Monday, March 02, 2015
CPAC in Black (and Brown)
It's been a few years since I went down to DC to revel in the madness that is CPAC (or "Comic-Con for conservatives" as told one friend somewhat unfamiliar with the goings-on). The last time Newt was one of the speakers. He was greeted like the rock star he once was (he entered the hall to Survivor's "Eye of the Tiger.").
Anyway, I hadn't planned on attending this year, but my old Capitol Hill friend Ron Christie asked me to participate in a panel he was moderating called, "The Content of Your Character." Oh, my, what on earth might that be about? Yep, it's another "outreach" thing. Seriously? Haven't we done enough of those. Does anything really change in Republican/conservative environments on that topic? And, oh, yeah, they scheduled us for 3 PM on Saturday, near the end of the third full day. Many people would already be heading for the exits. Do I really need to put myself through this?
But, Ron asked me and, hey, the principles of improv urge you to say, "Yes." (Uh, Robert, remember that definition of insanity -- doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result!) I chatted with Ron on Friday and told him, if I was going to do this, I'd do it on my terms and say what *I* wanted to say -- not just recite the same old pablum attendees at these gatherings always get.
Anyway, that's what I did. Besides Ron and myself, the panel included Mercedes ("Mercy") Schlapp, wife of CPAC's organizer Matt. Her parents fled Cuba when Castro took over; I met her mother. The memory and the anger is still there. Though I fall into that camp who believes U.S. policy toward Cuba must change, it's hardly a clear-cut case on either side. Mercedes warned conservatives that, regardless of where they stood on the issue of immigration, the tone they adopted was as important as the policy itself. The fourth person was Patrice Lee, a smart attractive young woman from the organization Generation Opportunity -- a free-market Millenals-focused group. She looked at criminal justice issues as something that could open doors to some in the minority community. Patrice also revealed that she was from the Caribbean island of Monserat. Thankfully, she's Protestant, so I didn't have to lose my "Catholic West Indian black Republican" line!
While we each included biographical moments in our remarks, I tried to focus more on getting Republicans off of the old "Party of Lincoln" baloney candidates inevitably start presenting when they campaign in front of "communities of color." As I said, I'm glad that you support Lincoln's freeing of the slaves, but seriously, what do you have to say to black communities today?
This sentiment also extends to the even-more-prevalent "Party of Reagan" line. I asked how many attendees were born after 1989: About two-thirds of the audience hands went up. These young kids weren't even alive when Ronald Reagan was president. So, why is it "Reagan this, Reagan that" for GOP candidates. I didn't get a chance to make this point, but it's interesting to note that Democrats rarely refer to themselves as the "Party of Roosevelt" or "Kennedy" or "Carter" (uh, well, scratch that one). Next year, they may talk "Party of Clinton," but that's a special case. Democrats do celebrate their legislative legacies...Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights Act, etc. But not the personalities.
Perhaps Republicans might consider doing the same, if they're looking to capture the next generation of voters?
Our CPAC panel can be seen here:
|
Anyway, I hadn't planned on attending this year, but my old Capitol Hill friend Ron Christie asked me to participate in a panel he was moderating called, "The Content of Your Character." Oh, my, what on earth might that be about? Yep, it's another "outreach" thing. Seriously? Haven't we done enough of those. Does anything really change in Republican/conservative environments on that topic? And, oh, yeah, they scheduled us for 3 PM on Saturday, near the end of the third full day. Many people would already be heading for the exits. Do I really need to put myself through this?
But, Ron asked me and, hey, the principles of improv urge you to say, "Yes." (Uh, Robert, remember that definition of insanity -- doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result!) I chatted with Ron on Friday and told him, if I was going to do this, I'd do it on my terms and say what *I* wanted to say -- not just recite the same old pablum attendees at these gatherings always get.
Anyway, that's what I did. Besides Ron and myself, the panel included Mercedes ("Mercy") Schlapp, wife of CPAC's organizer Matt. Her parents fled Cuba when Castro took over; I met her mother. The memory and the anger is still there. Though I fall into that camp who believes U.S. policy toward Cuba must change, it's hardly a clear-cut case on either side. Mercedes warned conservatives that, regardless of where they stood on the issue of immigration, the tone they adopted was as important as the policy itself. The fourth person was Patrice Lee, a smart attractive young woman from the organization Generation Opportunity -- a free-market Millenals-focused group. She looked at criminal justice issues as something that could open doors to some in the minority community. Patrice also revealed that she was from the Caribbean island of Monserat. Thankfully, she's Protestant, so I didn't have to lose my "Catholic West Indian black Republican" line!
While we each included biographical moments in our remarks, I tried to focus more on getting Republicans off of the old "Party of Lincoln" baloney candidates inevitably start presenting when they campaign in front of "communities of color." As I said, I'm glad that you support Lincoln's freeing of the slaves, but seriously, what do you have to say to black communities today?
This sentiment also extends to the even-more-prevalent "Party of Reagan" line. I asked how many attendees were born after 1989: About two-thirds of the audience hands went up. These young kids weren't even alive when Ronald Reagan was president. So, why is it "Reagan this, Reagan that" for GOP candidates. I didn't get a chance to make this point, but it's interesting to note that Democrats rarely refer to themselves as the "Party of Roosevelt" or "Kennedy" or "Carter" (uh, well, scratch that one). Next year, they may talk "Party of Clinton," but that's a special case. Democrats do celebrate their legislative legacies...Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights Act, etc. But not the personalities.
Perhaps Republicans might consider doing the same, if they're looking to capture the next generation of voters?
Our CPAC panel can be seen here:
Labels: American Conserivative Union, black conservatives, CPAC, race
Friday, July 17, 2009
On The Right Side of Shakedown Street
Two weeks ago, The Washington Post was caught "inviting" lobbyists to cozy off-the-record "salons" with various Obama administration VIPs -- for prices ranging from $25K-$250K.
The American Conservative Union asked FedEx for a check for $2 million to $3 million in return for the group’s endorsement in a bitter legislative dispute, then flipped and sided with UPS after FedEx refused to pay.[SNIP]
For the $2 million plus, ACU offered a range of services that included: “Producing op-eds and articles written by ACU’s Chairman David Keene and/or other members of the ACU’s board of directors. (Note that Mr. Keene writes a weekly column that appears in The Hill.)”
The conservative group’s remarkable demand — black-and-white proof of the longtime Washington practice known as “pay for play” — was contained in a private letter to FedEx , which was provided to POLITICO.
FedEx currently has one U.S. union contract for its entire express business. Under a change passed by the House and awaiting action in the Senate, FedEx — like UPS — would have to negotiate union contracts for individual locations, which FedEx claims would make it much more difficult to promise worldwide regularity for deliveries.[SNIP]
The American Conservative Union, which calls itself “the nation's oldest and largest grass-roots conservative lobbying organization,” took UPS’s side on Wednesday as part of a conservative consortium that accused FedEx of “misleading the public and legislators.” ACU's logo is at the top of the letter, along with those of six other conservative groups.
Just two weeks earlier, ACU had offered its endorsement to FedEx, saying in a letter to the company: “We stand with FedEx in opposition to this legislation.”
But there was a catch — an expensive one. ACU asked FedEx to pay as much as $3.4 million for e-mail and other services for “an aggressive grass-roots campaign to stop the legislation in the Senate.”
“For the activist contact portion of the plan, we will contact over 150,000 people per state multiple times at a cost of $1.39 per name or $2,147,550 to implement the entire program,” the letter says. “If we incorporate the targeted, senator-personalized radio effort into the plan, you can figure an additional $125,000 on average, per state” for an estimated 10 states. The total would be $3,397,550.”
Lane, the FedEx official, said the offer was refused. "The proposal didn’t fit with our strategy of taking a straightforward approach to discussing the issue,” he said.Good conservative help is hard to come by these days -- so, obviously, when it absolutely, positively, has to be there overnight, it's gonna cost you. And, if you can't pay up, well, you'll find out what brown can do to you. It's quite obvious that in these corporate battles, there is ultimately little difference for some conservatives between "principle" and "interest."
After the rebuff, American Conservative Union changed sides. ACU Chairman David A. Keene was one of eight conservative leaders who signed a letter to FedEx Chairman Frederick W. Smith, a champion of capitalism who in the past has been a favorite of conservatives.
The letter accuses FedEx of “falsely and disingenuously” labeling the rules change a “bailout” for UPS, since FedEx would become subject to the same arduous union structure.
The letter is also signed by Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, who is also on ACU’s board. FedEx is pushing its case with a website called www.BrownBailout.com.
If one party shows enough $$$ "interest", the principle will be found.
Labels: American Conserivative Union, David Keene
