Ah but you see the Black Commentator presumes that it is impossible to be black and have any self-interest in the politics of the right. So they don't even bother giving any consideration to the logic of those who do. Instead they presume that they are mindless stooges and worse. The only way you can make such foolish accusations is by assuming you know what is best for *all* black people which is why the BC is presumtuous. They are lazy because they feel that they are doing everyone a service by talking about a few black Republicans rather than the average black Republicans. There's nothing left to say about Ward Connerly, so he is Black Republican America according to BC, And since he opposes Affirmative Action, all black Republicans do. Lazy. Stupid. Wrong.

As for the 12 months. The existentials of Black Republicanism are still interesting and mysterious. I still expect that there may be intelligent questions that I have not intelligently answered. So I'm giving everyone another year. After that, my presumption will be simple. If you can't *expect* the legitimacy of black Republicans, you're straight out racist.

The reason The Black Commentator speaks on the particular Republicans they do is those are the Black Republicans that are running the straight party line. They represent the Republican Party. Given the "no dissention" policy Republicans have had for the last decade or so I find it reasonable.

And the legitimacy you're looking for has to come from the Republican party, and frankly that's a bad position to be in.

"No dissent" isn't real. Nobody hews to the platform. It's just window dressing.

So Republicans stand for…nothing?

Fascinating.

Nothing you care to parse based upon the intent and actions of real republicans. But don't let that hinder your strawman attacks. That's useful rhetoric.

Michael, if the platform is just window dressing how can you tell who's a real republican?

What's the platform for if no one follows it?

The platform, just like the jumping up and down at the conventions, is for show. It doesn't guide what all Republicans do and it doesn't necessarily say who is in or out. In other words, it's not holy writ.

What makes the republican party move is delivering votes on the ground. They guess what's attractive and they go with it. But what matters is what money and votes you bring to the table. Can you get a Republican elected? That means way more than whether or not you hew to some ideological test.

Make no mistake, there are plenty of ideologues who believe that the GOP is their stomping ground, but they have to fight for it every day. Who wins is who delivers. Period. That's how you can be the Party of Lincoln and not give a crap about the black vote. You use ideology to attract people who will do party work, but if it doesn't work, as the Isleys say - love the one you're with.

The Republican party is what it is *because* too many blackfolks have defaulted, and the surfeit of blacks in the Democrat party is not advancing anything. Everybody knows this, but nobody seems to want to do anything about it.

A cursory look at California Republican politics can be very revealing. Two years ago NOBODY could have guessed that Schwartzeneggar would be speaking at the RNC in NY. That's how volatile the GOP is.

I will add to the volatility. As long as the dominant ideas of the party, the ones you must adhere to to advance, are hostile to Black folks, I reject the party categorically.

And don't make the mistake of thinking this is about political parties on my part.

I will not support a party whose face is George Bush, Tom DeLay, et al. In fact, I'll work actively against it.