• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Edward Brooke, First Black Elected U.S. Senator, Dies

azgreg

Chicks dig the long ball
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
25,204
Reaction score
23,934
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Edward Brooke, First Black Elected U.S. Senator, Dies - NBC News

Former U.S. Sen. Edward W. Brooke, a liberal Republican who became the first black in U.S. history to win popular election to the Senate, died Saturday. He was 95. Brooke, who represented Massachusetts for two terms from 1967 to 1979, died of natural causes at his Coral Gables, Florida, home, surrounded by his family, said Ralph Neas, Brooke's former chief counsel.

Brooke was elected to the Senate in 1966, becoming the first black to sit in that branch from any state since Reconstruction and one of nine blacks who have ever served there — including Barack Obama. After Obama's presidential election in 2008, Brooke told The Associated Press he was "thankful to God" that he lived to see it. And with the president on hand in October 2009, Brooke received the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest award Congress has to honor civilians.

"Senator Brooke led an extraordinary life of public service," Obama said in a statement Saturday. "As the first African-American elected as a state's Attorney General and first African-American U.S. Senator elected after reconstruction, Ed Brooke stood at the forefront of the battle for civil rights and economic fairness."

Late in his second term, Brooke divorced his wife of 31 years, Remigia, in a stormy proceeding. Repercussions from the case spurred an investigation into his personal finances by the Senate Ethics Committee and a probe by the state welfare department and ultimately cost him the 1978 election. He was defeated by Democrat Rep. Paul E. Tsongas. Tsongas' widow, U.S. Rep. Nikki Tsongas, said Saturday that Brooke's career was "as courageous as it was historic."

Brooke was raised in a middle-class black section of Washington, attending segregated schools through his graduation from Howard University in 1941. He served in an all-black combat unit in World War II, and later settled in Boston after graduating from Boston University Law School. Brooke is survived by his second wife, Anne Fleming Brooke; their son Edward Brooke IV; his daughters from his first marriage, Remi Goldstone and Edwina Petit; stepdaughter Melanie Laflamme, and four grandchildren.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

He stood for many of the same laws and policies that Republicans now find "authoritarian". He supported a woman's reproductive right, a government's role in educating its citizens, and acknowledged discrimination is a factor of every American's life. Today, Republicans couldn't stand further away from such ideas. Democrats shouldn't act like they universally loved him either. John Kerry and other Massachusetts Democrats led a political lynching against him in the 70s that tarnished his reputation for decades. He was an honorable man way ahead of his time and too good for the two party system we have today.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

My thoughts with his family. In reading about him this morning I learned that one of the many things he did was advocating for fair housing and was the co-author of the Fair Housing Act which was part of the Civil Rights Act, very cool.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

I don't know much about his politics but I respect the courage and determination of trail blazers.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator


He sounds like he was a fine man, a groundbreaker, and although I'd not heard his name or story before your posting, I'd like to add my condolences and wishes for peace and comfort for the family and friends he's left behind.

Remarkable, in my view, that only 9 black Americans have found their way into the elected American Senate. I'll have to give some thought to that fact.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

He stood for many of the same laws and policies that Republicans now find "authoritarian". He supported a woman's reproductive right, a government's role in educating its citizens, and acknowledged discrimination is a factor of every American's life. Today, Republicans couldn't stand further away from such ideas. Democrats shouldn't act like they universally loved him either. John Kerry and other Massachusetts Democrats led a political lynching against him in the 70s that tarnished his reputation for decades. He was an honorable man way ahead of his time and too good for the two party system we have today.

Perhaps you could start a more appropriate thread for such a discussion - I'd be interested in people's thoughts about why so few black Americans have been elected to the US Senate.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

He stood for many of the same laws and policies that Republicans now find "authoritarian". He supported a woman's reproductive right, a government's role in educating its citizens, and acknowledged discrimination is a factor of every American's life. Today, Republicans couldn't stand further away from such ideas. Democrats shouldn't act like they universally loved him either. John Kerry and other Massachusetts Democrats led a political lynching against him in the 70s that tarnished his reputation for decades. He was an honorable man way ahead of his time and too good for the two party system we have today.

Such bull****.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Perhaps you could start a more appropriate thread for such a discussion - I'd be interested in people's thoughts about why so few black Americans have been elected to the US Senate.

It's not an RIP thread. I mentioned what the man was about and how he couldn't be further from modern Republicans. Did Republicans suddenly start supporting abortion en masse? What about the government's role in education? Did the right wing suddenly decide they're no longer opposed to the DoE and federal education policies? He was far from the post-Reagan Republicans we have today. Hell, there are few relevant domestic policies in which he would have seen eye to eye with modern Republicans.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

It's not an RIP thread. I mentioned what the man was about and how he couldn't be further from modern Republicans. Did Republicans suddenly start supporting abortion en masse? What about the government's role in education? Did the right wing suddenly decide they're no longer opposed to the DoE and federal education policies? He was far from the post-Reagan Republicans we have today. Hell, there are few relevant domestic policies in which he would have seen eye to eye with modern Republicans.

Fair enough. One can honor someone's life and/or life accomplishments without walking in lockstep with his views and goals. There will be many who honor President Obama's achievement as the first black President and yet consider him a disaster in the role. Perhaps 50 years from now people will wonder why there hasn't been a second black President just as it's remarkable that 50 years later, only 9 blacks have been elected to the US Senate since Senator Brooke first took his seat there in 1967.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Fair enough. One can honor someone's life and/or life accomplishments without walking in lockstep with his views and goals. There will be many who honor President Obama's achievement as the first black President and yet consider him a disaster in the role. Perhaps 50 years from now people will wonder why there hasn't been a second black President just as it's remarkable that 50 years later, only 9 blacks have been elected to the US Senate since Senator Brooke first took his seat there in 1967.

I find the above funny because Ben Carson, Republican, is being touted as the great black hope of Republicans. The right wing's answer to Obama. This phrasing of yours reveals the belief that even someone as educated as Carson has very little chance of being elected.

I don't find it that remarkable that 50 years later only 9 blacks have been Senators. We've only had one Catholic president, one Irish-American president, we've only had seventeen women senators in 200+ years. The positions of powers in this country are still very much a white protestant male's area. The same group who made ascension to these positions easy for themselves still control many of the positions.

That people believe these two things are 'coincidental' is pretty funny in the grand scope of thoughts. Downright dangerous when they believe it's just the luck of the white protestant male.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

I find the above funny because Ben Carson, Republican, is being touted as the great black hope of Republicans. The right wing's answer to Obama. This phrasing of yours reveals the belief that even someone as educated as Carson has very little chance of being elected.

I don't find it that remarkable that 50 years later only 9 blacks have been Senators. We've only had one Catholic president, one Irish-American president, we've only had seventeen women senators in 200+ years. The positions of powers in this country are still very much a white protestant male's area. The same group who made ascension to these positions easy for themselves still control many of the positions.

That people believe these two things are 'coincidental' is pretty funny in the grand scope of thoughts. Downright dangerous when they believe it's just the luck of the white protestant male.

There's nothing funny about my "phrasing". It reflects my belief that there won't be another black President in America for a very long time after Obama. Had Obama been a successful President, my opinion would have changed, but I think Obama has made it very difficult for those who follow him. Similarly, I thought Geraldine Ferraro was a real setback for women on the Presidential ticket going forward and Sarah Palin has compounded that problem. It's what happens when tokens are chosen to suit an agenda rather than strong candidates in their own right, regardless of gender or race.

9 black Senators over almost 50 years is remarkable to me. There are many areas of America that send black representatives to the House. It leads me to believe that there aren't many blacks who aspire to the Senate, but I have no factual basis to support that assumption. There are 200 Senators elected every 12 years so potentially 800 Senate positions in that time and only 9 elected - by contrast, in those same years, only 12 potential Presidential runs so your analogy is far off.

With about 17% of the American population being black and almost 95% of them consistently voting Democrat, it's inconceivable to me that so few black Democrats run for the Senate let alone Republicans. Carson would appear to be an oddity in that regard, thus he seems remarkable - but the Democrat side is far more telling, in my view.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

There's nothing funny about my "phrasing". It reflects my belief that there won't be another black President in America for a very long time after Obama. Had Obama been a successful President, my opinion would have changed, but I think Obama has made it very difficult for those who follow him. Similarly, I thought Geraldine Ferraro was a real setback for women on the Presidential ticket going forward and Sarah Palin has compounded that problem. It's what happens when tokens are chosen to suit an agenda rather than strong candidates in their own right, regardless of gender or race.

So... Obama made it difficult... for other people who are unrelated to him to be elected? Because... he's black... and they're black too and all blacks will be looked as the same? Lol. I don't really understand what you're saying. Are you saying that if the right doesn't manage to elect a reasonably qualified black candidate, it'll be because he's black like Obama?

9 black Senators over almost 50 years is remarkable to me. There are many areas of America that send black representatives to the House. It leads me to believe that there aren't many blacks who aspire to the Senate, but I have no factual basis to support that assumption. There are 200 Senators elected every 12 years so potentially 800 Senate positions in that time and only 9 elected - by contrast, in those same years, only 12 potential Presidential runs so your analogy is far off.

With about 17% of the American population being black and almost 95% of them consistently voting Democrat, it's inconceivable to me that so few black Democrats run for the Senate let alone Republicans. Carson would appear to be an oddity in that regard, thus he seems remarkable - but the Democrat side is far more telling, in my view.

There are many weird leaps of faiths, simply false statements and red herrings I don't know where to start. At the beginning, I guess. There are 200 elected senators every 12 years of so, and so what? It costs a ****load of money and resources to actually mount a senatorial campaign. Money and resources which up until recently weren't actually available to most of the black population for a number of reasons. Secondly, incumbents usually manage to retain their offices the higher up you go so while 200 senate seats may be up for grabs, a small fraction of these will actually go to new people. Democrats are particularly guilty of this with some senators holding on to their seats for well over 30 years.

As far as the numbers in your second paragraph go. Blacks are 17%.... in what census? Lol, the 2050 census? Or the 1810 census? Blacks haven't made up anywhere near 17% of the US population in like .... 200 years. With that said, we're hardly majorities in any state. At best, you have states like Mississippi and Louisiana, where blacks make up ~35% of the population. However, those states are primarily Republican strongholds so there is little chance of a Democrat - of any color - being elected in any of those states.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Fun fact: The total number of African Americans elected to Congress: 130.

Since 1900, only five were Republican.

Up until today! With the seating of the 114th Congress, the GOP can now boast of having elected a grand total of eight African Americans to Congress since 1900.


Yay!!!

Electing them to positions of POWER in numbers -- Now you're catching on, Grand Old Partiers!
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

So... Obama made it difficult... for other people who are unrelated to him to be elected? Because... he's black... and they're black too and all blacks will be looked as the same? Lol. I don't really understand what you're saying. Are you saying that if the right doesn't manage to elect a reasonably qualified black candidate, it'll be because he's black like Obama?



There are many weird leaps of faiths, simply false statements and red herrings I don't know where to start. At the beginning, I guess. There are 200 elected senators every 12 years of so, and so what? It costs a ****load of money and resources to actually mount a senatorial campaign. Money and resources which up until recently weren't actually available to most of the black population for a number of reasons. Secondly, incumbents usually manage to retain their offices the higher up you go so while 200 senate seats may be up for grabs, a small fraction of these will actually go to new people. Democrats are particularly guilty of this with some senators holding on to their seats for well over 30 years.

As far as the numbers in your second paragraph go. Blacks are 17%.... in what census? Lol, the 2050 census? Or the 1810 census? Blacks haven't made up anywhere near 17% of the US population in like .... 200 years. With that said, we're hardly majorities in any state. At best, you have states like Mississippi and Louisiana, where blacks make up ~35% of the population. However, those states are primarily Republican strongholds so there is little chance of a Democrat - of any color - being elected in any of those states.

My apologies - I mixed up the Latino vote with the Black vote - blacks make up about 13% of the electorate. That doesn't change my point that there are several States that are overwhelmingly Democrat in voting terms such as California, New York, Massachusetts, with very rich local, state and national Democrat parties and they can't find any competent blacks to promote and elect to the Senate? Was Barack Obama wealthy with a ****load of money to make his run? So why aren't the Democrats, the party that claims to be the only party that supports black Americans, more inclined to elect black Americans to the US Senate? Is it because blacks aren't interested in the position or because Democrats aren't interest in them as candidates, just as voting fodder?
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Fun fact: The total number of African Americans elected to Congress: 130.

Since 1900, only five were Republican.

Up until today! With the seating of the 114th Congress, the GOP can now boast of having elected a grand total of eight African Americans to Congress since 1900.


Yay!!!

Electing them to positions of POWER in numbers -- Now you're catching on, Grand Old Partiers!

When black people started doing the same thing the Italians and Irish have, it became an issue. Suddenly, black people have become racist for choosing people who were more likely to share a cultural background with us. Some whites find it unacceptable that blacks engage in identity politics like whites and their ancestors have for centuries. It's now racist to elect a politician because of a shared ancestry. However, this has only been an issue for the past 8 years or so.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Fun fact: The total number of African Americans elected to Congress: 130.

Since 1900, only five were Republican.

Up until today! With the seating of the 114th Congress, the GOP can now boast of having elected a grand total of eight African Americans to Congress since 1900.


Yay!!!

Electing them to positions of POWER in numbers -- Now you're catching on, Grand Old Partiers!

Yeah, for that to have any merit whatsoever, wouldn't we need to know the number of blacks who have run as republicans? Furthermore, why is that so astonishing when you consider that very few blacks even identify as republicans?
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

My apologies

Don't apologise. You can start by telling everyone why Republicans wouldn't elect a black man after Barack Obama. What stops them? What association could they possibly make between Obama and another black man? That they wouldn't have made before? Did Obama make it impossible for another black guy to gather the votes from the right? ;)

I mixed up the Latino vote with the Black vote - blacks make up about 13% of the electorate. That doesn't change my point that there are several States that are overwhelmingly Democrat in voting terms such as California, New York, Massachusetts, with very rich local, state and national Democrat parties and they can't find any competent blacks to promote and elect to the Senate?

It's almost like you aren't reading my posts because you really don't know what you're talking about. It's not as easy as simply finding a black senator or a female senator. It also involves incumbents and general political pragmatism. Why would Democrats find a new black candidate to run against Boxer and Feinstein when they've proven they can win elections for 20+ years? Then there is Massachusetts, where blacks make up 6% of the population, and there has never been an elected black Senator or Representative. A state where John Kerry held his office for 20+ years, and then appointed a black man. A state where Kennedy held it for 40 years and ran mostly unopposed. New York hasn't had any black senators, true, and yet it has had dozens of black representatives. In contrast New Jersey with only 13% of blacks, a black man is currently senator. Again, it's far more complex than saying "find a black dude and get him elected". A party isn't going to leave a senator elected for 20+ years to go find a black man to elect. A party also isn't going to pour millions of dollars on a long shot when it could just back the incumbent. Doing so would actually be playing the token game.

Was Barack Obama wealthy with a ****load of money to make his run?

Who said a candidate needed to be wealthy? I said it needed to have a ****load of money. That really is a fact. Hell, let's actually see how much of a fact that is using your example (Obama):

United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Democratic primary election, including seven candidates who combined to spend over $46 million, was the most expensive U.S. Senate primary election in history.

Then, in the actual race, Obama won against a carpetbagger - Alan Keyes, terrible fella - who was pretty much picked because Republicans had nobody to run against Obama. So, in short Obama's election as Senator can be mostly attributed to the terrible **** up that were the 2004 Illinois Republicans, him spending his way to winning the primary and the fact that he ran a campaign against a guy who was literally flown in last minute. The rest, as we know it, is history.

So why aren't the Democrats, the party that claims to be the only party that supports black Americans, more inclined to elect black Americans to the US Senate? Is it because blacks aren't interested in the position or because Democrats aren't interest in them as candidates, just as voting fodder?

What a false dichotomy. Lol, Democrats have elected the overwhelming majority of the black politicians in Congress for the past 100 years. That you're trying to make it seem as if their lack of Senators make Democrats uninterested in black candidates is pretty laughable and ignorant of actual American politics. What is more telling is that you've avoided the fact that Republicans are pretty much irrelevant when it comes to finding electable minorities in general. Why is that? ;)
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Yeah, for that to have any merit whatsoever, wouldn't we need to know the number of blacks who have run as republicans? Furthermore, why is that so astonishing when you consider that very few blacks even identify as republicans?

So... Whites Republicans won't vote for Black Republicans? ;)
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

So... Whites Republicans won't vote for Black Republicans? ;)

"Whites Republicans"? What's a "Whites Republicans"? :roll: Eeees tha lie a Browns Democrass?
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

No further proof required, your mischaracterizations speak for themselves. Champ.

Lmao, mischaracterizations? Because you say so? Get serious. I stated exactly who he was as a politician and his positions are worlds apart from those of modern Republicans. He was also viciously attacked by Democrats. Unless you've got some evidence to the contrary, you really should just slink away. Go on now, run along, this is no place for you to try and make your bones.
 
Re: R.I.P. mr. Senator

Lmao, mischaracterizations? Because you say so? Get serious. I stated exactly who he was as a politician and his positions are worlds apart from those of modern Republicans. He was also viciously attacked by Democrats. Unless you've got some evidence to the contrary, you really should just slink away. Go on now, run along, this is no place for you to try and make your bones.

Whatever, if it makes you feel better to pound your chest and claim false victory, knock yourself out. Champ.
 
Back
Top Bottom