Bush addresses NAACP

In what will be viewed by some as a purely political move, President Bush today addresed the NAACP. This by itself might not be newsworthy except for the fact that Bush has declined the invitation to speak before them for 5 consecutive years. Bush had addressed the organization when he was a presidential candidate in 2000, but things had soured between the prez and the group soon after that.

During the 2000 campaign, the NAACP ran a TV ad critical of Bush. It featured the daughter of James Byrd, a black man who had been dragged to death behind a pickup truck. She was critical of Bush's refusal to pass a hate crime bill while he was gov of Texas, despite her pleas to do so.

Bush is on good terms with the newest leader of the NAACP, Bruce Gordon, which probably led to his accepting their offer to speak.

All in all, the crowd was reservedly polite, the only interruptons being a couple of demonstrators yelling about Cheney and Iraq. The crowd rose and applauded loudly, however when Bush endorsed the Voting Rights Act.

The Washington Post has a transcript of the address at this link:

Bush addresses NAACP

When I saw this post, I was shocked to see there was no interest in it.
If he has again declined the invitation, I suspect this thread would be pages long...

I was surprised that Bush accepted a chance to speak to the NAACP knowing he had not spoken there in the past. At least not the recent past.
So, can we assume by this that Bush is only newsworthy when the news is negative

I have listened to the speech of Mr. Bush to the NAACP. Judging from the skeptical and cynical looks on the faces of the audience, he has a long way to go in order to win over African-Americans to the Republican party. If not, persuading them at all.


Personally, Mr. Bush, is talking out of the both sides of his mouth so he can save the mid-term elections for the Republican party. The POTUS has endorsed too many policies that have hurt the African-American community financially, politically and socially.

1)His lack of response about Hurricane Katrina

2) His endorsement of not giving into "quotas" (although in the speech today, he talked about "pouring money into minority owned businesses")

3)The meaningless of the "No child left behind act".

4)The lack of response regarding the slow passages of the VRA until it was "politically viable" to do so.

5)The lack of response about the Miami 7.

6)The lack of response regarding the disenfranchisement of African-American voters in Florida and Ohio.

7)The lack of addressing the income disparity between races, especially when it comes to class.

8)Although he said that the "Bush family was committed to civil rights", he never explained how his family has embraced the movement in the past as well as the present. In fact, he didn't say how this would be so in the future as well.

9)He also thought that "throwing money" at the problem would solve it. But, he did not describe pro-active ways to help African-Americans achieve economic and social equality.

With that being said, Mr. Bush has only visted with the NAACP twice. Once, when he was running as a Presidential candidate in 2000 and trying to be a "compassionate conservative". And now when he is on the bully pulpit for the GOP.

And now, when he has a "working relationship" with CEO and NAACP President Bruce Gordon (according to Mr. Snow, "more moderate" than other NAACP leaders in the past), he is making all these "promises" conveniently at a time when the Republican party desperately needs support. Again, it is an affront due to the fact that when he was "popular" he didn't need to visit with the African-American community. And now that he isn't, there he is begging for scraps.

The tradition has always been that every POTUS has attended the NAACP convention. Mr. Bush is the first POTUS in a long time to decline to visit until this year.


OTOH, the reason why people probably haven't had anything to say about this occasion is because on the boards, some people have called the NAACP an "racist" organization in other threads instead of taking the time to find out what the group actually advocates and stands for. Some posters have not possessed a desire to find out what the NAACP had done in a historical sense and why the group is important to the civil rights struggle of the United States--especially during the years of Jim Crow.









[edit on 21-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Well, I agree that Bush's appearance was politically motivated. But I wonder how many of the items listed are really valid criticisms of his policies. The Miami 7, for example. Why would he bring that up in a six-year speech?

Too much has been lost due to lack of communication. Bush has snubbed the NAACP for 6 years. Did he have a reason? In his mind, he probably felt like they stabbed him in the back with that TV ad and other negative campaigning that the NAACP did against him. Plus, some of the NAACP leadership have been openly caustic toward him. Why would he want to give them the opportunity to publicly ridicule him?

Both sides are at fault. I cannot say Bush was right in avoiding the NAACP all those years, but I cannot say that the NAACP was totally blameless either.

The Republicans have ignored the black vote for years. They are currently doing the same with the hispanic vote. To expect this administration to patch everything up and get an enthusiatic endorsement is not realistic. But hopefully, the first step has been taken to bring America back together.

[edit on 22-7-2006 by bombers8]

He was definitely politically motivated. Personally I really dislike the NAACP, and Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton and the likes. Martin Luther King was good, but these organizations and demonstrators, just increases racism. Let's forget about that, many of them ARE racist.

Unfortunately, Rev. Jackson, Rev. Sharpton and the likes do not make up the entire membership of the NAACP.

So, it is an unfair assumption to blame an entire organization for the likes of a few.

But, that is the argument that is always spoken whenever someone criticizes the NAACP. They always say that the NAACP is racist. But these accusers never have any proof why.

I'll say here what I have spoken on the another thread:

Prove it if they have ever barred whites from any social institution in America.

Sigma Nu, the fraternity that Trent Lott belonged to, barred Blacks for a long time from admittance. Mr. Lott personally did that--as Chapter president at Ole Miss.



[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

I never said that the NAACP was a racist organization, I said "many of these organizations" that advocate rights, etc. for one race are racist.

EDIT: What I did also say though, is that I dislike the NAACP. For many reasons.

[edit on 22-7-2006 by RetinoidReceptor]

Well how else can one race who has been systematically disenfranchised by the system for over 500 years (and nearly two hundred years since Emancipation) find an advocate in American society--especially when that society has been hostile to their social progress to the point of passing laws?

Who would speak for them if having such a group is racist?

Name one group that isn't racist that will fulfill these qualifications for helping those who are disenfranchised because of racial animus and bias.








[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Oh I am sorry you don't ever see any blacks who are successful? Who go to good colleges? They go through the NAACP or similar organization to achieve this? If there is a racist occurence then it should be reported. But there are black people who will play the race card at any toll booth they can get to! Cynthia Mckinney just for one of the many examples. That causes MORE racism. Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton INCREASES racism.

Now am I saying there are no stereotypes of black people in our society? Absolutely not! I know there are. Why are there stereotypes though? Do white people create it? Is it white people's fault that most jails are mainly black people yet they make up a smaller amount of the population? It isn't. Anyone can get educated, work, etc.

Is it harder for a black person to be more successful than a white person? I think in many cases, yes. Is it easier for black people to get a regular job with regular pay (such as at Walgreens)? Yes it is. Both are not fair. I have been a vicitm of racism by black and spanish people, yet nobody REALLY cares about that. If you call a black person a ni****, then that is it. If a police person calls a black person that, then the NAACP will get on your ass ASAP. If a black cop called a white person, say, cracker...it really wouldn't matter nearly as much. The white cop would be fired, and the black cop may get suspended for a few days if even that.

Black history month, reparations? Don't get me started.

So yes, these organizations are usually detrimental in my eyes. They need to focus more on picking up their community other than focusing on racism. Bill Cosbey is someone who is SENSIBLE about this whole situation. I have met successful black people, and my best friend for years and years is black. And they really despise what most of Jessie and Al and the NAACP usually advocates. My friend even asked me, why there wasn't a Jewish History month that was so celebrated like a Black History month. Why is that? There was a lot of anti semitism in America as well in the beginnings. But as a Jew, I would politely refuse a month dedicated to my "culture", because I really don't believe in having months dedicated to just one culture/race/religion that was mistreated. How about we have a tolerance month, advocating tolerance for EVERYONE.

Nobody has said it quite like Martin Luther King Jr.

My question is why are you venting your anger at one organization?



[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Originally posted by ceci2006
My question is why are you venting your anger at one organization?

You should be just as mad at the Council for Conservative Citizens.

Who said I wasn't just as mad at the CCC? This topic was on the NAACP, which I said I dislike. It would be strange to start talking about the CCC or another organization when the post has only NAACP in the story. Any group that increases racism/bigotry is on my s*** list. Including the minority ones. Including the white ones.

Fair enough. It's nice that you would like an equal world. However, you have meticulously pointed out that there are inequalities in society. And I am very sorry that you have experienced racism in your life. No one should have to.

Again, I am saying that Rev. Al Sharpton, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Dr. Rice or Gen. Powell do not speak or advocate for the entire Black community. Neither does Bill Cosby. They do not profess to be leaders of the community anyway. And I am glad you are able to see that Black people are individuals who have different motivations in life.

However, it's not about having a victim mentality. It's not about playing the race card. Who can people (like the family of James Byrd, Jr.) turn to when they have experienced racial animus if no groups existed to advocate for them and cater to their needs?

But I do have another question to ask, though:

Does that mean that the Simon Wiesenthal center and its work on Holocaust studies must shut down because of your hatred for groups that advocate for different races?





[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Absolutely not, if it is for educational purposes then why should it be? That would be like saying museums should be shut down. I have a problem when it is SHOVED down people's throats. And the people who it did not happen to hint that they should get special treatment from the people that did not ever inflict anything upon them. That goes for blacks, jews, natives americans, etc.

But the Wiesenthal Center has a group of scholars who continue Mr. Wiesenthal's work. As a group, they talk about and advocate for Holocaust survivors. So, by your logic, you do not want their work to continue.

After all, the NAACP also has scholars who historically uncover Black history in the same way and they also advocate for the civil rights of Black people. They also keep a library and an archive about Civil Rights.

So if you want one to shut down, you also want the other to shut down because you hate them for "spreading racism" and "shoving their message down other people's throats" in the same way.



[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Errr..... Did anyone happen to notice how loud Bush was, and as if he were under the influence of crack? Dont get me wrong- he was c-l-e-a-r and for once didnt hesitate with his words, but he was in some state of euphoria

Now i dont have the slightest idea what being on that substance is, but i will tell you i've seen a few #heads in my time in Cape Cod, and he certainly looked like he'd partaken of something.

Anyway, i'm just sayin'

Originally quoted by dgtempe
Errr..... Did anyone happen to notice how loud Bush was, and as if he were under the influence of crack? Dont get me wrong- he was c-l-e-a-r and for once didnt hesitate with his words, but he was in some state of euphoria

Now i dont have the slightest idea what being on that substance is, but i will tell you i've seen a few #heads in my time in Cape Cod, and he certainly looked like he'd partaken of something.

Anyway, i'm just sayin'

Lol. Yes, he did look a little "jumpy" didn't he? I wouldn't second guess it.

He certainly wasn't imagining anyone in their underpants (that old trick that you're supposed to do when you speak in front of audiences).

Maybe that is the reason why he kept on looking at Karl Rove in the audience the entire time he was speaking.





[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Originally posted by ceci2006
But the Wiesenthal Center has a group of scholars who continue Mr. Wiesenthal's work. As a group, they talk about and advocate for Holocaust survivors. So, by your logic, you do not want their work to continue.

After all, the NAACP also has scholars who historically uncover Black history in the same way and they also advocate for the civil rights of Black people. They also keep a library and an archive about Civil Rights.

So if you want one to shut down, you also want the other to shut down because you hate them for "spreading racism" and "shoving their message down other people's throats" in the same way.



[edit on 22-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Minority groups make a lot of noise about nothing often. Like the duke case, and how the girl who was supposedly raped said it was because they were racist. Well you saw a lot of black people protest, and representatives of the NAACP saying the boys should be put into jail, even though there was no clear evidence, and the girl changed her story numerous times.

And no, I don't care if they study and bring up information about the incidents. As I have mentioned before. Jewish groups usually advocate for the SURVIVORS, as you stated above. As long as they do not shove it down your throat and make you feel like you owe their great great grandchildren something [reparations] and don't creat a whole lot of ado about nothing, then it is fine.

I always never understand why in history books there are huge things about the holocaust and slavery yet people rarely talk about the millions and millions murdered in African genocides or the gulags during the Soviet era or the Japanese genocides against the Chinese. Doesn't seem very fair right?!

I am advocating balance. Which Jews are just as quick to call someone anti semitic as blacks are as quick to call someone racist. Both get on my nerves. Hell I have been called anti semitic (lolll) and racist for not even saying anything near discriminatory against them.

Oh well, you can believe whatever you want, I still dislike the NAACP nobody said you have to. Like I said, when they start, I don't know, picking up their community instead of focusing on racism and even making it up out the air sometimes, and blaming the white community for what state the black community is in, then it will seem like a more useful organization.

Originally quoted by RetinoidReceptor
Jewish groups usually advocate for the SURVIVORS, as you stated above. As long as they do not shove it down your throat and make you feel like you owe their great great grandchildren something [reparations] and don't creat a whole lot of ado about nothing, then it is fine.

It's funny how people forget that there are SURVIVORS from the Jim Crow era still alive as well. My older relatives are SURVIVORS of heinous prejudices committed during the era of segregation. A lot of their friends are also SURVIVORS of the same terrible prejudices committed during that time.

The NAACP also advocates for the SURVIVORS of the Jim Crow era. There are Black people still living who have endured the vagaries of what racist people have done to them politically, legally and socially. Some even have family members who have been lynched.

In fact, do me a favor. Deliver your beliefs to Emmett Till's mother. She's still alive. As well as Myrlie Evers, whose husband was killed. They would love to hear your attitudes of "shoving these things down the throats of people".

As for Rev. Jackson, he stood there and witnessed the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King assasinated at the Lorraine Hotel. He too is a SURVIVOR of the Jim Crow era, whether you like it or not.

As for reparations, the government gave them to the Japanese SURVIVORS of the relocation camps. Should they not have received them? But no one ever gets on their backs for asking for reparations.

And because of that, any group that advocates for their survivors (including the NAACP) also are as worthy as any Jewish group that advocates for survivors of the Holocaust.

Even with that being said, there are good and bad people of all racial groups. There are people who are successful and not so successful of all racial groups. There are a lot of people from different races who are in the ghetto. There are people who are in jail from all racial groups. So logically, every race has the same problems.

But, it depends on social mobility and how the powers that be afford it to certain races opposed to others. Therein lies the rub.

However, it always strikes me as funny that people from any other race feel that they have to give advice to Black people for some reason. They wag their finger repeatedly telling us that we have to "pull ourselves up by our bootstraps". However, they ignore the bigger picture and remain sedimented on the stereotypes pitched by the media, the pundits and the politicians.

And that is what you are exactly doing when you are bringing up what "Black people must do to get it together". What have you done to help the Black community instead of berate them in a derogatory fashion?

I always never understand why in history books there are huge things about the holocaust and slavery yet people rarely talk about the millions and millions murdered in African genocides or the gulags during the Soviet era or the Japanese genocides against the Chinese. Doesn't seem very fair right?!

There are groups that advocate many of these things. The Chinese have asked for reparations and restitution against the Japanese. Furthermore, Armenians have also formed groups that talked about the genocides committed to them.

It has to do with being aware of what's going on. And people who usually don't, complain about it. Others who do proactively write, campaign and publically speak about it. Research has long been written about all of these areas. There are centers who study the victims of war crimes and write about them. They interview, catalogue and create an archive of the different acts of genocide around the world. Some centers are held at various universities across the United States and internationally. Some scholars have made it their life's work. It takes research to find these things out instead of "crying for equality" and "tolerance".

Oh well, you can believe whatever you want, I still dislike the NAACP nobody said you have to. Like I said, when they start, I don't know, picking up their community instead of focusing on racism and even making it up out the air sometimes, and blaming the white community for what state the black community is in, then it will seem like a more useful organization.

As I said before, all communities have their problems. But there is a notable difference between the Black and Jewish community.

The difference between Jews and Blacks, is that Jews are white and are discriminated against because of religion. Their skin color does not create the glass ceiling in the work place as well as in society. And they are definitely not politically disenfranchised by representation in the government (although in Florida, retired Jewish voters were disenfranchised by the Florida recount as well as Black voters). However, if they were to give up their religion tomorrow, they could still vote, get a job and be productive members of society without being harrassed about color.

Blacks cannot hide behind a religion. Their skin color does not magically disappear if they renounce it. And as long as people continue to use skin color as a judgment of intelligence (i.e.,The Bell Curve), productivity as well as social integration and legality(i.e. ex-Secretary of Education Bill Bennett's comments about "Blacks and abortion"), there is still a problem here.

Yes, Jews and Blacks share a history of persecution. That makes both of us very close in our legacy of being discriminated against in society. In fact, Blacks and Jews have helped each other out in many ways. And for that, we need to reach out to each other on common ground when talking about tolerance.

But the problem here is education and and using that to enhance race-relations. Then you can talk about tolerance once you get a grasp of the issues instead of using stereotypes to say what's wrong with the Black community.

How do you suppose Blacks educate others about themselves if there aren't any groups who will advocate for them, research their histories and make political strides?

And how do you suppose Blacks change the minds of others when there are people like yourself that easily give into the "screaming about race" stigma that accuses Blacks of talking about their experiences? Because people accuse Blacks of "screaming about race", they tend to shut off the dialogue because they think that the experiences of Black people are not to be validated.

And how do you think Black people feel when no one wants to listen to their lives, stories or experiences--especially when it has to do with persecution?

And why do you think it is easier for people to understand and listen to Jewish people talk about their experiences and get people to understand them rather than other racial and ethnic groups?













[edit on 23-7-2006 by ceci2006]

Reparations are not for victims of the Jim Crow's laws, it is for the great great grandchildren of slaves. Even if it was for the people living during the Jim Crow laws, they shouldn't get reparations, Jewish people get it from Germany, because it 1)happened to them, 2)all their belongings, savings, and things of value were confiscated, 3)most of their family were killed. The Japanese in internment camps is the same way, minus #3.

I am not saying we shouldn't learn about this part of US history, but I have used this term numerous times, it should not be shoved down our throats. Meaning, black history month is enough. If Jews and the Japanese and Chinese and Mexicans and Irish all wanted to "teach" us all about there plights in America and the world as much as black people did, it would be overwhelming our calendar.

I am not saying that every race is perfect. Sure white people have their share of problems, but not as much as black and hispanic people do. Like I said, people will look down on black people a lot, because in their mind they equate black people with the ghetto, drugs, gangs, robberies, jail. And not because they are the only people involved in those type of things, but minorities have a much higher jail rate, and if you go into most bad neighborhoods, you tend to notice basically black and some degree spanish people. And if there is a even near amount of racism, some of these neighborhoods riot and destroy their neighborhoods. People look down on people like that, and subconsciously equate it with black people. It isn't because white people are all racist, it is because actions and the way many black people do things makes white people turned off. I know when I have been called racist or anti semitic I have been turned off by both cultures or whatever, and I am Jewish!

There is one thing minorities have that white people don't. They can call someone racist, and woah, it turns out to be a problem. You'll get the NAACP calling, staging things, etc. I am not saying they are bad, I am saying they go overkill. Again, increasing racism. I know you must notice that unless you live under a rock or you just don't want to admit it.

Listen I am just telling you from a white person's perspective. I mean, I care about all American history, but it isn't fair when we have to learn an extreme amount about one thing, and other things are left out/less covered.

Can you explain to me about the African American terminology? Why can't black people be called blacks? Why aren't white people called European American? My best friend hates that terminology because he says that he doesn't like being equated with 'African Americans', and he isn't one, because his family is from St. Lucia. I don't understand, please explain as I am curious, thanks.

Is there a double standard in the work place? Well yes. Like I said, it is easier for minorities to get lower income jobs and regular jobs. I mean, people who own businesses get bulletins making sure you have enough minorities. Not to mention you can get tax write off's. But in big business, especially dealing with international companies, they don't want to hire black people. Many in Europe, Middle East, Asia, don't like black people. They aren't use to them. It is like Bush sending Condi to the Middle East, well that is the worst person he could send. She is black and a woman...? People there don't respect either.

So in a closing note, I really didn't want to discuss this because it isn't important to me, but I want things to be more balanced. I want to not be blamed for black people's problems because I am white. I don't believe in reparations, I think it is a joke. And I believe that most of the time when people call others racist, it is much ado about nothing. And I believe affirmative action to be racist and stupid.

As a question to you: most advanced classes in school and good grades are made by predominately (not only) whites/asians. While lower classes usually have much more minorities. Why is that to you? Is it because of white people? Or is it because minorities don't believe they can do it? I think it is the latter. I think the NAACP should instill in the black community that they can make something of themselves, you know like that song "I know I can, be what I wanna be, If I work hard at it, I can be where I wanna be". I am just curious as to your thoughts.

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
So, can we assume by this that Bush is only newsworthy when the news is negative

On this board??? YES. Amazing huh? For a 'deny ignorance' theme it (the board
in general) really only sees what it wants to see when it comes to Bush43.