Kicking Ass: The Democratic Party's Blog

What Took Him So Long?

Posted by on July 20, 2006 at 11:27 AM

What took him so long?

For five years in a row, President Bush has declined invitations to address the annual NAACP convention. This year, with the Senate poised to renew the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Bush said yes.

The White House says Bush wants to address the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People on Thursday to show his commitment to civil rights.

''The president has had five years to prepare for this speech,'' Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, past chairman of the Congressional Black Democratic Caucus, said Wednesday. ''I hope that this time, he makes it worth the wait.''

Democrats have called on Bush to use his appearance to renew the Voting Rights Act. ''He could sign it right here on this stage,'' Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., told the NAACP on Wednesday, eliciting cheers from the audience.

...

Every president for the past several decades has spoken to the Baltimore-based group. Until now, Bush, who received 11 percent of the black vote in 2004, had been the exception. His appearance comes in a critical midterm election year, when Republicans fear losing control of Congress.

In light of the President's decision to finally speak to the members of this important organization, the DNC has prepared a list of 6 questions for the President, one for every year he has ignored the NAACP.

1. If the President is committed to civil rights, what took the President so long to address one of the nation's preeminent civil rights organizations?

2. Why has President Bush failed to provide real leadership on voting rights issues or use his political capital to get the Republican Congress to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act, stopping Republicans across the country from pushing discriminatory voter ID laws, and fully funding Help America Vote Act reforms?

3. Why has President Bush slashed small business loan programs that have been crucial for African American-owned businesses?

4. Why is it that, even though the number of African Americans who lack health insurance has climbed to more than seven million, President Bush has slashed funding for Medicare and Medicaid and forced through a prescription drug plan that raises prices for low income seniors?

5. If average household income for African American families has fallen by more than $2,000 and more African Americans are living in poverty, why have President Bush's budgets shortchanged college opportunities and gutted job training programs?

6. If African American seniors and children rely on Social Security at a rate disproportionately higher than the rest of the population, why is President Bush promoting a Social Security privatization scheme that would slash benefits for African American seniors and make it harder for survivors to receive benefits?

Yesterday at a press conference Tony Snow, the President's Press Secretary, said he was speaking with the group, "because he wants to." So by that logic, he has declined invitations for the past six years because he did not "want to" spend his time addressing the group.

Just for giggles, it's worth noting that President Bush is the first United States President in 80 years to go an entire term without speaking to the NAACP.

Comments (17) «

Here's another question to ask:

BUSH: Owning a home gives people a stake in their neighborhoods and a stake in the future.

Today, nearly half of African-Americans own their own homes, and that's good for America. That's good for our country. But they still got to do more.

So we're working to do our part with helping people afford a downpayment and closing costs, helping families who are in rental assistance to become homeowners, helping people understand the fine print when it comes to mortgage documents.

Well, a lot of that fine print is provided by predatory lenders, who target minorities because of their poor credit histories.

Think Progress, February 2006:

Bush Rewards Predatory Lender With Ambassadorship

President Bush repeatedly touts high levels of minority homeownership as the pride and joy of his economic expansion policies. Indeed, homeownership amongst minorities reached above 50% for the first time in 2004. But last year black home ownership fell back to 48.8 percent. And according to the New York Times, “neighborhoods with large poor and minority populations in places like Cleveland, Chicago, Philadelphia and Atlanta have experienced a sharp rise in foreclosures, in some cases more than a doubling.”

Experts believe subprime loans make purchasing a home for low-income homebuyers easier at the start but harder to keep. Subprime loans are made available to homebuyers with poor credit histories. They have interest rates that are three points higher on average than the prime rate (about 6.2 percent now) and carry higher fees and prepayment penalties that make it expensive to refinance.

Just last month, Ameriquest, the nation’s largest sub-prime mortgage company specializing in financing housing purchases in heavily minority neighborhoods, settled predatory lending allegations by 49 states, agreeing to pay $295 million in restitution and clean up its lending practices.

Days after the settlement, Roland E. Arnall, Ameriquest’s founder and the largest campaign contributor to Bush since 2002, was confirmed to be U.S. ambassador to the Netherlands.

Read the entire speech. There's plenty to dissect here.

1
Corinne on July 20, 2006 at 12:37 PM

Thanks Corrine, that is an issue that I'm annoyed about too. Predatory lenders should be banned, no question. Washington State is full of them, and the way they market to poorer communities is desperately unethical.

California has an independent candidate, Ken Grandlund, who plans to tackle this one.. It's an important issue.

2
Chandira on July 20, 2006 at 01:19 PM

He isn't speaking to the NAACP because he wants to; he's doing it because he "needs" to. He's alienated so many demographic groups that he can no longer "ignore" any ethnic group.

3
SandyH on July 20, 2006 at 02:34 PM

wasn't it clinton/gore that raised taxes on social security in the early 90's, thereby taking benefits away from seniors?

4
cutter on July 20, 2006 at 02:54 PM

While it took Bush five years to attend NAACP meeting, I wonder if it will take that long to get a Middle East Crisis Thread on the DNC.

5
PeppermintLizzy on July 20, 2006 at 04:11 PM

Hey, why are we opposed to having an ID requirement to vote? I forgot. I was thinking that producing a drivers license, passport, or state ID card kind of makes sense. Sure beats voter fraud. But we are against this. Tell me why please. Thanks.

6
NotSoldonPelosi on July 20, 2006 at 10:05 PM

The NAACP should have told Bush to get lost. He blew them off while he was on top, and now that his approval rating is in the toilet, he decides he needs to talk to them? The hypocritical jerk.

7
Butte on July 20, 2006 at 10:09 PM

So you ask what took him so long. My response is who cares. All he is going to do is lie and try and make people feel sorry for him. This man is one of the biggest con politicians of our times. He no more cares about the black people then the man in the moon. Or for that matter of fact, he does not care about anything or anybody if there is no oil involved. I sure am glad there is no oil in my back yard. I could not stand the bombing and noise.

8
usahope1 on July 20, 2006 at 10:34 PM

Dear Mr. President,(and Republicans)

On behalf of myself and my fellow Black Democrats.Heck,on behalf of ALL Democrats,I dedicate this song to you people.

THERE YOU GO (Rendition of Pink's song with the same title)

Please don't come around telling us how you changed,how you said good bye to racist ways, where was your ass after the hurricane?

We are so glad that we found us a party to believe in,they got more to offer us than Lincoln,that's why we're sticking to the BLUE team.

So you say you wanna talk, we DON'T, say your gonna change,NO you WONT,

We all know that

You had your chance,won't take you back,now what? Whatcha think about that?

Now when we say we're through we're through.Basically we're through with you.

Whatcha wanna say?

Had to have it your way,playing racist games,now you want our vote to sway.

(CHORUS)

There you go, looking pitiful.
Republicans down in the polls.
There you go,pandering to all the Blacks,
Trying to get our vote back.

There you go,looking pitiful,cuz your down in the polls and you need our vote,

There you go cuz you snubbed our voice,
Look at you there you go.
(climax)

Did you think that you could change our mind?
Did you think your ratings would climb?
Like we'd come running back
Do you think we Blacks are stupid like that?

Did'nt miss the Black Vote till it's gone,
But of course,we knew it all along,
When your points got low enough,
You'd come PANDERING....
There you go.....


LOL.


9
FreedomOfSpeechForProgressiveMajority on July 21, 2006 at 12:35 AM

Posted by FreedomOfSpeechForProgressiveMajority on July 21, 2006 at 12:35

FOS, Black Americans form an iron rod of strength that runs through the backbone of our country.

Despite being torn from their homes and family - despite being enslaved and treated as something less than human - they still love the country. They love it enough to put their lives on the line to defend it - and enough to put their lives on the line to insist that it live up to its promise and treat all of its citizens equally.

The Declaration of Independence in 1776, the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and the Civil Rights act of 1964, are all sign posts on a journey to the realization that we all live in the same house.

To quote John Lewis:

The lightning may flash. And the rain may beat down on this old house we call America. Call it the American House. Call it the World House. But we must never, ever leave the house. All of us must stay together and walk hand in hand. Maybe just maybe our forefathers and foremothers all came to this land in different ships, but we are all in the same boat now. During the last half of this century, we have come a great distance, but we still have a distance to go.

Don't confuse GOP leadership with rank and file Republicans. Don't confuse GOP policies with rank and file Republicans. The crimes of slavery belong to all Americans and whatever advances have been made belong to all of us.

The way I see things, Black America will one day need to transform the GOP - or this country will never truely be one house.

So good luck :)

10
dorsano on July 21, 2006 at 02:15 AM

dorsano,

Thank you for responding to my post.I do recognize that the Black American struggle for justice faced, and still faces, opposition from both sides of the aisle at various points of our nations history,but the fact remains,the Republican Party and their base in recent years,have done more to repeal,rebutt and revise all achievenments and success that came as a result of the Civil Rights movement with legislation that takes away from the Black Community.I also have no problem asserting that the Republican Leadership and their constituency are one and the same.This was their goal from the beginning (1994) and this is what they have proudly accomplished.Republicans pride themselves on being in "lock step" with their leadership so it is not wrong for me to "generalize" the entire party.This is their creation and they have to deal with that.They stood together when they deminished our great nation into a joke and a byword in the eyes of the world.Now,let them fall together and take the blame they so deserve.I think it's important to understand this one thing about the Black American Community.We are not as stupid as the Republicans think we are.We know the entire history.We know which political party played which role.We also, understand the ERA and the type of atmosphere America was in when these "historical events" took place.We draw a clear distinction between what was done to us in the name of a POLITICAL party and what was done to us on behalf of the entire White American RACE.We know which legislation was passed due to "change of heart" as opposed to "change of strategy" and which party was "real" in their dealings with us as opposed to "fake" .That's why Republicans get laughed off the stage by Black Americans when they bring up the only thing they think they can be proud of.(a half-ass attempt to end slavery and not deal with the aftermath by one,Abraham Lincoln)Well,it takes more than that.Democrats at least,try to COMPLETE the job, not ignore it and hope it goes away.Then again, Republicans are not very good with "Aftermaths" of any kind are they?

LOL

11
FreedomOfSpeechForProgressiveMajority on July 21, 2006 at 06:37 AM

SandyH -

Evidently the people who run this blog don't appreciate my "wit" as much as you. Note the absence of my last post on this topic.

Courage comes in very small doses in this party, does it not?

12
BaronScarpia on July 21, 2006 at 07:53 AM

Lincoln's getting a bad rap here.
Lincoln very little to do with the aftermath of the Civil War. It's kind of hard to deal with the aftermath of anything when you have a bullet in your brain. Lincold was shot shortly after the Surrender at Appomattox, and before his policies could be implemented.
Johnson, Lincoln's VP and sucessor, didn't agree with many of Lincoln's policies, and had his own agenda for dealing with the South after the Civil War.
Maybe things would have been different if Booth hadn't shot Lincoln, maybe not, but at this point, only God knows.

13
Butte on July 21, 2006 at 10:25 AM

Posted by FreedomOfSpeechForProgressiveMajority on July 21, 2006 at 06:37 AM We draw a clear distinction between what was done to us in the name of a POLITICAL party and what was done to us on behalf of the entire White American RACE.We know which legislation was passed due to "change of heart" as opposed to "change of strategy" and which party was "real" in their dealings with us as opposed to "fake".

FOS, I've no delusions that Rove, who would like to sway any percentage at all of the Black vote, considers me a useful fool.

But in the end, if America wins, who's the fool?

14
dorsano on July 22, 2006 at 03:51 AM

Yeh, I read King George Bush's oration to the NAACP.
Went like this: "BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH etc. etc. etc".
Talk about flip-floppers!
This man has ignored this respected organization(and the values they stand for) during his entire term. Now he wants to try to "CON"vince them that he's a swell guy and really interested in their cause.
I believe that they will see him for what he really is, a snake-oil salesman looking for their votes, nothing more.

LIVE FREE OR DIE

15
BetterDeadThanRed on July 22, 2006 at 07:17 AM

By appearing at the NAACP meeting, what substantive changes that are beneficial to blacks are made by a sitting U.S. president? Do black people simply fall by the wayside if the president does not attend the NAACP's convention? Finally, if the last Democratic president attended the NAACP's annual convention for eight years,then blacks should not have any problems in America. My point: apperances or non-appearances mean little. It is your actions that rise above your appearances.

16
hootie on July 22, 2006 at 04:27 PM

Was he able to bring this group to their knees? I think now!

17
freeforall on July 24, 2006 at 05:19 PM


« Hide Comments

Comments are now closed for this entry.