Mainstream Republican Racist
As people start looking beyond the midterm elections towards 2008, there’s one name that keeps popping up.
HANNITY: Who do you see that holds the Reagan mantle that you’d like to see run and win?
. . .
LIMBAUGH: Is there another Ronald Reagan out there? I don’t know, I don’t see one right on the horizon. But there’s only one Ronald Reagan.But now you’re asking me for a name? You want a name?
HANNITY: You got one?
LIMBAUGH: It’s early. The danger with mentioning names is that you hurt the feelings of people that you leave out. I’m going to leave some people out because of time constraints, but when I hear George Allen speak, there’s a part of me, “Yes, rah-rah.”
Who is George Allen? Well, he’s a Senator and former governor of Virginia, but he’s also a rising star in the Republican party who’s got a disturbing past :
Campaigning for governor in 1993, he admitted to prominently displaying a Confederate flag in his living room. He said it was part of a flag collection–and had been removed at the start of his gubernatorial bid. When it was learned that he kept a noose hanging on a ficus tree in his law office, he said it was part of a Western memorabilia collection. These explanations may be sincere. But, as a chief executive, he also compiled a controversial record on race. In 1994, he said he would accept an honorary membership at a Richmond social club with a well-known history of discrimination–an invitation that the three previous governors had refused. After an outcry, Allen rejected the offer. He replaced the only black member of the University of Virginia (UVA) Board of Visitors with a white one. He issued a proclamation drafted by the Sons of Confederate Veterans declaring April Confederate History and Heritage Month. The text celebrated Dixie’s “four-year struggle for independence and sovereign rights.” There was no mention of slavery.
. . .
Politically, Allen’s years in Palos Verdes were dominated by the lingering racial tensions from the riots in nearby Watts in 1965–when that neighborhood was practically burned to the ground–and the nationwide riots following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, which left other parts of Southern California in flames. It is with that context in mind that four former classmates and one former administrator at Allen’s high school described to me an event for which Allen is most remembered–and the first glimpse that the château-raised Californian might grow up to become a defender of the South’s heritage.It was the night before a major basketball game with Morningside High. The mostly black inner-city school adjacent to Watts was coming to the almost entirely white Palos Verdes High to play. When students arrived at school on game day, they found graffiti spray-painted on the school library and other places. All five people who described the incident say the graffiti was racially tinged and meant to look like the handiwork of the black Morningside students. But it was actually put there by Allen and some of his friends. “It was something like die whitey,” says Campbell. The school administrator, who says he is a Republican and would “seriously consider” voting for Allen for president, says the graffiti said, “burn, baby, burn,” a reference to the race riots.
I’m all for giving people the benefit of the doubt and I do think people shouldn’t necessarily have to spend their entire lives apologizing for dumb shit they did as teenagers, but you’ve gotta draw the line somewhere and for me, trying to incite a race riot is unforgivable. Especially considering that Allen’s love for Confederacy hasn’t waned more than 30 years later. When compared to somebody like Sen. Byrd, who’s also got some racist skeletons in his closet, I haven’t seen much to indicate that George Allen has tried to make amends for his past. Jesus Christ, having a noose hanging from a tree in his office?! How can there be any doubt in people’s minds that George Allen is still a racist scumbag?
Before you chalk this up as another Republican who’s a closet bigot, let me remind you of Allen’s enormous popularity within the party :
With visions of 2008 dancing in their heads, National Journal ’s political insiders made their parties’ picks for the presidential nod and came up with two senators, one seemingly obvious and one seemingly unlikely: Hillary Rodham Clinton and George Allen .This week’s survey combined both the political and congressional respondents — 85 Republicans and 90 Democrats in all — and gave each potential White House contender five points for a first-place vote, four points for a second-place vote and so on. The New York Democrat ran away with her party’s vote, collecting 407 points and 68 first places. The Virginia Republican’s tally was smaller, with 229 points. His 19 first places tied with Arizona Sen. John McCain , whose points totaled 217.
That matchup raises a perennial question: How important is name recognition, even three years out? Although insiders know Allen — one said he was “Reagan-like in his appeal to GOP activists”; another called him a “real dark horse who should not be underestimated” — he might make voters scratch their heads.
If the Republican party was serious about putting its legacy of racism behind them (Southern Strategy, Dixiecrats, neo-Confederates, etc.) and truly believed Chairman Ken Mehlman’s vow that it’s “not healthy for the country for our political parties to be so racially polarized”, party leaders wouldn’t be caught dead with a guy like George Allen. The remarkable thing isn’t just that Allen is welcome in the party (which can be explained away with meaningless rhetoric about having a “big tent”), but that this race-baiting, Confederate flag-waving bigot is considered a party leader. This is the guy the GOP wants to represent them in the election that will mark the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. and the passing of the Civil Rights Act?
10 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
The only thing out of that laundry list of things that can solidly imply that Allen may be racist is the noose. But even a noose isn’t necessarily racially-tinged depending on the context. It’s still pretty weird, I mean, who displays a noose?
The confederate flag on the wall? Hell, I have an 80 year old grandma that has one too. Oh, and she and my grandfather were outspoken civil rights advocates in a backwoods community where Klan membership rivaled that of the Rotary Club. While I understand why some people don’t like the confederate flag, it’s not fair to imply that it’s a potential indicator of racism — particularly in the deep South.
The graffiti? 35+ year old hearsay that I have a hard time caring enough about to determine its validity.
Really, I think that the most that can be implied from what was posted is that perhaps Allen is racially insensitive — or maybe in the early 90s he was politically stupid. Regardless, I feel that one should hold back a bit before throwing around words like ‘racist’ or ‘bigot’. The moment this notion gains even marginal attention is the moment that Republicans break out their megaphone and say that the Democrats are trying to destroy a man’s career based upon racially charged innuendo and hearsay.
A better reason not to vote for Allen? Because Rush Limbaugh really seems to like him.
Comment by kill whitey — May 4, 2006 @ 1:45 pm
That context is a history of racial intolerance. Seriously, you should read the whole article. The fetishistic attachment to the confederate flag (he wore a confederate flag lapel pin in his yearbook photo), opposition to the MLK holiday and other civil rights related legislation, and the graffiti incident all form a pretty obvious pattern.
Also, I dunno if I’d consider the claims of five different witnesses (including one supporter) to be merely “hearsay”, but that’s beside the point. The ultimate problem isn’t that this one man is a racist but that the Republican party is to keen on embracing him as a leader. Like I said earlier, if the GOP truly cared about race relations, there wouldn’t be a place for him in the party.
Comment by greg — May 4, 2006 @ 5:15 pm
Allen has another big problem…he has all the charisma of a wet cardboard box. Whenever I’ve heard him interviewed he just spews a neverending string of insipid sports cliches…
Comment by jimmarquis — May 4, 2006 @ 6:03 pm
Kill Whitey is right, when Rush starts getting that “kiss of CRACK” look of approval for a potential candidate, it’s time to walk away. (before the DEA shows up)
Comment by Mike Meyer — May 4, 2006 @ 7:25 pm
After the Bush presidency, rubberstamp congress, and a complete bias of Supreme Court for years, the names mentioned are moot. You kill a snake by cutting its head off, and you send a message to Republicans and Big Business by not electing ANY of their people. Ever, again.
Comment by patrick — May 4, 2006 @ 11:08 pm
I’m not by any means defending this George Allen character by any means who I have never even heard of previously… but the descriptions of the “chateau-raised Californian” from Palos Verdes who allegedly did some things in his youth are a bit of a strain for any person to stomach, let alone hold against a person 35 years later. Since I grew up in that area of Los Angeles it is important to note that Watts is not even close to being “adjacent” to Palos Verdes. And unless he was raised in France, even the large houses in PV are not chateaus. Also who cares what this anonymous school administrator says? When does blogging lend itself to simplistic characterisations instead relying on facts?
Comment by Andy Kirk — May 5, 2006 @ 10:00 am
Condi Rice would be the perfect vice presidential candidate for Allen. All she needs is an Aunt Jemimah outfit to win the votes in the south.
Comment by Becky — May 5, 2006 @ 11:07 am
Allen is almost, but not quite, stupid enough to replace the moron, if indeed there IS an election in 08 and the puppet has to step down (all of which I doubt will happen).
There are two things driving it:
(1) the nominee has to be so stupid that he could not begin to understand the job of President, let alone ever DO it, and
(2) he must not be so stupid that he doesn’t understand completely that should he EVER try to do one single thing on his own without orders, he will be killed instantly.
An example of someone TOO stupid to replace Bush would be Santorum. An example of someone too smart would be McCain.
I don’t think however that they want to have an election and lose—and then keep the White House anyway (a la Milosevic). So my guess is that there will be no more elections until the puppet dies, and even then the elections will by then have been so rigged that there will never be another honest one held.
Comment by SamSnedegar — May 6, 2006 @ 6:08 am
As a liberal Virginian, I have no love for George Allen; in fact, my feelings for him could best be described as “an apoplectic rage” since the man’s intelligence is in inverse proportion to his smarminess. All that being said, I have to agree with the creatively titled “kill whitey” - I don’t think he’s racist (I agree with “insensitive”), and perhaps more important to those of you reading this, I don’t think attacking him as such advances “our” cause. Not to get too far off topic, but those of you living in places other than the South should please refrain from judging all of us so harshly, especially if you’ve never been here and/or don’t understand the culture. Let us criticize ourselves; I mean, I’ll be the first to admit that stereotypes fit sometimes, but it’s not as if the rest of the country is so advanced. I’ve met thoughtful/ignorant people everywhere. The country is divided along rural/urban divides, which exist in every state.
Anyway, if you want reasons to hate Allen, I’d stick with what he’s done as Governor, or, more recently, as U.S. Senator. You will not be disappointed.
Comment by Ben — May 8, 2006 @ 8:29 am
I’d rather have a lot less Republicans, sure. However having a noose at a tree next to a law office is seriously funny if you like dark humor. Don’t know enough about the guy to tell whether that could apply, but the arguments for him being racist seem a little to light for comfort.
Comment by StefanMuc — August 29, 2006 @ 2:52 am