The question on the minds of millions of Americans this morning: How many people attended Glenn Beck’s ‘Restoring Honor’ rally yesterday in our nations’ capitol?
The answer to this question has ramifications far beyond mere crowd size. It is one of the few concrete indicators of the popularity and viability of the Tea Party and their message of traditional values, less government and a return to our Founders’ vision of America.
The New York Times described the crowd merely as “enormous and impassioned.” ABC was more specific, estimating the attendance at Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally in the “hundreds of thousands.” AP chimed in at “tens of thousands.”
Whether the attendance was 300,000 or one million, (you decide) the huge crowd gathered to hear conservative commentator Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and other notables, offered a compelling contrast to another rally being held across town held by Al Sharpton.
An estimated 3,000, most of whom were African-Americans, attended a rally/march hosted by Al Sharpton to commemorate the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s famous “I Have A Dream” speech. Sharpton railed against the Tea Party as he informed the crowd that MLK’s dream “has not been achieved.”
The fact that America has elected a black president didn’t seem to faze Sharpton as he trotted out his familiar message of black oppression. Sharpton’s solution? Support Obama’s latest money grab, appealingly entitled a “jobs bill.’ Yawn.
Jesse Jackson, who arbitrarily claimed the sole right to speak for Dr. Martin Luther King, was aghast that Glenn Beck dared to infringe on his territory. Jackson told CNN that Beck was mimicking King and “humiliating the tradition.”
NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous followed up, castigating the message of the Glenn Beck rally across town. “For a year and a half, we’ve been subjected to small hearts and small minds on our small screens,” he said, referring to conservative ideas.
Meanwhile, Martin Luther King’s niece, Dr. Alveda King, offered a different message at the Glenn Beck rally. A message of hope and an appeal to honor.
The message of the Restoring Honor rally was more religious than political, with many speakers openly professing their Christian faith, including Beck. Obama’s name wasn’t mentioned once in the 200 minutes of speeches. And the Mall was left spic and span.
Sharpton’s “Reclaim the Dream” rally offered a telling contrast. Both in terms of size and in terms of the message. This contrast is good news for America. A portent that the much abused race card may, finally, be losing its potency. An indication that millions of Americans value character, honor and God over racial politics.
The times, they are a changin’. For years, race hustlers have tried to keep the race card alive. After all, white guilt has proved very lucrative for Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the segment of the black population that seek to divide Americans by race.
What does it say about Sharpton’s message when one contrasts the 3,000 attendees to the hundreds of thousands of people across town at the Beck rally who were focused on honor as opposed to the color of one’s skin?
This is good news, America. Good news that may signal a death knell for racial and grievance politics and, hopefully, a return to basic American values that are shared by all Americans, regardless of their color.
Who knows, maybe one day soon Al Sharpton may have to go out and get a real job. And maybe one day soon, our elected officials will recognize that America is still a Christian nation. Hope springs eternal.
Crossposted from Right Bias
SAM: hi, IT seems to be a phobia in your life, in order to call everyone a disease,
THERE are some treatments available for that phobia. CHECK it up, and you will be happyer, after.
GOOD DAY.
@ilovebeeswarzone:
Sam was nothing more than a sockpuppet working hard to drive traffic to a website selling action figure toys.
He, and his alternate personality, now reside in the spam filter.
AYE CHIHUAHUA: hi, thank you for that, bye and good day.
Adios.
PAUL HAMMOND: HI, Dont say ADIOS, but only : AUREVOIR, bye
PATVANN: hi, I think THE PICTURE of you on a previous link,showing the SECOND ONE on the RIGHT, well your SON is looking much like you,AND good looking too. bye
@Beez
*blush*
Oh he’s MUCH better-looking than me!
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/todaysbuzz/os-poll-glenn-beck-rally-083010,0,3443695,post.poll?status=success
This is a result from a poll in the Orlando Sentinel, one of the most leftwing newspaper in Florida, and it shows that the Glen Beck D.C. Rally was a total success.
I wish I could have been there.
@ Patvann Post #20
Now that was funny! You may owe me a new monitor. I’ll let you know shortly.
@Inge: Hi Inge, You pose some interesting questions and observations. I don’t see goverment as running parallel to God. I believe what Peter said about Goverment. The Lord places all government in places. All of our leaders are appointed by God for his purposes. Sometimes it may seem that those goverments will serve to reign us in. Jesus tells us to render unto Ceasar what is Ceasars and render unto God what is God’s.
I was watching a movie this Sunday on TV called Beckett starring Richard Burton and Anthony Quinn. It was about the struggle between two former friends, Archbishop Thomas Beckett (Richard Burton) and King Henry II (Anthony Quinn). There was a scene in there where King Henry confronted Beckett about his loyalties and his obedience. Beckett replied to King Henry that he is commanded by God to render King Henry all of his obedience to him except where it violates his charge to God. He said I am charged by God to protect my sheep and defend my sheep and I must do so even if it means opposing you. On all other accounts you have my obedience. King Henry wasn’t satisfied with that. It seems that secular leaders seemed to crave obedience in all things at all times, and an obedience that goes beyond just obedience. It seems that they crave the adulation that is God’s right as well.
Upon watching that scene I was reminded of a scene in the Bible where the priest and Prophet Samuel confronts God about the Israelites wanting their own King to be like other nations. Up to this point, the Jews had been governed as a theocracy where priests and judges (military leaders ruled). They had no King. Now they wanted a King. God replies to Samuel that it was not him that the people were rejecting but it was God they were rejecting. God gave he people their wish. He gave them their king. That King was Saul and his reign was the beginning of horror. He brought destruction to the people of God.
I guess the moral of the story is that. We as people will be ruled one way or the other. We can be ruled by God or we can be ruled by Man and the choice is ours. The rule by man without God tends to lead to destruction and suffering.
So I guess that is how I look at it. I will be obedient to Obama unless he asks me to do something that is against God. I will not go to war with him. I will render my obedience to him. I don’t like him or his goverment but I have no choice. I will oppose him in the lawful means that are available to me. Like peaceful protests, writing letters, speaking out against his policies. Those are legitimate ways that people can be obedient yet express their disapproval. But I will not join a revolution against him. The people have chosen him and they now want a kingdom and a goverment that looks like every other kingdom. I seem to think that somehow it is human nature to crave something that is not good for them. And God has granted their wish for his purposes which remain unknown. I must accept that.
That is how I see things.
@Tammy
I don’t subscribe to that thought. I believe human nature is to crave freedom to live as one sees fit, but, like all things, there is a dark side as well, and in that dark side we see the the craving morph into a thought process that desires others to live as some see fit. Some people cannot leave well enough alone, and see that when some live their lives against what others believe, that they then must force all to submit.
Benjamin Franklin knew this, which is why his reply to the question of what kind of government we were given was, “A republic, if you can keep it.” The ability for a nation, especially one found so freely as ours was, to keep away tyranny, like the soft tyranny we “enjoy” now, rests solely on the individual. For, it is the individual, making up a part of the whole, that decides who he wants to lead the nation, and which direction it should go.
The individual is the most important part of our nation, yet people tend to migrate towards groups who think and believe like they do. When given the dark nature of wanting others to live as they do, you get groups encroaching upon the freedoms of everyone.
I sort of agree with that notion. Maybe the term craving what is bad for them is a little dark and pessimistic. I do think that people have a problem with the understanding of freedom. I think that some confuse freedom (which assumes a responsibiitity for one self and for others and for the community and the nation to which they belong) and licentiousness (which is the freedom that I often think of when people refer to freedom–the right to do as I Please).
It is interesting that the entire premise of this country and republic was built upon the notions of rebelling. The pilgrims came here because they didn’t want a goverment or a formal church telling them what to do. Our ancestors rebelled because they didn’t want to be beholden to a foreign power and its rule and pay the heavy taxes. So rebellion against authority is a part and pacel of our heritage. In that light, exactly what does a Republic mean for a nation that is based on rebellion.
You are right there is a dark side. Maybe I tend to think too darkly of the human nature when it seems that the pattern of seeking ones own destruction always seems to rise up when things are going well.
I also remember James Madison warning us that if a nation cannot self govern themselves by having a moral law then the goverment will do it for us. So I think that for the sake of freedom and self governance and to keep the goverment out of our affairs, the only way that can be done is for the people to have a common set of morals that is understood. We don’t have that right now.
So we have Obama trying to legislate our goodness. Our priest always says that government can’t make people be good. They can just make it so that people can’t do bad.
What do we want? I think that is the fundamental question that we all are faced with.
TAMMY: HI, YOU bring up such a logic point: I feel that with THIS FA alone, not even mentionning the other many BLOGS , THAT you can see the hope, the good feelings and vision from the many COMMENTS, THE INTELLIGENCE floating freely here by such qualified people from all walk of life,
THIS crowd alone could take over the GOVERNMENT BUSINESS with such wisdom and serve all the AMERICANS with the goodness and tolerance and firm beleifs that AMERICANS are so
PATIENTLY hungry to recongnize: SO if we include the other AMERICANS into the group
HERE at FA,that posess the same goal; I see no way to fail, I see such positive actions to give the FREEDOM so cherish by the people and a GOVERNMENT for the people, by the people. FOR this AMERICA
bye
@Tammy
I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be nitpicky here, but I take exception to that statement. Obama is not trying to legislate goodness. He is attempting a massive overhaul of our very way of life, by redistribution of wealth, nationalizing private companies, mandated salary structures for private business, selective government interventions using FEMA, and he is doing it by stirring the racial and class warfare pots.
While some, or most, people who still support him may approve based on good intentions, I don’t believe the leadership in congress, nor the WH, nor Obama himself have any such good intentions. I believe that they know exactly what they are doing, and their intention is control. The ignorant, with their good intentions, are just his enablers.
John, it might surprise you that I agree with you. Totally. I am not willing to judge whether his intentions are good or evil or not. I believe he believes that we would be better off as a socialist state or a communist state and he believes that is a better system of government. I also believe that he thinks he knows what is best. He is trying to expand our government in all aspects. And I do believe he is trying to legislate our goodness through political correctness and thought reform.
@Tammy
Point taken, and understood. I wasn’t trying to be argumentative with you at all, and I apologize if it came across that way. I just wanted to point out what I see as his motives for his actions, and none of them are nice or good.
@Adrian,
Great post thanks! Why is it that we can’t do what Italy has: distinguish true religions from those that hate and encourage genocide?
God bless Italy!
I was there. It was hot, crowded and AWESOME. We spent 2 hours in the metro getting a ticket. Everyone was impatient to get to the Mall, but NO ONE WAS RUDE or belligerent. We got to the Mall at the end of Sarah Palin’s speech. I am disappointed we missed her. I did hear Alveda King and she was AWESOME. She must have inherited her speaking ability from her uncle. I was there with my spouse, boss, his spouse, a good friend and her spouse. We sat under the trees since my boss is prone to skin cancer. We sat with like mind AMERICANS who are concerned about the direction our country is going in. It was hysterical that the DC cops had a riot van parked along the Mall. I think they were mistaken as to which event they were supposed to be attending. At the end of the event, 1315 or so, we started walking toward the Washington Monument which the pictures do not show as being packed with people. The line to get into the Smithsonian metro stop was back to the Washington Monument so we, like many other people, decided to sit in the shade and wait for it to disperse at the Dept of Agriculture building. After about 1.5 hours, we headed towards the Reagan Building near Constitution Avenue. The al sharpton march was on Constitution Avenue. We got to the intersection just as the seiu idiots were marching by. They were predominately female and were shouting “What do we want!!! Justice”. Not sure what they were talking about, but then they probably don’t either. We walked across the street in front of them, not hindering them in the least, and of course predictably they shouted insults at us and showed their collective ass. We just ignored them. We went across the river to Rosslyn to eat and continued to run into people who were there. It was extremely satisfying to speak with people from all over who feel like we do. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what the dem media wing says about the number of people who attended, it was amazing and I believe sent a very loud and clear message that AMERICANS from all across this country are fed-up and want the socialist agenda stopped. HEY OBAMA/PELOSI/REID, DO YOU HEAR US NOW?
@Theresa, MSgt (ret), USAF
I am glad you were there, amongst the many like-minded people. I’ve heard reports back from many people, including friends of mine from Louisiana, and all of them are positive. I’ve been to DC before and was humbled by the monuments and patriotic feeling they instill in people, even those with horror behind them like the Vietnam Memorial Wall, and can only imagine the feeling being there with hundreds of thousands of people for the same purpose, amongst those monuments.
@Ilovebeezwarzone: Thanks for the kind words
@John: No problem. I was worried that I was being misunderstood.
@Theresa: I am envious that I couldn’t have been there. Please post some pictures if you can.
Patvann, just want to thank you for the kind words to my post of a few days ago. I’m going to try your suggestion next time it arrives. Probably be a bawler but……….
bees, this is a thanks for something said a few moons ago. Of what who knows, have only done this two, maybe three times.
You’re welcome, Dee! 😀
And BTW, welcome to Flopping Aces!
dee: hi, HOW nice of you,and I wish I could REMEMBER where or when.
I do appreciate your kind acknowledgment, bye
Shameless plug in 1..2…3…..
I’d appreciate your opinion on this:
Glenn Beck’s predominately white rally”
A little different perspective.
@Robert
Not bad at all, but I wouldn’t have bothered the the “explanation/apology” at the end. I saw it as a distraction, and wholly unnecessary.
Patvann, Thanks, and I thought the same thing..I have a lot readers that may not comment but send emails. Some appreciated that part, and some didn’t. I didn’t apologize and made that clear. It was a bit of sarcasm too I reckon.
Anyway thanks for the input.
ROBERT: hi, on your 75, I found a nice blog, I”m always amaze of how some places can pinpoint a source of identification on visiters, IS it yours?. I was impress, bye
ILBWZ, I use a variety of tools to check on who is visiting my site. and yes that’s my little hole in the web. Thanks.
Note to the management!
I think y’all changed something because I swear I did not have this problem before.
But last night and again just now I composed a (I think) thoughtful comment, hit the Send and got an error message to the 3ffect that I had not noticed that I needed to enter my name and stuff again (in itself an un-necessary annoyance).
When I came back to fix that minor problem, my message had been erased.
Last night I used the technical term for “I ain’t gonna try to remember exactly what I wrote” and went to bed.
I’ve not quite gotten to that conclusion again–I may try to cool down and come back and try again, or I may just o try my luck with Robert’s blog. I think what I said needs to be said here.
@Robert:
Two things Robert.
1) America is “predominately white”. Anything other than a predominately white crowd would have been a statistical anomaly which would have been roundly attacked as being a bussed in “astro turf” type crowd.
2) Saturday’s event was attended by a representative slice of the American people. There were white, black, red, brown, and yellow people there. Young, old, and everywhere in between. The pictures of the event tell the story. I was there and I saw it first hand.
The media is using the “predominately white” meme because that’s all they have.
The crowd was peaceful. The crowd was polite and courteous. The crowd left the National Mall spotless. The DC Police reported that there was not one single arrest.
There is nothing negative that can be said so they fall back on the race card.
As for your premise that blacks are not engaged, I have to disagree. They may not be out in public making statements or protesting etc etc but don’t discount their engagement.
For example, when I went to vote a couple of weeks ago in our GA runoff election, I was the only voter in the place. One of the poll workers, who has been a poll worker for that precinct for all of the 12 years that we have lived here began to ask me questions. She is an elderly black lady. She doesn’t know me. She just knows that I vote in every election. Anyway, she began to ask me questions about the candidates in general as well as on very specific electoral issues.
Anyway after a half hour conversation it became very evident to me that, while she was born and raised a Democrat, she had moved dramatically away from those beliefs and convictions.
It was really a surreal kind of conversation to have with a person who is pretty much a stranger. I don’t, to this very moment, even know her name.
If you look back in the history of America and the history of our politics you will discover that prior to, and following, the Civil War, blacks were Republicans. The Democrats engaged in some of the most vile, deplorable, unbelievable activities in order to get blacks to vote Democrat. Those efforts included the creation, and use of, the KKK as their enforcement arm…basically a terror team…which would bring wayward blacks around to their way of thinking.
Essentially the Dems forced blacks back onto the plantation. This time, however, the plantations were not farms but a voting bloc. This time, when a black dares to leave, they are not hunted down with dogs or guns but, instead, they are hunted and haunted by accusations of being an “Uncle Tom” or a “house negro” or some such. And they’re treated that way not only by blacks but by whites as well. Remember how Condi Rice and, to a lesser extent, Colin Powell were treated? Those are perfect examples.
Another example of how blacks who dare have an independent thinking process are treated is Alveda King. She is the niece of MLK, Jr. and she spoke at the 8/28 rally. In the days leading into the rally she was assailed with vile, disgusting behavior. She received death threats. Simply because she dares to walk away from the “plantation” that the Dems have carefully constructed.
Yes, blacks are engaged. They are, however, still largely fearful of stepping out publicly because of what they have seen happening to those who have dared to go against the grain.
This is an attempt to recreate the lost message–my writing style is such that in my view, such recreations are not as good as the radio recreations of baseball games on radio years ago.
I have not read Robert’s piece thoroughly or completely but I do have three comments (if I can remember them). (I have put that blog on my Must Read List and will study it thoroughly when it comes up.)
1. There is a reason why people say we are “the majority”. There are a lot ore of us than there are other colors.
2. Dr. King had a message 47 years ago. Do you happen to know what it was? (Hint: It had to do with dreaming of a day when color didn’t matter.)
If anybody dishonored the memory of that even, it is the people that make the color of the attendees who make skin color the thing of paramount importance to the exclusion or diminution of things that are truly important.
3. As near as I can tell from a distance (I didn’t attend because of a shortage of funds, thanks to my government, and physical infirmities–that seem now not to have been as great as those of some who did attend) that the Tea Party Movement did not have much to do with the event, and to highlight that movement is to diminish both that movement and the rally.
Yes a lot of the people there are active in the Tea Party movement. But those people are active in PTA, Bobby Sox Softball, Pop Warner, Marching Bands, VFW, bowling, and on and on, all of which….let me say it again….all of which had as much to do with them being there as the Tea Party Movement did.
I think the lost draft was more eloquent, it was certainly a lot shorter.
Larry…
I feel your pain. I’ve had that happen a time or two as well. There is apparently a “refresh” mechanism that occurs in some time frame, and if you “cross” that time frame, stuff disappears. What I do now if I have a long comment to make is to do a highlight and copy of my comment, then do a deliberate page refresh, then paste and send. Sometimes when I have done that, like yours, the name info has disappeared – an indication to me that the same fate would have occurred if I had hit sent prior to the “refresh”.
Aye,
You think they are still engaged? Okay, then explain the lack of attendance at Al Sharptons rally. Explain the lack of participation in the tea party movement? Explain the lack of black participation in a lot of the things going on in the most politically active years our nation has seen since MKL.
I’m not saying ALL blacks are not engaged. I am comparing the current engagement with the 2008 engagement that got Obama elected. I’m also comparing the “Predominately white” label that Beck is dealing with, to the Predominately BLACK attendees at Al’s rally.
People need to look at the DC area’s racial make up. I’m not sure of the exact numbers but the black population in that area makes up well over 40% of the entire population. Everyone of them KNOWS of Dr King I’d bet. YET only 3000 people showed up to support AL.
The premise of my piece on this was to say that the black community is NOT as engaged as they should be, or as they were in 08 and why I think that is. It also shows the media’s idiocy in characterizing the tea party as racist. Glenn Beck had just as many Blacks at his rally as Al had at his…They were under represented in BOTH displays.
I have enough trouble explaining why I do what I do, I am not even going to try to explain what others do or why they do it. Particularly after I have made two attempts to do that. But what the hell, I’ll try again.
Yes, I do. I don’t know anybody bigoted enough to want to go more than a block to anything Sharpton had anything to do, and frankly, the Black Panthers (any incarnation) scare the shit out of me.
Sharpton does not have any thing to say to any of the black people I know.
As above. And part of that string is just not founded in reality. I don’t deal with fantasy well.
Just as a curiosity, who elected Obama in this racist world you see? (Reading back I see you sort of touched on that, so let me ask instead: Given that Obama and a largely black government is not in power, why did they disengage, if indeed they did?
I think I am wasting my time.
The facts are, the whites are in the majority–any crowd that does not match needs explaining.
I am coming to the conclusion that anybody who will not let go of the “mostly white” meme is in fact not somebody that has anything to say that is worth listening to.
Go listen to Crissy Matthews and Keef and all of the rest of your friends.
I’m going to stick with people who think Dr. King was on to something when he said the color of skin is not important.
I’m out.
Larry, WHAT IN THE WORLD DID YOU READ? Did you read anything in my article that says “racist world” I see? WTF are talking about?
My article was in no way a racist article. Nor did it seek to insult or disparage blacks. I was trying to show why Beck’s crowd was predominately white. And for you to say the country is predominately white as a reason for why beck has more whites than blacks is purely ridiculous. I’m talking about the area those rally’s were held in. They are predominately black areas. A civil rights march reclaiming “The Dream” should have pulled MANY MANY more blacks if it was done sincerely. I’m thinking the blacks saw through the Al sharpton charade.
Go listen to chrissy Mathews? HA! Evidently you didn’t spend much time reading my blog. Carry on…
@Robert:
Well, I would attribute the attendance level to multiple factors. Blacks are a sharp group of folks. They know when they are being manipulated. They know when the MLK legacy is being misused. They can see Sharpton for the self-appointed race hustler that he is and they know that by being seen at his rally they would be seen in the same light as Sharpton.
Those factors by themselves would be a driving factor in getting people to stay away.
As I laid out for you above, there are a number of factors which, IMO, prevent blacks from being front and center on opposing political issues.
Just take a look at how the blacks who have participated have been treated. That goes a long way in answering your questions.
It takes a tremendous amount of courage and intestinal fortitude for a black person to step out and go against generations of familial values and beliefs.
These folks realize that they will have to answer to their families and their friends and their churches if they don’t tow the line. Most, under that sort of pressure, would rather remain silent than face the wrath.
It’s a generational and cultural thing.
Was voting for Obama going with the grain or against it?
Which requires more courage; voting for Obama or attending a Tea Party?
If you were black, which would be looked down upon and which would be accepted/expected by those around you?
Now, I’m not saying that all blacks are swayed by cultural or peer pressures but simply take a look at those who have dared to step out.
Again, I would point out that Sharpton is not nearly as popular in the black community as many may think that he is. He is seen as a charlatan and a hustler by a large segment of the black community.
People of all colors see what is being done to the MLK legacy. They see what is being said about him now and they hear the beliefs that are being attributed to this long gone hero of the Civil Rights era.
Those that are smart. Those that heard the speeches of MLK and read the books of MLK know that his legacy has been hijacked by those who have much to gain from such behavior.
Again, blacks are a smart group of people. They see what is going on and even when they appear quiet on the outside they are most certainly still engaged.
It is my belief that the presence of so many people of color on the stage on Saturday will seize the attention of those watching.
LARRY SHELDON: YES DR KING was absolutly right to dream for that; but as ROBERT mention on his blog, the QUESTION is realy, why so few of the black COMMUNITY, dont engage fully with the need to restore AMERICA as PRODUCTIVE as she was, AS full of DREAMS as DR kING had;
THAT is the question; THERE should have been thousands of blacks, at BECK’RALLY,
ALONG with the white familys to pray; IT was meant for all AMERICANS.AND those who where speaking in front where CHEERd for their TALENT and gift of speech, they represent the BLACKS AND THE WHITES, but it’s time for the black to get into the move along with others,
LIKE all AMERICANS must do together, and support the trend to RECLAIME AMERICA. bye
Aye,
I agree with your assessment that Al isn’t too popular among everyday Black folks. BUT MLK IS. IF you were to hold a remember King rally at the mall and give the same time for publicity, I’m betting you’d fill the mall like Beck did with a very diverse crowd if the messenger was a respected person.
Beck’s rally was a “Restore Honor” and everyone knew it was in large part a salute to king. and it was. I am talking about the tea party’s. Blacks are NOT engaged in ANYTHING right now as they were during the 2008 election. That’s a fact. All I’m trying to do is put out a possible reason as to why.
I’d also like to point out the lack of black activism FOR Obama as a indicator of my conclusion. The most “Pro-Obama” rally’s have been held by SEIU, or other unions including the teachers….The next rally to be held at the Mall will be on Oct 2nd. It will be held by SEIU, ANSWER, and several other left leaning groups to show they have momentum going into the midterms. It will be interesting to see the racial make up of that rally….
WHY DO YOU SMASH CATS WITH A SHOVEL?
WHY DO YOU LET DOGS STARVE TO DEATH IN YOUR YARD?
Hard to answer when I offer no proof that those things are happening (in my case, when I don’t believe is.
I see no evidence what ever that blacks are anymore disengaged than whites are.
I can make the argument that the reason Obama is president is as much because the whites stayed home as it is that blacks wen out and voted.
I may have to drop this blog–my blood pressure medicine is not up to the task.
Okay Larry take it easy, I’d hate to be the reason you end up feet up.
You don’t see any evidence? Look backwards to 2007-2008. AND realize it was not WHITES staying home that propelled Obama into office it was a combination of Whites and Blacks voting for Obama. That’s a fact. Mostly independents like me…NO I didn’t vote for Obama, but I had no delusion that he was going to win.
I ask you to look back to see what true black involvement and engagement looks like. And compare what you are seeing across the nation now. Their guy is under attack and they are not engaged either in defense or on attack.
I’ll stand with my reasoning for it, and I’ll also stand with my recommendation that the tea party leadership tap that resource. There are a lot of predominately black areas that are suffering under this misguided leadership, and the tea party would do well to enter into dialog with them and try to get them engaged.
I can see Robert’s point, and partially agree with him. Truly, we will see in November just how much disengagement, politically, there is amongst the black community.
Robert:
There’s your answer to the Sharpton rally attendance question. Sharpton is largely NOT well thought of or respected. He is recognized for what he is and most people don’t want anything to do with him or his efforts to hijack the MLK legacy.
Further down in your post you mention SEIU. They were there at the Sharpton event on Saturday. I would be curious to know how many of the attendees of the rally were being paid to be there.
I would have to disagree with your assessment here. No one “knew” what Becks’ Saturday event would be. No one. Now, logic would lead one to deduce that King would have been mentioned because of it being the 47th anniversary but no one knew for sure what to expect.
As a person who was interested in the subject matter of the rally (since I planned to attend) I paid close attention to see if I could ascertain what I would be seeing. I was unsuccessful in my efforts. Beck told us much of what the event would not be but very little as to what it would be.
He kept all of the details very close to the vest and didn’t even reveal anything to his radio staff until the week before.
The secrecy was purposeful and was designed to prevent those in opposition from being able to have anything concrete to fashion their inevitable criticism around.
And I have laid out a series of explanations as to why.
The effort to get Obama elected in 2008 was a “with the grain” movement. It’s easy to go with the grain. Going contrary to the grain is more difficult.
Obama’s numbers among blacks has dropped somewhat since his Immaculation but, again, speaking out against the nations’ first black president isn’t something that most blacks are going to be willing to do.
Again, 2008 was a “with the grain” movement. Blacks voted largely as a bloc. Whites joined in. The Hopey Changey routine claimed the gullible by the thousands.
Most see that Obama has been an unmitigated disaster. Only the true believers are going to speak out in his defense.
The middle of the road voter isn’t going to go against the norms and expectations of the culture in which they live.
That would be good advice if it were workable.
Getting blacks involved and engaged in an effort to speak out against the nations’ first black president isn’t likely to happen on any large scale.
Sure, there will be some who are courageous enough to do so but there will not likely be a large scale movement in that direction due to all of the various things that I have already laid out.
I think the message of the rally was pretty clear to anyone that paid attention. When Alveda King was listed as a speaker, when he said “Restoring Honor, faith hope and charity” I think it was easy to see what the message would be…
IF it was workable? Why is it not workable? I really tire of folks saying “It can’t be done” IT can be done if people are willing.
You said:
Most see Obama as a disaster” and that is my point, they see him as a disaster but are not engaged against it. FACT. You keep saying they are engaged, yet you say they were with the grain in 08? so they were engaged in 08 but they aren’t now because they see him as a disaster?.. That’s what I’m saying too….
I’m not sure we are in a disagreement…
Your series of reasons for them not being engaged or saying they are engaged is a little contradictory.
It will be interesting to see the rally on Oct 2nd how the paid to be there crowd reacts to the messages.
Realistically blacks are NOT going to publicly speak up in large numbers against the first black president. It just isn’t going to happen. They will sit back. They will observe. They will remain quiet. And when the elections come around they may or may not get out and vote.
Don’t confuse a lack of public expression of discontent with a lack of engagement.
Those are two different things. Engagement is awareness.
And remember what I keep reminding you of in regard to going against the grain. It was easy for a black person to support and vote for Obama because that was the prevailing trend and the overwhelming expectation.
Vast numbers of his supporters were young voters, many of whom had never voted before and, as is typical of younger voters, their support has waned as they have moved on to the most recent season of American Idol or the continuing exploits of Lindsey Lohan and Paris Hilton.
No, we’re not in disagreement. At least not complete disagreement.
You asked some good questions and proposed the solutions as you see them.
I was simply answering your questions and analyzing your proposed solutions.