This is real time, folks. President Bush is speaking right now, taking questions on a sweeping range of topics. I'm going to address a few while he's speaking.
1. Race and economics.
One of the reporters asked what, beyond home ownership, the President thinks is necessary for African Americans to achieve success and if the President was dissapointed in the results of African American voters during the last election.
The President more or less dodged the issue of achieving results for African Americans, refusing the divorce home ownership's 'feel-good power' from other factors in economic success. However, the President did admit to being dissapointed that so few African Americans voted for him. Why? His reason being, at least the only reason he addressed in answering the question, was that he had elevated African Americans to positions. What kind of positions? 'Not just any positions, positions that matter, cabinet positions.'
Well, Mr. President, you are hallucinating if you think that should be good enough to earn a single vote from an African American. Just because Colin Powell and Condi Rice have important policy making positions does not mean you are a friend of the African American community. People don't care about a few token positions, what really matters are the millions of African Americans living in poverty. People don't care about Colin Powell and Condi Rice - people care about middle class jobs with benifits. Until you help African Americans recieve these jobs in large quantities, the Republican Party will never enjoy the support of the 90% or so African Americans who do not vote red.
2. Supreme Court Nominee
"I don't have to speculate her."
Well, Mr. President, can we speculate about her? Will you insist she, who has no record as a judge with decisions, actually answer questions asked of her during her hearings? I doubt it.
3. Iraq
"Iraq is part of a larger global struggle."
Congratulations, Mr. President. Because of your policies, Iraq is now part of a larger global struggle in your war on terrorism. If not for you, there would be no terrorist connections in Iraq save for a few in the Kurdish area where Saddam Hussien held no real power to thwart them (never mind that those few were enemies of Saddam Hussien, not friends).
When the President said Iraq was part of a larger global struggle, he said it as if that bolstered his position. Instead, it should mark a failure of his administration and presidency.
Posts
2 comments:
Why is it the presidents responsibility to elevate entire races? How come you don't bash the Black Community for not advocating self-elevation as loudly as you do for the President?
Also---Don't think for a second if we had a Democrat President right now he wouldn't choose a politically motivated person who has an agenda...he would. Denying it is denying yourself a dose of the truth.
Thanks for the comment Joe, I appreciate lively debate. I completely agree that there are many reasons for the racial/class divide in this country, some reasons having to do with the federal government, some with hundreds of years of bad history and racism and some with, indeed, the African American community. I'm sure most members of the African American community would admit as much. Nor am I suggesting that it is the government's responsibility to fully lift the lives of all the poor. However, the question is "Are we doing enough?" If President Bush thinks he's doing enough simply through nominating a few token individuals to major policy making positions, then he's sorely mistaken. Much more could be done and ought to be done.
As for the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, of course nominations are going to be political. However, this nomination seems to be going a little beyond your typical political nod. For example, Chief Justice Roberts was a brilliant political move which secured a conservative judge on the court.
Miers, on the other hand, displays the same sort of cronyism that was evident in Brown's elevation to head of FEMA. I question the wisdom of nominating a personal friend to a position supremely important to this country. If for any reason, cases dealing with the the executive branch are sure to come up in the Supreme Court. Is she going to recuse herself?
There are hundreds of unanswered questions: maybe this will become a non-issue after the Senate hearings, I just doubt it. If she's open and honest, willing to answer questions, then perhaps my fears will be for not.
Post a Comment