Black Republicans, Obama, JC Watts, Armstrong Williams, African-American Republican Leadership Council in Texas,

Why black Republicans support Obama

---

Posted: July 05, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

I don't necessarily like his policies; but … history thrusts me to really seriously think about it [voting for Obama]. … Black conservatives tell me privately it would be very hard to vote against him in November.

– Armstrong Williams, talk show host

Recent comments by well-known black Republicans J.C. Watts and Armstrong Williams that they're conflicted about the upcoming presidential elections and are contemplating voting for Barack Obama have sent shock waves through the Republican Party.

I'm hearing many black Republicans echoing similar sentiments. They say that because of the historical significance of casting a vote for the first legitimate black presidential candidate, they may cross party lines.

These statements don't surprise me.

So, how did black Republicans get to a point where they're willing to abandon their own "values" to vote for a socialist?

To get an understanding of this phenomenon, I recently interviewed several black Republican leaders on my radio program.

Calvin Stephens, chairman of the African-American Republican Leadership Council in Texas, said that he's voting for Obama because this is a "black pride moment!"

Can you imagine if a white person in a similar position even hinted at voting for a candidate because it was a "white pride moment"? That person would be castigated, labeled a "racist" and fired.

Other black Republicans came on my program and repeated the Obama mantra of "change" without defining what that change meant.

I understand now that there's a major difference between a black conservative and a black Republican. A black conservative votes Republican because the party agrees with his values: pro-life, lower taxes, strong defense and strong families, etc.

A real black conservative could never vote for Obama. On the other hand, a black Republican could vote for Obama because he identifies more with color than character.

Because black Americans have long been catered to by liberal Democrats, most still feel like they're owed something. Even the staunchest black Republican believes that his party owes him.

A new breed of black Republican has infiltrated the GOP with the intent to wield black influence over both the parties. They may agree with the Republican Party on taxes and other economic issues, but that's it! At their core they're dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrats.

Until some 20 years ago, I used to be a liberal Democrat too. I followed Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan and the NAACP. In my anger I believed what these so-called "black leaders" told me: that white racism was keeping me down.

I became a conservative after a deeply profound spiritual awakening at which point I repented of my anger, and God allowed me to see reality. I was then able to recognize that these liberal black leaders were no friends of decent black Americans. I could no longer identify with the liberal Democrat platform or their Godless "values."

I identified with conservative values and I joined the Republican Party to promote those values. I didn't join seeking to find what the party could do for me.

Understandably, white conservatives are bewildered and upset about the prospect of black Republicans voting for candidates based on race rather than values.

The Hispanic community already outnumbers blacks, and they're competing for representation within the GOP. Black Republicans' support of Obama will no doubt create a bigger rift between Republican leadership and blacks, and serve to close the window of opportunity blacks have had open to them to gain leadership in the party.

But what about "history"?

Let's examine the "history" argument. Is it right to vote for Barack Obama to make "history" while ignoring his record? Consider that Sen. Obama:

• believes in abortion on demand, and has told Planned Parenthood that sex-ed for kindergartners is "the right thing to do" (as long as it's "age appropriate");
  
  
• has announced his intention to gut our defenses including our nuclear arsenal and strategic missile defense programs;
  
  
• has said he would be willing to meet with the leaders of Iran and others without preconditions;
  
  
• wants to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq, which would lead to chaos in the region and endanger Israel;
  
  
• seeks to raise taxes across the board including on oil company profits, yet opposes drilling domestically.

It would be nice to have a black president. But shouldn't it be someone who believes in the values that made this country great and is ready to protect and serve the American people?

I hear many blacks say that an Obama presidency will be the dawn of a new day for black America. Really?

Americans have elected black members of Congress as far back as the late 1800s.

We've had two black Supreme Court justices. We have blacks represented in the highest stratosphere of private and government sectors. Trust me, if all these accomplishments haven't persuaded and uplifted the masses, electing the first black president won't do it either.

Barack Obama is not black America's messiah. But the only way for black Americans (including those who identify themselves as Republicans) to see that reality is to drop their un-American identification with race and be willing to hear the truth about the issues from any American, regardless of color.

The Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson is founder and president of BOND, the Brotherhood Organization of A New Destiny, and author of "The Seven Guaranteed Steps To Spiritual, Family, and Financial Success" guide. He's also host of "The Jesse Lee Peterson Radio Show." For more information, visit www.bondinfo.org.

www.ruffcommunications.com

Cook County blacks hit hard in drug war

Study finds racial bias in sentencing

By Darnell Little |Tribune staff reporter

December 4, 2007

Article tools

African-Americans in Cook County were imprisoned for drug offenses at 58 times the rate of white people -- the seventh-worst racial disparity among large counties nationwide, according to a new report.

The Justice Policy Institute, a Washington-based think tank advocating alternatives to prison for social problems, was set to release a study Tuesday detailing the different treatment white and black drug offenders receive under the criminal justice system. The institute found that nationwide, African-Americans are imprisoned for drugs at 10 times the rate of white people.

Cook County also ranked high for its overall rate of drug imprisonment, the authors said. In 2002, the year selected for study, more than 166 out of every 100,000 people went to prison for a drug offense in Cook County, the ninth highest rate in the nation.

A Tribune investigation last summer also found a high disparity between the treatment of black and white drug offenders, and detailed how new drug laws -- such as those targeting dealers arrested near churches, schools, parks and public housing -- disproportionately affect predominantly black neighborhoods.

The new paper, titled "The Vortex: The Concentrated Racial Impact of Drug Imprisonment and the Characteristics of Punitive Counties," argues that there is little relationship between a county's drug imprisonment rate and the rate of illegal drug use in the county.

Instead, high rates of imprisonment typically indicate counties with larger proportions of African-Americans, higher unemployment and poverty rates, and larger judicial system budgets.

Part of this is due to increased police attention in urban areas, where drugs are bought and sold in open-air drug markets. In suburbs, where overall crime rates are lower and drug sales and usage more often take place behind closed doors, police are less likely to notice or take action.

The end result is that though there are nearly 20 million illicit drug users in the U.S., the drug laws are selectively enforced primarily on minorities and the poor, said Jason Ziedenberg, executive director of the Justice Policy Institute and a co-author of the report.

"A huge subset of the population is involved in some level of drug offending on any given day," Ziedenberg said. "But policing practices enforce laws in a pattern that impacts one part of the population different than it impacts another part of the population."

Ziedenberg stresses that not only does research show that blacks and whites use illegal drugs at similar rates, but blacks and whites also sell drugs at similar rates.

"We've got a media culture that puts out an image of what a drug dealer looks like," Ziedenberg said. "Most people buy drugs from somebody of the same color. And since the vast majority of drug users in the United States are white, the majority of drug dealers are also white."

The report notes that between 1995 and 2003, the number of people held in state and federal prisons for drug offenses increased 21 percent.

However, the report states that little evidence exists to suggest that the increase in drug incarcerations has had any effect on the rates of illegal drug use.

Traditional methods for processing drug cases and rigorous sentencing policies are largely ineffective and very expensive, especially the use of prison as a solution to the drug problem, said Loyola University criminologist Arthur Lurigio.

----------

dlittle@tribune.com

www.ruffcommunications.com