Posted on 09/27/2007 4:38:10 PM PDT by sierrascrapper
WASHINGTON -- A PBS video previewing the network's Republican presidential candidates forum, set to air tonight from a historically black university, asks, "Can the party of Abraham Lincoln win the hearts and minds of all Americans?"
But none of the GOP's top White House contenders will show up to answer the question, each citing a scheduling conflict.
Related - New Hampshire's GOP race a real one for now - TOP OF THE TICKET Blog on GOP black forum
Related Stories - Democrats remain united on key issues
Instead, viewers will see four empty lecterns on the stage as Tavis Smiley, an African American talk show host, poses questions to five lesser-known candidates: Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine), Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.).
Coming days after the Spanish-language network Univision was forced to postpone its Republican forum because it was rejected by all but one candidate -- Sen. John McCain of Arizona -- the PBS forum has touched off a debate within the GOP over whether its 2008 candidates are trampling on past efforts to draw more minority voters.
"It's a missed opportunity," said former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele, who would have been the Senate's only black Republican had he won his election bid last year.
Steele, an organizer of the PBS forum, said he had confronted the campaigns in recent days, to no avail. He said that failing to connect with African American voters could be "lethal" in the general election.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
THIS SPEAKS VOLUMES TO ME. Who is not showing up for this debate????
FRED THOMPSON MITT ROMNEY RUDY GIULIANI JOHN MCCAIN
If I was a minority, I would be offended too. I'm glad that the other candidates feel it is important to speak to all groups in our nation. We are a "melting pot" after all and you can't exclude certain grouops due to their color of skin. They all have a VOICE and VOTE
Interesting article
So you want to waste your breath talking to a bunch of devout socialist?If you are a conservative I can see alot better things to do with ones time.You are not going to change anyones mind.
Pardon me amigo, but nobody is being excluded. According to the constitution there are no minorities. Candidates should not have to speak to so-called minorities like Blacks, Latinos, whatever anymore than should have to speak to Norwegians, Greeks, or any other ethnic group. Speaking to so-called minorities is called pandering. If certain ethnic groups feel excluded, they should stop excluding themselves from the rest of the country. They're the ones doing the excluding. Get over your race and minority hang-ups.
I would tell them frankly why the conservative agenda should be pleasing to all.
“Do you black guys feel uneasy when you look at your pay stub and see that 50% goes to taxes?
“Do you want to live in a society whree it is illegal to smoke in your own house?
Put it to them directly. All they can say is no, we don’t care.
They vote but usually for the party that supported Jim Crow laws and segregation, the party that fought tooth and nail against civil rights legislation. They vote against the party that was born out of opposition to slavery.
“So you want to waste your breath talking to a bunch of devout socialist?”
It wasn’t a waste of GW Bush’s breath when he increased the Republican percent of hispanics in Texas.
I am among the largest minority in the USA today. I am a white male, Christian, retired soldier, conservative. You don’t get any more minority status than that.
I guess when the Left Barks-everyone else is suppose to jump? Or is there a Group Now who has the job of keeping RECORDS of the number of times "Speaking Engagements are not attended?"
Double Dittos to THAT! ( Gee? I wonder just How many LIBERAL Candidates have had "Scheduling Problems" when asked to be interviewed or Speak on MINUTE MEN Forums? Mmmm?
Or how many times has EDWARDS, SHARPTON, Hillary Had "Schedual Problems that conflict with..." when RIGHT TO LIFE Forums asked THEM to come speak to defend THEIR Stances? Mmmm?
Never hear about THOSE " Conflicts " in the news? Do we? (Let alone "Comments" when Groups like the MinuteMen or Pro-Lifers were KICKED OFF with VIOLENCE from Public Speaking at Schools & Universities!)
I also tend to call into QUESTION the "Motives" and PRE-JUDGEMENTS Made by others or related PBS personnel, When THEY have the nerve to call Politcians like Duncan Hunter, Hukabee, or Tancredo " LESSER NAME " Republicans!? They are Pretty Top Name to me!----would they call "Shapton, Jackson" (All FAILING at all their attempts to gain National Recognition of Positions!) " Lesser Name Democrat Represenatives?
DA
Why would anyone go to get verbally beat up by a bunch of people that are not going to vote for you anyway, and as an opportunity to air their lefty positions?
“It wasn’t a waste of GW Bush’s breath when he increased the Republican percent of hispanics in Texas.”
Oh really?
http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2004/12/nep_revises_tex.html
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_48/c3910069_mz013.htm
I think the issue here is that the GOP sees Americans as “Americans.”
The Dems see Americans as: African-Americans, White Americans, Mexican-Americans, Asian-Americans, etc.
“Oh really?”
Yes, oh really.
The articles indicate the gains were not as large as initially reported. Granted. But Bush did nonetheless win more than before.
What is your strategy for Republicns to win? Writeoff blacks and hispanics? Just ignore them, because few will vote for you?
If you think about the 100 percent demographic pie, Republicans cannot afford to write off blacks, hispanics, and other groups.
Not so long as your goal is to win. But if your goal is to be idealogically pure, one might opt to cater to a decreasing but strident subset.
I think that their actions already prove they dont care.
That was then and this is now.The hispanics have thrown their lot in with the rats now.
Michael Steele is the Left? Who knew?!!!
Funny about that.Screw ‘em.
You sure label folks with a broad brush! There are many conservative hispanics.
Skipping it was stupid. So what if we can’t win that vote? We can at least get a few million voters from ‘em. So why stab them in the eye?
So they should perform like trained seals in front of an already hostile group whose main purpose is undoubtedly to tear them down?
When are these Socialists - of any color - going to realize that, in this day of the Internet, Cable TV, open forums and Blogs, along with YouTube and others - that the candidate can talk directly to us and tell us where they are on the issues.
Myself, I have little to no respect for those candidates who go running hither and thither at anyone's finger snap, to get publicity and/or out of fear of being left out - or whatever.
They show a propensity to follow, not to lead.
Race and minority “hangups” are held by the MSM and Democrats, who will probably lump ALL of the GOP contenders into the category of “racist” simply because the frontrunners didn’t attend.
They will do this regardless of the GOP’s sentiments of “We’re all Americans”.
If candidates speak to certain groups, I don’t consider it to be pandering unless they make promises to certain individuals based on whatever their group is. In other words, tailor their speech to fit each group.
I don’t see Hunter doing this. His message and actions always seem to be the same. I don’t know enough about the others to say that about them though.
The second tiers who are attending could use the exposure, IMHO.
The debate is about to begin.
I hope they ask a question about Red China with all that’s been going on lately!
“If you think about the 100 percent demographic pie, Republicans cannot afford to write off blacks, Hispanics, and other groups.”
Who’s written them off? And one fact Bush/Rove never seem to discuss is that Reagan won 41% of the Hispanic vote. Where are the great gains Bush made? Using more realistic numbers than the discredited 44%, he probably did worse at just under 40%
Bush/Rove, with their six and a-half year attempt to give amnesty to illegal aliens have done incalculable harm to the GOP by pushing and pushing, year-after-year a plan the GOP base and GOP controlled House did not want, and the House rejected it time and again.
For Jorge Bush to try and ram amnesty down the throats of the GOP base once he had a Democrat majority in the House showed a person solely concerned about himself and not giving a damn how much he damaged the party and people who put him in office for two terms.
It remains to be seen, but the Bush/Rove legacy may well be that they squandered the GOP majority built up by many people other than them, and other than GHWB who managed to squander Regan’s coalition after four years. Who knows when it can be rebuilt after two Bushes.
Now Jorge is on board with Global Warming. What other betrayals are Republicans in for before January, 2009, which can’t come soon enough.
The GOP should have continued appealing to Hispanics and blacks through basic conservative principles, and not with pandering, amnesty for illegals schemes a large majority of Americans oppose. And that scheme sure isn’t winning them an new black voters, who are now the second biggest minority.
“See you at the bill signing.”
Basically the reason I posted this article is because even though all types of races should be considered Americans, some don’t come out to meet the candidates on other platforms unless it is related to them. I think attending this debate is an important tool for the GOP to get the word out to all AMERICANS no matter what their color. The vote of the “minority” is important for our nation as a whole. I find it interesting that the “top” runners don’t see the value in it.
Agreed,but I dont think enough.You look at california and it sure does not seem that “conservative Hispanics” make up a big enough voting block to stem the tide of liberalism that has a strangle hold on that state.What do you think the break down is regarding conservative verses liberal voting Hispanics?
J.C. is correct.
‘”When you consistently regret invitations to appear in front of black and brown audiences, I tend to think that’s a pattern and not a scheduling problem,” Smiley said in an interview Wednesday.
THIS SPEAKS VOLUMES TO ME. Who is not showing up for this debate????
FRED THOMPSON MITT ROMNEY RUDY GIULIANI JOHN MCCAIN”
They are only enforcing the Dem’s propaganda that Republicans don’t care about them.
But the Republican candidates with courage came, and did a really great job!
“I find it interesting that the “top” runners don’t see the value in it.”
Yeah, me too. They blew off quite a few of the debates, didn’t they?
I’d offend the blacks, too.
Since they vote pretty much as a block - 90% Democrat, and are openly hostile to Conservatives and Republicans who DO visit their their little shindigs...
And since they have openly separatist organizations like the Congressional Black Caucus, and the NAALCP...
Why the Hell SHOULD Republicans worry about them?
Write ‘em off and go look for votes elsewhere. Like among conservatives...
A nation divided can not long stand.
Are we headed for another great civil war between the left and the right while we are in the middle of a war between Islamo-Fashism and Judeo-Christain Democracy
“If you think about the 100 percent demographic pie, Republicans cannot afford to write off blacks, hispanics, and other groups.”
Nobody is “written off”. Everyone is invited. What you are talking about is blatant racial pandering.
The Republican Party and Conservative values aren’t trinkets to be peddled on late-night infomercials.
“But if your goal is to be idealogically pure, one might opt to cater to a decreasing but strident subset.”
We shouldn’t be “catering” to anyone. This isn’t a dinner party, it’s our country. Compromise is part of politics but generally there is no compromise with those who hate you.
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.