Posted on 07/14/2007 7:14:28 AM PDT by lowbridge
Posted by Matthew Balan on July 13, 2007 - 18:34.
CNN contributor Roland Martin took aim at Republicans on Friday's "American Morning, since Congressman Tom Tancredo was the only GOP presidential candidate to appear at a recent NAACP forum. Co-host John Roberts asked Martin, "what do you make of this idea that nine of the 10 Republican candidates took a pass on this convention?" Martin's response was blunt: "Of course, conservatives won't like this, but the bottom line is, the GOP, they're scared of black folks. I mean, it's as if they can't even talk to them."
Martin, a regular contributor on CNN's "American Morning," and a liberal talk show host based out of Chicago, has been given regular opportunities on the morning show to give left-wing lines about various issues without a counter-balance from a conservative. He continued his offensive by citing President Bush's single appearance before the NAACP in his several years as president, and Rudy Giuliani's "terrible history with black folks in New York" as the reason there was "no doubt he [Giuliani] was going to ignore the NAACP."
To his credit, Roberts followed up to Martin's answer by asking, "Let me just play devil's advocate here. They are afraid of African-Americans, or do they just think that the NAACP has been sort of historically hostile to Republicans?"
Martin's answer:
No, no, because over time, when you look at Republicans in terms of the ability to reach out to African-Americans, that is sort of this apprehension there. Of course, there's history there. The whole southern strategy, Richard Nixon, in terms of trying to ignore black voters, appeal to white voters in the South. And so, that was part of their strategy. Ken Mehlman, when he ran the RNC, he apologized for it.... Republicans have always had a difficulty in trying to speak to African-Americans. And let me tell you, John, issues like immigration, which Republicans are against, nine out of 10 of my callers will be absolutely against it. The issue of education, the issue of gay marriage, there are issues there the Republicans can dialogue on. But you can't continue to say, well, we want to reach out to black voters, we don't want them simply voting Democrat, but then you never talk to them. So, you have to cross that line. And so, frankly, not talking to them makes no sense. That was an opportunity that they lost.
One could predict, however, that the mainstream media, possibly including Martin himself, would have criticized Republicans for using "wedge issues" like immigration and gay "marriage" as a means to reach out to blacks.
The major detail that wasn't mentioned during the segment was the reason why President Bush didn't appear before the NAACP until 2006. When he was a presidential candidate, Bush appeared before the NAACP in July 2000. Just over three months later in October, the NAACP ran a race-baiting TV ad which featured the daughter of James Byrd, who was dragged behind a pickup truck for miles and was murdered. She blasted then-Governor Bush's decision to not support new "hate crimes" legislation in Texas. "When Governor George W . Bush refused to support hate crimes legislation, it was like my father was killed all over again." The media was largely silent in response to the ad.
It goes to show that Roberts was right to ask Martin if Republicans think that the NAACP has been "historically hostile" to the GOP.
Bring on the Fairness Doctorine.
We should have 'equal time' to rebut such comments.
Am I alone in thinking that one should be very careful what one wishes for, for their wish may come true?
They are not “scared of black folks”. They just see that it is a waste of time to pander to a group that is so narrow minded in their own political views. They refuse to be shaken down and hustled by the Jesse Jacksons, Al Sharptons and Julian Bonds of the world.
He is a token house slave doing the bidding for his liberal master, the NAACP is a joke now, run by Democrats for Democrats, so any Republican would be wise to skip out on this grave yard of old socialists and burned out 60’s radicals.
They’re scared black folks will vote for stupid Democrats, which seems to be the pattern.
Showing up at a hostile venue like the NAACP is a no-win situation for a Republican. It’s not like a Republican can expect any significant number of NAACP members to vote for him
You hit that nail on the head. It would be like going to a moveon.org crowd, why bother.
Why has the NAACP been such a failure at promoting self-responsibility and family-responsibility in the African American community in the four decades since the passage of the Civil Rights Act?
Why has the NAACP been such a failure at promoting African-American small businesses in the four decades since the passage of the Civil Rights Act? (Not talking about getting government doles for small businesses, but promoting and assisting this activity in the African American community.)
Why, in the four decades since the passage of the Civil Rights Act, are there so few African-American owned convenience stores in the African-American communities? Doesn’t the NAACP have a role in that tragic failure?
Why, in the four decades since the passage of the Civil Rights Act, has the ownership of motels nationwide been heavily taken over by people from India? Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but African-Americans were already here. Why didn’t they, with the help of the NAACP, come up with the idea of establishing themselves in a specific business sector, the way the Indians, and other ethnic groups (all relative new-comers compared to African-Americans) have done? What is the NAACP’s role and responsibility in this massive, catastrophic failure.
Why has the NAACP failed, in the last four decades, to promote good use of the English language among children in African-American communities? Why does it allow them to grow up sounding (in many cases, I’m sorry, it’s true) like a community of ignorant savages? What is the role/responsibility of the NAACP in this massive, catastrophic failure of assimilation into the richest country on earth?
The answer, in my opinion, is that the NAACP, like the Democratic Party, does not WANT a free, prosperous and assimilated African-American population. If such a population existed, who would need the NAACP?
No, the NAACP, like the Democratic Party, wants to keep African-Americans on the Poverty Plantation, where they will always have a need for the NAACP.
What do you expect from the CommieNewsNetwork?
>>Martin’s response was blunt: “Of course, conservatives won’t like this, but the bottom line is, the GOP, they’re scared of black folks. I mean, it’s as if they can’t even talk to them.”<<
Yup, I shake in my boots everytime I talk to my sister, my nieces and great-nieces and nephews. Those baby black folk are the scariest.
The only black folk I’m scared of are the Nigerian ones you smackedown. How’s that going?
Perhaps the GOP recognizes the futility of attempting to separate Blacks from the Democratic Plantation.
Hey Roland, my wife might take issue with that. She talks to me so much that...never mind, she reads my posts...
5.56mm
Why is it that Blacks can’t be racists??????? This prick certainly is.
Republicans don’t seek votes at the Communist convention either.
You are right. But that difference is emphasized and institutionalized by the NAACP and other “black leaders” who benefit directly by their people being downtrodden and who feel personally threatened by the mere hint of an existence of a free, prosperous and independent African-American middle class.
The NAACP and other “black leaders” are criminals. The only criminals in history to be revered by their victims.
He works for CNN so what else would he spout but lies and leftist propaganda?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.