Kerry said he would like to be known as 2nd Black President????

[higgybaby]

Senator Kerry, in March attempted to classify himself in the mold of Bill Clinton, he said he would like to be known as the second "black president" Mr. Kerry told the Urban Radio Network: "President Clinton was often known as the first black president. I wouldn't be upset if I could earn the right to be the second."

Paula Diane Harris, founder of the Harrisburg, Pa. based Andrew Young National Center for Social Change, gound the remark not only laughingly phony but offensive "John Kerry is not a black man--- He is a privileged white man who has no idea what it is in this country to be a poor white in this country, let alone a black man," Ms. Harris retorted.

She also denounced left -leaning civil rights leaders who "sit back and ignore these types of comments, a practice that further insults African Americans."

link (http://www.ayncsc.com/2ndblackpresident.html)

[RedskinsDave]

I'm sure the NAACP would be demanding an apology if a Republican said this.

[Yudolindo]

Insane.

[akhhorus]

the only problem is that the link from MSNBC that they said shows that Kerry said this doesn't work. And the only sources that say this are places like Newsmax(who ran the doctored photo of Kerry) and unsubstatiated webblogs.

[Yudolindo]

Something that funny has to be true.

[akhhorus]

Originally posted by Yudolindo
Something that funny has to be true.

Every heard the newspaper reporter's saying:
"Too good to check out"?

[NamVet4]

MSNBC Link to Kerry Quote (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4432875/)
‘Comeback Kerry’ lives up to his name
Senator's triumph validates his political resilience. . .
The Associated Press
Updated: 11:07 p.m. ET March 02, 2004

One example of Kerry was looking ahead to November was notable for a wry humor and an all-inclusiveness that seeked to span races and preferences: “President Clinton was often known as the first black president," Kerry told the American Urban Radio Network. "I wouldn’t be upset if I could earn the right to be the second.”

[Spence]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
I'm sure the NAACP would be demanding an apology if a Republican said this. It'd never happen. No Republican would say something like that and alienate the support the GOP needs from white racists.

[RedskinsDave]

Which I guess is why JC Watts was co-chair of the 2000 GOP Convention. :rolleyes:

[Keino]

The same JC Watts who left politics because he was tired of being the GOP Token Knee-Grow

[akhhorus]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
Which I guess is why JC Watts was co-chair of the 2000 GOP Convention. :rolleyes:

Watts was also passed up for a lot of positions and rewards by the GOP. He should have been House Whip or majority leader, but they were promised to other Congressmen who had less seniority. I cant blame him for being pissed and leaving. Now, Watts doesnt support the GOP publically, and he would be a perfect stumper for Bush in the Midwest and south.

[Spence]

Yeah, Dave. J.C. Watts is not an example you want to use. Especially considering the way he left the House and the things he had to say about the GOP House leadership on his way out.

[RedskinsDave]

So you think the GOP needs to cater to white racists to get their vote? That's like me saying the Dems have to cater to left wing loopies. I know you were really just implying that we are all white racists but I'll let that slide. ;)

[Yudolindo]

Originally posted by Spence
It'd never happen. No Republican would say something like that and alienate the support the GOP needs from white racists.

Come on now.

[natgbz]

Originally posted by Spence
It'd never happen. No Republican would say something like that and alienate the support the GOP needs from white racists.

Man that's low.

[Spence]

If you guys think the GOP does not rely on votes from white racists then you are inconceivably naive. And you're not. You know it, you just don't want to admit it and you certainly don't want anyone else pointing it out. Just as the Democrats relied on the vote of white racists for about 100 years [from the early part of the 19th century until the 1948 Democratic convention, where President Truman's support for civil rights split the party and led to the "Dixiecrat" presidential campaign of ardent segregationist and future Republican heavyweight Strom Thurmond], the GOP now relies on those votes. Strom Thurmond was not the only racist Democrat to abandon the party for the GOP, he was merely one of the first.

Everyone knew Trent Lott's views on race, especially his fellow Republicans. They all knew he cavorted with the Conservative Citizens Council [formerly known as the White Citizens Council] which led racist resistance to desegregation. The GOP made Lott their top Senator anyway and it was only after he publicly embarrassed the party that they demoted him. [Being a racist is fine, apparently, just don't call too much attention to it.]

White racists know why Ronald Reagan gave his famous 1980 speech in support of "states rights" in the same town where four civil rights workers were murdered by white racists in 1964. [The story that was made into the movie "Mississippi Burning."]

White racists know why George W. Bush spoke to Bob Jones University.

White racists know why George W. Bush announced his intention to lawsuit against the University of Michigan Law School to end their affirmative action program on Martin Luther King, Jr's birthday.

Perhaps the significance of all these things [and many, many more] escapes you because you are not racists. Fine. Good for you. But don't tell me the GOP does not need, rely, and actively court the support of racists. I know they do. And now, so do you, whether you've got the stones to admit it or not.

[higgybaby]

The same JC Watts who left politics because he was tired of being the GOP Token Knee-Grow


Yeah, Dave. J.C. Watts is not an example you want to use. Especially considering the way he left the House and the things he had to say about the GOP House leadership on his way out.


I would like to see a link to validate this, I have heard it from you and spence a number of times yet, I have never seen any thing showing this to be truth.


Now, Watts doesnt support the GOP publically, and he would be a perfect stumper for Bush in the Midwest and south.

I watched Watts give an awesome speech on why he thought that George W. Bush's economic policies were the right way to go for our country and why Kerry's would be the wrong way to go, Doesn't sound like someone who wouldn't support the GOP publicly. He even debated it with some democrat, can't remember whom, but it was on a televised C-SPAN event for Local leaders. By the way, I think that this was in the Midwest, Kansas City is about as mid-west as you can get.

Lemme see if JC supports any of Bush's other policies and is willing to go public with it...

JC on W's Education Policies (http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1538989)

Man! for someone "tired of being the GOP Knee-gro" He sure is doing alot of rallying of Bush supporters!! (http://www.georgewbush.com/News/read.aspx?ID=2210)

[higgybaby]

Lets not forget about what this thread was actually about; Kerry's assertion, that he(the 700 million$ man who wouldn't even know what it would be like to be a poor white kid) wants to be known as the 2nd Black president!

[RedskinsDave]

Now higgy, why would we stay on topic when there was a perfectly good opportunity to call all Republicans racist?

[Spence]

A couple of articles which hint at what I'm talking about. There are more explicit ones in Roll Call, which is the unofficial newspaper of Capitol Hill, but it's now a subscription-only site.

Here (http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/07/01/watts.future/) and here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2933-2003Jan2?language=printer). That second article is long, but interesting, and includes information about Mr Watts' troubles with the Bush admin and some membrs of Congress. To wit:Being the only black guy in the room wasn't easy, though Watts usually treated it with eye-rolling good humor. When party leaders asked him to appear at welfare reform press conferences, he'd privately remark that since a majority of those on welfare were white, he didn't really see the point in his attendance. But more often than not, he'd show up.

Sometimes in the halls of Congress, a clueless colleague would make a point of introducing him to a black constituent, as if the constituent and Watts had to be long-lost friends, members of some club who might slap-five. Watts would grin and bear it.

Far more damaging were Watts's tangles with House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, his frustration at his lack of clout within the Republican leadership and his growing sense that he wasn't being treated with the same respect as other House leaders.
...
On his 41st birthday, Watts became the fourth-ranking Republican in the House, putting him on track for even bigger things. But he soon found himself at odds with one of the Hill's most formidable political pit bulls: Tom DeLay.

A former pest exterminator from Texas nicknamed "the Hammer," DeLay didn't have much use for anyone who wasn't part of his bare-knuckles, vote-gathering machine. And Watts wasn't.

"Have you ever seen the movie "A Few Good Men'?" Watts asks as he ruminates about DeLay and the whip's frequent run-ins with the media. At the film's climax, a young lieutenant played by Tom Cruise needles Jack Nicholson's Col. Nathan Jessup into his courtroom confession. "When Colonel Jessup was on the stand down in the stretch there, and Cruise knew he was going to convict him? The reason he knew he would convict him is, he knew Jessup had too much pride to lie. He said, "Did you order the Code Red?' and Jessup said, "You're damn right I ordered the Code Red!' "

Watts smiles, letting the analogy hang there. It's an interesting comparison, considering the villainous Nicholson character is a man who took the Marine Corps code to extremes.

"Tom's a very proud conservative," Watts observes. "He knows one way, he's very hard-charging."

And in 1999, it was clear that DeLay was charging right for him. That summer, DeLay's office distributed an array of communications materials to the House Republican Conference, publicly doing Watts's job for him. Then, in December, conservative syndicated columnist Robert Novak wrote that "dissatisfaction" with Watts as conference chair was "being voiced by his congressional colleagues, including other members of the party leadership."

Watts, who considered resigning or retiring then, says the criticism of his performance was unfair. Elected conference chairman in November 1998, "I didn't get a staff and budget until the middle of March," Watts says. "And everybody was saying, "Oh, he's gotten off to a rocky start,' but I didn't have the ability to do the job I was elected to do."

He was used to the Uncle Tom broadsides from the Jacksons and Sharptons of the world. But public sniping from "other members of the party leadership," as Novak put it, that was too much. "There was, I am convinced, an orchestrated effort to cause me problems and to keep me from doing my job," Watts says.

DeLay's office didn't return numerous phone calls to comment for this article. But a Republican source describes DeLay's thinking this way: "Tom's very frustrated when the message doesn't get out. Tom wants the whole team to work together, and he wants the message part to work . . . "Just do the job. If you're going to do the job, great. If you're not and you want help, we're here to help. If you're not and you don't want help, then we're going to do the job.' "
...
For months last year, the Pentagon had been considering killing the $11 billion Crusader artillery program, which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld considered a Cold War relic not worthy of 21st-century warfare. Watts was one of its principal defenders: The weapon system was to be partially assembled in Elgin, Okla., and used for training at Fort Sill, both of which lie in Watts's district.

Generally the pet projects of congressional leaders are sacrosanct. But President Bush made it clear that he would veto any defense appropriations bill that continued funding the Crusader.

Watts didn't seem to have much clout with the Bush administration, despite having been one of Bush's earliest supporters. He couldn't even get the administration to return his phone calls.

"I had been trying to call Don Rumsfeld for probably six weeks," Watts recalls. "And finally, after about a month, I got a call back from [Deputy Defense Secretary Paul] Wolfowitz." He told Watts that the Pentagon was studying the issue, and things could go either way. "We may end up canceling the program," Wolfowitz told Watts in late April, "but, you know, we may end up building more."

On the morning of May 8, Watts received call after call from people who'd heard that Rumsfeld was announcing the program's demise at 2 p.m. No one from the administration called. News of the program's imminent death appeared on the Associated Press wire. Still no call.

Finally, at around noon, Wolfowitz phoned to give Watts the news everyone already knew. Watts was furious. He told Wolfowitz and eventually Rumsfeld that the way the administration had treated him was "indecent and totally unprofessional."

"Such a thing, it gnaws at you," says one of Watts's closest allies, Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.). "You think, "My gosh, I'm an active supporter of the president, the fourth-ranking Republican in the House. And more than that: I'm the only African American Republican in Congress and, as such, am asked to do so much for my party -- to go around the country and raise money. And they don't even give me the courtesy of a heads-up?' It's gross."

When Bush came to speak to the 223-member House Republican Conference the following week, its chairman didn't show up. Everyone knew why Watts had stiffed the president. He felt he hadn't been treated with the same respect another member of the House leadership would have received. "I doubt it would have happened to anybody in the top three," Watts says, still bristling at the memory.

I give J.C. Watts credit for knowing a few truths, however: "Affirmative action isn't the problem. Lousy education for black kids is the problem. Until you fix these schools don't talk to me about equal opportunity."

[Spence]

Originally posted by higgybaby
Lets not forget about what this thread was actually about; Kerry's assertion, that he(the 700 million$ man who wouldn't even know what it would be like to be a poor white kid) wants to be known as the 2nd Black president! What is it about that you would like to discuss?

[RedskinsDave]

I'm curious why in 8 years Clinton wasn't able to improve schools for inner city kids. Now you want another shot? Please

[Spence]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
I'm curious why in 8 years Clinton wasn't able to improve schools for inner city kids. Now you want another shot? Please Dave, local education is controlled locally. No president has the power to make drastic improvements in local education. Federalism does not work that way. During President Clinton's term, more African-Americans owned homes, had jobs, owned businesses than ever before. And African-American life spans, which actually declined during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, rose again.

If you don't think Bill Clinton was good for African-Americans, take it up with the 90-95% of black voters who supported him twice.

[RedskinsDave]

"No president has the power to make drastic improvements in local education."

I think I'll hold onto this gem.

[Spence]

If holding on to it means you'll learn something from it then I rejoice with you, Dave. :D

[RedskinsDave]

Next time someone blames the GOP for poor inner-city education or claims that Dems are more qualified to fix it. Last time I checked most inner cities are run by Democrats. You'd think those folks would've learned by now.

[Spence]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
Next time someone blames the GOP for poor inner-city education or claims that Dems are more qualified to fix it. Last time I checked most inner cities are run by Democrats. You'd think those folks would've learned by now. Dave, you will note that schools are funded by local property taxes. Local property taxes are raised from local property owners. Propery in poor areas is worth very little and thus very little tax revenue is raised from them. Ergo, the public schools in economically-depressed areas have little money to work with. I tutor kids from D.C. and I've been to their schools. The lack of funds is obvious. No computers. Old books. Crumbling schools. No money, no excellence. Where I grew up, in Bethesda, the public schools are magnificent. It's an affluent neighborhood and local property taxes are very high. Ergo, the money for schools is plentiful and the schools are superb. Perhaps you cannot buy love, but you sure as hell can buy a decent education.

From time to time, some federal solution to this problem is sought. For example, in 2001 Mr Bush and Senator Ted Kennedy came up with the No Child Left Behind plan, which would drastically increase funding for local schools in return for more teacher accountability, among other things. As it turned out, however, the money from the Bush admin and the GOP-controlled Congress has not been forthcoming. The plan has failed and local governments--from liberals in Atlanta to conservatives in Salt Lake City--have turned against No Child Left Behind and are often refusing to implement it. So, did Mr Bush and this Congress make the schools bad? Nope, they just failed to make them better. At least they pretended to try, which is more than President Reagan ever did.

[Spence]

And now a thread that was supposed to be about John Kerry and "the second black president" is about local education. I'm happy to...er...educate you fellas on this subject, but it does seem as if we're veering off the topic again.

You Republicans--always trying to change the subject. :D

[higgybaby]

at the time that Watts was retiring, this is what
Watts told George W. Bush,"I told him he could count on me any day of the week and any place in America to count on him," Watts said.

From this article it sounds like he left for reasons other that what has been thrown at us time and again and again and again and so on by our left leaning friends on this site: Watts states the he left for family reasons but has also said he acknowledges frustrations with the ego's of those in the House of Reps.

Watts has also said that he would like to go on to make more money for his family.

Watts acknowledged frustrations with the "egos and personalities" in the House, but said that he never intended to spend his career in Washington.

I am still searching high and low for those reasons that certain leftists are citing for his departure, It is beginning to look as though that the only people that see racial motivation here are the lefty's(how convenient for them that a racially dividing issue like that would only serve the democratics need to convince the country that the Republican party is racist party and minorities need not apply!)

I have said it before and I will say it again, it is aweful funny(bothersome funny, not ha ha funny) that the only ones spewing out racially divisive rhetoric on this site and all around the country are those that are personally benefitting from trying to label the Republican Party as a racist party) If you say something often enough then it will eventually begin to sound like the truth with out questioning it. (i.e. the constant assertions that JC retired due to racial reasons of being tired of being used as the "GOP knee-gro", not my words, and definately not JC's words nor are these his feelings but the words a one of our leftist friends on this site.)

If you would like I will go back and count how many different times in this thread and other similar threads where this very idea has been attributed to JC Watts specifically, off the top of my head there have been at least 6 different times(this and similar threads included). I bring this up because to my knowledge, nobody has even stopped and asked you to verify this, we (myself included) has just accepted this as truth because you say it with so much conviction it sounded like it was true. I have searched thoroughly and cannot find a single story that shows JC saying this. No, amazingly enough, the only links that I could find were Liberals who insinuate the same kind of racist trash that has been said on this site.

----Now maybe, just maybe you fell victim to accepting this as true and are not purposely spreading these untruths because you heard these accusations so many times on the countless liberal sites that continue to this day to spread this lie.---- If this is so then maybe you could admit it and stop putting this untruth out to this board.

One last note but a very imprtant one. One of our left leaning posters has stated that they do not equate an insinuation like the ones being said here and on other threads as racist, but I do, solely because of the ramifications of doing so! I know that I am not the only one on this board who feels this way:

the sole purpose of making such claims would be to incite feelings of anger towards those who the remarks are attributed to or against.

****Take a deeper look at what you are using to do this, racial issues, to use racial issues to incite these responses is a form of racism, whether purposely done or not is not the issue, the end result is a racist result.****

By the way this story that I linked to addresses some of the Watts problems that he had with the House leadership and the way that things were run, notice that yes he was upset with that and I am sure that that would contribute to his reasoning for departure but note nothing of the sort of implications being bandied about on this forum.

I forgot to post this link originally (http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/Watts_020701.html)

[higgybaby]

I have read your article, Tom and am still searching for the quotes from JC Watts on His retiring had to do with being tired of being the GOP Negro or anything even close.

[Spence]

Okay, Higgy. If you prefer not to believe it then that is fine with me. I told you what I think and I provided what I believe is ample support. If you don't accept it, so be it.

And since you have now repeatedly veered off the topic of John Kerry, despite your stated demand that we not do so, I can only assume you don't take this very seriously. Thus, as you can imagine, I find it hard to take it seriously, as well.

I'll leave this thread to you and Dave then. Enjoy.

[higgybaby]

Spence, a response to you and the other(s) is not veering off topic, it is called responding. Where have I repeatedly, veered off topic?

[Keino]

Higgy the last 2 paragraphs of Spence's post seem to be rather pointed comments as to how Watts felt he was treated as a Token rather than a respected Colleague. Admittedly, I didn't read either article, only the parts quoted.

Like I said, he was tired of being the Token Knee-Grow. I believed the term he used was "gross".

[higgybaby]

Keino, the last two paragraphs in the article show a Representative of the House who feels that he was not given a courtesy call ahead of a major decision in which would directly affect his constituents and of which he was the head of the committee of, Of all the articles that I have read(which is ranging in the 10-12 articles range at this point) According to the articles that I have read this is the point that is quite clear. JC felt that the party owed him more than that(I happen to agree with him) Nowhere I repeat, nowhere, does it even come remotely close as to JC saying that he felt that he was the token knee-gro or that he was being abused by the GOP because of his unique status as the only African-american GOP Rep. In fact, JC Watts is still campaigning for the GOP and for Mr. Bush all around the country. This does not sound like a man who felt that he was being used in such a way. JC Watts has a book out calledWhat Color Is a Conservative? : My Life and My Politics The whole point of his book is to fight against the pre-conceived notion that if you are black then you must be liberal or must fall in line and vote for liberal candidates. This is not the viewpoint of a man who would consider himself the token knee-gro !