I’m not a Republican, but I support certain Republican politicians. I have “issues” with George Bush, but I’m glad that he, and not John Kerry, is in the White House. I’d vote for Tom Tancredo if he ran, but he won’t because he can’t win. Too pro-America and pro-immigration enforcement.
Rightroots is an effort to raise funds to help Republicans maintain control of the Senate and House of Representatives, a worthy endeavor, indeed.
Member bloggers are Lorie Byrd of Wizbang, Mary Katharine Ham (with lots of links here) of Townhall, Ed Morrissey of Captain’s Quarters (also here), Erick Erickson of RedState, John Hawkins of Right Wing News, Pat Hynes of Ankle Biting Pundits, and Rob Bluey of Human Events.
Behold the power of the blogosphere! Check it out, support the people you believe in, raise money, and vote!
Disclosure: I am not being paid to promote Rightroots or any political candidate. Wish I were… 
P.S. Michelle Malkin blogs about black-face. More here. Politics is an unpleasant business. They couldn’t pay me enough…
Update: I think my 32-year-old “baby” brother is about to have a political awakening. He’s been reading my blog and called with questions about the differences between liberalism and conservatism (he’s really apathetic) and why I believe what I believe. He’s concerned about things like high taxes and illegal “immigration” and doesn’t understand why some of his peers are content living on the government dole.
“What happened to hopes and dreams?” he asked.
“And pride?” I added.
Baby bro sounds like a…conservative!!! 
For decades, conservatives have been labeled as racists, bigots and homophobes throughout the media. However, it has been the left that has resorted to using increasingly bigoted tactics against their…
Pingback by 4thelittleguy.com — 08.02.06 @ 5:23 pm
Unlike LaShawn, I am a Republican. I will send a little money here and there, and I will vote. But I am holding my nose. I back Steele and and a few others, but I think Hagel should have an epiphany and elope with Specter. If their seats were left empty, it would be an improvement. This may just be the time to let the Republican jelly bellies get canned so that more worthy candidates can rise to replace them.
I so distrust the Democrats and their agenda of tax and pander that I may end up getting enthusiastic for the Republicans, but it is hard to imagine it at this point in time.
Comment by Heliotrope — 08.02.06 @ 6:41 pm
Hugh Hewitt has Mel Gibson and Jane Hamsher: The Arianna Connection
Pingback by FullosseousFlap — 08.02.06 @ 7:07 pm
Congratulations on the political awakenings of your brother. It is a joy and clarity that many of us would wish for our own families. A good example is better than a sermon!
Comment by Veritas Regina — 08.02.06 @ 7:44 pm
If I could change, your brother can. But I’m the only one who’s woken up.
Comment by mj — 08.02.06 @ 10:34 pm
Truth be told most Black folks are. It’s just that a certain political party has the attention of lots of Black folks and told them “conservative” is a dirty word.
Even Dick Gregory admits many Black folks are Conservative.
Comment by Independent Conservative — 08.02.06 @ 11:42 pm
LaShawn Barber “not a Republican”?
lol Yeah, o.k.
She’s “not Republican” only because there’s no category or Party called “Ultra- Republican”. lol
Definitely one of the most Conservative people I have seen in the blog world.
As for little brother…. make sure you don’t brainwash the man with one side before he has a chance to see all perspectives.
He should check out Mirror On America, and the African American Political Pundit.
I’ll admit I have some Conservative tendencies. Mostly on Social Issues. But I tend to be more visionary, pragmatic, creative, populist, and progressive (and logical) when it comes to matters of politics and foreign policy. But it really all depends on the issue. I look at each issue with an open mind, and base decisions on what is most logical and practical.
That’s the beauty of being an independent….a true independent. You can’t put most independents into any particular box. It’s called thinking for yourself (Independent Thinking).
Once people started joining The Republican and Democrat Parties in large numbers…that’s when the problem started. People gave up their civic responsibility in recent decades (the responsibility to engage in the political process, stay informed about the issues, to hold their representatives accountable, and to change the Republic if the politicians or the system failed to work for the people).
Instead, people have blindly passed on the responsibility to think for themselves and the other responsibilities listed onto the leaders of these political parties, hoping that they will make the right decisions for them. In the process, Americans have been dumbed down….to the point where folks are waking up now just to find out that the country has been sold off…co-opted, and is no longer “their” Country.
Peoples brains stop functioning when they allow their political leaders to tell them how to think, and what to say, what to read, and what to listen to.
This problem has also affected members of Congress themselves. You have a Congress that votes in predictable blocks. Few (if any) Congressmembers think for themselves, or vote based on the best interest of the people they serve. Instead, members of Congress typically vote the way that their Party leaders tell them to (usually threatened with losing funding for some project in their area, or not getting support for some bill…. Gangster style arm twisting is what it amounts to. It is certainly not “Democracy”).
What’s the point of having this group of 530+ members of Congress, when they vote along Party lines so often? That’s why I say…some of the issues should be decided with anonymous voting… you would get a different result on many issues. No member wants to upset their party, a corporate or political lobbying group, or upset their Masters (the Congressional Leaders) by voting based on individual conviction and the best interest of the people.
The Founding Fathers would be disappointed about the kind of system that we have today.
I’m an “Ultra- Conservative,” actually. I learned early on that “Republican” doesn’t necessarily mean “Conservative,” at least not in ways that matter the most to me. I think my brother can make up his mind and come to his own conclusions, no matter what he decides, but thanks for the “advice” about sending him to your blog. If he starts blogging, one of the things I’ll stress is that he blog under his real name. - Admin
Comment by The Angry Independent — 08.03.06 @ 5:08 am
Once again and out-of-control Left-Wing blogger cannot get past her hatred and emotionalism and slaps Lieberman into Blackface. The Left blogs are so full of hatred and making political opposition to them criminal, racist, unpatriotic that they fail to see how juicy they are as targets if the Right really does sink to their level and “Coulterizes” them as a matter - not as Coulter does tongue in cheek - but as seriously and humorously as the Left behaves.
You see whiffs of this at RedState and Free Republic, a hate site like LGF —but nothing like the routine venom present at DU, Huffin-Puff, and Daily Kos.
I hope that the Right does not sink to what the Far Left and leftist Democrats like Durbin, Kennedy, Boxer, McKinney, and Schumer regularly spew. I notice that many on the Left or in the Democratic center have begun to get very concerned about Leftist extremism undermining the Party. Peter Beinhart is banging the drum that opposition to Iraq does not mean cheering the deaths of US troops by “freedom fighters” if the Democrats wish to be taking seriously, and to recognize that America does have a foreign policy,it should serve our national interests, defense and sometimes war is necessary…and America is not “criminal & evil” for doing so. Like the Centrists defending Lieberman - Beinhart appears to be losing his argument to the shrill screamers of Code Pink, etc.
A good liberal voice who should be listened to by the Right as well as the Left is Niall Stanage, who writes in the New York Observor “Dems Must Resist Voices of Outrage”. http://www.observer.com/20060807/20060807_Niall_Stanage_politics_wiseguys.asp
Some relevant text:
The danger is simply turning off the average voter by behaving in a way that may reinforce other activist anger, but be repellent loathsome tantrum-throwing antics of “outrage”, “shocked, shocked outrage” and blanket accusations of criminal or unethical conduct by not just demonized politicians but those who support them.
I’ve always said the biggest pro-life liability is not the feminists, clinics…but the Right to Life fanatics calling anyone who thought T Schiavo was a vegetative a “monster”, or calling
for the execution of doctors, nurses, men who pay for, women who have abortions as “premeditated murderers”. That is fine to rally other fanatics, even strict religious believers not otherwise fanatics…but the ceaseless anger and calls for 10s of millions of criminal trials of women - even their executions - tends to drive the Center away from the fanatics when they vote.
That the Far Left feels no compunction about using homosexual taunts on the likes of Sullivan when he was pro-security, puts Steele in blackface, and have all but embraced terrorists as victims of Bush Facism shows how far out on a limb they are. Farther out than the “execute the abortion murdering women & medical staff” RTL fanatics, IMO.
Niall raises the obvious as well. Currently our government is broke. Congress is either paralyzed or passes only legislation that is shoved down their throats by leadership or which is Greased by special interest bribes so enough in both Parties are co-opted. Ag subsidies, Homeland security pork, ethanol, etc.
There is a huge difference between what looks like the honest passion of Senator Feingold, Tom Tancredo and the phony photo op passion of Smarmy Schumer or Boxer’s “Outrage Du Jour”.
I believe the public is quite ready for bipartisanship. Bush and Delay failed that test tremendously, as did the usual Lefty Dem suspects that hoped to carry their ghosts of the Nixon and Clinton impeachment agendas, SCOTUS “win at all costs using all smears” philosophies forward and seek obstructionism or total bloody victory over the other side. The public was ready 8 years ago, and have been waiting ever since.
Comment by Chris Ford — 08.03.06 @ 6:08 am
I understand fully why La Shawn is not a member of the Republican Party. It’s a shame that Angry Independent is unable to see a very simple truth.
I’m not a member of the Republican Party either. I vote Republican almost all the time, and the reason is that the opposition is so universally awful, not that the Republicans are so wonderful.
There is no way on earth I will send a penny to the party campaign committees, not as long as it will wind up in the hands of such liberal candidates as Lincoln Chafee and Arlen Specter. My contributions, such as they are, go to individual candidates who can demonstrate both moral character and a proper political position. Party membership is no reason to give someone money.
The Angry Independent seems to be too “angry” to understand that La Shawn and the rest of us who are not party members have made our positions crystal clear in print repeatedly, and that we really don’t need all the grand advice about thinking for ourselves.
Comment by RedBeard — 08.03.06 @ 6:36 am
WHAT’S THE DEMOCRATS BIGGEST PROBLEM?
Um, they’re….Democrats.
They are the “party about nothing”. They are the “vote for us because we aren’t them” party.
The democrats remind me of that month old meatloaf that’s been sittin in the tupperware in the back of the fridge.
It looks fine sittin there, but don’t pop it in the microwave and eat it.
Even so, as the election approaches and the American people prepare to really ‘eat’ something, the ‘bacteria living in the Democrat meatloaf becomes apparent.
They want us to vote for them to run the country, but they can’t even run their own party. Howard dean and Rahm Emanuel AREN’T EVEN ON SPEAKING TERMS! Here we are 4 months out from their huge “landslide” election and they don’t even have a workable “get-out-the-vote” plan?
This is why they lose folks. Any liar can win in a mudlsinging contest - hell, they can say any outrageous, non-truth thing and get headlines from a willing press. But when i really comes down to the real election…
SUBSTANCE MATTERS.
A note on polling.
Look at the numbers “under recent polling”. There is a large overweight being given to Independents in the sample.
Word to yo mother - Independents DON’T stand in line to vote in mid-term elections.
Look at the turnout in the VA “hotly contested” Dem Primary to run against Allen. How many of these “angry and determined Dem voters on a mission to take back America” actually turned out to vote?
3%
‘Nuff said.
2006 - Dems lose again. Take 8-12points off any polling lead you see a Dem enjoy right now and you’ll get the actual totals.
Comment by Bill Mitchell — 08.03.06 @ 6:46 am
The Knuckleheads of the Day award
Our winners are Rightrooots plus Lorie Byrd, Ed Morrissey, John Hawkins, Robert Bluey, Mary Katherine Ham, Patrick Hynes, Erick Erickson, Senator Bill Frist, and Rep. Jack Kingston are today’s knuckleheads of the day.
Trackback by The Florida Masochist — 08.03.06 @ 7:45 am
It looks like your baby brother will be another endangered species, a black conservative God fearing man with a good head on his shoulders with a great big sister that I can attest too.
Greetings from the land of the Morning Calm LaShawn and with all that is happening in with Iran and North Korea I will have a front row seat.
Comment by Warrior Nurse — 08.03.06 @ 8:23 am
Miss La Shawn,
Tell your little brother, “Welcome Aboard Bro”. Glad to have him on the conservative side. Most Black people have conservative values but back liberal Democrats. We need an “awakening” to show Black America that the Dems are gutless, God-less, favors government dependency no matter what and can be bought by any left-wing group who wants to destroy the family.
Comment by Tracey — 08.03.06 @ 10:16 am
Back in the day - when I was growing up - Democrats and Republicans did NOT hate each other. It just wasn’t an issue. And Senators did not march in lockstep, nor were they expected to, with their parties. Senator Frank Lausche of Ohio was a prime example of this (Okay nobody here has heard of him - but I’m OLD and I have) because he did something that is apparently unheard of by MOST politicians these days - he voted the needs of his constituents (novel concept) and his own conscience! He used to get razzed about this and I remember that the Cleveland newspapers used to publish cartoons about “Frank’s Fence” but it was gentle ribbing, not the character assassination and ugliness being directed at Senator Lieberman. I swear, if I had the funds, I would take a month off, go to Connecticut and actively campaign for the man just out of simple outrage at the treatment he is receiving at the hands of HIS OWN PARTY. It is an absolute disgrace.
Comment by Gayle Miller — 08.03.06 @ 10:43 am
#9 Redbeard: For all practical purposes, you are a Republican. It appears that you and I have the same contribution strategy and are able to pull the handle for a worthy Democrat when the Republican choice is a stinker.
The Angry Independent makes me giggle. If you are trying to be an independent in a strongly two party system, of course you are going to be angry. In spite of all the fuss and feathers they blow to the contrary, Independents, Libertarians, and Mugwumps are not participating in the race because they have not got the power, purpose, organization, Moxie, agenda, vision, wherewithall, stamina, and a few dozen other important qualities to get a horse into the starting gate.
Most voters figure our where they lean and go with the crowd that is most likely to please them.
When you can’t quite make a commitment, you call yourself a moderate or an independent and you and your partner just live together and you don’t get involved in religion and you try to look at all sides of every issue and you can’t see how anyone can think his culture is superior to another culture and………..z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z!
Comment by Heliotrope — 08.03.06 @ 10:51 am
How true, Helio. As my father once said, standing in the middle of the road will only get you run over.
The problem is that my position is well staked out and quite definite, while the Republican Party wanders all over the landscape, looking dazed and confused as it searches for a place to stand.
As for worthy Democrats for whom to vote, I’m reminded of the Woolly Mammoth and the Sabre Toothed Tiger. Well, maybe more like the Whooping Crane; not totally extinct, but teetering.
Comment by RedBeard — 08.03.06 @ 11:05 am
What popped out at me in reading this post is something that has been a troubling influence for years.
Right, Left, up the middle… the money talks. We don’t have a country in which people work their way up through the political ranks and ascend based on experience and skill, and we don’t have a populace raised to believe that you must investigate the cause and effect results of the moves made by the politicians.
Instead, it’s most often about who has the most money to make the most noise, and who has the smoothest speech.
Comment by Mark La Roi — 08.03.06 @ 11:14 am
Let me tell you something about polls. Exit polls, telephone polls, just about any kind of polls…..people LIE.
The reason the voting booth is closed in is so that you can cast an ANONYMOUS vote. If the voting booth was in an open place where everybody could see who you’re voting for, I ‘magine the races would turn out very different, but as it is you vote in PRIVATE.
Which means, that you can tell a pollster anything you want after you leave the booth, and it won’t matter. This is why exit polls in the presidential elections are so skewed. I’d be willing to bet my last paycheck there are plenty of screaming public Liberals out there who secretly (once the curtain on the voting booth was closed) voted for Bush. And tell the exit pollsters that they voted for a liberal Democrat. Ever wonder why the Dems celebrate the exit polls and are then left scratching their heads when the balloting doesn’t match the polls??
Comment by Duchess Of Austin — 08.03.06 @ 2:10 pm
Clearly you all don’t understand what a real Democracy Is…. you don’t even grasp the concept.
I’m not that kind of independent. I am an independent who would like to see more Parties emerge, on an alternative platform. I’m not one with no vision. I could write an entire platform for you right now…. I have a position on just about every major issue facing the country. (and then some).
The reason why no other Parties can emerge in this country is because this system is not conducive to it. Other parties are not allowed to emerge. The playing field is not level in that regard. The two parties have colluded to make sure that no other parties can emerge to challenge their grip on power. Everything is geared towards making sure that Democrats and Republicans are safe from real competition.
That’s not a Democracy. It makes the U.S. a hollow Democracy (at best). But in my opinion, this country is nothing but a 2 party dictatorship…with a rotating seat at the top every few years.
The U.S. is one of the very few major, so called “Free” nations, with only 2 major political parties participating in government on the national level.
Most of the real Democracies of the world have multiple political parties in government at the national level (at least 3 or 4 & many with a lot more). Americans have been stuck with this 2 party system for so long that they have grown content with it….they don’t know any other system. And besides, they couldn’t challenge the 2 party dictatorship even if they wanted to.
I find it ironic that our soldiers died and continue to die in Iraq so that a country could hold elections where voters had a choice of over 100 voting options…. Yet, here at home, we have no such Democracy…no such choice.
Ralph Nader (Who I am no fan of) really made it plain in this speech from a couple of years ago.
Listen at the bottom of the following message.
http://mirroronamerica.blogspot.com/2006/05/election-maps-for-2006-elections.html
I’m amazed at how Americans really believe that they live in some sort of Democracy. lol
The voting system, and Party system in this country is about as Democratic as the voting system in Iran, Egypt, Russia, Belarus, or any other nation where voting is a joke. Voting in this kind of system is nothing more than a ceremony.
Comment by The Angry Independent — 08.03.06 @ 2:33 pm
Um… Ok, Angry Independent, could you tell us just what it is that prevents you from starting a new party, or raising the Green Party to prominence? Who runs this conspiracy? What laws would you change? And why ARE you so angry?
Comment by RedBeard — 08.03.06 @ 3:19 pm
#19 Angry, here are a few facts: The United States is a representative democracy. There are no direct or pure democracies and never has there been one. Upon leaving the Pennsylvania State House at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention, a woman asked Dr. Franklin what type of government had been created and he replied: “A republic, if you can keep it.” For more on this I suggest you read Federalist Number Ten.
The founders did not envision political parties (although they clearly understood “factions”….Federalist Number Ten) and the election of 1800 threw the infant country into turmoil. The “cure” to the election problems was to enact the Twelfth Amendment.
The Twelfth Amendment lays out a set of rules that make it nearly impossible for there to be more than two political parties. In essence, it replicates the representational balance between the House and the Senate arrived at in the Connecticut Compromise and recreates it in the Electoral College structure and rules.
There are many representational democracies that have plural parties and operate a government by coalition. If we were to amend the Constitution to establish the direct election of the President or to require each state to award election of electors in proportion to the vote for president in the state, it would be possible to have multiple parties.
To have multiple parties and coalitions is not a well considered idea. While politics is the art of compromise, coalition government is the art of compromising the compromise while struggling within the compromise to overcome your ally. It also gives rise to the mischief of faction. (See Federalist Number Ten.) Lebanon has Hezb’Allah as a factional party in its coalition representative democracy. And Lebanon is learning that they have “a republic, if they can keep it.”
Comment by Heliotrope — 08.03.06 @ 3:34 pm
I guess I just don’t understand why moderate or independent is such a dirty word. I happen to feel that way about most things anyway.
Demos and Pubs are quick to throw out things like the comments above about standing in the road will get you run over or other assorted BS like that. I might agree with some issues and disagree with others. So what. I’m human. I don’t get mad at others who follow the party line hook, line, and sinker. Isn’t that your business and right to do so?
People need to learn how to agree and how to agree to disagree. This political discourse that goes on these days is for the most part sad and pathetic. And we being the common, regular folk continue to allow it to happen.
Comment by Tiffany in Houston — 08.03.06 @ 3:38 pm
Hey LaShawn
What do you think about the website fancyford.com? How many Republicans are calling out the lavish lifestyles of white Republicans? Why is it that becuase Ford lives a lavish life, he has it thrown back at his face? Maybe becuase the idea of a young black man enjoying the good life makes people cringe in Tennessee and it makes for good politics.
Ned Lamont has condemned the blackface photo and distanced himself from it. Now let’s see how many conservatives disavow fancyford.com.
Comment by vikram — 08.03.06 @ 4:26 pm
I looked over that website, and didn’t see anything in the way of racial slurs. Was there something I missed? In what section can I find the critics denouncing him because he’s black?
Comment by RedBeard — 08.03.06 @ 5:02 pm
La Shawn said: “I’d vote for Tom Tancredo if he ran, but he won’t because he can’t win. Too pro-America and pro-immigration enforcement.”
And THAT is a testament to the saddest state of American politics imaginable, when a candidate is TOO pro-America, I fear that we, as a nation, are doomed…
And I have to say, La Shawn has stated MY feelings exactly…
Comment by TexasFred — 08.03.06 @ 5:38 pm
There is hope for everyone!
But LB, I thought you were a Republican before…because you wrote on your blog during the presidential election that you would not vote for an Independent such as Constitutionist.
Was this change due to contemplation and prayer or listening to Michael Savage?
Comment by Griffin Lilly Jr — 08.03.06 @ 6:54 pm
Well, anyway, LaShawn was doing “blog duty” by posting about RIGHTROOTS which is a consortium of bloggers who have presented the conservative Republicans they support in hopes of furthering the conservative agenda.
This is a useful and practical effort which is possible because “Al Gore invented the internet”!
I, for one, appreciate LaShawn’s effort in getting us in touch with RIGHTROOTS and my $$$ will follow.
Comment by Heliotrope — 08.03.06 @ 7:11 pm
Redbeard
Lots of poltiticians live fancy lives. Why do they feel the need to point out Harold Fords? Why do they need to point out a black man’s lifestyle in Tennessee? Sorry, but there is an undertone of BS when you say it is harmless campaigning. It is the first website of its kind and it is not coincidence that it is directed at a black man. 40 years is not a long time in the south. As Faulker once wrote, ” In the south the past is not dead. It isn’t even past.”
Comment by vikram — 08.03.06 @ 10:57 pm
I would definitely vote for Tancredo as well.
Comment by Job — 08.04.06 @ 1:27 am
Go, girl! Your momma raised you right.
Unfortunately, my formidable bride of six years, Mama Moonbat, has also had a recent political awakening, and I’ve found her to be a populist with liberal leanings. Can I ditch her and marry you?
Comment by A. Truman North — 08.04.06 @ 2:38 am
I certainly hope your wife doesn’t read LBC.
Comment by Tiffany in Houston — 08.04.06 @ 9:52 am
Vikram, I didn’t defend the attack nature of that site, nor did I call it harmless campaigning. It’s pretty sleazy, in my opinion. All I said was that I didn’t find any racial component there.
Comment by RedBeard — 08.04.06 @ 10:35 am
“What happened to hopes and dreams?†he asked.
“And pride?†I added.
Baby bro sounds like a…conservative!!!
Ain’t it fun to watch? They grow up so fast these days…
Comment by Frank — 08.04.06 @ 10:39 am
#28 vikram: Harold Ford is a politician. There are 535 of them in the Congress. They play hardball, for the most part.
I know very little about Harold Ford except that many feel he is a rising star. That means that he is stepping into the big leagues where the mudslinging is fast and furious. If one silly web site, protected by the first amendment, can knock him off his stride, he will not succeed.
Perhaps some might think that the “rednecks” are after him for being “uppity.” Perhaps some might think that the “community” is after him for “acting white.” I have no idea. When people insist on dealing the race card into the game, there is no knowing where the mud will fly and land.
Comment by Heliotrope — 08.04.06 @ 12:52 pm
Heliotrope
Tough campaigns are one thing. Race baiting is another. If Ford’s opponents openly came out and said he was acting uppity for a black man, no one would tolerate it. So why should we tolerate it when they do it in a cowardly way. For example insinuating he dates only white women, as was the case recently in an email sent by a PR firm. These people can’t have it both ways. You can’t claim to be color blind and then turn around and use dirty race baiting tactics in the South.
Comment by vikram — 08.04.06 @ 6:38 pm
Angry has one point that’s valid. Our plurality-takes-all election system effectively assures a two-party structure. Since any vote I cast that doesn’t go to one of the top two vote-getters (not counting my vote) does not affect the margin of victory between them, it only works as a feeble protest. If we had a proportional representation system, then we’d probably have a dozen or so parties with seats in Congress. We’d have a much better chance of finding candidates that agree with us on most issues, rather than having to choose between the lesser of two evils.
Comment by The Monster — 08.04.06 @ 6:43 pm
That’s true, Monster, but the parliamentary system was considered by the founders and rejected in favor of a shared powers government. There is something about this in Federalist 52, but perhaps a more knowledgeable constitutional scholar can point to a more specific explanation.
In addition, Congress, it must be remembered, is a creation of the sovereign states, 1/3rd of a federal government, not a national government.
Comment by RedBeard — 08.05.06 @ 8:43 am