The Minority Response

Yeah sure, I'm a cynic, but I'm guessing I wasn't the only American watching Bobby Jindal stride up to the camera Tuesday night to instantly assume that the equally cynical Republican leadership cast the first-term Louisiana governor in that role, primarily based on the color of his skin. Gives new meaning to the phrase the minority response.

The GOP is an overwhelmingly white party, and predominantly old, white male at that, and so their relentless efforts to present a diverse face by touting young governors like Jindal and Sarah Palin as party leaders just comes across as pathetic. No doubt Jindal and Palin bring more to the table than a little melanin or estrogen, but if the Republicans are really interested in rejuvenating and recasting themselves, instead of just putting their same-old, same-old rhetoric in the mouth of a younger, darker face, they'd do better for themselves and the nation by elevating the likes of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist... a silver-haired white man, sure, but at least one who appears willing and able to question party orthodoxy during these extraordinary times.

Republicans are understandably envious (and increasingly alarmed) at the Democrats' growing success with minority voters, but it seems they have the cause-and-effect behind our nation's political segregation exactly backwards. Minorities don't vote for Democrats because we have more minority leaders; Democrats have more minority leaders because we are a fundamentally more inclusive party that supports and promotes policies that better serve the needs of minority communities. And Republicans just can't slap a Jindal or a Michael Steele in front of a gaggle of rich, old, white men and magically bridge that gap.

Jindal may indeed be smart and wonky, and perhaps may yet earn his reputation as a rising star, but he is only 37-years-old, and his three years in Congress and one year as governor of one of the most endemically corrupt and mismanaged states in the union hardly recommends him as a national leader. And judging by the early reviews, last night's performance didn't do much to enhance his stature:

National Public Radio's Juan Williams said that Jindal's presentation was "sing-songy" and that Jindal looked "childish" compared to Obama. "I think he had a really poor performance tonight, I'm sorry to say," Williams said on Fox News Channel.

MSNBC's political site was critical as well: "The Louisiana governor, a Rhodes scholar, is a serious guy who's known for sometimes being too wonky and even somewhat humorless. Well, he tried too hard NOT to look wonky and humorless. But it didn't work ... his speech seemed to be too much of a brochure about himself rather than about his party and its ideas."

And then there's conservative commentator David Brooks' scathing instant assessment on PBS's The News Hour. Ouch.

Still, I guess that's okay; Jindal wouldn't be the first young governor to flop in that role, so it's hardly a career killer. Indeed, if history is any guide, Jindal might someday have a promising career as Commerce Secretary.

David Goldstein writes on WA state politics at HorsesAss.org

Comments

[cyrano1]

Thanks! You're dead on!

And I think (hope) that the major shift we're going through right now may maintain itself longer if the "transparent government" policies being put into place now become a precedent for the future.

An open government with vigilant citizens may temper the pendulum swings which arise when the inevitable selfishness of those in power begin to subvert the real interests of their constituents.

[SilviaMaria]

Democrats are inclusive; they include everybody regardless of race, religion, color, gender .... You have blue dogs democrats, centrist, progressive, etc. This mix will drive anyone crazy, but it seems to work for the Democratic Party because it welcomes ideas. Unlike the Republican Party, if anyone suggests some social spending that person is called "socialist"... (just look at the way the governors of Florida and California are being treated for doing the right thing).

One of the things that the Democrats should distinguish is between common good (need) and a want. There are things that are common good: Social Security, Health Care, education, etc. and this does not necessarily means that it needs to have a profit. This is one of the main differences between both parties: Republican want a profit on everything.

The GOP has held onto power by using fear-mongering tactics; it does not work anymore. It might work for certain people with prejudices against blacks, muslims, and minorities in general, but not for the majority of people.

[SPQR1775]

"The GOP is an overwhelmingly white party, and predominantly old, white male at that, and so their relentless efforts to present a diverse face by touting young governors like Jindal and Sarah Palin as party leaders just comes across as pathetic.R­epublicans are understandably envious (and increasingly alarmed) at the Democrats' growing success with minority voters, but it seems they have the cause-and-effect behind our nation's political segregation exactly backwards. Minorities don't vote for Democrats because we have more minority leaders; Democrats have more minority leaders because we are a fundamentally more inclusive party that supports and promotes policies that better serve the needs of minority communities. And Republicans just can't slap a Jindal or a Michael Steele in front of a gaggle of rich, old, white men and magically bridge that gap."

I agree completely, and to add to that, the GOP does nothing without calculation and it is obvious. Many GOP politician and country club hooded white's have a minority "friend", just to make themselves feel like a good christian. The stars are aligning against the GOP and every one of their friends who are as bigoted, racist, condecending and follow the Palin-McCain white supremacy mantra. The revolution will not be televised and Faux news won't have any idea when they go bankrupt within a year! The Gods are great and science is making a comback in its rightful place. We are evolving!

[Scarllatti]

Your blog is very accurate and straight to the point. Until the GOP makes a diagnosis of its ailment and has an insight and a candid answer to its racist and bigoted tendencies, they can "appoint" as many minorities with Stockholm Syndrome as they want but will not get the minority votes.

Minorities can now put a face behind that white hood over the Republican face.

[danonchalant1]

Loyalty. You forgot loyalty. Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Alberto Rodriguez, brilliant people one and all. Minorities, sure, but impressive resumes. This is what makes their plot all the more diabolical. These are some of the most qualified people on the face of the Earth, but they got their posts because they are minorities. Ole "W" made hus picks to outdiversify Clinton's cabinet. "Us GOP'ers got some of that diversity too!"

[jade7243]

I can't speak for any of the three you mentioned directly, but I suspect that Condi and Colin embraced the GOP not for it's political resume on minority relations, but as means to enhance their own. It's easier to stand out of the crowd when you are the only raisin in a big bowl of milk.

Both Colin and Condi came of political age, not during the heyday of Republican moderation -- ironically the 1940s to late 50s, but during the Goldwater era embrace of southern Dixiecrats and the "southern strategery."

Finally, Alberto RODRIGUEZ might be a brilliant politician, but I think he prefers baseball. Alberto GONZALEZ is neither a good ballplayer nor brilliant politician. You damage the credibility of your party when you can't remember who the "brilliant" folks are, or consider ANY minority interchangeable with another.

[Cye]

A lot of commentary fails take into account that the Republicans don't wish to take the 'Democrats' route to inclusiveness. They would prefer to appeal to minorities via their core values:

(a) pro-business (big and small);
(b) pro-liberty;
(c) pro-traditional morality.

A a lot of minority groups identify with these values, so there is some scope for Republicans to be inclusive on their own terms. They therefore need to identify policy opportunities which would achieve this. However, exactly how inclusive these would be in practice, when compared with route taken by the Democrats, is uncertain. The point is that, if the goal for the Republican party really is inclusiveness, it naturally would not want to achieve this by becoming Democrats.

[AnnfromCA]

Here, Here!

[lastcallmd]

Liberals are kind of funny; if a minority rises in the Republican party, they don't celebrate what it actually means, but fall back on their own bias. Instead of celebrating a diversity of opinion (which they think they are all about) they jump into their paternalistic "we know better than those black folks do" mode. How condescending. But, not too surprising, since the "progressives" know what is best for all of us. And will impose it, like it or not. Freedom, folks, not the tyraney of those who think they are more enlightened than the rest of us.

[danonchalant1]

Rise, or back in to position! Remember, the last two candidates for RNC chair were Steele, and "Whites Only Club Member"

[dali partin]

If race wasn't an issue to the GOP, why would that be the first thing addressed in a rebuttal to a speech that said nothing about race?

[Cye]

To be fair, this kind of complaint can be made of both progressives and conservatives - in more areas than just minority inclusiveness. For instance, isn't the Republicans' continued obsession with sexual morality (eg 'abstenence only') presuming to know what's best for us? And seeking to impose it?

[Texas4Obama]

The republicans can not 'create' their own Obama.
People like Obama are few and far between.
It might be another 50 years before another person with Obama's skills at oratory and Obama's intellect and qualities appear on the national stage. We are living in a period of history that is remarkable and one that I have never seen before in my lifetime and one that I will probably never again see. It's a shame the the republicans can't just sit back for a bit and enjoy the moment.

[AnnfromCA]

The GOP clearly has a lot of work to do within their ranks. I will always say that McCain sponsored a very good immigration bill and then suffered the backlash in his own bid. But, that aside, the issue of putting forth Steele and Jindal as merely tokens does both men a disservice. The same was true of Sarah Palin.

Everyone should be judged on their own merits or, in some cases, their own flaws.

But stereotyping isn't any prettier if it comes from the liberal left than if it comes from the right.

[wltdnfaded]

For once, Ann, I actually agree with you. Stereotyping on either side is wrong. But you have to admit (really, you do) that until Obama and, yes, Hillary came onto the scene, The GOP was perfectly happy with their beige-boys club. Sure, they let a few others in-- Rice, Powell, Gonzales. But these people were not policy makers. They were employees who served under the pleasure of the President. The power they held came directly from the President and not a mandate of the people.

While Steele, Jindal, and Palin do have their merits, the sudden and meteoric rise of all three was really nothing more than a knee-jerk response from the GOP. It's not about substance, it's about marketing. It's like they were sitting in a board room on Madison Ave saying, "People like Pepsi more than Coke! So let's change the flavor of Coke to taste more like Pepsi!" Remember New Coke? Remember how THAT little diddy fell like a lead ballon?

Obama wasn't elected president because he was black-- he was elected because he proved to the American people he was the right man for the job. But this is something the GOP can't seem to understand. They don't see potential. They see gimmicks.

[AnnfromCA]

I disagree. The GOP sees just how formidible he is.

Frankly, he's offering the moon and has, for now, convinced people we can have it all without even flinching. There's no fiscal discipline at all, due to the crash.

We crashed due to a trillion dollar deficit.

What do we think it's going to be when it's a 4 or 5 trillion dollar deficit?

Seriously.

[FlamingLibrul]

The GOP is an overwhelmingly white party, and predominantly old, white male at that, and so their relentless efforts to present a diverse face by touting young governors like Jindal and Sarah Palin as party leaders just comes across as pathetic.

You said it all right there. A bunch of hopelessly out-of-touch, country club, old white guys are desperately trying to pander to a segment of the population they have for decades ignored- or used as scapegoats in their fear-mongering campaign tactics. The GOP needs to be told unequivocally that the majority of Americans are not fools and we're not swayed by the "Will do anything for money and power" right wing, and their smoke and mirrors non-solutions.

[Scarllatti]

And believe me, they will soon go into extinction!!! Time and history will give them a raw deal. They do not learn anything from history. You can hold down a man physically for as long as he allows you to get away with that but you will NEVER hold his spirit down when he decides to turn it ON.

[soonhappyamerica]

Jindal offered a poor rebuttal to Obama's speech, every bit as elegent, charismatic, strong and meaningful as any of JFK's speeches.

Jindal, who demonstrated very little political savvy,. was flat and uinimpressive. He's got no charisma and though this has no bearing on his ability to lead, he seems like the poor shnook who can't get it right in bed. The Republicans are desperate to find new faces to represent their party but instead what they get is Palin with her contiinual ethics issues and Michael Steele, equally unimpressive. This doesn''t help matters. The Republican partiy's desire to move forward into the 21st century, with a substantive message, able to reach minorities of all ages, doesn't look like it's going to happen anytime soon. My guess is, it's going to take about 20 years to rebuild this party, Having said that, I'm really not sure that it's ever going to be the party that it once was, which is fine by me.

[StillIRise]

I agree. Jindal's sudden rise to the top of the GOP's list of 2012 contenders, Michael Steele's rise to the top of the RNC and even Sarah Palin's pathetic rise as the new face of the Republican Party are desperate attempts by the GOP to compete with President Obama and to compete for the minority vote. Obviously they assume that minorities are as guided by the superficial as they are, and that all it takes to pull us over to their side is to see a black man, a brown man or a woman on the book cover, but that's only if we don't open the book and be reminded of what's on the inside!

The GOP, as you so accurately describe, are essentially a group of old white men who have an old white worldview of America, and their flailing effort to convince us otherwise simply reveals just how out of touch they are with reality and how disdainful they are of the American intellect.

[Scarllatti]

Both "men" are GOP props and pawns on their well-calculated chess board.

[s miller08]

So, you think if Joe Biden was elected president, they wouldn't have picked Jindal to give the response? I think you're probably right. I wonder if Hillary won, would Sarah Palin be the RNC response? I feel sorry for the qualified GOP politicians. This is "affirmative action" run amuck.

[StillIRise]

In response to your "affirmative action" comment, I have no doubt that there are as many women and minority politicians who are as qualified as their white counterparts. It just so happens that they are few and far between in the Republican Party, not in respect to their qualifications but in respect to their membership of affiliation with the GOP. But the GOP is not concerned about qualifications anyway, which became evident when they chose Sarah Palin to run for Vice President. So actually they've twisted the concept of affirmative action. Whereas affirmative action seeks qualified individuals who would otherwise be looked over (because of their race or gender), the GOP merely looks at race and gender, qualifications aside!

[nubret2008]

To be honest if you look at the actual GOPstaff it takes only the intelligence of a fourth-grader to be qualified

[sarge]

You nailed it, Goldy. And I, too, was reminded of the stiff and uninspiring response by our own Gov. Locke to a Bush State of the Union address.