The
N.O. Tribune Endorsements for Nagin reflect a near perfect flip-side to the devious strategy outlined in the (now famous)
Adrastos-oyster theory. The Tribune showcases how
voices of Black Power are naively supporting the same candidate as the
Republican bigwigs behind Nagin. It's really incredible. Worse, these two factions-- total ideological opposites-- are primarily concerned with FUTURE elections. That's right! They've both based their strategic endorsements for Nagin on some future election scenario playing out. The conservatives want Nagin in office so they can run against him statewide in the fall, and the Tribune wants Nagin in office because it might help elect another black mayor in 2010.
So, in the so-called "most important election in the history of New Orleans" we have extreme factions trying to convince New Orleanians that we should vote for Nagin because FUTURE elections are more important than this one. It's absurd. Neither faction even tries to argue that Nagin's the better candidate. Instead, he's preferable because he's the
worse candidate, or because he's the black candidate.
This is awful. An unholier alliance using a weaker collection of arguments is impossible to imagine.
So here are my shorter versions of the Tribune's Nagin endorsements:
1) The real "pawns" are black voters who don't understand that electing Nagin will help "us" elect a black mayor in 2010.
2) The real "useful idiots" are black voters who don't understand that electing a white mayor in a majority-black city sends the "wrong" message to the international community.
If you're masochistic, feel free to read both commentaries, and see if my summaries are unfair or inaccurate. (H/T
A Christmas Story.)
You know, the more I think about it, maybe bigwig Democrats should have covertly supported David Duke when he was running for Senator and Governor in the early 90's. They could have told progressives that electing Duke would ensure Democratic dominance for generations to come. Don't worry about the near-term, they'd say, look toward the next election. We know the stakes are high, but please understand: high strategery is involved here. Sure, electing a fascist will become a huge embarrassment for LA, and perhaps we'll be isolated and mocked for decades to come, but, but, ...
BUT...DON'T YOU SEE? IF THE RACIST WINS, IT WILL BE GOOD FOR OUR PARTY IN FUTURE ELECTIONS!!
Perhaps these "strategic Dems" could have used
Tony Snow's explanation for the 55-60% white LA voters who chose Duke (over Johnston and Edwards).
Duke is talking about things people really care about: high taxes, crummy schools, crime-ridden streets, welfare dependency, equal opportunity. A lot of politicians aren't talking about these things.
If only "strategic Dems" had adopted these ridiculous talking points as cover, while quietly explaining to the rank and file how electing a racist Republican could bring long-term benefits to the Democratic party... The strategic Dems could have said: "In short order Duke will be exposed as a horrible mistake, and there will be a ferocious backlash against his Nazism. Prior to election day, though, we should quietly support him for the ultimate good of our party. Let's focus on how crooked Edwards is, and make him the issue. In doing so, we can 'sacrifice' him to the greater good, Duke will win, and we can run against him in the next election."
Don't those sort of tactics make sense?
9 Comments:
I can't vouch for the bigwig Republican's as I'm not one. I don't understand why they'd even take a stand on this race. They should just stay out of it.
If individuals like Jindal wish to make an endorsement so be it.
As for the racist angle I just don't get your logic.
The bigwigs aren't taking a "stand", really, they're working in the shadows.
The "what if" scenario imagining a group of strategic Dems supporting Duke over Edwards (solely for long term state party benefit) is written in sarcasm. I'm trying to make a point about this idiotic "elect the worse candidate" logic that we see (covertly) on the right and overtly in the far left.
New Orleans can't afford these games.
(If you weren't referring to that imagined scenario, then please take the time to read the Tribune articles I linked to.)
The Tribune is so stupidly wrong here. White conservatives are supporting Nagin specifically because they know his agenda will make it more difficult to elect a black mayor in the future.
To quote Warren Beatty in "Bulworth", "When will white people learn that they have more in common with black people than they do with rich people?".
Sorry O it's sometimes hard to get the sarcasm. Plus everytime I hear Dukes name it pisses me off. The guy is real scum.
I guess I've read so many posts about conservatives supporting Nagin because they're racists, it just all blurred together.
What Jeffrey said makes absolutely no sense. If the whites were so racist they would never support a black mayor, no matter what his agenda was. Conservatives liked Nagin pre-K and probably still do. Add that to not trusting Mitch and that's a pretty easy to follow.
I really don't believe in conspiracy theories. Plus even if you put a couple of Republican leaders schemeing behind the scenes, each man can only vote once and I don't think most Republicans are overly influenced by what Mike Foster has to say.
My sarcasm, and blog in general, is definitely hit and miss.
Moldy City wrote a post that echoes some of your criticisms, Roux. I think you'll find it more balanced than Jeffrey's critique.
this "Black and Blue" (meaning blue-blood) alliance has done a lot to get African Americans elected in the south. I suggest Kip Holden in Baton Rouge as the most prominent example of this, not Ray Reagan.
Either my memory's off or you all are missing something about the Tribune. I looked at it from time to time prre-K and its main focus seemed to be the need for minority business contracts. Fair enough, except it defended every minority contract that was criticized. It went way beyond the historical context defense for modern urban corruption to such a degree that I wondered who financed it. It certainly hated Nagin when he seemed to be to be trying to clean up City Hall.
I have no idea whether Nagin was insincere from the beginning or whether he made compromises, but the recent contract shenanagins didn't begin after Katrina. I think that everyone's forgotten about some stories--advertising on garbage cans, overpriced parking meters-- that started to appear before Katrina. I think that might have something to do with the Tribune endorsement.
nike air max 90
nike air max 95
nike shoes
nike air
nike air shoes
nike air max tn
nike air rift
nike shox r4
sports shoes
nike air rifts
nike air rift trainer
nike air max 360
nike shox nz
puma cat
air max trainers
mens nike air max
nike air
puma mens shoes
puma shoes
puma speed
nike shoes air max
nike shoes shox
air shoes
Lucyliu IS Lucyliu
nike shoe cart
puma future
levis jeans
nike rift shoes
cheap nike air rifts
bape shoes
cheap puma
nike rift
jeans shop
diesel jeans
