I provided a couple of my more left-of-center friends with a ready-made punch line over the weekend. I mentioned that on Monday, I was covering a speaker who would talk about the Republican Party's history regarding civil rights.
The response was perhaps inevitable, if not entirely fair: "Wow! That must be a short speech!"
The speaker in question was Michael Zak, who spoke at the Republican Club of York County's annual shrimp dinner on Monday night.
About 150 people attended, including U.S. Rep. Todd Platts, R-York County, county Republican Chairman A. Carville "Peck" Foster, state Rep. Stan Saylor, R-Windsor Twp., and state Rep. Bev Mackereth, R-Spring Grove.
Before Zak, former U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs Anthony Principi gave a pro-McCain stump speech, during which he focused mostly on McCain's character.
But I'd like to discuss Zak's talk here. Zak has written a book called "Back to Basics for the Republican Party." His whole contention is that the Republican Party has a more thorough grounding in civil rights history -- a legacy that Democrats have usurped, with Republicans' tacit permission.
He made some interesting points. Republicans, of course, can claim credit for Abraham Lincoln. When suffragist Susan B. Anthony was arrested for casting a vote, that vote was for a straight Republican ticket.
Zak didn't stick with the 19th century, either. He mentioned how the landmark pro-integration Brown Vs. Board of Education decision was written by Republican Chief Justice Earl Warren, appointed by Republican Dwight Eisenhower. And in 1964, Republicans such as Sen. Everett Dirksen of Illinois helped pass the Civil Rights Act, even as some southern Democrats were fighting it tooth and nail.
Zak mentioned repeatedly that Republicans need to "return" to those roots to save the party. Before the dinner, I asked him if his use of the word "return" implies that the Republican Party has strayed in some way.
He said it hasn't -- although frankly, I got the impression that he was reluctant to criticize any aspect of the GOP while serving as featured speaker at a county Republican Party dinner. Fair enough.
Those are interesting points he raised, though. And I think everybody, Republican or Democrat, could stand to be reminded of them.
I dislike this practice of reducing large groups of people, with a wide range of ideas and opinions, to simple, reductive and insulting labels. Some Democrats do seem to hold the opinion that Republicans are necessarily racist and sexist, but it simply isn't true.
It's no more than the stereotype, frequently expressed by Republicans, of Democrats as a bunch of feckless peaceniks who run like scared deer at the merest hint of conflict. American history is full of examples to the contrary, for better (FDR's leadership during World War II) and for worse (Chicago Mayor Richard Daley's police brutalizing anti-Vietnam protesters in 1968).
It seems to me that Zak's speech raises a bigger question. To what extent can modern-day Democrats and Republicans claim their respective parties' legacies?
Whew ... That's a big can of worms, and this entry is getting pretty long already. I might have to pick that up in the future.
Remember, I'm covering a local appearance by James Carville and Mary Matalin tomorrow night. If things go according to plan, I might have a surprise for all of you. Stay tuned.
Leave a comment