The most under reported story of the 2010 political season

[The Third Man]

Thirty eight black Republicans running for national office.

Hoorah! for these great Americans of color who have rejected the victim mentality of the Marxist Progressives-regressives actually- and have taken a stand for freedom, individual liberty, and the founding principles of this nation!


http://todayspoliticsfreedomlover.blogspot.com/2010/10/thirty-eight-black-republicans-running.html

[Aramike]

Thirty eight black Republicans running for national office.

Hoorah! for these great Americans of color who have rejected the victim mentality of the Marxist Progressives-regressives actually- and have taken a stand for freedom, individual liberty, and the founding principles of this nation!


http://todayspoliticsfreedomlover.blogspot.com/2010/10/thirty-eight-black-republicans-running.html
Oh how I long for the day that this is not story ...

...alas, I must agree - the mainstream media loves to celebrate any achievement related to blacks, so long as it is a liberal achievement. Frankly I would prefer nothing be related to skin color, but such is the world we live in.

[Tribesman]

No surprise at the tone of those two partisan trolls.
It won't matter how many mainstream media articles there are about black people who ain't democrats its still gonna be a conspiracy in the "liberal" media.
Still it could be worse, it could be another round of nonsense about hispanics always being rounded up for the democrat vote.

Hoorah! for the great redstate conservative blogger who thinks the current pillocks in office are marxists:rotfl2:

[SteamWake]

Oh how I long for the day that this is not story ....

This...

Everyone hoped that when Obama was put in office it would be a great step foward in uniting. It seems to be having the opposite effect.

[gimpy117]

Thirty eight black Republicans running for national office.

Hoorah! for these great Americans of color who have rejected the victim mentality of the Marxist Progressives-regressives actually- and have taken a stand for freedom, individual liberty, and the founding principles of this nation!


http://todayspoliticsfreedomlover.blogspot.com/2010/10/thirty-eight-black-republicans-running.html


or it's just the republican party saying "hey! we've got black guys too!"
I'm all for racial equality...but when a black president gets elected by large numbers and Suddenly theres African Americans running as republicans, i have a hard time believing its anything other than political posturing.

[Tribesman]

Everyone hoped that when Obama was put in office it would be a great step foward in uniting. It seems to be having the opposite effect.
I am a uniter not a divider....GWB....same office different face same result.

I'm all for racial equality...but when a black president gets elected by large numbers and Suddenly theres African Americans running as republicans, i have a hard time believing its anything other than political posturing.
Not really, the republican have done the media hype on plenty of "first black whatever" just as the Dems do. They also play the same hispanic native asian ........cards in exactly the same manner.
For a change Aramike made sense with his initial line, before letting himself down with his usual sink. As in
Oh how I long for the day that this is not story ...


It will always be a story for both sides and will always be used as a story for both sides and there is absolutely no chance of changing that as with the two party system the outside parties become adopted into the two party system.

[August]

Suddenly theres African Americans running as republicans

But that isn't the case. Although our Democrat controlled media would never admit it. African Americans have held seats in the Republican party ever since the civil war.

[Takeda Shingen]

African Americans have held seats in the Republican party ever since the civil war.

That is certainly true. The Republican Party was founded as the party of civil rights.

[Platapus]

That is certainly true. The Republican Party was founded as the party of civil rights.

I don't know if I would agree with you on that. It is my belief that the Republican party was formed more as a response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 and the concomitant argument of State's Rights vs Federal Rights.

One can infer that the issue at the center was about slavery, but I feel that is a more simplistic explanation. It was more an issue of State vs Federal governments.

It is my belief that the original core of the Republican party was a position against State Sovereignty and was only demonstrated in the context of civil rights. A subtle but, in my opinion, an important distinction.

[Takeda Shingen]

I don't know if I would agree with you on that. It is my belief that the Republican party was formed more as a response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 and the concomitant argument of State's Rights vs Federal Rights.

One can infer that the issue at the center was about slavery, but I feel that is a more simplistic explanation. It was more an issue of State vs Federal governments.

It is my belief that the original core of the Republican party was a position against State Sovereignty and was only demonstrated in the context of civil rights. A subtle but, in my opinion, an important distinction.

The counter to that argument is that the defense of the institution of slavery was the defining reason behind the battle for States' Rights. Federalism, combined with the addition of new states, were the greatest threats to the economic system of the slave-holding states. States' Rights advocates saw the new party's (Republicans) growing power in Washington as a harbinger of change, which a strengthened Federal government would only hasten, as the party, although not officially abolitionist, was rife with supporters of that cause.

I agree that slavery does seem, on the surface, to be a simplistic argument. On examination, however, I think it the most accurate. Without the issue of slavery, the Kansas-Nebraska Act would have been known best for it's original purpose as another step towards the realization of the Transcontinental Railroad, rather than a fatal step on the road to civil war.

[Platapus]

Some very good points. :yep:

[Sailor Steve]

What they thought at the time:
http://www.librarycompany.org/republican/exhibition/republican%20label%20copy/1856campaign.htm

And the campaign issues of the 1856 election:
http://dig.lib.niu.edu/message/campaignhistory-1856.html

The Republicans selected Fremont because of his opposition to the Fugitive Slave Laws, and according to the second article many prominent southerners vowed to secede if Fremont were elected. Did they actually fight each other, or beat each up in the Senate over State Sovereignty issues? Not that I've heard of.

[Aramike]

or it's just the republican party saying "hey! we've got black guys too!"
I'm all for racial equality...but when a black president gets elected by large numbers and Suddenly theres African Americans running as republicans, i have a hard time believing its anything other than political posturing.What August said.

You do know that black conservatives exist, right?

Ultimately I suspect you're the product of the liberal media that I so disdained in my earlier post. How much was Secretary of State Rice celebrated? How much credibility did Colin Powell have as a Republican? (Ironically, I can remember the non-stop mainstream coverage of Powell when he came out to support Obama in the last presidential election.) What about Michael Steele?

These people were referred to as Secretary of State, Chairman, etc. But they were not given hardly any lipservice to their race - which is how it SHOULD be.

However, enter a liberal in similar firsts, the media fawns all over them - for their race.

I also find it funny how conservatives tend to elevate more blacks to prestigious positions than liberals, but that's for another discussion. I just think it's time that we stop giving a damn altogether about the color of ones skin in preference to the content of one's character.

[Sailor Steve]

Well said.

[Tribesman]

How much was Secretary of State Rice celebrated?
Lots and lots. not only as a black person but also the incredible fact that she was really a female.
How much credibility did Colin Powell have as a Republican?
errrrrr....Powell got the big credibility fall when he made a prick of himself at the UN.
Then again since Republicans spread right across the spectrum what exactly is a republican and how do you measure which version is credible and to which degree?

Ultimately I suspect you're the product of the liberal media that I so disdained in my earlier post.
Says someone who takes talking points from limbaugh and thinks they are true:doh:

I just think it's time that we stop giving a damn altogether about the color of ones skin in preference to the content of one's character.
That makes sense, but you should know its only a pipe dream in a hopey changey way

[SteamWake]

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh312/UlteriorModem/Condy.jpg

[Tribesman]

Whats up Steamwake , were you confused by the pile of "liberal" media articles about the first black woman to achieve high office?
But don't worry even the Pentagon still hails Powell on its website as the first African American to achieve his position.
Though of course when the "liberal media" repeats the establishment and wingnut fringe lines on these same events its a liberal conspiracy to change or ignore the perception of events.
Though to paraphrase the pair of them or even the RNC chair....if the country didn't have such a screwed up ongoing history over race then race wouldn't matter:yeah: