There are over 30 African-Americans running for office as Republicans with very strong credentials and compelling biographies. But they probably shouldn’t bother as there are too many racial and political barriers, The New York Times suggests as it slides in yet another dig at Tea Party activists
Diversity is a grand concept except where it trips up The New York Times and other media outlets that use race as a foil against Tea Party activists and public officials who advance small government initiatives. This article about the 30 plus African-Americans running for congressional seats as Republicans gets off to reasonable start, but disintegrates into transparent innuendoes that do not belong in a straight news story.
The election of President Barack Obama as the first African-American has opened a lot of doors with other black candidates in both parties, the report points out. Although the Republican contenders are running in competitive districts, they are well-credentialed a biographically compelling, Times acknowledges.
“State and national party officials say that this year’s cast of black Republicans is far more experienced than the more fringy players of yore, and include elected officials, former military personnel and candidates who have run before,” the report says.
So far, so good.
And it’s fine to include Democratic critics to balance out the report and offer up some historical perspective. After all, there are plenty of black Republicans who have run before but unsuccessfully. This point is made Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist and Tavis Smiley, a black talk show host.
Unfortunately, The Times finds slide in the canard that says a small government agenda is somehow incompatible with congenial race relations.
“A recent New York Times/CBS News poll found that 25 percent of self-identified Tea Party supporters think that the Obama administration favors blacks over whites, compared with 11 percent of the general public,” the report says.
The fact the NYT feels a need to ask such a question in the first place is itself revealing, but it’s also worth noting how the question is framed.
Moreover, the black candidates running under the GOP banner have called out the new media for manufacturing racism where it does not exist.
“I have been to these rallies, and there are hot dogs and banjos,” Allen West, the candidate in Florida is quoted as saying. “There is no violence or racism there.” West is a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army.
A Republican party that makes serious inroads with African-Americans could be positioned to build a lasting majority, much to the chagrin of the liberal media. Black voters hew closely to socially conservative positions that have a home in the Republican Party, so there is an opening here.
Despites its oft stated enthusiasm for the concept of diversity, it is evident The Times does not relish the idea of black voters breaking orbit from the Democratic Party. Diversity in voting does not fit in with the agenda.
Instead of encouraging black candidates to court both major parties, The Times goes to extra lengths to make it appear as though any lasting relationship with the Republican Party is a bridge too far.
“…Republicans face a double hurdle,” The Times asserts. “Black Democrats who are disinclined to back them in a general election, and incongruity with white Republicans, who sometimes do not welcome the blacks whom party officials claim to covet as new members.”
To be sure, there are barriers.
But if African-Americans see an opportunity to break open monolithic voting patterns by way of Republican candidacies in the age of Obama, they ought to receive a fair and even-handed hearing in the news media.
Popularity: 2% [?]
