The Gray Conservative: December 2007

If you're reading this entry, I assume you watched the most recent YouTube debate. Perhaps you caught the following question:

Part II: CNN/YouTub Republican presidential debate transcript

Cooper: All right. Let's move on. Another question here from Los Angeles.
Actually, let's show -- all right.
David McMillan: Hi, my name is David McMillan, and I'm from Los Angeles, California. On a variety of specific issues -- gay marriage, taxes, the death penalty, immigration, faith-based initiatives, school vouchers, school prayer -- many African Americans hold fairly conservative views.
And yet, we overwhelmingly vote Democrat in most elections. So my question to any of the Republican candidates here is, why don't we vote for you?
(Laughter)
Cooper: Mayor Giuliani?
GIULIANI: We probably haven't done a good enough job as a party in pointing out that our solutions, our philosophy, is really the philosophy that would be the most attractive to the overwhelming majority of people in the African American and Hispanic community.
Whether they are upper middle class, rich, middle class or poor, the -- good education is something that everyone in all these communities and all communities want. The idea of choice in education is something that would totally turn around education in this country. It's something that large percentages of African American and Hispanic parents support. They would like to be able to choose a private school, a parochial school, a charter school, home-schooling for their children.
Instead, they have the government telling them that their child has to go to an inadequate school.
So there are many, many issues on which we can reach out. I found that one of the best was moving people off welfare. I moved 640,000 people off welfare, most of them to jobs. I change the welfare agency into a job agency, and all of a sudden I had people that had a future, people that had great hope in life.
I think the reason that crime not only declined in New York more than anyplace else, but continues to decline, is that many of those people who were hopeless 10, 12 years ago, now have hope. They have a future. They have gotten the genius of the American way of life. We haven't made it available to all people, and we have to do that.
We will be a very popular party in those communities.
Cooper: Time. Governor Huckabee, 30 seconds.
(Applause)
Huckabee: Well, according to your network's exit polls, some 48 percent of the African-Americans in my state did, in fact, vote for me, which is unusually high for African-Americans voting for a Republican. Here's the reason why: because I asked for their vote, and I didn't wait until October of the election year to do it.
And, while I was governor, I tried to make sure that we included people not only in appointments and employment, but also in the programs that would truly make a difference, like putting disproportionate amounts of help for health problems specifically targeted to African-Americans like hypertension and AIDS and diabetes. So there's a reason. And I just want to express that our party had better reach out not just to African-Americans, but to Hispanics and to all people of this country.
I don't want to be a part of a Republican party that is a tiny, minute and ever decreasing party, but one that touches every American from top to bottom, regardless of race.

The bolds are not in the original.

Despite appearances to he contrary, this blog is not an attack on conservatism. This is blog investigates why conservatism generally has no traction among black voters. What I've found in my initial investigations is that conservatives tend hurt themselves in this area, particularly with regard to how they go about communicating their philosophy--and in that respect, Rudy Guiliani is absolutely correct when he says that his party has not done good enough job in pointing out that their solutions and their philosophy is the philosophy that is the most attractive to black Americans. But let's put solutions to the side for a minute. Today I want to talk about the communication of the philosophy. Today I want to talk about mixed messages.

Peter Beinart and Johan Goldberg discuss Mike Huckabee

Peter Beinart - 5:02:

Well I think i-i-it always kind of brings me back to this question about what conservative politics in America is in reality versus what it is in theory. I mean - there- as far as I can tell there really has been no limited government conservatism in practice in the United States since maybe Calvin Coolidge left office. Um, i-it has uh, you know, i-it's- it's a theoretical construct that every Republican politician whose been seriously about actually wining an election has thrown overboard.

The trouble with conservatives is that they very often can't even agree about which principles are the most important to a conservative identity. Conservatives seem to organize into two distinct ideological camps: Traditionalists and Libertarians. Although some conservatives like to mix-and-match in these areas, these are two distinct rooms in the House of Conservatism, and neither camp seems to be in complete agreement about what constitutes theoretical conservatism. As Beinart makes clear in the above video, there have been very few conservatives who have sought the Republican nomination by running on a "limited government" platform.

"Traditionalist" often goes by another name and is probably more recognizable by the name, "Social Conservatism", while Libertarianism tends to fall under such labels as "Limited Government Conservatism", or "Fiscal Conservatism". So on the one hand you have Huckabee, the traditionalist, with his efforts to connect with evangelical Christians as the "true conservative", his positions on abortion, and his positions on gay marriage - while on the other you have Ron Paul, the libertarian, with his stated views on centrally managed trade, the centrally managed monetary system, and his solid record of constitutional conservatism. Although both men are currently seeking the Republican presidential nomination, they have wildly differing views on policy (foreign and domestic). Despite this, many people would still consider both men to be "conservatives". But to get a better understanding of the differences between these two sects of conservatism, I suppose it's proper to go directly to the source to see what other self-described conservatives have to say about it:

The Conservative Consensus: Frank Meyer, Barry Goldwater, and the Politics of Fusionism
by Lee Edwards, Ph.D.

Conservatives have always been a disputatious lot. Their disputes are passionate and often personal precisely because they revolve around the most important thing in politics—ideas. Far from being signs of a crackup or a breakdown, intense uninhibited debate among conservatives is an unmistakable sign of intellectual vigor in a national movement whose influence and longevity continue to surprise many in the political and academic worlds.

The dispute between traditionalists and libertarians has been among the fiercest and most protracted in American conservatism. Like the generational conflicts of the Hatfields and the McCoys, the philosophical feuding between these two branches of conservatism has been going on for some 50 years.

As Peter Beinart makes clear in the YouTube video, conservatism doesn't have its theoretical House in order, and this disorganized house is what William Buckley lamented about:

Conservatives openly conceded their intellectual disarray. "The conservative movement in America has got to put its theoretical house in order," William F. Buckley Jr. wrote in frustration. Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, a conservative European and frequent contributor to National Review, lamented that the movement had no coherent "ideology."

While there were points of agreement between traditionalists and libertarians—a belief in the free market, dismay at the increasing size of the governmental colossus, concern about the Soviet Union's belligerent foreign policy—there were as many areas of dissent. What was the proper balance between liberty and order? What was the appropriate response to the threat of communism? Could devout Christians and secular economists find common ground on the role of morality in the polity? What did libertarians and traditionalists really have in common?

I'm not sure that Huckabee and Paul have anything in common, and that's another post for another day, but there is a palpable disconnect between a theoretical political ideology that supposedly advocates for a limited government and a political party whose government policies (foreign and domestic) are anything but limited when put into practice. As anyone who has been watching the current activity in the GOP primaries will attest to, this disconnect between theory and practice has become even more palpable because of the presence of Ron Paul, even if you don't agree with some of his libertarian positions.

The point of this is not to enter into a discussion about traditionalism versus libertarianism, but to acknowledge that these two "-isms" are two concrete parts of the conservative tradition that have yet to be fully reconciled to each other: Social Conservatism versus Limited Government; Constitutional ban on abortion versus letting the States determine their own abortion laws; Constitutional ban on gay marriage or returning the issue to State control; Traditionalist versus Libertarian.

So let's get back to talking about mixed messages. Now, you might say, "Great, so you have these two sides of the House of Conservatism: what does this have to do with the GOP's outreach to black voters?" Well, the point is: how can conservative Republicans market a conservative message and "philosophy" to black Americans, when conservatives themselves aren't even sure what conservatism is all about? The short answer is: if you don't have a holistic view of conservative philosophy that is free of the type of internal contradictions between theory and practice that Beinart mentions, then conservatism can only be sold to black Americans on a piecemeal basis in terms of its philosophical appeal.

You have to wonder, then: when conservative Republicans express an interest in including more minorities in the GOP, just what type of conservatism (meaning what type of "conservative philosophy") are they advocating towards minorities? Are they trying to attract black Americans to the GOP from a more traditionalist perspective or a libertarian one? Or both?

What does it mean when conservative Republicans say that they need to increase their minority out-reach efforts? If traditionalism and libertarianism represent two distinct areas of conservatism, then which of these appeals more to black Americans? To get a better sense of what conservative Republicans mean when they talk about "minority outreach", we turn to Ken Mehlman:

RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman’s Remarks Today At The NAACP National Convention

Our party was founded to eliminate slavery, and our first Republican President was Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator.

It was the Republican Party that led the effort to pass the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments.

We spearheaded the Homestead Act of 1862 and the Morrill Land Grant College Act, which recognized that education and opportunity and property ownership were all essential to the American Dream.

It was a Republican president, Teddy Roosevelt, who invited Booker T. Washington to dine at the White House, shocking official Washington at the time.

It was another Republican president, Dwight David Eisenhower, who sent the 101st airborne to integrate a school in Little Rock, while a Democratic governor blocked the schoolhouse door.

The reader should note that there is a lot of mention of what the Federal government has done for black Americans. Of course, none of this history seems to matter for some conservatives when they opine about the relationship between black Americans and the Federal Government, which further alienates black Americans from the libertarian side of the house.

I know it is not in my interest as chairman of the Republican Party for close to 90% of African-Americans to vote for the Democrat every election. But more important, it’s not in the interest of African-Americans for 90% to vote for the Democrat every election.

This makes sense (to me at least), but throughout his speech, Melhman repeats the familiar refrains of the conservative appeal: Education, Faith-Based Initiatives, Home Ownership, and Aid to Africa. Again, we're not analyzing the solutions, but the philosophy. His message of, "Give us a chance", doesn't always mesh with what conservative Republican pundits have to say about the presumed political opinions of black Americans:

This message -- give us a chance and we’ll give you a choice—should sound familiar. It’s the same theme that 50 years ago inspired decent Americans like Joe Mehlman to support the work of the NAACP. We’re not asking for folks to embrace all of our policies or to vote for all of our candidates. We’re not asking for agreement on everything or endorsement of our platform. All we’re asking for is a fair hearing, the chance to make our case, the benefit of the doubt that we’re sincere in wanting to renew our historic bonds.

Okay, let's assume that conservative Republicans are sincere in wanting to renew their historic bonds with black Americans. Perhaps they are legitimately sincere--but how can you succeed in renewing these bonds when there is no clear agreement between traditionalists and libertarians? How can you ask for a fair hearing from black Americans when conservative Republicans are continually sending them mixed messages about where they fit into conservatism? If you read what conservative Republican pundits have been saying about black Americans and traditionalist beliefs, you'll find that many people tend to recognize that black Americans are naturally socially conservative. The following quotes are oozing with various efforts to recruit black Americans into the traditionalist wing of conservatism:

Leading Conservative Black Pastor for Bush Predicts President Will Win 20% of Black Vote

(AANewswire)WASHINGTON, D.C. - "Black pastors have greater political and community influence with their members than do white leaders," says Bishop Harry R. Jackson Jr., who holds and MBA from Harvard and is one of the leading conservative pastors voting for President Bush.

As the national election draws close, Bishop Harry Jackson believes the black vote could swing momentum toward rather than away from George W. Bush. Traditionally blacks have stood solidly with the Democratic Party, but Bishop Jackson sees signs the black vote may be changing as democratic ideals leave many faith-oriented blacks disillusioned. "I believe President Bush will have about 20% of the Black vote in this election - about double the votes he received in the last Presidential election, said Bishop Jackson. "Many Blacks are saying the Democrats have taken our vote for granted and we're not going to take it anymore," said Bishop Jackson, the author of three books.

"Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson do not reflect the views of the New Black Church," explains Bishop Harry Jackson who serves as the senior pastor of multi-cultural Hope Christian Church in College Park, Maryland with over 2500 members. Blacks of deep faith and conviction are far more conservative on moral issues like gay marriage, a topic that consumed a good proportion of last Tuesday night's debate between vice presidential candidates.

More blacks becoming conservative as they age

'Failure of the party'
Jeremy Levitt, a professor of law at DePaul University, said the shift by older African Americans could be a response to what is "arguably a failure of the Democratic Party agenda to uplift the African-American community.

"These are also individuals who actively participated in the civil rights movement and tend to have a higher level of patriotism than the 19- to 25-year-olds. But these stats are interesting because blacks were in the Republican Party until the 1940s. This 51-64 category grew up in households where their parents were members of the Republican Party," he said.

"Blacks are conservative. So when you look at the same-sex marriage, death penalty, school choice, prayer in school and the list goes on, you'll find we subscribe to a conservative doctrine. The only reason why we don't have 20 percent and above figure for blacks in the Republican Party is because the Republican Party has not been able to wash away the perceived stain of white supremacy.

Conservative Black Pastors Fight Bill on Hate Crimes

A coalition of conservative African American pastors is lobbying Congress to vote against a bill that would extend federal hate-crimes laws to cover gays, saying they fear it would prevent them from preaching against homosexuality.

Several pastors last week urged House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), a sponsor of the bill, and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus to vote against the proposed Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

They say it would pin the hate crime label on their sermons against homosexuality, which they consider a sin.

Abortion foes seek allies in black clergy

Anti-abortion advocates are using the same political-religious blueprint that same-sex marriage opponents used two years ago, when white evangelicals bonded with some black pastors. Supporters say gaining the backing of faith leaders on that issue helped President Bush capture 11 percent of the African American vote in 2004, an increase of two percentage points over 2000.

This anti-abortion effort is part of a national strategy by conservative white and African American faith leaders to work together. The Rev. Jerry Falwell and Martin Luther King Jr.'s niece, Alveda King, shared a stage last Sunday at Justice Sunday III -- an event to rally support for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. Organizers held it in a predominantly black Philadelphia church; the previous two events were held in red states, Kentucky and Tennessee.

The organizers of Saturday's anti-abortion event in San Francisco event also put together one of the city's first anti-same-sex marriage events in 2004.
...
Star Parker, another conservative African American who will speak at Saturday's rally, said she hoped more faith leaders would connect the two issues because "they are both rooted in sexual lawlessness."

"It doesn't mean that African Americans will go out and become Republicans," said Parker, a Los Angeles resident who speaks out nationally against abortion after having had four such procedures herself. "But it does mean that they will soon be putting more pressure on their leaders to speak out (on abortion)."

But some black pastors say Childress, Parker and others will find it tougher to enlist African American pastors in the anti-abortion cause than they did in the fight against same-sex marriage.

For one, there is political pressure not to speak out against abortion, which is one of the Democratic Party's core values.

symposium - should Republican Party recruit more African Americans

Q: Should the GOP do more to reach out to black voters?

Yes: African-Americans' belief in faith/family and community make them a natural future GOP constituency.

As the majority party in Washington, the Republican party not only should continue to reach out to black voters, but all voters. Yet it will not be easy. A long history of distrust in the black community will be hard to overcome with only the simple truth of how close the views of African-Americans and the Republican Party really are. But we cannot and should not give up, because in doing so we're giving up on them.

As usual, the bolds are not in the original.

You can read the above quotes and connect the dots for yourself. All the talk about abortion, gay marriage, faith, prayer in schools, school choice, and the death penalty makes it perfectly clear: When it comes to including black Americans in GOP outreach efforts, Conservatism turns to black Americans and says, "There is plenty of room for you on the traditionalist side of the house." But when it comes to including black Americans in the GOP on the basis of their amenability to the libertarian side of the house, not so much:

GOP's Race Problem Doesn't Always Include Debates

Though it admittedly is a generalization and there are exceptions, the GOP's fundamental problem is that African-Americans think of the government as a protector and benefactor, while most Republicans (and all conservatives) see government as a problem. As long as that is the case, and specifically as long as affirmative action is an issue, Republican opportunities in the black community are extremely limited.

Why Courting the Black Vote Won’t Work

The rights of the states are at the heart of a good constitutional republic, but blacks won’t easily forget it was the federal government that enforced their civil rights after Reconstruction, got them jobs under the New Deal and protected them from billy clubs, dogs and water hoses in the 1960s. Do you blame them for believing a bloated, central bureaucracy is still savior even in 2004?

New Coalition Introduces Students to Black Conservatism

Conservatism Is Not Politics
Walker opened his part of the program by saying black conservatism has nothing to do with political affiliation. He introduced some of the major black conservative thinkers of the past, including Booker T. Washington, Zora Neal Hurston, George S. Schuyler, and W.E.B. DuBois. He discussed some of the ideas that made them so important to the ongoing history of black conservatism, such as Hurston’s questioning of the Brown v. Board of Education decision and Schuyler’s theory that “The American Negro is the outstanding example of an American conservative.”

While pointing out the differences between black conservatism and white conservatism, Walker compared the two to white and black churches; while the services and beliefs may differ, members of each church can coexist peacefully. He explained that while white conservatism is based on political affiliation and a theory of limited government, black conservatism is based more on religion, philosophy, principles, tradition, and class. Walker expressed his belief that the oldest conservative institution in black culture is the church.

These quotes, but particularly last quote from Mr. Walker--in which he says that "black conservatism" has more to do with "religion" than it does with a theory of limited government--should make it plainly obvious to anyone, that the communication of the overall conservative philosophy to black Americans is largely a piecemeal endeavor that welcomes black Americans with open arms on one side of the house (traditionalism), while leaving them out in the cold on the other (libertarianism).

As I dig further into the issue of why conservatism does not attract black followers, I am continually surprised and amazed at the amount of projected, preconceived political assumptions and circular reasoning that is contained within the subject. So when Rudy Guiliani talks about his party's failure to communicate their philosophy to black Americans, I seriously doubt he is digging very deep into the issue.

So who is to blame for this failure? Part of the blame can be laid at the feet of certain black conservative Republicans who repeatedly fail to open their ears when ordinary black Americans speak to them about why their message fails to resonate in traditionally Democratic-voting areas. The other part of the blame can be laid at the feet of conservatives-in-general who tend to operate under the political assumption that black Americans see the government as a "benefactor", thus excluding them from the libertarian side of the house.

If I was in charge of the Minority Outreach department of the GOP, I'd be pulling my hair out. In many ways, conservative Republicans, especially public ones, hurt their own cause when it comes to attracting black followers to their message. The reality here is that Ken Mehlman's "fair hearing" is simply not possible so long as assumptions continue to form the basis of conservative opinion about black Americans. And this will continue to be the case as long as conservatives refuse to do their homework on the issue.

Unfortunately, when it comes to conservatives' opinions about the politics of black Americans, there is no such thing as a politics of Fusionism in this area. Conservatives seem wholly incapable of figuring out how to include black Americans in both the traditionalist and libertarian side of the house; they excel at the former, but fail at the latter because of a fundamental inability to cite the history of institutionalized white racism as the main "exacerbator" of the relationship between black Americans and the Federal government. Barry Goldwater, for his part, sought to create a consensus among traditionalist and libertarian conservatives:

In the opening speech of his presidential campaign in Flagstaff, Arizona, Goldwater sounded both libertarian and traditionalist themes. He pledged to stop "the cancerous growth of the federal government" and to let the people "use more of your money for yourselves." At the same time, he promised "not to abandon the needy and the aged" and pledged that "we shall never forsake the helpless."

Regarding morality, he said that "the tone of America" was too often being set "by the standards of the sick joke, the quick slogan, the off-color drama, and the pornographic book." In a clear reference to the indicted Bobby Baker, who had become a millionaire as secretary of the Senate when Lyndon B. Johnson was Senate majority leader, Goldwater said that "the shadow of scandal falls, unlighted yet by full answers, across the White House itself." Public service, he charged, "has become for too many at the highest levels, selfish in motive and manner. Men who preach publicly of sacrifice practice private indulgence."

The central fusionist theme of Barry Goldwater's presidential campaign had been established in his acceptance address at the Republican National Convention. It was "to set the tide running again in the cause of freedom," but a freedom properly understood:
This party, with its every action, every word, every breath and every heartbeat has but a single resolve, and that is freedom—freedom made orderly for the Nation by our constitutional government; freedom under a government limited by the laws of nature and of nature's God; freedom—balanced so that order, lacking liberty, will not become a slave of the prison cell; balanced so that liberty, lacking order, will not become the license of the mob and the jungle.

Goldwater, much like Ron Paul, was called a 'kook' by our media. If conservatives have such difficulty with incorporating the fusion of traditionalism and libertarianism into their own philosophy, is it any wonder why they send such mixed messages to black Americans about where they fit in in the House of Conservatism?

Here is what Conservatives have been observed to do:

- When it comes to the compatibility between conservative traditionalism and black Americans' political beliefs, conservatives often assume that because of their inherently traditionalist political beliefs on social issues, that black Americans would and should be the model conservative Republicans - if only they stopped siding with the Democrats and voted according to their politically conservative, traditionalist beliefs on social issues. We don't need to look very hard to find examples of this.

- But on the other hand, with regard to the libertarian side of the house, conservatives often assume that because of the history and circumstances surrounding the relationship of black Americans to the Federal government, that black Americans have a near-monolothic political philosophy that is completely, totally, and irrevocably unamenable to the libertarian side of the house. Again, we don't need to look very far to see examples of this. In fact, in my post, Catching up on the Gray Conservative Project, I outlined how conservatives' opinions about the relationship between black Americans and the libertarian principal of limited government are fueled and driven by preconceived and pedantic political assumptions.

When it comes to communicating their philosophy, Conservatives take a two-handed approach in courting African-American voters; and this two handed approach results in black Americans being placed in a type of ideological Nowhere Room in the House of Conservatism. One hand is an open, extended palm: it warmly welcomes black Americans to consider the conservative Republican message with the assumption that the traditionalist (i.e. socially conservative) views in the African-American community would make them natural candidates for the type of conservatism that values traditionalism in society. The other hand is a closed fist: it holds tightly to the assumption that African-Americans live under a monolithic political philosophy that is incompatible and unamenable to the the libertarian aspects of conservatism. The closed hand holds tightly to the assumption that there is no room for black Americans on the libertarian side of the house, because like Stuart Rothenberg and LaShawn Barber, it is assumed that black Americans view the Federal government as a savior and benefactor. It's not that there is no room for black Americans on the libertarian side of the House of Conservatism, it's that conservatives are generally of the opinion that black Americans are incapable of walking through the door.

What does it mean when our political assumptions about black Americans place black Americans in an eternal limbo state (a type of ideological "nowhere room") in the House of Conservatism? Philosophically speaking, if traditionalism and libertarianism represent two distinct ideological sides of the House of Conservatism, then black Americans are wooed in with one hand, and shooed away with the other; forever placed into a never ending ideological tug of war on the traditionalist end, and an ideological shrug of war on the libertarian end. In the House of Conservatism, this the Nowhere Room.

Progressives are not innocent in this either. With statements such as this–"Obviously, it is legitimate to criticize governmental failure. However, black conservatives too often sound as if government is the enemy of black people, and come perilously close to embracing the radical libertarian premise that people should be left to the vagaries of the marketplace, and everything will be just fine. Black people do not subscribe to this view."–Progressives and Liberals show their ultimate arrogance in presuming to speak for All Black People by assuming that libertarian ideas are fundamentally harmful to black Americans, when in many instances, libertarian ideas (such as the libertarian views on centrally managed trade, foreign policy, taxes, and the centrally managed monetary system) would be of immediate benefit to black Americans–who by the way, still pay income taxes like everyone else.

In a recent debate, Mike Huckabee recently called for the abolishment of the IRS, certainly a libertarian thing to suggest-- but how many black Americans do you know who enjoy paying income taxes?! Both Progressives and Conservatives alike routinely make the grave assumption that black Americans are oh-so in love with the Federal government and its institutions, but nevertheless, this Black Commentator article offers some sage advice for conservatives who are sincere in wanting to effectively communicate their philosophy to potential black American converts. Although this is the final paragraph of the article, conservatives of every stripe should probably read the entire thing at least three times:

I have offered these views in the hope that black conservatives who are truly interested in changing the lives of black people for the better take another look at why their ideology has not taken root in the black community. It might comfort some to blame the “liberal media” for ignoring them. But let me suggest that black people have heard the black conservative message. They just don’t like what is being said and how it is being said. There are white conservatives who have a long history of antipathy toward black people and they too hate government. But they hate government because they think government does too much for black people. If black conservatives don’t distance themselves from such convoluted sentiments, they will be shouting in the wilderness for a long time.

The Gray Conservative

Friday, December 28, 2007

These BioChips Ain't Made By Frito Lay

Haven't You Noticed #2: Once Again, What the Hell is So Funny?

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Let's Take America Back

Monday, December 24, 2007

The Scent of Desperation

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Some Questions Just Answer Themselves

Saturday, December 15, 2007

I Refuse to Support Any Candidate who Ignores the Issue of the Falling Dollar

Monday, December 10, 2007

Haven't You Noticed #1

Friday, December 7, 2007

I Need Crap Like That

Thursday, December 6, 2007

Shameful and Intolerable

Monday, December 3, 2007

The House of Conservatism: Traditionalism, Libertarianism, Fusionism, and the Black American "Nowhere Room"

GOP's Race Problem Doesn't Always Include Debates

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

Campaign For Liberty Blog

About Me