Disarming the NAACP
Why won’t Kweisi Mfume defend Julian Bond?

By NR’s John J. Miller & Ramesh Ponnuru
February 26, 2001 1:50 p.m.

omebody at the NAACP didn't receive his talking points last week, judging from the wildly different responses to House Majority Leader Dick Armey's letter to NAACP president Kweisi Mfume. In a February 22 missive, Armey suggested that he and Mfume get together. In addition to discussing items on the NAACP agenda, wrote Armey, "I have another concern that I would like to discuss with you."

Armey continued: "I believe there is a phenomenon in American politics today that could justly be called 'Racial McCarthyism' or 'reverse race-baiting.' In my opinion, it has become an all-too-common practice to spread unfounded, racially charged falsehoods against Republicans for political advantage. Deliberate or not, if left unchallenged, this practice will continue to divide our nation, polarize our political parties, and do untold harm in the lives of real people who are unjustly accused of conspiracy against the civil rights of African Americans."

Armey called special attention to the NAACP's anti-Bush ads last fall and "the likening of Florida to Selma." He also noted a recent quote by NAACP chairman Julian Bond: "The new administration almost daily separates and divides. …[It] selected nominees from the Taliban wing of American politics, appeased the wretched appetites of the extreme right wing, and chose Cabinet officials whose devotion to the Confederacy is nearly canine in its uncritical affection."

The letter was tough, aggressive — and fair. Bond's response to it was predictable, and practically proved Armey's point: "This is a typical complaint of those who oppose justice and fairness and who accuse those of us who insist on fairness of this tactic."

Mfume, however, took a different tack: "Dear Dick …I'm sure we could agree that there is enough blame to be placed on both sides, but the real question is where do we go from here? How do we get beyond the last election in order to build a more perfect union and when will dialogue replace demagoguery on the issue of race in our nation? Like you, I know that all Republicans are not racists or bigots and neither are all Democrats saints or saviors."

It's surely too much to expect genuine rapprochement between the GOP and the NAACP. But perhaps there is a flicker of hope in Mfume's response, which does not attempt to defend the anti-Bush ad or Bond's words.

By and large, Republicans should bypass organizations such as the NAACP and communicate directly with black voters. But when they engage such groups, Republicans should do so with the kind of cordial forcefulness Armey has demonstrated here. It makes possible editorials like the one appearing in today's Roll Call — no friend of Dick Armey — noting that "Now there's a tendency on the part of some African-American members [of Congress] to match [conservatives like former Rep. Bob] Dornan in incendiary rhetoric."

When Julian Bond utters something pretty close to anti-Republican hate speech, the NAACP will pay a price — but only if Republicans call him on it.