"No GOP hopefuls on Urban League slate so far" -- STLtoday.com

[LizF]

Seems like RP has a scheduling conflict that won't allow him to attend.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/politics/story/9312E1B1B6CF49C086257317000FA261?OpenDocument

[chandlerLBT]

i wish he could have made that, i think it would have been an extremely positive thing for him to do, dropping the white supremacist lie, while simultaneously being known as the only republican to care about the black vote.

[Dan Klaus]

I agree that it would be a good forum for Dr. Paul - but strategically it could backfire with one ill-timed inadvertant comment. thinking of Perot....

[Man from La Mancha]

I agree that it would be a good forum for Dr. Paul - but strategically it could backfire with one ill-timed inadvertant comment. thinking of Perot....

I wish he could attend to, Ron is no Ross, his skill as a statesman far surpasses Ross.

[UCFGavin]

I really hope what Dr. Paul has planned instead is something worthwhile.

[angelatc]

Tancredo got a standing O at the NAACP event in Ohio, IIRC, just for being the only Republican to show up. That's gotta tell you something .

[Akus]

I agree that it would be a good forum for Dr. Paul - but strategically it could backfire with one ill-timed inadvertant comment. thinking of Perot....

What'd Ross Perot do?

[Gee]

This makes me wonder how serious RP is about all this. So much of a fuss is made about excluding him at Iowa, but he declines this? I hope he has a good reason. I guess he does have to get the GOP nomination first, and such a forum is unlikely to include many republican voters...

[Wyurm]

Maybe he's picking and choosing his debates for a good reason. It is his campaign, and he's welcome to decline any debate he wants. I just kinda assumed he wanted to show up at all of them.

[Dan Klaus]

I wish he could attend to, Ron is no Ross, his skill as a statesman far surpasses Ross.

Agree 100%...


What'd Ross Perot do?

He attended a forum (don't remember which) and made the statement 'you people' at which he was roundly boo'ed and was picked up by the MSM...


Tancredo got a standing O at the NAACP event in Ohio, IIRC, just for being the only Republican to show up. That's gotta tell you something

hope the campaign takes this into consideration..but in the end - I trust they know what they are doing...

[richard1984]

Here is a problem with this organization and others like it (and is, perhaps, the reason Ron Paul probably won’t go): these groups are race/color-centered and race/color-focused. This serves to perpetuate racism in the form of active separation and grouping based on color. Now, to be sure, I am not condemning such groups, because they do a lot of good. But I think that it is a problem in that it separates us. I am very aware of the hardships that many black people face (such as poverty, callus prejudice, etc.), but is suffering not universal? The evils of the world do not discriminate, and they are not picky.
Therefore, we should not create organizations that cater only to people of a certain skin color--whose ancestors came from a different part of the world than mine did. The only race is the human race--for it is our soul that is truly fundamental and that binds us.

The mission of the National Urban League is to “Enable black Americans to secure economic self-reliance, parity, power and civil rights.” But poverty is not restricted to black people. Again, suffering is colorblind. And “parity”?! I see no potential for genuine parity in a black people-only organization. It only hurts the cause. I mean seriously, if people want parity, someone’s gonna have to give the white people a hand. As far as I can tell, black people have the parity thing down waaay better than white people do. The white Americans need the black Americans’ help!

Of course, I’m being facetious, but you get my point. I’m just saying that the National Urban League would perhaps do well to remove the word “black” from their mission statement.

We really need to stop separating, dividing, and grouping ourselves. “Civil rights” are supposed to bring us together as human individuals, for they are universal and fundamental--an intrinsic quality of our soul.

Anyway, perhaps Ron Paul shies away from such organizations as a matter of principle. I am only speculating, though.

[Man from La Mancha]

I thought that too but then I remembered he wanted to go the Iowa Christian Alliance Talk. Would that not be a separate religious group like a separate race type of deal.
.

[richard1984]

I thought that too but then I remembered he wanted to go the Iowa Christian Alliance Talk. Would that not be a separate religious group like a separate race type of deal.
.

Nah. They are very different. I mean, "race" is a phenotype--it's something we are born with. But religion is a choice. And it can have very subtle effects or very extreme effects, depending on the person. Also, religious affiliation (in this case, Christianity) can give you a general idea about the type of person/people you are dealing with, and help structure talking points and ideas to help to better communicate with these people (such as using examples from the Bible, talk about rights given to us by our Creator, etc.). Of course, Ron Paul is also a Christian, and his message and principles appeal to true Christians. He is likely to get support for them.
But race isn’t a religion, a philosophy, or even a choice.
You can support a group of people with united ideas, but you shouldn’t support a group because of shared race (your color isn’t your philosophy).
And I feel like I’m beating around the bush, unable to say exactly and succinctly what I’m trying to say, but perhaps you understand what I’m trying to get at--I think that the correlation of race and religion is a categorical mistake.

People build communities around ideas. They shouldn't build them around race or color (or any other physical differences).