Some people say that under Democrats, Blacks have not made any progress or have regressed. They point to the out of wedlock birth rate as well as the marriage rates. Those declines cannot be denied, but the following is never mentioned.
 

Black Stats (DarkStar Spouts Off)

http://darkstarspoutsoff.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/11/black_stats.html

 

Given the above advances, has life for Blacks been all bad? 

OK, it's said that Blacks don't vote for Republicans. I state it is mainly because Republicans don't try to get their votes, and if they tried, it would be different. Here is some information that supports what I state.

Michael Steele said he needed 20-25% of the Black vote to win. He got 25-30%, exceeding his goal and getting 3 times the percentage of BLack votes in Maryland that Blacks normally give REpublicans. Ehrlich received 20% of the Black vote, which is about 2 times more than Blacks normally give the Republicans in Maryland. That’s after Ehrlich’s first term where he went to Blacks and did things for HBCUs in Maryland, which had been traditionally underfunded.

Ken Blackwell, a Black Republican, prior to the last election, received more than 50% of the Black vote.

Mike Huckabee said he received more than 40% of the Black vote.

Jackie Winters, a Black Republican in Salem, said she receives a large majority of Black votes in her elections.

Arlan Specter stated he receives 25-30% of the Black vote. After he first won election, although he didn't get even that, he still opened up an office in a Black area for constituent services.

http://darkstarspoutsoff.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/01/black-republica.html

 

 There may be a problem with the survey method for this one.

http://darkstarspoutsoff.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/09/put-up-or-shut-.html

 

Put Up or Shut Up

 The original link has closed. It was from WBAL radio in Baltimore

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-14-GOP-racial-politics_x.htm

Posted 7/14/2005 11:49 PM

GOP: 'We were wrong' to play racial politics

"Some Republicans gave up on winning the African-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization," Mehlman said at the annual convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong."

Mehlman's apology to the NAACP at the group's convention in Milwaukee marked the first time a top Republican Party leader has denounced the so-called Southern Strategy employed by Richard Nixon and other Republicans to peel away white voters in what was then the heavily Democratic South. Beginning in the mid-1960s, Republicans encouraged disaffected Southern white voters to vote Republican by blaming pro-civil rights Democrats for racial unrest and other racial problems

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/820110/posts

 Open Letter to the Board of the California Republican Party
ChronWatch ^ | Thursday, January 09, 2003 | Shannon Reeves

Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 2:57:38 AM by dwills

Open Letter to the Board of the California Republican Party

By Shannon Reeves Thursday, January 09, 2003

To: Members of the Board of Directors of the California Republican Party

Dear Colleagues: As many of us have learned in recent media reports, Vice Chairman Bill Back distributed an article entitled, ''What if the South had Won the Civil War?'' -- an article that concludes that problems with race relations in America are the result of slaves being freed through Reconstruction, and black migration out of the south as a result of desegregation. This article trivialized slavery and it trivialized the impacts of slavery on my ancestors and people of African decent. The notion that this country would be better off if my ancestors had remained enslaved, and considered less than whole people, is personally offensive, abhorrent, and vile.

It is particularly offensive because my own party's vice chairman distributed this bigoted propaganda in an official CRP newsletter. Those of us in leadership positions have a responsibility to teach, raise awareness, and encourage thoughtful debate. We also have a responsibility to do so in an honest and ethical manner. Had distribution of the article in question been prefaced by a disclaimer that the editors didn't necessarily agree with the author's views, however, and felt the article had value for the debate it might create on federalism, I might have accepted the vice chairman's position in his January 4 statement that his ''newsletter is a forum for varying political discussion.'' As reported in the same day's Contra Costa Times, when asked several different times if he was offended by the article, Bill Back sidestepped the question and refused to answer. The lack of any such disclaimer or direct and honest response to the reporter can only lead me to one conclusion that Bill Back is sympathetic to the author's views. Why else would he distribute an obscure article that has absolutely no relevance to California, nor to Republican politics in his official California Republican Party newsletter?

I am sick and tired of being embarrassed by elected Republican officials who have no sensitivity for issues that alienate whole segments of our population. Republican leaders who consort with the Council of Conservative Citizens, highlight stump speeches at Bob Jones University, reminisce about segregationist campaigns, and sympathize with the bigoted views - and the very real possibility that others in our party affiliate with the Free Congress Foundation and groups with similar offensive ideology - perpetuate broad public opinion that Republicans harbor racist and bigoted ideals. Bill Back's conduct is the most current embarrassment to our party. His decision to distribute bigoted information demonstrates a lack of judgment and political acumen that's not appropriate for someone in a leadership position, especially as vice chairman of the California Republican Party.

This embarrassment is different for a black Republican. Not only do I have to sit in rooms and behave professionally towards Republicans who share this heinous ideology, I have to go home to a hostile environment where I'm called an ''Uncle Tom'' and maligned as a sell-out to my community because I'm a member of the Republican Party. When I go to the barbershop on Friday or my church on Sunday--wherever I go in the black community--I have to explain that Trent Lott's affiliation with the Council of Conservative Citizens doesn't represent all Republicans, that it was just an isolated incident. When they then question me about the scores of Republicans who visit Bob Jones University, I tell them that Republicans visit black universities, too. When they ask how I can serve in a party where the second in command, the man seeking our top spot distributes bigoted literature, I tell them that Bill Back doesn't represent the grassroots of this party--he's just one man. Black Republicans are expected to provide window dressing and cover to prove that this is not a racist party, yet our own leadership continues to act otherwise. People judge people by their experience of them, and by their actions, and when those actions do not match their words, actions become the more honest means by which to measure a person.

I don't talk about what it's like for me to be a black Republican, and what I live through day to day because I've made a choice to be true to and fight for my beliefs. But I think the time has come for those of you in this party to understand what I encounter from other Republicans. Maybe it will help you understand how hard this fight really is--and how insurmountable the ill-conceived actions of Republican leaders like Bill Back make it.

When I travel to speak at Republican conferences and events around the country, wandering through hotels, convention centers and social clubs, as I approach the rooms where I'm scheduled to speak, I am often told by Republicans that I must be in the wrong place. While boarding a shuttle bus to a national convention a few years ago, an attendee who was already on the bus introduced himself to another white guest who was boarding, took one look at me and, in an attempt to be helpful, told me I was on the wrong bus. As a Bush delegate at the 2000 convention in Philadelphia, I proudly wore my delegate's badge and RNC lapel pin as I worked the convention. Regardless of the fact that I was obviously a delegate prominently displaying my credentials, no less than six times did white delegates dismissively tell me to fetch them a taxi or carry their luggage.

Imagine how our Republican women would have felt if they had been mistaken for hotel maids. These people didn't see that I wasn't wearing a uniform; all they saw was a black face and they made an assumption. I am a proud Republican, one who has traveled this great country from Harlem to Honolulu to promote the Republican message. I've campaigned from Inyo to Siskiyou. Wherever I've been asked to go, I've shown up for this party, speaking to literally thousands of groups. And through it all, I've met thousands upon thousands of grassroots volunteers who have welcomed me, given me good advice, prayers, love, and support. They've taught me a lot, and I've always been grateful for their support. No one has treated me better than Thaddeus Taylor, Inyo County's chairman, who opened his home and treated me with such love. This is not another inter-party squabble of moderates versus conservatives, or rural versus urban. These are grassroots Republicans for whom the principles of inclusion and the big tent are an intrinsic part of their very fiber.

All is not lost in this party, but leadership is the problem. There is a prevalent insensitivity within this party's leadership regarding issues that are important or hurtful to the African American community in general. We cannot continue to elect leaders who have no regard for all of the people. President George W. Bush is the leader of this party and upon his election, he sent out a call for the best and the brightest talent to fill his administration. Through his efforts--in word and in deed--he now has the most diverse administration in American history. President Bush has set the example; it is up to the California Republican Party to follow.

Of the more than five hundred CRP recipients of the newsletter in question, not one party member was sensitive enough to recognize and question the offensive nature of the material, much less to do what should have been done: call for his censure. Subsequently, Bill Back was elevated by the membership from regional vice chairman to statewide vice chairman in the next CRP election, and he currently seeks the chairmanship. I have never called Bill Back a bigot or racist, but I condemn his distribution of bigoted propaganda in his official CRP newsletter. Bill Back cannot under any circumstances be bestowed with the honor of serving as chairman of the California Republican Party. I have not and will not endorse any candidate for chairman in this race, eliminating any perceived political motivation for this letter. If anointed CRP chairman, Bill Back's actions give the Democrats a two-year run in defining our party as one led by someone who sympathizes with bigoted views, which will be damaging to our president as we approach the 2004 election. It would further compromise California's elected Republicans in any matter where race is relevant, and hang like an albatross around the necks of future Republican candidates, a burden they don't deserve to bear. If the CRP elects Bill Back as chairman, then the party in effect endorses his actions of distributing bigoted propaganda. Such an endorsement would take the CRP beyond the point of repair with voters in a pluralistic state--where ethnic populations comprise our majority--and doom us to irrelevance.

As secretary of the California Republican Party and a fourteen-year conservative Republican activist, I call upon Bill Back to withdraw his candidacy from this and any future leadership race of the California Republican Party, and call upon you, my fellow members of the California Republican Party, to contact Bill Back immediately and urge him to withdraw his candidacy.

Yours truly, Shannon F. Reeves Secretary of the Board

cc: Ryan Erwin, Executive Director, California Republican Party Membership of the California Republican Party

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2007/09/19/gingrich_kemp_republican_candi.html

“For Republicans to consistently refuse to engage in front of an African American or Latino audience is an enormous error,” Gingrich said. “I hope they will reverse their decision and change their schedules. I see no excuse — this thing has been planned for months, these candidates have known about it for months. It’s just fundamentally wrong. Any of them who give you that scheduling-conflict answer are disingenuous. That’s baloney.”

Said Jack Kemp:

“We sound like we don’t want immigration; we sound like we don’t want black people to vote for us. What are we going to do — meet in a country club in the suburbs one day? If we’re going to be competitive with people of color, we’ve got to ask them for their vote.”

 

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-commentarydavis0831.artaug31,0,3487488.story

To use the King legacy to divide and conquer is a useless tactic to prove one is not "monolithic." It's typical "crabs in a barrel" against Obama. It may be believed that acceptance brownie points will be garnered from white Republicans.

Black Republicans faking to feel included should ask why African American Republican Dr. Deborah Honeycutt, a highly educated, beautiful and successful physician running for the U.S. House in Georgia's 13th Congressional District, can't get support from the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee or the Georgia State Republican Party. Since 2007, according to the Federal Elections Commission, she has raised over $5 millionto try to defeat her white Democratic opponent, incumbent Rep. David Albert Scott. To date, he raised nearly $700,000.

I asked Honeycutt's campaign manager, Michael Murphy,if John McCain has reached out to her or whether anyone of significance from Washington or Georgia is offering help.

He hesitated and gave an embarrassing "No." I then asked him why and he said, "Well ... I don't know. Perhaps when she goes to the convention they will change their minds once they see her."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-07-06/new-gop-racist-headache/full/

Note to Republicans: Racist “humor,” the Internet, and political ambitions don’t mix. Audra Shay, vice chairman of the Young Republicans and the leading candidate to be elected its chairman on Saturday, is now the latest in a growing list of GOP officials learning this lesson the hard way, based on pictures of a now-deleted Facebook page obtained by The Daily Beast.

“This is still America… freedom of speech and thought is still allowed… for now any ways… and the last time i checked I was a good ole southern boy… and if yur ass is black don’t let the sun set on it in a southern town…”

On Wednesday, Shay—a 38-year-old Army veteran, mother, and event planner from Louisiana who has been endorsed by her governor, Bobby Jindal—was holding court on her Facebook page, initiating a political conversation by posting that “WalMart just signed a death warrant” by “endorsing Obama’s healthcare plan.” At 1:52, a friend named listed as Eric S. Piker, but whose personal page says his actual name is Eric Pike, wrote “It’s the government making us commies… can’t even smoke in my damn car… whats next they going to issue toilet paper once a month… tell us how to wipe our asses…” 

Two minutes later, Piker posted again saying “Obama Bin Lauden [sic]  is the new terrorist… Muslim is on there side [sic]… need to take this country back from all of these mad coons… and illegals.”

Eight minutes after that, at 2:02, Shay weighed in on Piker’s comments:  “You tell em Eric!  lol.”

I always like to ask, why is it that the same venom is not directed towards Jewish voters who vote 80-85% for Democrats?

 

Why is it that the party born out of abolition, is the same party that avoids the offspring of those whose rights they originally fought for?