Republicans

Impeach Obama Embroidered Patch Republican Barack Obama Joke Gift Novelty Emblem
$4.99
This brand new embroidered patch is a protest for those who oppose Barack Obama. Makes a great gift for Republicans. Heat-seal backing allows buyer to iron this patch onto virtually any fabric.

Grand Old Party: A History of the Republicans
$35.00
The author is CLEARLY a Democrat. Now the funny part is this: it was written as part of a series with Jules Witcover writing 'Party of the People,' and Witcover is also a Democrat. So a Democrat is writing the story of BOTH parties? This sounds eerily similar to having a recount in four counties with a heavy concentration of supporters of one party.....

There is a lot of good historical information in the book. The problem is that Gould views anything that does not fit into his worldview with jaundiced eyes. He insinuates there is a moral equivalent between Reagan conservatism and the racism of the Democratic Party in the South in the Jim Crow era.

When Gould can show me which Republican governor denied blacks access to college by standing in the door way a la George Wallace, his analogy will have some evidence. Until then it is nothing more than a slanderous lie.

I do not expect the book to be an ode the 'greatness' of the Republican Party. Both political parties have made contributions to America, some good on both sides and some bad on both sides. Neither side has a monopoly on virtue despite what Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken would tell you. And neither side has a monopoly on corruption, either. Republicans had their Teapot Dome and Watergate scandals while FDR showed contempt for the Constitution by trying to stack the Supreme Court - a move that was opposed by his own party, btw.

The problem is that Gould imposes his own morality and worldview on the conservatives - and comes out with the usual caricature of racist, homophobic, sexists. Although is language is far more restrained as becomes a history professor, his bias is all too clear. Although Witcover showed bias as well, he was a better writer and fare more restrained in his judgments for the most part.

There is no further proof necessary to demonstrate Gould's bias than the early portion of the chapter entitled, "Bush to Gingrich to Bush, 1988 to 2000." For we read this incredibly biased statement on page 442:

"A moderate, centrist Democrat, Dukakis seemed a fresh face who might be able to tap into a public desire for gradual change after eight years of Ronald Reagan and the Republicans."

Dukakis was a MODERATE?

If Dukakis was a moderate in this author's worldview, I think that pretty much settles where he's coming from. Dukakis was so far to the Left of the spectrum that Teddy Kennedy would have been George Wallace by comparison. And a few pages later on pp. 444-445 we read this:

"The furlough program began during the term of the Republican predecessor to Dukakis, but it was continued by Dukakis. Under the policy, and African-American convict named William J. Horton, Jr., who was serving a life sentence for murder, was released on a weekend furlough. Horton fled to Maryland where he assaulted a couple, raping the woman. A Massachusetts newspaper brought the case to light. One of Dukakis's Democratic rivals, Senator Albert Gore, Jr., attacked the furlough policy (but did not mention Horton) in a Democratic debate in December 1987."

Later on page 445 - after a soliloquy about the alleged racism the Horton issue incited - we read this:

"The Republicans had a legitimate issue in the furlough policy. They rarely mentioned that Ronald Reagan had purused a similar arrangement as governor of California. While denying racial motivation in the Horton controversy, the GOP strategists in the Bush campaign made only pro forma gestures to stlil the furor over the advertisement and its implications."

There is plenty wrong with what Gould writes here, and he sounds more like an apologist for the Dukakis campaign than a historian. First, Gould tries to implicate (though he fails to name) Dukakis' Republican predecessor, Francis Sargent, as the person to blame. He doesn't bother to mention that not only did Dukakis support the furlough program - he supported it AFTER Horton escaped and assaulted the Barnes family (whom Gould also doesn't name) in Maryland. He further fails to mention that Dukakis refused to meet with the Barneses after the assault and CONTINUED to support furloughs for first-degree murderers like Horton until just prior to the 1988 New York primary - when he reluctantly went along with the Massachusetts state house that had been trying to end the furlough program.

Gould also has Horton's middle initial wrong, but it is difficult to get on his case since that may be a proof-reading or editor's error. Horton's name was William R. Horton.

Gould further tries an apples and oranges comparison when he implies that Ronald Reagan's governorship of California and a support of furloughs constituted the same type leadership. Gould fails to point out that Reagan OPPOSED furloughs of first-degree murderers (such as Horton) or the fact that while 45 other states had furloughs on the books, NONE of them with the exception of Dukakis' released first-degree murderers.

And as is the usual custom in looking at the media-generated Willie Horton controversy, Gould never mentions Dukakis' own furlough ad. In the fall of 1988, Dukakis did Bush one better by running a furlough ad about a convicted Hispanic named Angel Medrano, a drug dealer who murdered a woman named Patsy Pedrin. There are quite a few differences here with Bush:

1) Bush never made a commercial, his supporters (one he sued, in fact, in 1991 over the Clarence Thomas hearings) did; Dukakis DID make a commercial portraying a Hispanic as a killer.

2) Bush had never supported the federal furlough progam that housed Medrano; Dukakis not only supported it, he fought its extinction AFTER Horton raped Angie Barnes in Maryland.

3) Bush's campaign found out about it from another Democrat named Al Gore. This led them to the 'Reader's Digest' article written before Dukakis was the nominee.


I realize some would say that Gould did not have time to fully develop each point. I concede that to be true. But if you're writing a history as opposed to a polemic, you need to tell the truth about BOTH sides. I'm not arguing that Willie Horton was OK - but it is nothing more than sour grapes to say that Bush only won because of a racist campaign. After all, it was Dukakis who refused to pick a black man as his Veep even though that guy finished second in the race. Could we not infer something siniser from that?

It is good to have the book as part of the series. However, I would advise readers to delve deeper into the subject by reading other works. I would name some here but I've not personally found them as yet. Hopefully that will soon be rectified.

Texas Irons Republican Steak Branding Iron
$24.95
These Republican BBQ Brands are sure to be a huge hit at your next patio party. Show your personality when you serve your steaks and let everyone know who ccoked the meal.

Republican Flag - 3 foot by 5 foot Polyester (NEW)
$19.99
3 foot by 5 foot Polyester Flag with sharp vivid colors. Comes with 2 Metal Gromments for easy mounting to a flag pole (or wall) & a Canvas Hem for long lasting strength. For outdoor or indoor use.