CNN: Exhibit A

An article on CNN.com today, "GOP, confront your racism policy," (CNN) exemplified a central problem with the Pew findings I mentioned yesterday. Not only is there too much opinion and commentary these days, but the nature of that opinion and commentary leaves a lot to be desired. Whether it is the blustery, right wing talking heads on Fox spouting half truths and outright lies or the overly moralistic, ironical and indignant (and innately superior, in their own minds) liberals on MSNBC, we can almost predict what they are going to say on any given issue before they say it -- and it has little to do with the facts surrounding that issue. One can certainly protest that in a postmodern world there is no line between truth and fiction, but that's just another form of cynicism that assists those that want to keep the public ignorant, ill-informed, fearful and suspicious of everyone around them. The reality is we need a little reality if we are to improve the political climate in America today. Yet just feeding the preconceived and deeply-held convictions of those watching and listening to you do little to actually make them critical thinkers who can make well-reasoned decisions for themselves.

So on to the article. In it, LZ Granderson makes the salient, and I believe correct, argument that the GOP is not just suffering from an "image problem" when it comes to minorities, they are suffering from a racism problem. Ironically, though so oft-repeated I probably shouldn't repeat it (but will anyway), the party of Lincoln has been winning elections by turning their back on that history and instead fostering and fomenting White resentment and backlash at the victories of the Civil Right Era (most notably the Great Society of LBJ). This culminated in Reagan's conservative revolution in the 80s, though hints of the backlash could be found in Barry Goldwater, Nixon's two victories for the "silent majority" and the troubling tallies Wallace attained in the 68 election running on a pro-segregation ticket (68 Vote Count: 14%). Since then, the GOP has been blaming minorities for the declining quality of life of Whites, blaming them for their poverty and doing everything they can to undermine the victories of the 50s and 60s (including a number of court cases over the past almost 30 years that have made the U.S. and U.S. schools as segregated as they were before 1954).

The fundemental problem with Granderson's argument, to me, is he has nothing to say about the actual policies, instead focusing solely on the inherent racism in the party. But it is the policies, more than the rhetoric, that affect the lives of minorities. Sure racism has deep cultural, political and economic impacts, but they can be mitigated by policies that help alleviate the ill effects of poverty and create opportunities (both educationally and economically). That is what the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 1965 Voting Rights Act and 1968 Civil Rights Act of LBJ accomplished. They actually cut Black poverty in half and created new opportunities in education, jobs and even places to live. The fact that the GOP has been seeking to undermine all of these gains, and been relatively effective in doing so, cannot be washed over by pretending that they are done with their racism, or even eliminating it from the party. It's what they actually do for those suffering that matters. And they not only do little, they often actively seek to do bad. 

Granderson frames his coverage purely within the world of rhetoric and race without ever touching on policies that might positively affect minority communities. He even goes so far to say that as an independent he might be more willing to vote Republican if they could address their racism. This might be an interesting piece to read, but like so much political coverage today it is steeped in political discourse discussion, framing issues and no discussion of policy -- the ultimate determinant of a representative's effectiveness at their job: representing the people who elected them. I used to decry the call for more objectivity in reporting, believing it was moving us too far afield from the sort of reporting that actually moved people and challenged power, but now I look back to those bygone days for any semblance of a relationship between journalism and telling people what's actually happening.