notes from underground - societal whispers
all the news that print will fit.


Sunday, July 11, 2004  

np: jim white - drill a hole in that substrate and tell me what you see

as usual, the folks at dailykos have done a much better job than i ever could summing up this late unpleasantness (washington post - free registration needed, but very much worth it).

long story short: despite invitations every year for the four years of his presidency, president bush has yet to come to the national NAACP convention. not only that, but despite obviously knowing when the NAACP convention would be for some time now, he seems to have purposefully planned to be on a bus tour in the same state (pennsylvania) at the same time as a further snub to the organization. let's cut to our good friend scott mcclellan for the tale of the tape:
Earlier this week, the White House said the invitation had been declined because of scheduling commitments, and officials said that was the reason cited in the letter to the group. But when asked about the matter by reporters on Air Force One on Friday, White House press secretary Scott McClellan made it clear that a lot more was involved. "The current leadership of the NAACP has certainly made some rather hostile political comments about the president over the past few years," he said.

The NAACP said Bush is the first president since Warren G. Harding not to meet with the group while in office.

first president since warren g. harding not to meet with the NAACP while in office? the first president since 1923 not to meet with them? well, what exactly are bush's reasons?
Bush, during a day-long bus tour through Pennsylvania, said in an interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer and two other state newspapers that he "admired some" NAACP leaders and said he would seek members' support "in other ways."

But he castigated the group's officers, who include President Kweisi Mfume and Chairman Julian Bond. "I would describe my relationship with the current leadership as basically nonexistent," Bush said, as reported by Knight Ridder Newspapers. "You've heard the rhetoric and the names they've called me."

so, you know, instead of going to speak to the convention to try and shore up support amongst an increasingly wary block of voters, he cries out 'name caller' and publically flaunts his tantrum. nice.

speaking of rhetoric, there are two terms thrown around by conservatives that boil my blood worse than anything. they are: "'special' rights" and "reverse discrimination." my reasons for groaning whenever i hear the latter should be obvious. how is it reverse? as if somehow discrimination has been a one way street up until now? labeling it something different ('reverse') only sets up people to somehow get the idea that it's worse than 'regular' discrimination. "'special' rights" on the other hand, is just insulting. the implication that gay marriage rights/civil rights/etc. somehow imply some sort of 'special' treatment instead of, oh, i don't know, inalienable rights, is stupid. i hate to be so terse and blunt toward a point of view, but it's unconstitutional and opponents of civil rights understand that. which is why we have to worry about silly things like the upcoming senate vote on the federal marriage amendment.

but i digress.

DHinMI sets up a wonderful parallel between bush and the only other president from texas not named bush. take a look at this excerpt and commentary on a johnson speech in the heart of the civil rights debate:
Now the people that would use us and destroy us first divide us . . . all these years, they have kept their foot on our necks by appealing to our animosities and dividing us. Whatever your views are, we have a Constitution, and we have a Bill of Rights, and we have the Law of the Land, and two-thirds of the Democrats in the Senate voted for it, and three fourths of the Republicans. I signed it, and I am going to enforce it, and I am going to observe it, and I think any man that is worthy of the high office of the President is going to do the same thing. But I am not going to let them build up the hate and try to buy my people by appealing to their prejudice.

Far from soft-pedaling civil rights, Johnson had traveled to the Deep South to deliver the message that the days of Democratic racism were numbered. Would the flag of racial fear be picked up by the opposing party?

shall we answer that last question? or shall we safely assume that not only did republicans pick it up...they ran with it.

i've beaten this example into the ground over the years since i first ran across it, but martin luther king jr. saw this happening in the collection of writings that eventually became letter from birhimingham jail. he knew that the poor, dis-enfranchised whites of the south had/have far more in common with their poor, dis-enfranchised black brethren than they would/will ever have with the upper middle class/wealthy white class. but the wedge of racist, racial divide permeates. king lamented that the civil rights movement could have been a large step forward not only for blacks, but for poor voters as well. however, the race card was too strong to mount a large enough synthesis of ideas. and now, forty years later, bush is still playing that game, only it's softer, less open and far more insidious and potentially costly.


posted by J. Neas | 7/11/2004 01:20:00 PM


Comments: Post a Comment
communique
are 'friends' electric?
political science
local motion
ministry of information