Go Right Young Man

You BOLDLY assert documents. Can we see them? What is the source of your BOLD assertion?

I like your BOLD highlighting. This highlighting in BOLD is like engaging in a debate with the aid of a megaphone.

The documents that have been revealed here are your many posts that were clearly wrongheaded and mere attempts at obfuscation. No admission on your part that you were wrong? I’m surprised.

Regarding Reverend Wright, I’d disavow him, as Obama did, if I didn’t agree with much of what he said.

You’re accusing people on left leaning Web sites of being lemmings, is patently ridiculous. We know who the lemmings are. They have their eyes and ears glued to right wing media outlets, where they are indoctrinated with falsehoods, distortions, blatant racism, and fascist propaganda.

Facts, what facts? Facts are not your forte. Your forte is obfuscation.

Peetawonkus,

You have NO COMMENT when presented with evidence of some in the media desiring to arbitrarily paint Obama critics as racist?

It’s easy to yell racism when one is losing an argument.  And losing you are.  Huge. 

-

ITW, Peeta and now kerry,

THANK GOD you are, at best, 8% of the fringe from the Left.

Excuse me.  I feel quite ill once again.

“When discussing racism, a common tactic today is to counter accusations of racism with accusations of reverse racism. When discussing the issue of racism within the Tea Party movement, if a debater shifts the debate away from the issue of Tea Party racism, to other supposed instances of racism, real or imagined, I’ll argue that that shift away from the original issue has resulted from an inability to refute information that supports the contention that there is racism in the Tea Party movement.”

Documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Conspire To Label Critics As Racist

“And I think this threads the needle. If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction.”  We know the lemmings on Left leaning Web sites won’t question the facts.  They’ll eat it up.

That whole story seemed manufactured to me, just like
the ACORN incident.

  However,  I am on a website that discuses , Glen Beck,
as if he was worth discussing.

  Who , besides sensationalist idiots even keep up with
Glen Beck?  I can’t remember the last time I saw or
heard Glen Beck’s voice,  why would I want to?

  Debate the Glen Beck show…....Good Eugene Pulitzer.

If I was Obama ,  i would have replaced the
Sec. of Agriculture for suggesting her to resign without
an investigation.
  “You will be on Glen Beck tonight, so I want your
  resignation”.

  It shows how shallow Obama is and the cabinet he
selected is.

JDMysticDJ
I’m not sure how I led ITW into plagiarism but, um, you’re…welcome…?
BTW, I enjoy your posts, as well as those of ITW. Insightful and thorough.

Inherit The Wind

I’m in agreement with all your recent comments

JDMystic:

I would never intentionally plagiarize you…but they sure were good words!

GRYM is hopeless. 

If Sarah Palin said “We need to ship all Blacks back to Africa” he would find a way to claim that wasn’t racist.

If she then turned around and said “I never said that” he would find a way to counter any argument that the latter statement was a lie.

For any discussion to be made, you must first agree on the definition of words that are used.  GRYM has his own definitions of “Bigot”, “Racist”, “Honorable” and “Lie” that he changes as need be to meet the circumstance—and he counts on YOU having a set definition of those words and not recognizing his changing definitions.

It’s a sleazy, dishonest tactic, learned at the knee of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, John Boehner, and Mitch McConnell.

Peetawonkus

You have unintentionally led Inherit The Wind into plagiarism. I know my words when I read them. Not at all important though. I am in agreement with your posts.

Go Right Young Man

You ignore the testimonials by Peetawonkus and Lesleypalmer as if they don’t exist, as well as the missive by Mark Williams, and the admitted Tea Party racist who described recruiting at the Tea Party rallies.

You need to tune in to the latest news. Everyone now knows that the Breitbart video was edited out of context. The video involves Shirley Sherrod describing her awakening regarding racism, and her realization that race was not the issue of primary concern. The incident occurred 24 years ago, before she was a federal employee. She described to her audience the incident that enlightened her. She did more than walk the couple down the hall to an Attorney. She learned seven days before the foreclosure that the white Attorney she had connected the couple with was doing nothing to help them. She related how she did not give up on the couple and how she eventually connected the couple to a black Attorney who saved the couple’s farm from foreclosure. Ms. Sherrod states that she worked with the couple for two years and that they became good friends. The couple was interviewed and had nothing but praise for Ms. Sherrod. They adamantly refuted the suggestion that Ms. Sherrod was a racist, and they were outraged by the by the treatment she received.

The laughter you heard from the NAACP was nothing but a kind of recognition, and anticipation of what they new was to come in the story. They were laughing at racism, not laughing in approval of racism.

Tom Vilsak, Secretary of Agriculture, the man who fired Ms. Sherrod has publicly apologized profusely to her, and offered her job back.

Knowing you like I do, I know that you, like Breitbart, will deny the reality of the events. Breitbart has a long history of false accusations, and doctoring evidence, and he is making a fool of himself trying to claim he did nothing wrong. Even right wing bloggers are disavowing Breitbart. He claims the small segment of the video was all he had access to, but he will not identify the source for the video. I guess we’re supposed to accept his refusal to reveal his source as an example of journalistic integrity.

This has been a shameful incident and Breitbart is responsible for it. It was nothing more than an attempt to blunt the NAACP’s request that the Tea Party disavow the racists in its midst. Ben Jealous, head of the NAACP, and the white house’s knee jerk response to the deceitful video is also shameful. They should have known better than to take action based on a Breitbart video. Fox News has not commented yet.

“The Brooklyn district attorney announced the local ACORN office there hadn’t engaged in any criminal conduct—despite the hyperventilating by Breitbart and on Fox News. And in fact, a law enforcement source told the New York Daily News, the hidden-camera tapes James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles made of themselves posing as a prostitute and her boyfriend were “edited to meet their agenda.”

What amazes me is that, after the ACORN non-scandal, anyone in the White House would believe that Andrew Breitbart would present a video about one of his most hated organizations that was actually unbiased.

Instead of being gullible stenographers, it would be refreshing if the media would do its job for a change. I’m not a journalist, but a few investigative questions might have been asked of Breibart, such as: Why did you post the video if you didn’t have all of it, especially after making a statement about context mattering so much? Why did you say she was a federal employee at the time? Why did you then go on tv and say she was a racist if it wasn’t about her? How on earth can her lack of racism prove NAACP’s racism?

And this is for the ultra-right trolls on this site: don’t you guys get sick of being wrong all the time? Why don’t you go look for those Weapons of Mass Destruction and come back when you find them? I’m sure you’ll be welcomed as a liberator.

Glenn Beck last evening -before “news” broke of tape being edited- defended Ms. Sharrod and lambasted the Obama Administration for acting without all the facts and context.  I think Beck didn’t go far enough.  He should have included the media as well.

I too am guilty of doing something I should have known well not to do.  Comment on any “news” item in the first 48 hours.  Before doing any of my own research.

-

Mr. Beck also spent a good deal of time last evening discussing the evils of the Military Industrial Complex.  - What a Whack-Job “Neo-Con” the man is.

Peetawonkus, - “The sad truth is, the right wing can only makes its “points” by lies and distortion.”

-

Here we have the best example of the pervasive bigotry on this and other Web spaces, in coffee shops and in living rooms with children about.  This small individual has convinced himself that there are “Good Guys” and “Bad Guys” in Washington and in State Capitals across the nation. 

Sowing ignorance, unhinged hatred, and purposeful division and intolerance helps no one.  His progeny will grow to hate and fear roughly half the nation.

What is that makes this “progressive” thinker so intolerant while other like-minded more inclusive?

Vilifying MSNBC doesn’t change the facts. But these facts can be verified anywhere.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38321920/ns/us_news-life?Gt1=43001

The sad truth is, the right wing can only makes its “points” by lies and distortion.

A lesson for the White House
NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous: Is it true that Shirley Sherrod at the USDA has been caught on film making reactionary comments?
NAACP Employee: Yes Sir.
NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous: Contact the White House immediately
White House: Yes Mr. Jealous, we understand, this could end up on Glenn Beck tonight. Contact Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack immediately.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack: Yes Mrs. Sherrod, pull the car over now. The White House wants you to resign now, this will be on Glenn Beck tonight.
NAACP: Mr. Jealous, we have new information. I guess we should have watched the whole film.
NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous: Yes, that’s right, Mr. President, we seem to have jumped the gun, the whole film shows a differenent story. Say, you haven’t watched Glenn Beck have you?

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack: Yes, Shirley, nobody’s perfect. The NAACP seems to have panicked. Has Glenn Beck called you?

White House: Yes Mr. Vilsack, that’s right, talk nice, and slow, don’t get panicked. Here is what you will say. By the way, has Glenn Beck contacted you?

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack: that’s right folks, we will be looking at the whole picture, I mean the whole film. We will get this corrected.

White House: First, contact Pravda America, I mean MSNBC and CNN and tell them not to panic, we will tell them what to say. They will say, Fox News has caused the whole mess. Secondly, Tell Vilsack to send flowers to Shirley and to only speak to Vilsack. Lastly, for God sakes, put someone full-time watching Glenn Beck.

Only logical conclusion to this mess: The NAACP needs to invite Van Jones back for a second “Image” award, then the spotlight will be taken off of this truly embarrassing moment for the NAACP.

Can’t wait to read Robinson’s take on the Sherrod episode.  Though it appears to be a clever ruse, by Breitbart, that fooled the NAACP, they were mighty quick to condemn Sherrod and offer apologies——-methinks they have a guilty conscience.

“Setting aside the issue of children: I firmly believe that we should discuss issues such as slavery in terms of the pros and cons.  Why?  Because there are millions of people who believe in the pros. - We rarely change minds by ignoring an individual’s issues.”

Pros to slavery? Yes, they’re called Slave Owners. Only in the fevered dreams of ultra-right reactionaries in permanent attack mode could there be a “pro” to slavery. Sad to see another human being become such an eager tool in the service of so many wrong—and just plain mean—ideas.

kerryrose,

Let me begin by writing that I respect greatly your profession.  Commendable work.  I believe there is no higher calling.  I sincerely take no joy in disagreeing with you on how to teach children about slavery.  But disagree I do.

Setting aside the issue of children: I firmly believe that we should discuss issues such as slavery in terms of the pros and cons.  Why?  Because there are millions of people who believe in the pros. - We rarely change minds by ignoring an individual’s issues.

-

I have spent my adult life as an investigator.  My life’s work has been the study of human behavior.  That is the lens in which I view what is factual and what is opinion.  It saddens me greatly how so many a. fail to authentically listen b. do not distinguish facts from opinions.

-

I have not read the book you refer to.  I have, however, listened closely to those who make the same claims (voting against one’s best interest).  I see identical reasoning from those who claim to reside on both the political Left and political Right.  The root reasoning is identical.  It is truly a matter of opinion; which is derived from the starting point of the person laying out their opinions on the matter. 

Example: I read the book “Liberal Fascism”.  The author, a self-proclaimed conservative, lays out some very compelling arguments in regards to the roots of fascism and contemporary “progressive” thinkers.  All of his arguments were well reasoned and rooted in factual history, however, I disagree with a great many of his conclusions.  His opinions. - I also learned that calling someone a fascist today is almost useless as there are a myriad of definitions.

From my perspective as a “social liberal”, “fiscally conservative” moderate who believes in a smaller federal government and a greater roll for individual states, I personally see Progressivism as far more fascistic.  Far more dangerous to the public at large.  But, and I need to be clear on this, that is my “opinion”.  I believe it is the pinnacle of arrogance to believe otherwise.

From my chair I see most true “conservatives” as more humble, more accepting of different views and a great deal less elitist and/or arrogant.  That is what I see after 26 years of studying human nature.

As an aside: I have seen thousands of people act on the darker side of human nature.  A nature which every human being has residing within them.  ALL humans have this darker side.  However, I still do not fully understand or appreciate what makes one individual act on that dark side while another does not.

-

Back to the topic at hand:  In my career I have studied hundreds of sociological, physiologic and psychological studies.  I have never seen a study which illustrates one grouping of human beings as more or less bigoted and/or racist.  They simply do not exist.  I have, however, seen and heard several thousand opinions on the matter.  It always comes down to one’s perceptions.

A serious question:  You have your perceptions of what a Tea Party protesters is.  How many racially motivated incidents are you actually aware of?  Distinguish between the many opinions you have heard.  Put away for the moment your years of conditioning and reasoning in regards to your belief in Progressivism.  What are the hard facts?

GRYM needs to get a job. His Xbox must be on the fritz. Too much time on his hands, so he makes the same inane arguments with the same irrelevant “proof” points over and over and over…zzzzz

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/notes/tim-wise/faux-pression-racism-and-the-cult-of-white-victimhood/10150209253760459

GRYM

As far as being a bigot because I believe (it is a recognized phenomena) the middle class votes Republican for things not in their best interest, I can tell you that I think they are wrong to vote that way.  In fact, I think anyone who votes Republican is wrong especially when it hurts them.

I am a progressive.  I believe the fundamental ideology of conservatives is wrong.  Whether it is from ignorance, selfishness, or fear doesn’t make any difference to me although others have tried to explain it.

George Lakoff, cognitive scientist, wrote a book stating that the reason progressives lose the debates on issues is because they defend against conservative terminology instead of using a moral position.  Therefore all positions are equal morally, and they are not.  Lakoff states that conservatives have set the dialogue and progressives just respond in the same language.

For instance, although progressive ideology hinges on morality they refrain from making moral arguments.  A strong statement like, ‘It is wrong,’ garners the kind of response that you had to me.  ‘You’re a bigot, you think they are wrong!’

If progressives could learn to effectively frame their arguments in morals, alot of people who are deaf to them would begin to listen.

GRYM

The above is fact and documented not only by the book ‘What’s the Matter with Kansas’ that I mentioned but many others.  It is not an opinion, but a fact that has earned the interest of authors and sociologists.  I did not make it up, I have observed it and read about it.

Also, your inability to allow me to state an outcome about teaching which is observed from years of experience speaks to your rigid mindset with no experience of your own to counter… just what you charge… it is your opinion.

You had to notice that Barrack Obama sure didn’t pick

to promient black Americans to oversee the rebuilding

of Haiti…..nope, sent two ex-presidents that represent

everything about imperialist america that the Haitians

dispise.

I would say this Administrations response to

the disaster in Haiti was as close to being racist

poison that I have ever seen….....................

\  Eugene Robinson,,  Mr. Pulitzer…..

I believe it is a racist act to send 8 billion dollars
to Pakistan while black america is forced to live under
the conditions that they have to live here in America

  Mr. Pulitzer,  I believe Barrack Obama and Ms. Hilary
            Clinton racist SOBs for sending all the
            support they send to Israel to suppress
            freedom, while black america is forced
            to live under the conditions they have
            been forced to live
Mr. Pulitzer
  you,  Barrack Obama,  Ms. Hilary Clinton are racist
bigots…..GET IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!

Re Robinson: “Tea Party Express boasts on its website of having staged rallies featuring such speakers as Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter and one Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, better known as Joe the Plumber.”

Palin and her faux tea party crowd like to “talk the talk” about reducing the budget, but when it comes to “walking the walk” and actually tackling real wasteful spending issues like these duplicative private intelligence activities described in the recent WaPo article, you can bet they will all go AWOL:

——“The privatization of national security work has been made possible by a nine-year “gusher” of money, as Gates recently described national security spending since the 9/11 attacks.”

——“With so much money to spend, managers do not always worry about whether they are spending it effectively.”

——“Someone says, ‘Let’s do another study,’ and because no one shares information, everyone does their own study,” said Elena Mastors, who headed a team studying the al-Qaeda leadership for the Defense Department.

——“It’s about how many studies you can orchestrate, how many people you can fly all over the place. Everybody’s just on a spending spree. We don’t need all these people doing all this stuff.”

——“Another official, a longtime conservative staffer on the Senate Armed Services Committee, described it as “a living, breathing organism” impossible to control or curtail. “How much money has been involved is just mind-boggling,” he said. “We’ve built such a vast instrument. What are you going to do with this thing?”

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/national-security-inc

And the beat goes on Eugene Robinson,

you did good keeping the political debate of this
country to trivial gibberish.

P.S.  Robinson,  once again,  America is not a racist
nation,  it is the lawmakers and media pundits that
feed of this notion for their existance that make race
an issue.

  And P.S.  ....I hope and wish the NEW BLACK PANTHER
          PARTY WELL,  and I sure hope they
          educate the blacks what is in their own
          self-interest.
The imprisonment rate of black males is still unexceptable,  so is the black unemployment rate.
And for those that don’t like Van Jones,  tough.
Is he supposed to make himself acceptable to you?????/

Keep people separated so they spend all their time arguing with each other.  That way, they can’t unite to form a civic body large enough to have influence on their government.

The ploy is as old as the hills, literally.  And racism is one of the issues that has been used most successfully to keep people divided.

Everybody is subject to accusations of being “racist” because most people are concerned about being—or at least claiming to be—at least “as good as” others, preferably “better than” others.

Of all the “hot button” issues, “racism” is perhaps the hottest because white people have been making so much of their “superiority” for so long. 

Considering that there are so many millions of people who are not “white” (even if that designation (whiteness) can be made to seem credible!) but are all shades and varieties of tans, browns. reds and blacks, it is pretty amazing that the “colored” peoples have not got together and killed all the “white” people.

That would seem to argue in favor of the superior generosity and understanding of all the “colored” peoples who have been so systematically abused by “white” people over the centuries.

PS 1—The idea of “white” supremacy is not borne out by any facts except those construed by “white” people to support their point of view, established worldwide by—guess what—killing, exploiting and enslaving “colored” people on a systematic basis of force and violence.

PS2—I am not proud to be a “white” person, but regret it, though there is nothing I could have done to avoid it.  That’s the thing about race—you can’t avoid who you are, even if you want to. But my point is—whitness nothing to be proud of, considering centuries of historical evidence.

By kerryrose,

“There is no bigotry to recognize how many middle class and lower middle class people vote Republican against the policies that are not in their best interest.”

Are you claiming that the above is a fact and not your derogatory opinion?

“Also, for someone who rants about how careful one should be about name-calling, you are pretty trigger happy with defamatory words.”

Actually I am not quick at all.  Your comment, reflective of how you view the world, is rooted in learned, intolerant/bigoted, perception.  Not unlike Sean Hannity.

Also, how many 9 year olds do you know?  I know hundreds, so I am in a better position to judge the impact of curriculum on a class.

I think you’ll understand when I write that I have little faith in your perceptions.  I am certain we disagree on how to “discuss” weighty issues with children.  I take no joy in writing that.

-

I think you believe that “those people”, those ignorant,  unwashed, republicans and Tea party people, are beneath you and “unenlightened” Neanderthals who don’t know any better.  Feel free to tell me I’m wrong.

Maani,

I have now seen an extended version of the Sherrod video.  It seems Iwe did see and hear Ms. Sherrod tell a group of people how she had had a harder time helping a white farmer.  We did see and hear her explain in some detail how she took the white farmer to a white lawyer.  I did hear the NAACP crowd laugh at the incident.  I also heard her tell the crowd that she had “learned something” from her racism.  Good for her.  The video, however, remains legitimate to any honest observer.

It may interest you to know that FOX News did not report on the video until after Ms. Sherrod resigned her position.  It made the news cycle because she lost her position.

GRYM

There is no bigotry to recognize how many middle class and lower middle class people vote Republican against the policies that are not in their best interest.

As a matter of fact the book ‘What’s wrong with Kansas’ is just about that phenomena.

Also, for someone who rants about how careful one should be about name-calling, you are pretty trigger happy with defamatory words.

Also, how many 9 year olds do you know?  I know hundreds, so I am in a better position to judge the impact of curriculum on a class.

kerryrose - “No You’re wrong GRYM.  What 5th graders understand from the discussion is that the financial gain (pros) of enslaving a human being are a justifiable defence against the crime of enslavement.

This either prepares students to excuse slaveholders, whether they grow up to be (metaphorically) a slaveholder, or a slave.

-

I passionately believe you are wrong.  Nearly every 9 year old I know will fully grasp how the cons of slavery outweigh the pros. 

As far as your last statement is concerned: “Does this sound like a lower middle class person voting Republican against their own best interests?” <—GOOD GOD YOU ARE A BIGOT!  A small-minded, unapologetic, bigot!

Inherit The Wind, - ““Get rid of your racist elements” is translated by Palin to “The NAACP is calling me a racist.’ ‘Wretched lying fascist bitch.”

-

As you well know I have read the Dionne article myself.

For the seventh time I ask very plainly:  Can you show us the lies you write of?  Do you have anything tangible in support of what you claim?  Anything will do.

Yelling racist, racist, racist is NEVER enough.  Crying liar, liar, liar is simply never enough. I am certain you understand. One day, in some way, you are forced to produce something tangible.  Something real.

You make some extremely dangerous charges.  Do you have anything, anything at all, in support?

GRYM

If you read my posts I wouldn’t need to repeat myself.  Not all racists are equal because there are racists everywhere.  The racists that need to be exposed are the ones that have the power, politically or socially, to impose that ideology on others, and to make them suffer.

kerryrose, July 20 at 8:33 pm #

Yes,the US practices racist policies, and Obama’s reverend made racist statements.

But this article is about the evident racism in the Tea Party.  Why does everyone counter with other forms of racism?

Other forms of racism don’t excuse or diminish Tea Party racism.

-

We finally agree, kerryrose.  I can honestly write that I agree with everything above.

Now if you could revisit how and why we disagree.  Why are you so willing to ignore “other evident forms” of bigotry and racism in order to attack forms of bigotry and racism?  Is it due to your stated belief that not all forms of bigotry are created equal?  Do you have any examples of positive bigotry?  Positive racism?

And no.  I do not believe you are honorable.  I don’t believe it because you don’t believe it.

For the sixth time I ask:  Where did you learn of Sarah Palin claiming that the NAACP had called her racist?  Did you perceive it or, did she actually say it?  Did you imagine it, or can you show us in a real and tangible way that she “lied” about this?
**********************

Read the article by EJ Dionne!  How can such disingenuous mealy-mouthed twister of facts and defender of every fascist on the right and every fascist lie from the right DARE to call anyone “dishonorable”?

No
You’re wrong GRYM.  What 5th graders understand from the discussion is that the financial gain (pros) of enslaving a human being are a justifiable defence against the crime of enslavement.

This either prepares students to excuse slaveholders, whether they grow up to be (metaphorically) a slaveholder, or a slave.

Does this sound like a lower middle class person voting Republican against their own best interests?

Mark Williams is not a satirist. To be a satirist, one must be educated and, preferably, not a bigot.

I, like some others on this thread, have been to a tea party rally.  Since the people at the rally assumed I was one of them, they felt free to say what they wanted. Practically every conversation I engaged in and most of the comments I overheard were racist.

People who defend the Tea Party are in profound denial.

Maani, - “Re the Shirley Sherrod incident, it has now been exposed as a fraud perpetrated by the Tea Party:”

-

Exposed how?  By CNN reporting that the NAACP now claims fraud?  With sincerity I write; we can’t be that incurious, correct?

I saw ms. Sharrod quite clearly say that she had a harder time helping a white farmer when so many black farmers had been injured.  How she walked the “white farmer” down the hall to a “white lawyer”.  How the NAACP crowd felt her comments tickled them.  - I DO NOT believe NAACP crowds are inherently more racist than any other crowd.  That is NOT my position in the least.

Can you imagine if Rush Limbaugh handed all black callers off to Walter Williams?  Can you imagine the literal lynch mob that would rise from that?  Can you imagine the lynch mob backing off simply because Limbaugh releases a statement that what we witnessed was not what we all witnessed?  Honestly?

If the video turns out to be nefarious I will retract quickly.  I’m not retracting simply because the injured party, the NAACP, claims what I witnessed myself is not what I witnessed myself.

Another problem for Mr. Robinson?
First: The NAACP attacks the Tea Party for racial overtones (by some members) right after comments by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs saying that the Republicans could be taking control of the House of Representatives in November’s election.
Second: The NAACP’s leaders and President Benjamin Todd Jealous gave Anthony “Van” Jones an NAACP Image Award. President Jealous says Van Jones is a “National Treasure.” While Van Jones may have left the White House under a cloud, the NAACP says that’s not his whole story. The group considers him a pioneering hero for the environment and civil rights. Jones resigned in September 2009 from his position on the Council on Environmental Quality, under a firestorm of criticism over a petition he had signed. The NAACP keeps saying he is the most misunderstood man. Is he misunderstood because he’s a 9/11 Truther? Is he misunderstood because he’s a self avowed Communist? Is he misunderstood because he is a guy who defended Mumia Abu Jamal, the cop killer? Let’s see. We know where Van Jones stands on Marx. The question now is: Where does the “New” NAACP stand on Marx?Where does the “New” NAACP stand on the Black Panther party? Does the NAACP’s timing seem strange considering the November election is just around the corner and after Gibbs comments there seems to be panic? The NAACP would never use “the race card” would they?
Third: the case that involves the New Black Panther Party members accused of intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place in November 2008 has been abandoned by the Obama Administration save for a narrowly tailored injunction against one member—but the case heated up two weeks ago when ex-Justice official J. Christian Adams testified that the Justice Department was showing a bias in favor of black defendants. Adams spoke before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which is investigating the handling of the case. “If Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and his department are not colorblind in enforcing civil rights laws, they should be nailed,” he wrote. “If the Commission on Civil Rights’ investigation is purely partisan, that should be revealed.

Mr. Robinson, a Pulitzer winner for outstanding commentary, got it far from outstandingly accurate on several counts. First, there was no screaming, but rather thoughtful speeches about taxes, debt, deficits, government waste, the nation’s founding principles, and the problem of burdening our children and grandchildren with unsustainable levels of debt and taxation.
Second, one could hardly say that the “Tea Party phenomenon” has been “overhyped,” except in a negative way by the mainstream media and by establishment politicians. Right from the start, Nancy Pelosi warned that Tea Partiers were Nazis because she saw a picture of a swastika at an event. There were a few swastikas and Hitler pictures (plus some occasional pictures of hammers and sickles and Lenin and Che), but those were anti-Nazi, anti-totalitarian and anti-Communist expressions, examples of the threat to individual liberty from overblown government and overreaching politicians.
Third, I was there and I’m no devotee of the gold standard, no devotee of Sarah Palin, not a lobbyist for an insurance company or any other capitalist enterprise, not a Medicare recipient, not an outright racist or a masquerading one, and not a fat-cat professional politician pretending to be an outsider.

On the “birther” part, but if it was me and millions of people thought I was a foreign interloper, a pinko from Kenya, I’d just produce the original birth certificate.
I’m not a ‘constitutionalists’ who hasn’t read the Constitution. I’ve read it and I have a pocket-size copy of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, courtesy of the Cato Institute, in my glove compartment.
Robinson concludes by saying that “American public opinion seems to have become an unguided Weapon of Mass Suspicion.” In fact, that’s exactly what Robinson has done in his ridiculing of the Tea Party. He’s allowed his suspicions to distort his objectivity and destroy his credibility.

The issue is that the money the American people have invested in Social Security has been squandered by the government, their 401-K money has been gambled away in high-risk insurance schemes, government mandates have forced banks to give mortgage money to millions of unqualified borrowers, Medicaid and Medicare are going bankrupt, there’s a gold-plated revolving door connecting the thieves on Wall Street with the political crooks in Washington, and now we’re supposed to hand over our healthcare to these government geniuses.

The result is that four out of five Americans now say they don’t trust the federal government to solve their problems, according to a recent Pew Research Center survey, and nearly one in three says he government is a “major threat” to their freedoms.

And the Tea Parties are the problem? Come on, Mr. Robinson, let’s be real.

Seems like racism is only condemned by some…including the NAACP when it involves groups that have White majorities…and it is quite alright for Obama and his family to attend a racist church for 20+ years..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM

kerryrose, - “The pros and cons of slavery.  Do you believe the pros of slavery are something to be discussed with anyone let alone a 5th grade class?”

-

YES!  Absolutely yes!  All of life is pros and cons.  Discussing exactly that is the best way to teach life’s most important lessons, the best way to learn and the best way to avoid narrowness of thought and context.  What better way to teach children to arrive at their own conclusions about slavery.  Teach everyone how the cons of slavery far outweigh the pros, YES!  Unless, of course, we all want to pretend there are not many millions of people across the globe who believe in the pros of slavery today.

We cannot simply discuss your view of American history.  If fact discussing only the cons of slavery is likely the best way to return to slavery.

-

Teach the pros and cons of slavery to 9 year olds?  After a few minutes of thought, yes.  I am certain that if we teach the pros and cons, leaving out all commentary, 5th graders will grasp the evils of slavery still practiced all over the globe.  I sincerely believe a nine year old will fully grasp how and why slavery is an issue always worth speaking out and acting against.  In fact, I believe many adults have forgotten many of the things most 9 year olds inherently understand.

I am sincerely taken aback by your question.  Yes!  Teach exactly that.  The pros and cons to slavery.

GRYM:

Re the Shirley Sherrod incident, it has now been exposed as a fraud perpetrated by the Tea Party:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/20/agriculture.employee.naacp/index.html?hpt=C1

Peace.

Yes,the US practices racist policies, and Obama’s reverend made racist statements.

But this article is about the evident racism in the Tea Party.  Why does everyone counter with other forms of racism?

Other forms of racism don’t excuse or diminish Tea Party racism.

Am trying to remember if the NAACP made any comments about the racist, anti-Semitic and anti-American remarks the Rev. “God Damn America” Wright made in the racist church that Obama attended for 20+ years.  Even after Obama was in the WH…Wright complained that those JEWS won’t let him get near Obama….Any complaints from the NAACP????

Eugene Robinson, do you want to expose some racism???

How about exposing the U.S.  racist economic policy with
our neighbor , MEXICO.

Or,  the Depleted Uranium Warheads used on missles
all over the Muslim world that makes for mutant babies
and dead mothers and fathers….

Huh Eugene????  Come on man ....hate the racism, Pulitzer

Dave Z

Having a moral problem with racist or discriminatory behavior is not hatred.  It is the mainstream media solution to banality.  Everything deserves an equal hearing, and don’t take a moral or ethical stand on any issue.

Not all positions are equal.  There is equality and there is inequity.  There is acceptance and tolerance and there is discrimination and bigotry.

I teach a fifth grade class from a Texas inspired text book.  In the Civil War curriculum we are supposed to debate the pros and cons of slavery.

The pros and cons of slavery.  Do you believe the pros of slavery are something to be discussed with anyone let alone a 5th grade class?

ITW,

I sincerely hope one day you will come to understand the myriad differences in “lying” and having “a different point of view”. 

And no.  I do not believe you are honorable.  I don’t believe it because you don’t believe it. 

For the sixth time I ask:  Where did you learn of Sarah Palin claiming that the NAACP had called her racist?  Did you perceive it or, did she actually say it?  Did you imagine it, or can you show us in a real and tangible way that she “lied” about this?

-

Yelling racist, racist, racist is never enough.  Crying liar, liar, liar is simply not enough.

Tolerance, ITW.  Tolerate different points of view.  Learn that honorable people can disagree.  Human beings can disagree tolerably and respectfully.

Dave Zx3,

it is probably because i have been so obnoxious.
trying my best.

However , there is a political scam that has been going
on in this country since the end of WWII that has
devestated this nation and many others.
  It has been a total collusion by both the Dems and Pubs.
Every election time, like clockwork,  the Dems accuse
the Pubs of racism and the Pubs accuse the Dems of
Tax and Spend….it is by design.
that is all that I have been trying to expose !!!!!!!!!!!!

ofersince72, - “We may be 180 degrees.  But we are still back to back on this issue”

-

We do often disagree.  I appreciate that we both allow the other their respect.

-

There is a very dangerous game afoot.  When anyone makes a charge of racism in the United States they better damn well prove it.  And prove it beyond all doubt.  It’s always treated as serious amongst Americans.

I have seen five clear incidents of racial animosity amongst those who claim to identify with the protesters.  This, we are told by narrow minded bigots, is proof of wide-spread racism.  It’s not enough.  Not enough by far!  Not five amongst the crowds we have witnessed.

A bigot is one filled with hate and/or intolerance for others unlike themselves. Well, the open hatred and deafening intolerance is certainly on display from all sides and toward all sides.  To suggest that “those people” are bad (democrat), or that “my people” are good (Tea Party), is, by definition, practiced bigotry. - Of course it works in the reverse as well.  Only a narrow mind would believe otherwise.

-

Unless a group is, by its roots and its goals, racially motivated, there is absolutely no evidence that any group of human beings are more or less bigoted or racial than another.  None whatsoever.  Bigots believe otherwise.  They have no real evidence of it, mind you. But rather a deep seated and learned perception.

I have given several examples of, what is generally thought of as, racist thought and actions.  Some of it very serious, e.g. a government official giving lessor preference to certain peoples of color, kill cracker babies, white devil.  Some of it not so serious e.g. Hymie Town, clean articulate black man.  All displayed by the Left side of politics.  Is the Left in this nation racist?  Or are they being human?

Jesse Jackson once explained that when walking at night and hearing footsteps from behind, how relieved he is when the people approaching him are not black males.  Does this suggest Jackson to be racist?  Are black men generally racist?  Democrats?  Inherently racist?  A myopic mind would think so.

Imagine Jackson’s very same sentiments coming from Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, or Mitch McConnell. 

If 90% of “white America” had voted for the white guy in the last election there may be something to this charge of racism.  The fact is, however, the very same margins of voters cast their ballets for President Obama as cast ballots for Gore in 2000 and Clinton before him.  Where, I ask, is the racism?

I see “black America” as having acted predictably human.  Nothing less.  But if we apply the reasoning in which we are witnessing on this Web space, then it demands that we label black Americans, as well as the democrat party, as rooted in bigotry and racism.

-

Yelling racist is a serious charge.  Extremely dangerous in America.  One better damn well prove it past one’s own narrow perceptions and myopic bigotry.

Rico,

Thanks for the kudos, I mean it.

I don’t know about Shabbazz, but the New Black Panthers Party is not much more than a few racist loudmouths that stole a much more influential party’s name.  They aren’t the Black Panthers any more than that Democratic Republic of North Korea is democratic.  They are nothing. They aren’t even a real party.  They were ignored by DOJ because they weren’t big enough to worry about.

You CAN turn off your messaging.  There’s a switch for it.

ITW:

You make a valid observation concerning the rules of debate. “Oh, yeah? Well what about…” is indeed not a valid refutation of a charge. But I’m pretty sure the error is committed by both sides of a given truthdig debate. I look for some examples.

Having said that, I am willing to stipulate that the Tea Party movement is rife with racists and bigots. I’ll go so far as to say that it is the glue that holds the movement together.

So, what about Shabaz and the NBPP? Did they get a pass or not. Would the DoJ have dropped the case if the two guys hanging out in front of the voting hall were skinheads?

I don’t usually agree with what ofersince72 has to say, but I have to agree, at least in part, with his statements on this thread.

I think America is getting over its racism, though I would admit that there is still a ways to go.  As the younger generations grow up, racism disappears slowly but surely.  The barriers are certainly coming down when Tiger Woods gets the biggest applause at the Masters in August, Ga.  And, obviously, the election of Barack Obama has to say something. 

But apparently we will never be rid of hatred, which manifests in many ways.  Some hate Christians, some hate Jews, some hate communists, some hate blacks, some hate crackers, some hate homosexuals, etc etc.  Most Truthdiggers hate Teabaggers, Glenn Beck, conservatives and republicans and demonstrate it daily.

Hatred and intolerance for those different is a character flaw in a large portion of humanity.  Hatred is not racism, but may appear to be racist in nature.  Groups of people hate other groups of people for many reasons, with the primary one, IMO being insecurity in their own selves. 

So what is the difference between hatred of a group of people based on their politics and hatred of a group of people based on their race or culture. 

I would submit that there is nothing at all different, both representing insecurity in the hater regarding a group which poses some sort of threat, real or imagined. 

Character flaws are not illegal, however.  Lying and hating, two of the worst, are perfectly legal.  And nasty words like cracker, nigger, spic, wap, are not illegal.  Most hatred is protected as free speech until it manifests as actual physical harm to another. 

So, I guess my point is, what makes you think that your character flaw of venomous hatred against the tea party, George W. Bush, Jews, or whatever, is more righteous than someone elses hatred against, lets say illegal immigrants stealing their jobs? 

One or the other may have a connotation of racism attached, in that the hatred is directed against a group that shares a common characteristic of race, and others might not. 

But what is the difference?  Why do liberals think they can express intense hatred against others with an air of righteousness?  At their core, they are as big a problem as those they hate, if not bigger.

The liberals hatred is is no better or worse than whatever hatred may be in the mind of a teabagger, if any.  And in truth, I see a lot more hatred on the pages of TruthDig than I do at TeaParty rallys. 

If there is any worth to any so-called progressive movement, you would think one of their main goals would be to eliminate all this intense hatred in their own ranks.  It is not any different than what they are blaming everyone else for.

Mark Williams has got to be a red herring.

How can a national movement progress with spokespeople like this?

Ron Paul was right in his view of the Tea Party.  “This tea tastes funny”.

GRYM

Just admit the Tea Party is a bunch of right wing, middle class, white Republicans who generally do not like black people, brown people, different cultures, and poor people.

Just admit it and stop filling up my inbox with your nonsense.

GRYM invents things he thinks I said yet again.  This borders on flat-out lying.  He’s the one who likes to tell people they are not honorable:

“The argument you found so insightful is, well, quite shallow.  What ITW was trying to argue is that if someone proffers the least argument in favor of the Tea Party, no matter how well intentioned or reasoned, that argument cannot hold merit because it does not agree with his views.”

No, GRYM. What I said was specific and SOLELY about racism in the TeaParty.  And it’s true. EVERY accusation of racism about the TeaParty is countered with some accusation of racism on the left. It’s never actually refuted, so the playground game of “Well, he’s doing it too!” is used.

You like to pull up this one incident of a tiny bunch of obnoxious (and racist) loonies two years ago as you SOLE argument against myriad racist incidents, statements and “codewords” by TeaParty regulars.

In fact, in your post you YET AGAIN refused to address the issue of racism in the TeaParty, instead lashing out with verbal assaults, accusations and flat-out untruths.

You are as much an irrational religious fanatic as a talibanista, only for your radical political views.

NABNYC, - “The teaparty movement began based on one issue only:  these people are racists, and are horrified that we have a black president.  They had nothing to oppose when they got started, and their signs reflected that lack of substance.  “Give me my country back.”  What does that mean?  It means we’ve got a black president.”

-

There is nothing racial in the words “I want my country back”.  Nothing whatsoever. 

I am not a Tea Party member.  I have never attended a Tea party rally.  What I have done is listen.  When people within the Tea Party openly say “I want my country back’ means no big government and no socialized medicine I take that to mean no big government and no socialized medicine.  Why are you making it an issue of race?

If one does not know what “I Want My Country back” means then that person did not truly listen.

-

You write how the Tea Party had nothing to oppose when they got started.  Is it really unfathomable to you that roughly half the nation voted for someone else?  Do you recall the eggs thrown at President-Elect Bush on inauguration day?  Was that racism against the white man? - If someone had thrown eggs at President-Elect Obama there would be no convincing some that the violent act was racially motivated.

-

Let me share an example of your thinking:

MSNBC talk show host Chris Matthews asked Rep. Bob Inglis, R-S.C., last Wednesday why Republicans in his state would nominate an Indian-American, Nikki Haley, for governor, and a black, Tim Scott, for Congress, even though “they’ve got a problem with a black president?”

Mathews’ reasoning, such as it is, goes something like this: Republicans and Tea partiers oppose President Barack Obama’s policies. Mr. Obama is (half) black. Therefore, tea partiers and republicans oppose Mr. Obama’s policies because he is black.

It seems not to have occurred to Mr. Matthews that the “problems” South Carolina Republicans have with Mr. Obama have nothing to do with the color of his skin.

I maintain that the absence of evidence of the Tea Party being singularly racist makes Chris Mathews the bigot.  It is Mathews who is placing a GREAT DEAL of importance on the color of the president’s skin.  He seems utterly incapable of imagining anyone opposing “the good” Barack Obama for any other reason but his pigmentation.

The teaparty movement began based on one issue only:  these people are racists, and are horrified that we have a black president.  They had nothing to oppose when they got started, and their signs reflected that lack of substance.  “Give me my country back.”  What does that mean?  It means we’ve got a black president.

This story is less about teabaggers and more about the punitive and harsh measures taken against anyone who speaks the truth about what’s going on.  It’s usually someone non-white or a female who objects to racism or sexism.  The entire right-wing then focuses on that person or institution and sets out to destroy them.  That’s what’s happened to the NAACP.  What did they say?  The teabaggers are racists.  (They are).  What have I seen on the media since then?  Hours of coverage of the NAACP head guy and some teabagger.  What is there to discuss?  From what I’ve seen, the NAACP is repeatedly being assaulted with demands that it apologize for speaking the truth, and the arrogant pointy-hate sheet-wearing teabaggers act all indignant that anyone would call them racists.  But they are.

Then this morning we see a black woman fired because she said the obvious, that white men receive more help in this country than do non-whites or women.  Because she spoke the truth, she has been fired. 

Truth is the enemy.  Anybody who says the truth must be destroyed.

Peetawonkus, July 20 at 12:59 pm

How you did completely miss ITW’s rationalization. 

The argument you found so insightful is, well, quite shallow.  What ITW was trying to argue is that if someone proffers the least argument in favor of the Tea Party, no matter how well intentioned or reasoned, that argument cannot hold merit because it does not agree with his views.

In other words; any argument which does not portent the Tea Party to be racist should be disqualified.  Any argument which does not uphold the same views should be thought of as “changing the subject matter”.  - I’m sorry but that is not “insightful”.  It’s a MASSIVE rationalization intended to shut down all opposing points of view.

Kerryrose, - “The racists to worry about are those with political or social power who have the ability to act out on racist ideology.  The Tea Party fits that definition.”

-

People do write and say what you wrote above.  What I have not seen, however, is actual evidence of the Tea Party as a singular concern. 

Does your evidence to fear the Tea Party mimic the predominately democrat Black Panther party?  Or Shirley Sherrod’s open racism within the USDA?  Or the predominately democrat voting NAACP crowd which thought her open description of racial preference humorous enough to laugh about?  Or the much derided comments of Joe Biden toward candidate Obama?  or the 90% of black American who voted for the black candidate?  Or democrat Jessi Jackson referring to New York as Hymie town?  Or the predominately democratic voting Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan’s open disdain for Jews and references to white devils etc.?  Is this the type of party (group) affiliation you are thinking of?  If it is then the democratic party is, according to your standards, rife with open and vile racism and bigotry. 

Exactly what is it that makes the Tea Party more racist than all of the above or, for that matter, any other grouping of human beings?

Note: As I wrote in another recent and relevant thread.:  Obviously both the KKK and Black Panther Parties are racist groups with racist agendas.

Nice try Eugene Robinson,  but no cigar, go back to

the WAPO and play this racist card.

  America is not a racist nation, 
just its lawmakers their political pundit friends in the
media.

A real delemma for Americans isn’t it???

You’re damned if you do,  and you’re damned if you don’t

We put ourselves in this position, nobody else did,
we did it all by ourselves and we need to straighten it,
all by ourselves.

  If you are looking to the Democrat Party for an ally,
they will take you the cleaners just as fast as a
republican will, already have.  Eight billion for projects
in Pakistan while our infastructure is falling apart and
black American males unemployment rate probably at thirty
per cent or better.  Take a stroll through the gettos,
most blacks even fear this.  Democrat Mayors, Republican
Mayors,  Democrat Governors,  Republican Governors…..
A judicial system that is not only a worldwide joke,
shameful to our country.

I have been saying this same thing for at least six
months here on Truth Dig and will repeat it again,

From now until election time the Democrats are going to
be stirring the racist pot as much as they are allowed
to get away with it.

  They are desperate,  they have to have the black vote
to win anything.  What better way than to point a racist
finger at a fringe element.
  America is not a racist nation,  but both the political
parties are,  and the media helps them stir the racist
pot to keep the “split and conquer” vote alive.

We may be 180 degrees

But we are still back to back on this issue
Go_Right_Young_Man.

Has anyone commenting on this thread ever experienced
personally any racist act by someone that called themself
a tea bagger??

I am not a member of a tea party, nor am i defending
them. 
  I am pointing out that the Democrat history shows
them to be equally as a racist organization in their
lawmaking as the republicans.

  I ask , why,  with a 60 vote filibuster proof Senate,
a huge majority in the House,  and a Democrat President

why were they not able to force an up and down vote
for federal voting rights for the D.C.,,,, instead
they let the republican party add amendments that made
that bill unpassable. also they decided, if such voting
should ever take place, that the whites needed another
federal district added for them, the Democrats also agreed
to this….

  the Democrats,  as well as the Republicans are a
racist organization.  Both parties collude against blacks
as witnessed by the black unemployment rate, the city
gettos, the black public education system, ect, ect, ect.

A regular poster to this website, ITW, someone quite insightful, left this behind once while addressing this topic:

“When discussing racism, a common tactic today is to counter accusations of racism with accusations of reverse racism. When discussing the issue of racism within the Tea Party movement, if a debater shifts the debate away from the issue of Tea Party racism, to other supposed instances of racism, real or imagined, I’ll argue that that shift away from the original issue has resulted from an inability to refute information that supports the contention that there is racism in the Tea Party movement.”

Go Right Young Man,

‘Group’ of people refers to organized group not racial or cultural group. The Klu Klux Klan is a racist ‘group’ of people.  The Tea Party has given evidence of harboring racist views, subsequently having an unspoken racist agenda.

There are racists with every race and culture, but not all racists are equal.  The racists to worry about are those with political or social power who have the ability to act out on racist ideology.  The Tea Party fits that definition.

kerryrose,

I don’t know what you believe.  I can only repeat what I can prove.

Those who have convinced themselves that today’s opposition to the president is based on the color of his skin are the true bigots and/or racists.

a. The current president was elected by the same basic margins as the previous president. b. The opposition to the previous president fall within the same margins as the opposition to the current president. c. The current president is half black.  The previous white. d. The previous president was republican.  The current a democrat.  e. The margins which elected the current democrat president are the same as voted for the previous two democrat candidates.  f. The same margin of republicans voted against the current black democrat president as voted against the former white democrat president.

Conclusion: Clearly politics was the driving factor in electing the current president.  Not, as bigots would have us believe, skin color.

-

90% of Black Americans voted for the Black candidate.  What does this tell us?  It tells us all that black Americans are human beings.  Some people hold a different view.

If you believe Eugene Robinson is correct in his narrow views then you will, necessarily, be forced to admit that the vast majority of Black Americans, and by extension the whole of the democrat party, is racist or bigoted.  I don’t believe that.  I believe that to be an extreme view held by narrow-minded bigots.

-

I have a question about your views:  Can you show us a sociology study which illustrates one group of human beings as more or less racist or bigoted than another?  If you can I will give great weight to Mr. Robinson’s views.  Baring that, however, I will continue to stress that only extreme bigots believe they can denigrate whole groups of people based on color, politics, ideology or geography.

Tea Partiers also deny coming from immigrant forebears.  I guess they think they sprouted from US soil from some kind of seeds. 

Conservatives of all stripes share one common feeling and agenda: FEAR

They ruled the US during the Reagan years with fear of Soviet threats and Reagan outspent the Russkies until Gorbie gave up - ignoring the huge deficits, of course.
They took over Congress in 1994 with the fear of Democrat taxes (even though Clinton built up huge surpluses).
They ruled the roost for the 8 years prior to Obama with fear of terrorists, again generating huge deficits.
And here they come again, using fear to take back Congress - fear of “huge tax increases”, fear of “socialism” and “communism”.  In reality, the taxes only go BACK up on the wealthy who made out during the Bush years.  “Socialism” merely bailed out the very wealthy, the banks, the big businesses, and the car companies.

I guess liberals can take solace in the knowledge that we fear very few things - even conservatives and their bogey men.

Since the blacks have been marginalized by both
the Democrat and Republican parties over the years with
no end in sight…

  It is not suprising that there might be a
New Black Panther Party that educates the blacks that
their loyalty to the Democrat Party is mistaken and
foolish.

Right wing diversionary tactic #1: don’t attack the validity of the message. That would require you to engage in facts and evidence—a slippery slope for right-wingers. Instead, attack the messenger.

So let’s look at one aspect of the latest right-wing strategy for dealing with allegations of racism within the Tea Party. This tit-for-tat approach presupposes all racism is equal.

Since they’ve been caught at it, after a fury of
hysterical (and increasingly racist) denials, they’ve decided to point fingers and say, in true apologist fashion, “Racists are everywhere and within every group!” True. One major difference is that in the United States, however, blacks and other minorities have never been in a position of power. There do indeed exist black racists and Korean racists and Native American racists—but they’re not running major corporations or holding political office in the United States. In other words, they’re not in a position to politically impose their racist will on anyone beyond a few unlucky individuals.

Tea Baggers, who espouse an ultra-right-wing political ideology, have often found themselves at the same rallies with Christian dominionist and white supremacist individuals. The Tea Party clearly seeks political power and are on the verge of gaining it. If the Tea Party cannot and will not address the racists and tin-foil hat crazies within their group, then they are no better than a mob. Either they stand for something that is civil, decent, wholly and inclusively American, or they don’t.

Who was the party in the majority when the funding for
ACORN was pulled?

  What party was in majority in Congress when the 100:1
crack to powder cocaine sentencing was concocted?

  Why do we only see Tea Party movement stuff on national
TV?

  Both parties actions are equally racists.

The first thought that crops in my mind when i think of africans is the fact that i wldn`t be here if blacks of afrika had not adapted for survival in afrika and then over eons spread northward and eastward.

These first humans gave birth to shemitic peoples, indians, chinese, germanics, slavs, goths, gaels, et al.

OK, blacks `acchieve` less now— to bad whites did not `achieve` less also- but in infinity of time who knows who wld be next best `achievers`? 

But what are we really `achieving`? A better serfdom and soon even slavery? tnx

Peeta:

That was quite an apology.

How would you feel about a Tea Partyer making the same excuses for Mark Williams?

The story that FOX and their right-wing minions is pushing revolves around an incident on election day 2008 in which several men from a small, fringe organization called the New Black Panther Party (NBPP — no relationship to the original Black Panther Party) stood in front of a polling place in a majority Black voting district, one of them carrying a nightstick.

The Bush Justice Department charged them with civil voter intimidation charges, after deciding that the case didn’t meet the bar for criminal charges.

After Obama took office, the Department of Justice dropped most of the remaining charges, saying that they weren’t supported by the facts and the law, while obtaining an injunction against the man who had been carrying a nightstick.

No “victim” — white or otherwise — has come forward to say he or she was intimidated by the NBPP members on the day in question.

But in FOX’s hands, the story has become that the case was dropped because of anti-white policies in the Obama administration, with Andrew Breitbart and host David Asman effectively calling the president a racist. CNN’s has also followed FOX’s lead without much fact checking.

FOX’s story, which sidesteps a mountain of facts, is based solely on the allegations of J. Christian Adams, a former Republican DOJ attorney who claims that the Obama administration dropped the New Black Panther Party case because of race.

Even the most basic digging reveals that Adams is nothing more than a conservative activist hired by a Bush administration that was hell-bent on politicizing the Justice Department and subverting its civil rights enforcement mission.

During the Bush years — the bulk of Adams’ tenure at the DOJ — civil rights enforcement decreased. The DOJ failed to even investigate numerous clear civil rights violations when the victims were Black and Latino, especially allegations involving voting rights.

“King Shamir”?...could you please tell me the source of that quote?...sounds like an Outside Agitator to me…wouldn’t a real genocidal racist be a tad more,shall we say,subtle?...or is part of the point that he(and by extension, the Democrats,NAACP,etc.)is too stupid to realise how moronic he sounds?...

Go Right Young Man:
‘There is no evidence, of any kind, that one grouping of human beings is any more or less racist than another.  Only small-minded bigots believe as you do.’

Wrong GRYM, I believe the same, and I am not a small minded bigot.

What are you afraid of?

The Tea Party movement members are really ultra conservatives who — surprise — vote Republican. It has always been a media fabrication that these people are something different from ultra right wing Republicans who, whenever a Democrat gets elected, go ballistic. This time, of course, with the Democrat being African American, the crazier elements of this far right wing group have become even further unhinged. Thus, it is no surprise the Republicans are supporting them. In shorthand, the following equation is true: Tea Party “Movement” = Republicans

The Tea Party may or may not be racist at its core, but there are racists within the Tea Party, in no small part because the neo-Confederate ideology of the Tea Party attracts them. Anyone who says differently is refusing to confront the evidence. Aside from my experience with Tea Baggers during the Health Care “debates”, I have some members of my extended family who claim to be Tea Party members and they make no secret about their racist feelings…about blacks, about Mexicans, or anyone of color or minority status. Sure, they talk about taxes, etc…but they almost always like taxes raised for foreign wars – no questions asked. They’ll talk about deficits and Obama’s reckless spending but had no problem whatsoever with Bush’s tax cuts to the rich or Bush’s unnecessary wars that created those deficits. Regardless of whatever else they talk about, the minority resentment is there. Sooner or later their private conversations will come back to it. This entire mantra of “I want my country back” is more about the changing face of America than it is about small government. I’m not saying every single Tea Bagger is a racist, but in my personal experience with Tea Baggers race factors heavily in their ultra-right ideology and accounts for more than just a few members.

Purging the Democrat Party’s Racist Poison

“I hate white people, all of them. Every last iota of a cracker, I hate him.” - “You want freedom? You are going to have to kill some crackers. You are going to have to kill some of their babies.”  - King Shamir, registered Democrat and New Black Panther Party member and frequent speaker at national NAACP events.

—

(Democrat) Shirley Sherrod, a USDA official in Georgia, has resigned after publicly admitting that race played a factor in her decision to limit how much aid would be given to a white farmer.

Sherrod, who is African American, made the comments during a local NAACP banquet on March 27, according to information displayed on the video. - Huffington Post

The NAACP has released a statement calling the reaction (laughing) from the crowd to Shirley Sherrod’s racist statements “disturbing”.

—

WASHINGTON (CNN)—Sen. Joe Biden planned to spend Wednesday focusing on his official announcement that he was running for president, but the Delaware Democrat instead found himself defending remarks he made to the New York Observer about his Democratic opponents.

In the article published Wednesday, Biden is quoted evaluating presidential rivals Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-New York, former Sen. John Edwards, D-North Carolina, and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois. His remarks about Obama, the only African-American serving in the Senate, drew the most scrutiny.

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” Biden said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

-

This is a “teachable moment”, Mr. Robinson. There is no evidence, of any kind, that one grouping of human beings is any more or less racist than another.  Only small-minded bigots believe as you do.

Wow Gene. Not a word about the New Black Panther Party.

At least, cynically, maybe, disingenuously, maybe, the Tea Party went through the motions of throwing out a moron and his followers.

Please explain your silence regarding the NBPP.

My landlord is a Tea Party person.  While she recieves Social Security and Medicare, she also gripes about her husband’s unemployment benefits not being extended.

This leads me to believe that Tea Party are status quo, they don’t gripe about corporate tax breaks or financial systems because they are inflamed and organized by corporate interests. They protest the acceptable, American, status quo notion of ‘taxation.’

What are they really protesting since ‘taxation’ was reduced under Obama?  Maybe, the Southern Strategy is alive and well.  ‘Community organizer’ is Palin’s keyword for Obama, and the Tea Party gets it.

Community organizer.  You know, empowering the inner city full of scary black people, and reducing the power of us middle class white people.