I had an opportunity to confront Georgia Representative John Lewis, who accused McCain and Palin of "sowing the seeds of hatred and division." Whatever Lewis says about the House of Obama, I do not believe that Republicans and conservatives have a place in it.
Where exactly do Republicans and conservatives fit in a political space where Barack Obama will soon assume the powers and duties of the President of the United States?
When posing this question I am not asking whether Republicans will be included in the Obama cabinet although it is likely one will be. If unity is one of the objectives of an Obama Presidency how would President Obama reach out to Republicans and conservatives? Would President Obama direct his supporters to hold out the olive branch?
I recently had the opportunity to hear civil rights icon and Georgia Democratic Congressman John Lewis speak at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. His lecture was largely a testimonial of his first hand experience in the civil rights movement. Lewis was a contemporary of Martin Luther King, Jr. and like King he put his life on the line in standing up for the equality of all Americans before the law. Lewis became a Freedom Rider in 1961 and was beaten bloody by white mobs for his trouble. But this did not deter him. Lewis would sustain a concussion and skull fracture from Alabama state troopers during a non-violent protest march in 1965 he led from Selma to Montgomery on the Edmund Pettis Bridge. But this did not deter him. Unlike King, Lewis would live to tell his story. He would become an Atlanta City Councilor before his election to Congress in 1986.
Although I have occasionally been subject to ridicule for my beliefs I cannot say I have ever been in a position where my life was put in jeopardy because of them. John Lewis has known such jeopardy simply because he exercised the rights all Americans should have and for that he has my utmost respect.
It would be an understatement to say that John Lewis was elated by the victory of Barack Obama. He said it has moved him to tears and to accept hugs from complete strangers. While Lewis initially supported Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries he would switch his endorsement once Obama eclipsed Clinton in the delegate total in late February 2008. Lewis said Obama's election made America "a better country and a better people." He went on to say that America, even Republicans, were "one people, one family." "We all live in the same house and we all have a place at the table," said Lewis.
If Republicans and presumably conservatives have a place at America's table I cannot help but think that we would be assigned the worst seat. Not only would we have the worst seat we would get the smallest portions during mealtimes. I also suspect that we would be expected to do the heaviest lifting with very little reward to show for it. Republicans and conservatives would probably be asked to sleep out on the back porch after a hard day's labor.
John Lewis is an American hero. But American heroes aren't above criticism. John McCain considered Lewis an American hero. McCain went as far as to tell Pastor Rick Warren and national television audience at the Saddleback Forum last August that he was one of the three wisest people in America that he would seek out for counsel if elected President.
Despite such lofty praise from McCain, it did not prevent Lewis from accusing McCain and Sarah Palin last month of "sowing the seeds of hatred and division." He asserted their campaign rallies reminded him "too much of another destructive period in American history." Lewis would evoke George Wallace and the 1963 church bombing in Birmingham that claimed the life of four little girls.
But having listened to Lewis' testimonial about his struggles in the 1960s I failed to make any connection between activities in McCain-Palin campaign and a church bombing forty-five years ago that resulted in the deaths of innocent children. So during the Q & A session, I challenged Lewis' assertion. I told Lewis that I had no recollection of McCain uttering, "Segregation now; segregation tomorrow and segregation forever." Nor did I recall Governor Palin ever blocking a schoolhouse door. I asked Lewis if such remarks had the effect of diminishing the meaning of racism.
Lewis affirmed his remarks by stating that he was not referring to statements made by McCain or Palin but rather by the behavior of those attending their rallies. (If Lewis had no beef with McCain and Palin how was it they were sowing the seeds of hatred?)
He based this information on things he saw on television and had read in the newspaper specifically citing there had been people at McCain-Palin rallies who said "kill him" in reference to Obama. Lewis was given a hearty round of applause for his answer.
There was only one problem. What Lewis said wasn't true. Evidently, he didn't read The Times Leader, a newspaper out of Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania. According to The Times Leader, the agent in charge of the local Secret Service field office stated the incident never occurred based on interviews with people who were at the Sarah Palin rally in Scranton on October 14th.Nobody at the rally said "kill him." Nobody at that rally called for Barack Obama to be assassinated much less acted upon it.
After the Q&A session, I went downstairs to try to get a word with him directly. After shaking his hand, I told him the Secret Service officially disputed the "kill him" statement. Lewis looked at me as if I was a lobster trying to reason with a chef bent on boiling it. Nothing I could say would convince John Lewis that people who supported McCain and Palin weren't racists and purveyors of hatred ready to kill Obama. This made me sad rather than angry.
No one can question John Lewis where it concerns the civil rights movement because he was there. However, it is our duty to question John Lewis where it concerns conservative political activism because he wasn't there. He simply saw it on TV and read about it in the newspaper and accepted what was put out at face value. He accepted it because he wanted to believe it. I thought John Lewis was better than that but I alas I was wrong. Hero or no hero, John Lewis is a human being with both virtues and faults.
Whatever Lewis might say about the House of Obama, I do not believe that Republicans and conservatives have a place in it. This goes well beyond disagreement on the issues of the day. Many of Barack Obama's supporters and liberals in general have a deep rooted conviction that Republicans and conservatives are inherently bigoted and predisposed to racism and all kinds of other hatreds. So long as such an attitude prevails we are better off staying away from the House of Obama.
If Barack Obama genuinely wants help from people whose support he has yet to earn then he can earn it by publicly telling his supporters be they John Lewis or a first-time voter to stop calling racist Republicans, conservatives and other people with whom they disagree. This would go a long way in demonstrating the House of Obama is welcome to all people. However, in the real world such an admonition from Obama is about as likely as an apology from John Lewis to McCain, Palin and their supporters.
Republicans and conservatives are better off to rebuild our own house rather than wait for the day the welcome mat is rolled out to grant us entry into the House of Obama.
Aaron, I feel like you’re portraying Republicans and conservatives as the kids who didn’t get invited to the birthday party. We didn’t get a warm welcome into the White House yet, but I doubt we would have extended such a welcome to the liberal illuminati either, were the circumstances reversed. Yes, there is no doubt that we need to rebuild our own house. We should not wait around to be invited to the party. But there’s also no need for this “poor me” attitude I’m sensing. We need to pull our party together and focus on what we have, rather than what we don’t have: immediate favor in the White House. We have much to do. And would we really be happy in the White House anyway, or would we continue to cherry-pick and complain?
Aaron,
In stating that his cabinet would include Republicans, and in requesting that Robert Gates stay on as SECDEF, I believe that Obama was extending an invitation to a “place at the table” for one or more leaders with conservative values. An eventual return to more fiscally conservative economic principles, as abandoned by GWB, will be critical in achieving a complete economic recovery.
With regard to social conservative issues, the picture may be a little different. Republicans have used certain of these as wedge issues in the past to help get out the vote. As a consequence, their relative importance to the overall good of the country has been blown out of proportion (especially in the minds of the right wing).
In this last election social conservatives won on important ballot measures in California and Florida. Obama is smart enough to understand that these issues, so near and dear to the right wing, are of relatively low priority given the economy and foreign policy problems facing the country. Except possibly in education reform, I believe it is unlikely that the new administration will try to move further left in any significant way on social / religious conservative issues at the federal level. Social conservatives can still push these issues at the state level.
So, like jeanedcrusader1, I hope that Republicans will not take up the victim’s mantle. They need to either revitalize the Party as presently constituted, or let the far right go their own way. If formation of a breakaway ‘social conservative / religious right’ party is inevitable, as many on the far right are advocating, then get it over with as quickly and painlessly as possible. If such a schism occurs , history has shown that one of the two factions will not long survive unless the Electoral College system is modified.
Regardless of how the Republicans resolve their current existential angst, this country needs a functioning multi-party system. Good (or at least better) government depends on a reasoned, principled, and above all loyal opposition.
Thus far the Obama presidency looks like a “great symbolic trumph.” The LA and NY Times are both rushing to insist that Obama must “rule from the center”,ie. throw out his campaign promises that enabled him to defeat Hillary. And the O-man has complied by appointing a slew of (Bill)Clinton economic moderates to his cabinet. I doubt Obama has much of an idea what he believes in (or at least what might have given us some clue was dismissed by the media)which explains why he was so vague on what he stood for during the campaing and why he can so easily shift to different sides of the political spectrum. This s also why he remains attractive to Lewis and other blacks from the generation of the ’50s are content with “symbolic” victories. Whether Obama really does anything for blacks is less important than having a “black man” in the White House.
I’d argue it does more for whites and conservatives than it does for blacks and liberals. For one thing, blacks and liberals can no longer fall back on the ‘a black-liberal couldn’t get elected in this country’ canard. I, for one, am relieved to finally have this particular straw-man behind us; and, hopefully, the next black candidate can be less a race-symbol, less the socialist poster-child, and a good deal more transparent regarding both past and politics.
Yet, I must temper this optimism with a little anxiety. I still look to the day race isn’t something we approve, but, rather, is altogether irrelevant. Obama’s presidency is going to be a lightning-rod for more than just terrorists and foreign powers seeking to test his metal, it is also going to be a testing time for us as Americans on how we treat our first black president. For all these reasons and as a conservative, I will oppose him when he is wrong, but will likewise oppose those who will no doubt delight in causing or exacerbating a failed first black presidency. Therefore, I wish him well as a moderate, because, otherwise, it could set race-politics back a notch; and that would be a national disgrace. If I am sometimes still critical of Obama, it will be only be to pull him back to center.
This is our chance to show it isn’t just so much rhetoric we say every American owes it to every president to put partisanship aside. How often have we decried liberals who do exactly that. Keeping faith with principle and short of him blowing our faith, then, we must get behind Obama as our nation’s new President; else show ourselves no better.
John Lewis?
Sorry, I was under the misapprehension that it was …not the color of a man’s skin, but the content of a man’s character… that was important. I shall never make that mistake again!
From OJ to Obie, I have been taught by their actions that nothing matters more than skin color. Of course he looked at you lobster! He projects himself on you! We, each of us, measure the world by the measure of ourselves. A thief thinks everyone steals… a liar that all lie… and to a race-obsessed bigot that would kill on account of a man’s color, that people would say those things must be true!
Living a long time, I’ve learned a man’s mouth might lie, but his actions generally don’t. This man’s actions towards those who are losing power tell it all. He is no hero, just a man looking out for others with his skintone. I’m sorry he’s fooled you. The heroes from that time are the whites who endured the same treatment as blacks. They were working on the behalf of others… fellow human beings. Lewis was not, he just wanted a piece of his.
I am sick to death of color. We don’t know if MLK was better than his followers or not, because he was assasinated, but those from his movement were all singing the same song: character, not color. Well, we see now how much they believed that! I’ll always wonder, now, whether MLK believed what he said or if he was just putting on an act as empirical evidence says this clown was.
These people preach racial harmony, yet let the wind change and they hoist the Jolly Rodger!
Yeah, I know: if this is allowed to go up the catcalls of “racist” will come from all quarters…
Let me ask you this. Replace “black” in this controvery with your favorite thing. Now, is what conclusion you’d draw if it were, say, obesity or left-handedness. When you do that, w/o the emotional charge of race polarizing the thought process the conclusions are almost certainly what I’ve advanced.
BTW:
what 1st started me thinking along these lines was a comment by a black aquaintace about a different black politician: “he’s only doing what’s best for his people, staying off the plantation…”. Best for his people? Why not do what’s best for all Americans? Blacks are only 13%-14% of the population, so “his people” should have consisted of atleast a few white voters — since color obviously matters SO much! You know, maybe one or two, right?
I am SO tired of this! If we Conservatives don’t load our factual and ideological blunderbusses and go hunting bear we deserve what we get!
And the 1st step is to shed the guilt! This man isn’t a hero! A hero works selflessly! This man just wanted “his people” to “get some”. When he got there he stopped working and instead starts taking revenge — against those without whos help he’d never have gotten there! It was Conservatives and Republican whites who were the abolitionist and white civilrights heroes! That he then backstabs them tells volumns about his character.
On second thought: no wonder skincolor trumpts character for him, its completely understandble… he has none of one…