Killing An Urban Legend
The National Review Online in an article on July 11, 2000 www.nationalreview.com/daily/nr071100.html) says:
"The Washington Post recycles a popular urban legend among reporters in its story today on Bush's NAACP convention speech. Writers Terry M. Neal and Michael A. Fletcher remark that Bush, in his comments, refrained from 'explicitly acknowledging his party's failure to support much of the 1960s-era civil rights agenda.'
"Perhaps that's because there's no failure to acknowledge. In fact, Republicans in both the House and Senate were more likely than Democrats to favor, say, the 1964 Civil Rights Act. (In the Senate, Republican support was 82 percent, compared to 69 percent among Democrats; in the House, it was 80 percent and 63 percent, respectively.) Many conservatives voted against the legislation on federalist or libertarian grounds. And yes, many Southern Democrats who also opposed it (Vice President Gore's father, for instance) later drifted toward the GOP. But the truth of the matter, contra Neal and Fletcher, is that Republicans did in fact support much of the 1960s-era civil rights agenda.
"So why is that Democrats never do the apologizing at NAACP conventions? Well, Bush himself essentially asked for the Post's rebuff, however erroneous it is, when he said that "there's no escaping the reality that the party of Lincoln has not always carried the mantle of Lincoln." It's not clear what this is supposed to mean.
"Republicans should get over thinking that they have to apologize for being Republicans whenever they appear before black audiences. In fact, it would be nice if they simply cited the 1964 vote totals and then segued, as Bush essentially did yesterday, into a discussion of the new civil rights battles — not over hate-crimes laws, but making sure poor children can attend good schools."
"The Washington Post recycles a popular urban legend among reporters in its story today on Bush's NAACP convention speech. Writers Terry M. Neal and Michael A. Fletcher remark that Bush, in his comments, refrained from 'explicitly acknowledging his party's failure to support much of the 1960s-era civil rights agenda.'
"Perhaps that's because there's no failure to acknowledge. In fact, Republicans in both the House and Senate were more likely than Democrats to favor, say, the 1964 Civil Rights Act. (In the Senate, Republican support was 82 percent, compared to 69 percent among Democrats; in the House, it was 80 percent and 63 percent, respectively.) Many conservatives voted against the legislation on federalist or libertarian grounds. And yes, many Southern Democrats who also opposed it (Vice President Gore's father, for instance) later drifted toward the GOP. But the truth of the matter, contra Neal and Fletcher, is that Republicans did in fact support much of the 1960s-era civil rights agenda.
"So why is that Democrats never do the apologizing at NAACP conventions? Well, Bush himself essentially asked for the Post's rebuff, however erroneous it is, when he said that "there's no escaping the reality that the party of Lincoln has not always carried the mantle of Lincoln." It's not clear what this is supposed to mean.
"Republicans should get over thinking that they have to apologize for being Republicans whenever they appear before black audiences. In fact, it would be nice if they simply cited the 1964 vote totals and then segued, as Bush essentially did yesterday, into a discussion of the new civil rights battles — not over hate-crimes laws, but making sure poor children can attend good schools."
posted by Robert at 2:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home