Ken Blackwell, If Barack Obama is a Magic Negro, Then What Type of Negro Do They Think You Are?
As an African American Republican who has been a member of the party for over 13-years, one of the big irritations I have are with other Black Republicans who are apologists for actions and statements made by white leaders in the Republican Party that are clearly racist and exclusionary. It is highly frustrating to see someone like former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell say there is a "hypersensitivity" by the media when it comes to issues of racism and implies the Barack the Magic Negro thing is not that big of a deal. Blackwell's statement comes as he vies for the RNC Chairmanship.
I wish the very accomplished, well respected and articulately spoken Mr. Blackwell would wake up! Chip Saltsman, his competitor also running for the RNC Chairmanship is not a fine person for sending other white colleagues and members of the RNC this CD.
Mr. Blackwell and other African Americans that believe a statement like this is not that important or remain conveniently silent, please allow me to tell you why the word "Negro" is harmful. The word Negro is Spanish for black. The Spanish language comes from Latin, which has its origins in Classical Greek. The word Negro in Greek is derived from the root word necro, meaning dead. I can see how someone racist like Saltsman and others might think it would be magic to see a walking dead man like Barack Obama become elected as President of the United States. If I had to ask Mr. Blackwell a question, I would ask, what type of Negro do you think they might see you as?
I am not a Black Republican who screams racism at everything that has a twist of negativity when it comes to African Americans or people of color. It is true black folks in particular can get a bit too petty sometimes and yes over react. However, in this instance select members of the Republican Party leadership who continue their overt assaults against President Elect Obama is not hyperbole. This song should be insulting to anyone who has any form of civility and respect for others not like themselves.
If the Republican Party is going to ever become serious about attracting and maintaining its people of color, then leaders like Blackwell must stop prancing around this problem inside the party, speak up and condemn these statements and divisive actions once and for all.
Perhaps since President Elect Obama will be sworn in next month, this is a ploy by Blackwell to garner support for chairmanship? The truth is Blackwell or any black running for this post can't have it both ways - on one hand support racist stupidity by being silent or playing it down, and on another hand try to leverage the fact that a Black man going into the White House is an opportunity for a black man to lead the Republican Party.
Maybe Republicans are astute enough to see the value in this strategy. However, in the end, I do not think the white establishment in the party want to or even plan to let go of the reigns. They can't or won't even imagine the "new" face of the RNC as black. That is too much blackness in one year already.
Additionally, another real point about being a National Party Chairman is that you must have the capability of raising tons of money. African Americans like Blackwell and others like former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele wanting the position have not proven they are money machines. As a matter of fact, there has not been any African American Republican candidate of prominence who has demonstrated a capability to consistently raising or has access to millions. However, the other side of the aisle has - Ron Brown when he was DNC Chair did it so well he forced the hand of former President Bill Clinton to make him Commerce Secretary, and of course Billion Dollar Man himself Barack Obama. This is a small diversion to the point of this article, but a point that must be made nonetheless about how white Republicans are also thinking.
Therefore, since there are also other realities to this position, turning a blind eye to racism will not get Blackwell or any person of color closer to becoming elected head of the RNC. To Blackwell and Steele and others who are black and "powerful," and can make a difference, try having just a little bit more General Colin Powell style backbone for a change. It does a mind and soul good.
|
Fox News Airs "Magic Negro" Message On New Year's Broadcast
Think Progress caught a "magic negro" reference during the New Years Eve broadcast on Fox News. Viewers were allowed to text in messages that scrolled...
|
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Part (1 of 3)
Yvonne,
This is a very eloquent piece, but I was patiently awaiting the part where you describe why you are an African American who supports the Republicans. I know it must be difficult explaining this position because many people see it as an oxymoron. I can never make sense. I am an African American and seriously cannot understand why any African American would support that party, even if they are socially or fiscally conservative. I wouldn't want to be in that position, as I know it would grow increasingly annoying because many blacks on the right are thought to be uncle Toms.
One reason you stated in an earlier response regarding your party affiliation was that "There are philosophical constructs and ideals I greatly identify with being Republican
It seems too to Black Republicans want to stand out from the norm,instead of standing up for whats right.
the question here is beyond race and Ms. Davies' personal interests and choices for staying in the republican party. What is alarming to me is that Ms. Davies, an evidently bright and thoughtful person, chooses to stay in this party, despite the lack of responsiveness, inclusiveness, from a party whose members are often elected undemocratically, whose leaders have violated the constitution, the Geneva convention, and just overall treated the people they represent with disdain. When so many things are wrong with your party, what is right then?
Trinity29,
What is right is for Republicans (even if it is a few) to always challenge and call out the party for its racism and wrong doings; i.e. like Colin Powell and others have. Not run away from the party, but if necessary be a thorn.
I know this is very hard for you and others to wrapped your head around because your thought process is so very one sided. As you would want me to see how you raise question after question about my being in the Republican Party still. Open up your mind and see how people in the party might remain Republican for purposes other than your assumptions on what you think or feel, but have no real knowledge about.
Thank you for your comments again.
So when someone calls out the wrong's in your party it is a right thing to happen for your party, I get that. However, isn't it a bit circular for your reason to be affiliated with a party whose merit now according to you is that having people call out their wrongs? If that is your reason, then that is also the reason for staying in any other party, democrat, green, libertarian, etc. this reminds me of a bad co-dependent relationship where the explanation is, "he is not always bad, and he listens to me sometimes when i call him out."
I think your attack on me is ad hominem without any substance, which is something you are trying to ask in the same argument. Does it not seem a bit ironical that you cannot have a civil discourse without attacking? Can you point out what in my post was "one-sided?" I am still floundering in your "reason" to stay in the party other than "Collin Powell does it so it must be good for me too.
Finally, If you are so sure that I have "no real knowledge about" can you please educate me what would be "real" knowledge that I and others are lacking?
After reading through the comments and Ms. Davies' fervor in responding to several of them, I have made the following observations.
1. While Ms. Davis attempts to articulate why she is aligned with the Republican party, her reasons for such alignment sounds like right wing talking points rather than substantive differences between the two political parties. That she is fiscally conservative and somewhat of a libertarian do not automatically exclude the democrats because there are many of us who are of the same mindset. I would have been more impressed with something she spoke about with conviction about the republican party and her decision to stay in it than a cursory lipservice. However, I respect her individual choice of being in whatever party she chooses to be in.
2. When people point out the excesses of the worst of the Republican party, Ms. Davis is quick to respond that she too disagrees with such excesses and she brings her presence to speak "truth to the power." And that she cannot be held responsible for the actions of leaders in her party with whom she has no connections. This seems like a flighty argument to me because it lacks the conviction of her beliefs. If you are not identifying with the excesses of the worst and don't want to be associated with the leaders who create such excesses, then when is it do you get to say "enough?"
Trinity29,
Happy New Year. You have missed the point I was originally making and you have decided to engage in something else. What is a Right Wing talking point? Is that the same as what you might be writing? A left wing talking point? If you had carefully read the replies to my comments, then you would see where my convictions are related to why I am in the party and my views. Since I have already now three times discussed the notion of fiscal conservativeness, libertarians and Democrats versus Republicans, it would be a waste of time to repeat that again.
Your judgment is catisgating rather than analytical. In your second point when you discuss my so called argument about not being held responsible for the actions of leaders of which I have no connections, where is the logic to this statement? Where are the facts? How do you know? What do you know? You are only guessing and making ad hoc statements.
Finally, I reply to the comments because I think it is important to let people know you are reading their view points - good or bad, logical or illogical, truth versus conjecture. Thank you.
1. I am not questioning your rationale to replying to comments but merely observing your fervor in doing so.
2. right wing talking points are essentialistic points that create a binary between fiscal and social conservatism vs liberalism. what i have stated are no one essentialistic points but a troubling of multiple points that exist in a continuum for liberals. for example to assume that democrats are not pro life or that they are not for fiscal conservatism would be right wing talking points. you state these points as those that are ideologically aligned with the Republican party.
3. judgment by definition is castigating to some extent but it does not require that it will be devoid of analysis. my suggestion is to read a bit closely what my second point states. it states points based on your comments as you have claimed in this post to not be held accountable for the excesses of the worst of the leaders in your party. No one expects you to be responsible for any of them not even me if you read closely to what I said. My question is where do you draw the line in the sand to say enough is enough and these people and their actions cannot represent the party that I am aligned with philosophically or ideologically? what would that breaking point be for you if there is any?
Part (3 of 3)
And as you may know the list goes ON and ON and ON. But many of the things I just stated had to do with race, their atrocities range so much further on so many levels and I didn't want to get sidetracked. I don't know what you believe is the positive side of this party, or even what it is you see that is forward-looking. Do you believe the demographic of the Republican party is a reflection of America in the 21st Century? I'm sure you do not, and they are working increasingly hard to keep it that way. I'm sure the Republican party has a moderate wing, but it is very quiet and does not have a voice. It's prominent voices are very far to the right, and this has drifted the entire party further to the right. The point of my post is, with the party doing so much harm to so many people, how could any sensible person support them? Especially an African American with which they take such pronounced positions directly against. How can you support this? Everytime you vote for them you heartily endorse these actions.
Part (2 of 3)
One reason you stated in an earlier response regarding your party affiliation was that "There are philosophical constructs and ideals I greatly identify with being Republican
Has been doing all it can do to ENCOURAGE the racism that you condone.
CONTINUES to use fear and divisiveness to conjure up votes.
Uses TORTURE to gain (false) information to create more war and further violate the Geneva Convention, causing more misery, pain and suffering to many around the world.
Demonizes the poor and ANYONE who attempts to fight poverty in this country.
Does everything possible, legally and illegally, to prevent minorities from voting. Continuously creating false controversies like ACORN, to allow them to challenge votes coming from black neighborhoods and others that lean Democratic. This is similar to how they stole the election in 2000.
Do NOT believe in Democracy.
Sees the response to Hurricane Katrina as outstanding and doesn't believe the government should have intervened to help those who were trapped. Showed absolute apathy to those thousands of Americans who died because they were of another race and class.
Do not have any wishes to include minorities in their party besides those necessary to shield them from cries of racism after their actions clearly and overtly demonstrate it.
I totally agree, neocon666. How can any minority, including people of color not look at the history of the Republican party and it's racist views be a party to such behavior. The GOP has NEVER been inclusive and don't care what minorities think or feel. How long will Ms. Davis keep associating with a party who continues to air it's racist views in public display? She obviously hasn't lived long enough to have experienced the hatred and bigotry that the Republican party has leveled on people of color for decades like I have first hand. It always amazes me to see these young black people who live in the world, but don't really know about it. I could never belong to political party who fought for the right to tell my grandmother and I that we had to sit on the back of a bus that our tax dollars help pay for. I'm all for everyone's right to choose any party, but please, know your history before you do. That's why other blacks look at people like Ms. Davis in bewilderment. She says that she can't be held responsible for the racist and bigoted views of the Republican party. Understood. Then why would she associate with a party who's members include the KKK, white supremists, and skinheads? Does she think it's an accident that these people are not Democrats? At some point you have to wake up.
It is incredible irony that the point of your comment is to know your history yet republicans were the first to abolish slavery with lincoln. and your second point about the KKK which had a prominent member in the senate his name was Robert Byrd your beloved democrat so yeah you're right know your history before you pick a party.
While there is some truth to what you say, that back in the 1850's, the Republican party was more like the Democratic party of today, the policies and viewpoints of the those parties shifted in the late '50's. My family and I were personally victims of Republicans, NOT Democrats, and this is a page from my own personal history. And if you really want talk about history, Abraham Lincoln was actually kicked out of the Republican party for advocating a constitutional amendment freeing all slaves. The fact is that JUNE 8, 1864 he was Renominated for president by the National Union Party with running mate Andrew Johnson. While Lincoln was the country's first Republican President, he died in office as a member of the National Union Party, NOT the Republican party.
The Black republicans don't think the GOP is speaking of them; only the "rest of us" African-Americans. that is why they keep apologizing for them. Dumb and Dumber....
OK- last comment.
It's a bit perturbing to have to characterized your party affiliation with your race. "Black" Republican
Brooklynycitizen,
I would not characterize myself as any party, but I would describe my party affiliation and race in a written piece to make a point. It is a fact and it helps to make a point. No one walks around with a sign that says these things, but it is who I am as well as a i.e. WMBE - Women Minority Business Enterprise. who also sees and experiences injustices while running a business Party affiliation with race is not the point at all. Thank you for your point however. Be well.
Yvonne R. Davis HuffPost Blogger.
You are identifying as Black Republican to make a point.
Is that about right?
Party affiliation with race seem to be the very point of this post since you are discussing Mr. Blackwell and Obama .
however in this article you identified yourself as an "African American Republican
Considering the apathy that the republican party has demonstrated toward people of color since Ronald Reagan began his all out assault on the Civil Rights Era legislation, it is significant that the writer identify herself as such. While it is beyond my comprehension as to why she would continue to be affiliated with a party that has demonstrated its apathy toward her and people like her time and time again, it is important that it is known that she has chosen to remain aligned with them.
And while I also consider having to characterize party affiliation with race as a bit "strange", to quote Langston Hughes: "I must think of myself as black because you think of yourself as white".
Neocon666,
Thank you for your comments and Happy New Year. Your label about me is quite inappropriate. As it would wrong for me to label you based upon your name Neocon666. Based upon your name, perhaps I should be concerned about your belief system.
Additionally, the real issue is not my speaking my truth about this issue, is your dislike from a person who happens to be Republican and not like yourself.
Tell me what defines white? I ask this because you have entered into a common pathology that certain African Americans go into when they are just furious about an issue without analyzing it properly or clearly reviewing what is being discussed.
However, then again you may not be African American. If this is the case, then you are certainly not qualified to label a person.
I appreciate your thoughts just the same.
Yvonne R. Davis HuffPost Blogger
You would if Hillary had been elected.
I have to ask, and I am not being rude, just plain gobsmacked
ZimboChick,
Thank you for your question. If I were to run from something everytime I saw divisiveness, trouble or problems, I would not be a part of too many things. My reasons for being a Republican has nothing to do with Blackwell or the racists in the party. And as I have written and publicly said before, it is necessary for Republicans to have persons in the party to speak truth to power and call them to task. If I were a Democrat I would call them out when they falter and they have at times, but not nearly like Republicans. I am socially and fiscally conservative, but very libertarian in many areas well.
Happy New Year!
Yvonne R. Davis HuffPost Blogger.
You keep dancing around the reasons you ARE a Republican- this is a good opportunity to enumerate them- we'd liek to know.Hones
I think what people really want to know is how much is enough for people like you, who have decided to "tough it out" and stay with the republican party when they clearly have no intention of treating you with any respect. As an example, the link below is to an open letter from an African American secretary of the republican party in California who had members ask him to hail cabs and carry their bags WHILE WEARING HIS OFFICIAL CREDENTIALS among other things:
http://www
Do they have to burn a flag onstage for you to get the message that you're not wanted?
How has speaking truth to power in the Republican party helped the "truth" in your case? What impact were you able to create?
Yvonne, if you are honest with yourself, how do you accept being a Republican when their actions have been so hostile, with a few moments of correctness, towards African Americans? Do you think a majority of White Republicans accept you when you are not in their presence as an equal? They smile to your face and I'm sure promote you for their agenda, but you know the reason they do that is because your black. Sarah Palin and McCain's campaign made it abundantly clear they could care less about the African American population.
Bazokbros,
Firstly, my being a Republican has nothing to do with the hostility of others in the party. I think it is important for African Americans to be in the party if they have ideological beliefs that are aligned, but it does not mean a black person should not call them out assertively and stand up. The problem is most won't. Colin Powell is not leaving the Republican Party. If he did, he would be running and so would I and I won't.
Secondly, I am not a Republican for acceptance from or by white people; as I hope others are not Democrats for that reason. Racism extends well beyond the Republican Party. I have not been "promoted" for "their" agend. I only support agendas I can support The truth is a lot of Republicans who are racist are not very concerned about me or any one black, they are just racist. The other fact is one does not have to be a white Republican to be fake and phony and smile in a black person's face if they are racism.
True the McCain campaign was not inclusive, but they also knew the black vote was going his way anyway. Could he have done something to cut into the 96% black support for Obama; who really knows? But, if tried to do something and meant it, then perhaps some of the things that came out so viscerally hateful and anti black would not have happened.
Yvonne R. Davis HuffPost Blogger
Yvonne:
Have you noticed where that "idealogy" has gotten us. It started with Ronald Reagan. I guess you too earn 6 figures; get a clue, America is falling off of a cliff because of republican GREED. Please spare me the nonesense of the "trickle down" economic idealogy. It's a mind game the republicans play with the "less informed" voters to keep them as a voting block. They actually believe the "free market" will enable them to be RICH within a few years. Go back and view/listen to John McCain's message to "Joe the Plumber" at the debate. He said, "Joe, you will be rich". These people actually live by that. The language has been around for decades. Karma is quite appropriate for the republican party. It is what they deserve. BTW, they will never accept you for who you are, and no other African-American either. As you previously stated, they fear our knowledge. That is exactly why Gen Colin Powell was "dissed" and used by George W. Bush & Co.
what makes you think that a party is monolithic in ideological beliefs? if you look at the republican party, many like yourself, are speaking out against the race-based rhetoric against obama. so what makes you so sure that your ideological beliefs are aligned with the republicans? i am not asking you to be a democrat because thats a very personal choice. i am asking you to critically reflect how you have essentialized one party to be one thing and the other to be not. to say that one party is fiscally conservative or the other party is not prolife is painting both parties with a broad brush. a party, if it represents its constituents, cannot ever be any one thing at the cost of another, because then politics will fail. Politics thrives on being able to shift positions for either party. I am just curious about how you have come to the decision that republican party is so much better aligned with you and your ideological beliefs than the democratic party or even better no party at all.
You have the patience of Job. Everytime I think I can understand Republicans (conservatives?) they reaffirm thier lack of conviction for expanding the party. Yvonne I hate to say it... they (Republicans) want it this way!
Skepptic,
Yes, many do want it this way, but the moderate wing of the party needs to speak up! Wouldn't it be shocking if Blackwell got the Chairmanship though? Thank you so much for your statement and what you wrote.
Yvonne R. Davis - HuffPost Blogger
Yvonne,
I'm not a Republican but thank you for speaking out. Black Republicans need to make their voices heard or the nonsense is never going to stop!
I'm African American, and there are Republican stands on some issues that I can relate to. However, there's no way the Republican party can count on my support or my vote as long the Republican leadership continues to let me know via folks like Saltsman that they really don't want me around.
If Republicans can show me they're serious about being inclusive then MAYBE we can talk. Until then I'm still a registered Dem.
Keep it up and thank you!
jazzdrummerb,
Thank you for your kind words. I am glad you understand and appreciate the piece. Happy New Year.
Yvonne R. Davis - HuffPost Blogger
Yvonne - I'd like to thank you for your excellent article. You make your points very well, and I agree with your analysis of the situation.
Even more, I admire your well considered and thoughtful responses to comments here. I disagree with some of your stated opinions, but I respect them in spite of the disagreement.
The current group of republicans have nothing to do with fiscal conservatism. They are 'borrow and spend' republicans.
The only time the government has gotten smaller and the budget was balanced for the past 40 years was while Clinton was president. If republicans are fiscal conservatives, then why does government expand and the national debt increase whenever they occupy the White House? The republicans have been guilty of false advertising for at least three decades.
I am a fiscally conservative democrat. We sorely need people like Everett Dirkson and Barry Goldwater that were real fiscal conservatives and that knew that supply side economics was a scam.
Supply side economics has been thoroughly debunked as a fraud.
I look forward to more articles from you.
It's time you analyzed your own bigotry!
Calling Mr. Blackwell "accomplished" and "respected" illustrates your absolute (pro)Republican bigotry. Blackwell is the prototypical scorched-earth 1996-2008 Republican. His role in Ohio will earn him a footnote in history.
Blackwell sold his soul and office to become Governor. Like Florida in 2000, Bushies bought the Secretary of State in Ohio in 2004, doing everything legal and illegal to reduce minority turnout or a legitimate vote tally. Blackwell's targeted purgie of black voters was reprehensible. Add a voting machine that prevented recounts and chair of the Bush reelection committee, and that's his accomplishment. Even if he could conduct a recount, Blackwell refused. Every study showed the variance between polls and actual counts contradicted every statistical model. The probability of a legitimate count was zero. That didn't bother Blackwell.
He's a hack, bought and paid. To see how he is "respected," look at his Gubernatorial run: 20% of the African-American votes, about the same as Bush in 2004. Pathetic.
Perhaps if you had overcome your bigotry of better, smarter, accomplished Democrats in 00/04 we wouldn't waste time on toadies like Blackwell. And saved 7,000 American lives, 30,000 grievous injuries, a trillion dollars in taxpayer bailout dollars, thousands of jobs, the national treasury, and the good will of 75% of the planet.
Before casting holier-than-thou stones at Blackwell (who is beneath contempt), look into your own apologist behavior for contemptible people you support because an (R) follows their name.
Imajobob,
Thanks. Firstly, before you cast labels on who is a bigot, please make sure you apply the proper definition. Whether you like it or not, Ken Blackwell is accomplished and well spoken. This is a fact. In terms of legal or illegal issues, that is a matter of ethics. There are many accomplished and well spoken persons who are not ethical. It is not my job to get into this with this article. Since you appear to be more knowledgeable about that issue, I would defer to you.
In this piece, I did not discuss his poor Gubernatorial run; of which I am aware. I felt it was not needed to make the point. Again bigotry is misapplied - "A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding state of mind." Your points post this takes the discussion in a totally different arena. I am tolerant of Blackwells feelings, but I surely don't agree and have a right to say so.
You can't have it both ways. On one hand I am being "holier than thou," which is comical to me since I am simply saying Blackwell is totally wrong to support racism and on the other hand you say he is beneath contempt - which is a very self righteous.
An apologist is one who takes on a defense of an issue or something that has happened.
Yvonne R. Davis Huff Post Blogger
It seems to me that you are suggesting that someone being accomplished and being ethical is mutually exclusive. Therefore, according to you, being accomplished can be something completely different than being ethical. If thats your view, then you are indeed well aligned with the republican party.
It is always good to remember that Ken Blackwell, while erudite and cagey, is, basically, a right-wing nut job. Read far, far right; he and Ann Coulter shared the stage at Rev. Rod Parsley's World Harvest megachurch a few years back...eno
If the GOP wants to put Mr. Blackwell at the head of the RNC, I say GO FOR IT! Under his stewardship, the GOP would become more divisive, more retrograde than ever.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
