest we forget, Clinton was the first black President.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by Robinrs
Oh, Lord...here we go again...

And here you are again.

and the way he's ruled these past four years.

Interesting choice there "ruled". Would that be something like "King George"?

You have more than just dislike for his policies. You have comtempt and dislike for the man himself. Maybe not hate, but pretty darn close.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by Viking
Thank you for proving my point

Umm.. I must have missed something. I don't see how she proved your point.

 

[peachgirl]

Originally posted by Elwood Blues
Do you think that Kerry would appoint any minorities to high level positions?

I could care less what color his appointees are as long as his only reason for appointing them are their qualifications.

The problem with Bush is he wants to use their race for political purposes.

 

[Timster]

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by Teejay32



I agree with him about the activist Left mostly because of pictures like this.

And this isn't an isolated incident. There are many that feel the same way and cheer these people on.

Oh, and then there's this

Cryptic Comedy "I'm Gonna Kill the President!" to Play Somewhere in NYC


Could one of you on "left" please find an incident portraying Kerry in such a despicable way?

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by peachgirl

The problem with Bush is he wants to use their race for political purposes.

Proof??


.

 

[Elwood Blues]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Actually, I did say "token black". Why I said it would take a very long response but here's the quick version:

When someone complains that Bush doesn't do x, y or z for the black community, Republicans immediately start pointing towards Powell and Rice as though it's some kind of proof that Bush and his party deserve the votes of black people.

And just who are those people? And why do they complain when there are no blacks (or other minorities) chosen?

No one in their right mind would ever admit that's the reason. But then again they don't have to because of AA.

 

[Samsara]

Originally posted by Elwood Blues
And this isn't an isolated incident. There are many that feel the same way and cheer these people on.

Oh, and then there's this

Cryptic Comedy "I'm Gonna Kill the President!" to Play Somewhere in NYC


Could one of you on "left" please find an incident portraying Kerry in such a despicable way?

Please. Are you really suggesting that this is a one-sided affair in politics and that only the left engage in such activities? Whoa, we may need more help than I originally though!

And, personally, I'll stand up for those who engage in such political actions. You know, I support this little thing in the Constitution called, get this, freedom of expression. Your undergarments are all bunched up tight because someone dresses as they did in that picture and makes a commentary on the shrub??? Wow. You would like to see that type of speech and expression stifled? Wow. So this is what you, as a republican, stand for? Wow. We need change even more than I though!