‘If things get really desperate,’ they will ‘play the race card’

August 31, 2006

It’s been a rough August for [tag]conservatives[/tag] and racial problems.

We had the “macaca” scandal; the “nice little Guatemalan man” flap; the leading congressional candidate in Florida who said he knows from personal experience that black people can’t swim; several high-profile Republicans backing racial profiling for people who “appear” to be Arab or Muslim; and Pat Buchanan’s belief that we should have a “moratorium on all immigration” in order preserve the dominance of the white race in America.

Given all of this, just from the last few weeks, you’d think conservatives would extra careful when it comes to discussing [tag]racial[/tag] issues. Unfortunately, the problems keep popping up. Take [tag]Conrad Burns[/tag], for example.

During a fundraiser Wednesday with first lady Laura Bush, the three-term Montana senator talked about terrorism, tax cuts and the money he has brought to his state. Burns is one of the more vulnerable Senate incumbents, facing a tough challenge from Democrat Jon Tester.

At the campaign event with Bush, Burns talked about the war on terrorism, saying a “faceless enemy” of terrorists “drive taxi cabs in the daytime and kill at night.”

Burns is a classy guy, isn’t he? A few months ago, he told reporters, “I can self-destruct in one sentence.” He wasn’t kidding.

Of course, it’s not just Burns.

In Colorado, Republican gubernatorial candidate [tag]Bob Beauprez[/tag] criticized African-American women for an abortion rate that he made up.

Beauprez stated that “in some of our ethnic communities we’re seeing very, very high percentages of babies, children, pregnancies end in abortion.” When Warner asked him to name “which ethnic communities in particular” he was referring to, Beauprez answered, “I’ve seen numbers as high as 70 percent, maybe even more, in the African-American community that I think is just appalling.”

In fact, according to the latest figures from the November 2005 issue of the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, a publication of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, among states in which abortion rates by race were adequately reported, the 2002 “abortion ratio for black women” was “495 per 1,000 live births.” In other words, roughly 33 percent of pregnancies among African-American women that do not end in miscarriages or stillbirths — less than half of what Beauprez claimed — end in “legal induced abortions.”

Not surprisingly, the African American community in Colorado wasn’t pleased with Beauprez’s comments. State Rep. Rosemary Marshall said, “Coloradans deserve better than Beauprez’s disgusting demonstration of ignorance. Beauprez should stop trying to push his anti-abortion agenda at the expense of African-Americans.” Beauprez later apologized, saying he “should have verified the statistic before repeating it.”

I have a hard time believing [tag]Republicans[/tag] would actually coordinate these disconcerting comments, but I’m reminded of something Joe Klein said about Karl Rove in May (via FDL):

He will deploy an ugly, stone-throwing distortion of Christian “values,” especially against those Democrats who choose not to discriminate against homosexuals. And if things get really desperate, he will play the [tag]race[/tag] card, as Republicans have ever since they sided against the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

Something to think about.

With all the Republicans attacks against our fellow Americans, who needs Al Quaeda? Ann Coulter alone has probably called for the deaths of more of her fellow citizens than Osama killed on 9/11.

  • Something to think about.

    Not t be contrary, but this is more of something Dems ignore at their own peril.” Or, “here’s one key to 2006 and 2008, so wake the heck up and kick down the door and become the heroic defender of progressive and humanitarian ideals that Liberals are supposed to be.”

    They keep throwing softballs, and we keep watching float on by, all the while remarking about how easy they would be to hit. Time to swing.

  • Wow. Who get’s to suggest we don’t let Asians drive to reduce fuel consumption? (They cause accidents anyway) Who has the Tax Indian Casinos cause they just drink away the money anyway plan?

    Honestly, what is the plan here? Scare whitey into voting Republican because if they don’t the clinically intolerant and chronically stupid will be unrepresented in Washington?

  • And the Washington Times time tries to make the Conservative side of the aisle more palitible or at least make the Democratic/African American “alliance” look weak with the following article:

    Black Democrats: Not Liberal Enough

    Which is I think, in response to the WaPo endorsement of Wynn’s opponent.

  • eadie, it’s the ones in power that must propose to do and do, not the ones out. The repugs are hoping democrats will make a proposal so they can bring in “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” and set the voters straight. Different is all that is needed when what is being done by those in power is a failure.

    Kennedy never mentioned “The New Frontieer” during his successful bid, 1960 until he was in. Nixon’s gang would have demonized the notion of man on the moon and killed the program before it began by putting themselves on the opposite side so they couldn’t do it ever. The same applies to Iraq. Democrats have a “different” plan is all the voter needs to know right now. Either they can “stay the course” or go with different. “Cut and run” is different but just one of many possible differents. The voters know that.

    In California they are simply making the association of local candidates like Swartznager to Bush. Bush is the problem to be solved. It’s political suicide to get into the details until the Bush problem is solved.

    Looking for something to get into. Try http://www.hoax-buster.org Pat Robertson is noticably quiet this time around. Don’t you think?

  • Technically I think Buchanan didn’t call for a moratorium on all immigration–I think he said he would allow immigration from white countries.

  • This is the war against “political corrrectness,” that creation of America hating liberals that Rush, Bill, Sean and Ann are always railing against. You know, respect for others, basic civility, manners, etc.

  • At the campaign event with Bush, Burns talked about the war on terrorism, saying a “faceless enemy” of terrorists “drive taxi cabs in the daytime and kill at night.”

    Precious. Is it just me?
    LOL

    One more thought: Tom Cleaver should consider writing a horror movie just based on [they] ‘drive taxi cabs in the daytime and kill at night.’ Where’s George Romero when you need him?

  • Actually 70% of african american babies are born out of wedlock compared to 30% for whites .
    I know this is something we need to work on.
    We need to try and achieve more mongamous relationships
    I’ve been married almost 18 years. (But I did have a baby beforre marriage.)
    And stress marriage before babies .
    But it should’nt be forced down our throats .

  • “When Warner asked him to name “which ethnic communities in particular” he was referring to, Beauprez answered, “I’ve seen numbers as high as 70 percent, maybe even more, in the African-American community that I think is just appalling.” ”

    Perhaps Beauprez was actually appalled by the number of live births among African-Americans as that is what the 70% actually represents. That would tie in nicely with Buchanan’s fear of a non-white takeover of the US.

  • Help me understand something: how is “495 per 1,000” roughly 33%? To me, that’s roughly 49.5%, that is, much closer to 50% than to 33%. Still less than 70%, yes, but where is that 33% coming from?

    I think Beauprez’s an asshat, but I’m confused by the response.

  • I had to look at that one for a minute too.

    495 abortions + 1000 live births = 1,495 pregnancies. Thus, 1/3 of the pregnancies are aborted. Live births, not pregnancies, is the metric.

  • Rick – It was per 495 abortions per 1000 live births. The total number of pregnancies in the equation is 1495(1000 live births plus 495 abortions). To figure the percentage you would divide 495 by 1495 which is approximately 33%.

  • I’ll bet that Beauprez was actually thinking of the born-out-of-wedlock rate, which is just about 70% on average for African Americans. That’s a terrible statistic, but it’s also suggestive that Beauprez mixes it up with an abortion rate. It must all run together in his mind, what with the downward moral slide in America.

  • #11 READ # 10

    [hitting head] Always refresh…always refresh

  • The race card, the homo card, the God card and the bogeyman card. Hell, they even play the 9-11 card to kickoff every fall campaign. Why is anyone surprised? They play their bluff every election year and half the Dems fold, even though they have stronger hands to play.

    Even when they apologize, like Beauprez and Allen did, they know they’ve succeeded in energizing their racist base. And they’ll keep on hijacking every election till Dems stop calling it the race card and start calling it the KKK Lynch Mob card, or other definitions that expose their ugly tactics in its bloodiest glory.

  • Call it what it is: the hate card.

    The “party of values” always crafts its appeal to the ugliest aspects of human nature. The least offensive part of this is the tax resentment strategy: “it’s your money.” The patriotism, which obviously there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with, in Republican hands is all too often turned to a God-given right to kick ass and take names wherever the leaders feel is necessary.

    And then there’s the tribalism, which is what we’re seeing now. Color and creed–all the things that shouldn’t matter in a nation founded on principle and premised on equal rights and equal protections under the law.

  • Call it what it is: the hate card. — dajafi (#20)

    Eggzacly SO; dajafi got it in one.

    It doesn’t matter what the subject line is — race (with its multitude of tentacles), terror, religion… Hate comes first, like knee-jerk response. Of course, hate burns brighter than tolerance, so it’s a much more useful tool, at half the cost/effort…

  • Having been raised in the rural South, I can tell you from personal experience that racism is alive and well there. Even friends and family that I’d consider “tolerant” have almost all disappointed me at one time or another by allowing the ‘n’ word to slip out of the cage.

    The sad fact is that there is no shortage of people who cannot grasp the complexity of economics and who, furthermore, subscribe to the popular and abused notion of “individual responsibility” (e.g.: poverty doesn’t cause crime; crime causes poverty).

    Therefore (in the minds of the ignorant), because such a disproportionate number of the poor and impoverished are black, it must be God punishing them for their propensity toward crime. Liberals are aiding and abetting criminals and giving all their tax money away to people that *they* perceive don’t deserve it.

    The only alternative is to understand that crime rates are directly proportional to one’s educational and socio-economic background. This, of course, makes the “law and order” types feel as though we’re making “excuses” for criminal behavior.

    In other words, “there but for the grace of God, I go not”. I’ve always had the distinct impression that the average southern white believes that, if everything were reversed, and whites had been enslaved for half a millennium and only gradually “allowed” to participate in the society that enslaved them, that they would *not* be impoverished, alienated and diseased by violence and crime.

    I would always find myself (in moral debates with people I otherwise considered intelligent and sensible) asking “what is it if it isn’t economics?”. There is usually no answer but I presume the answer to be “blackness”. “That’s just the way they are”.

    Since the tail-end of the Reagan administration, I have watched the rural, white trailer-park/NASCAR/fundamentalist Christian movement intermingle with the most primitive instinct of blaming other groups of people for the problems of a crumbling middle-class (blacks, gays, “liberals”, hippies, movie stars). I have watched this from the inside (as a bible-toting Christian myself) for most of my life and had concluded around 20 years ago that, what was only a relatively local movement at the time, could someday become dangerous.

    This movement came to partial power in 1994, assumed greater control in 2000 and literally “grabbed” power on 9/11, 2001.

    I believe a critical portion of this administration’s constituency *do* secretly support an abstract ideal that, if they could just get rid of blacks, fags, liberals and the judges who have the audacity to grant these people the same rights as they, we could return to the peaceful, homogenous, husband-supported family structure they believe has been robbed of them by the “evil” of liberalism.

    Of course, most do not grasp the mathematics of the fact that there simply isn’t enough wealth to go around anymore. Their wives must work to help support the family. Women, in turn, expect equal treatment both in the workplace and at home (feminism). Abortion becomes an issue as fewer and fewer people perceive themselves capable of affording a family and as the “liberated” women wrestle for their right to make that choice. A freshly integrated and racially distinct group of people (who had been held back and considered sub-human for hundreds of years) will further drive wages down and result in many resorting to non-legitimate means of making a living (i.e. crime). The “bread-winning” males of this group will become alienated and a matriarchal subculture will develop. The poor, undereducated females of the latter cross-section will depend more and more on a system based on the idea that a nation should take care of its people.

    Without understanding and confronting the fact that slavery was evil in its most sinister form, and that there’s a price to pay for that sin, we are going to be at the mercy of those who blame the gutting of the middle-class (and the crime and social decay that follows) on a difference in skin tone.

    In other words: those who blame the symptom for the cancer.

    If this isn’t stopped, someone is going to propose a “final solution” to the problem of the blacks, homosexuals and liberals who have ruined their suburban American utopia.

    I do not believe these are “slips of the tongue” but are subtle messages to the most extreme and aggressive of the intolerant and xenophobic “underground”.

    In desperation, it just might be that they’re hoping they can awaken a “sleeping giant” that will replace all the level-headed (if I can use that term) conservatives who are becoming uneasy with the GOP’s current direction and just aren’t crazy enough to follow them past the point of no return.

  • Thanks JTK for your explanation of the feelings behind racism in your comment above. As an Afr Am person, I’ve been horrified to hear that kind of sentiment you described on so-called progressive blogs – something like how there are poor villages in India and crime is non existent so poverty is no excuse for blacks.

    Of course, there are poor villages in Africa where crime is non existent too. But I’m sure the racists would have an answer for that too. Thx again.

    • Comments are closed.