I've been on the fence about the TEA Party. My husband, who is much more conservative than I am, fully supports the TEA Party and has attended rallies. I, however, have not. I do agree with several of their points, but I've been trying to research the accusations of racism and homophobia. No claims made by TEA Party members has been as convincing to me as this claim made by an African American liberal:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/04 … Page2.html
That being said, I wonder if the TEA Party isn't just like any other group - it has good members and a few bad ones, but I don't think it's fair, based upon what I've found so far, to paint the party as a whole with the broad brush of racism.
That's probably true.
I do think, based on what I've seen, that the Tea Party tends to tilt towards older white conservatives, so not exactly a demographic friendly to gays and ethnic minorities in general.
I had one black female friend who attended one and she said she got asked constantly why she was there. If she were white, would she have been asked the same question constantly? (She was not wearing an Obama shirt or anything like that)
The vast majority of blacks vote Democrat so that's probably why they were so curious.
Black people tend to vote about 80% Democrat. So do Jews. Do you think if a Jewish person showed up they would be asked why they were there, repeatedly?
You can't tell if someone is Jewish. Unless their Orthodox of course.
How about a Star of David necklace?
Do you think someone who was clearly Jewish would have been asked repeatedly what they were doing at a Tea Party rally?
I don't know. I don't think that its really common knowledge that Jews mainly vote Democrat.
Why is it common knowledge that approx 80% of black people vote Democrat, while not common knowledge that Jews vote the same way, among conservatives? (I emphasize among conservatives, because among liberals, it is common knowledge.)
Because they are an extremely small minority in the United States. No one ever talks about the Jewish vote affecting elections.
What do you think conservatives think of the voting patterns of gays and lesbians?
If a gay person were at a Tea Party rally, would they be asked what they were doing there?
To save history from repeating itself!
I'm going to say that "How would anybody know that they were gay?"
And then you're going to say "Let's say that they are wearing a gay pride shirt."
And then I'm going to say, "I wouldn't know, I can't predict the exact reactions of a possible million people."
I think that you're generalizing the Tea Party people too much. There are Democrats and Independents among them.
I'm trying to get at why a black woman would have her motives questioned at a Tea Party rally. I can easily imagine a gay person would similarly have their motives questioned, and a Jewish person would not.
I believe that's the case, and I believe that it's because to a large number of older white conservatives, blacks and gays are considered hostile groups, while Jews are not (and it's obviously not a matter of voting patterns).
Maybe they asked the black guy what he was doing there because he was just there to stir up trouble.
What makes you think a black person is just there to stir up trouble? And do you think sentiments like yours have anything to do with the fact that black people wouldn't feel comfortable attending a Tea Party rally?
How do you know they were not there to cause trouble? I would think holding up a sign that was once used at a Nazi rally is looking for trouble. I asked a reasonable question I didn't express any sentiment at all.
I gave the example of a friend, a black woman, who attended a rally in Georgia. She is an open-minded person, not partisan at all, and was there just to see what it was all about. She had lots of people asking her what she was doing there.
Of course it isn't fair! The left is afraid of this group which is largely middle class, older, and well educated, and they happen to VOTE! The dems want to disparage them paint them as a fringe group of right wing extremist racist haters.
Consider this, Obama got more than 90% of the black vote, so how many blacks would you expect to see by a group that is opposed to his policies, especially since they are only 13% of the entire population?
I think I could make the case than that black voters are actually racist since they almost all voted for the black candidate. Now, would that be fair?
Habee, I only read the first page of responses, so I may be saying something someone else already said. Forgive my repetition if so.
The Tea 'Party' is split pretty equally between far right conservatives (Palin supporters) and Libertarians (Ron Paul supporters). If neither of these ideologies fits you, it probably wouldn't be worth your time getting involved.
In fact, even if either ideology suits you, it still probably wouldn't be worth your time getting involved, because this unified movement has really only one goal, and the meeting of the minds will dissolve once the goal is no longer relevant.
One party or the other will maybe eventually take control, (but I doubt it since they're so evenly split and the honor of retaining the name is dubious.) The parties already exist. You have your Focus on the Family republicans, and you have your semi-anarchist libertarians.
While there are some things they agree on, they are far too ideologically opposed to permanently merge. They come together for one reason only, and that is to try and thwart support of the current president and the democrat party.
If you feel that's a good worthwhile goal, then you may want to do that. Personally at this point I think the party lines are drawn. The tea 'party' is unlikely to actually gain any further support than what it already has.
I should add that there is a few other elements within the party, odd dems and independants disgruntled over healthcare or just disliking of Obama, but they are in such a small numbers as to be nearly irrelevant within the tea 'party'.
It can't be much of a party with just tea, and no rum,vodca,liquers to go along with them guns!
If the TEA party were to merge with the Anarchist movement, would the new group be called the "TEA and A party"?
Now THAT'S something I could get behind!
I agree, Livelonger. I'm starting to think most of them are retired folks! Both rallies that were held in our town were during the work day. Who else could attend but retirees?? lol
I did read something to that effect (that most are unemployed, either retired or not) recently.
At any rate, she's in Fayette County, Georgia; I don't know where that is, but it sounds like Deep South, where the racial/political lines might be more hard-coded than elsewhere.
Fayette County is metro Atlanta - geographically part of the Deep South, but not politically or culturally speaking.
Peachtree City is in Fayette County and is listed as the eighth best place to live in the US. Its population is a little over 11% black.
I'm glad he called him out, too.
I don't think the KKK guy was a plant. I believe he thought the Tea Party ideals would resonate with his own. I wonder how he got that impression?
A few people do not represent an entire movement.
Yes, clearly. I'm glad that we're so evolved as a country that no major movement of any kind takes in racists anymore.
My point is that racists do feel that the Tea Party would welcome them, far more than your average left-wing rally. A mistaken impression, maybe, but a telling one.
That's the way it appeared to me - he looked genuinely annoyed at being confronted, and not sheepish. If he was an infiltrator, he was a good actor.
While I commend the tea partiers for confronting him, I think there are two important points. For one, the tea party communicates a message that is not much different from what white supremacists have been saying.
And secondly, it's very telling that the tea partiers could only deal with this guy as a "liberal infiltrator commie Soros stooge." I mean, how paranoid is that? Why can't you just confront racism on its own terms, instead of conflating communism and liberalism in some grand conspiracy theory?
Great film! I'm proud to see the TEA Party giving this guy the boot. I loved the sign one of the real members was holding - the one with arrows pointing to the racist that said, "We're NOT with stupid!" Where was this nazi from? He definitely didn't have a Southern accent.
I've never been to a Tea Party rally, but I have eyes and I've seen the coverage on the news from all the sources; listened to the mainstream news try to trash some of them in interviews early on and since a concerted effort to present them as racist and gun toting Americans to be alarmed about......and it sickens me. Of course there are elements of any group that are more or less extreme in their notions and beliefs, we are not a country of robots, yet; and we certainly are not a country of racists, it is a tool being cleverly used.
At this point, it is quite clear that if at all possible something negative will be orchestrated to target the Tea Party as the culprit. The very idea that the Democrats feel the need to infiltrate is surely just the tip of their efforts to incite any fringe elements that may be excitable. I hope and pray that no one takes the bait, and being baited is just exactly what I perceive as happening right now.
What I have seen of the tea party on TV news on tax day in major cities was ordinary citizens who have decided to protest against the actions of our government.
Mainstream USA peaceful non violent demonstration trying to wake up our elected officials in Washington.
Where is the mainstream media? Obama is on the major channels mocking the tea party demonstrations and not one word from the mainstream Obama news media.
Many in the black communities are finally realizing that the democrat propaganda is being exposed by certain news medias. President Obama's promises to the black community have not been fulfilled as promised. The truth will eventually set them free from all the mumbo jumbo lies of this President.
Same reason Weather Underground gravitated to democrats. So are you saying that groups like the Weathermen see their ideology reflected in the democrats, Livelonger?
Yes, they certainly did. But the organization doesn't exist anymore. The KKK does, and its members seem to cling to the right-wing.
The Weather Underground is alive and well and re-invented as the extreme left wing Democratic party.
And if you want another current example, have a look at the churches affiliated with the right Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his open and truly racist pseudo-religious organization -- they've been 'meeting' regularly for many years, yet even today they aren't targeted as racist or seditious or full of hate speech - amazing what life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness coupled with free speech means to liberals versus what they wish to grant to those who do not share their ideas.
No, it's not.
And if you're going to equate Jeremiah Wright, as delusional a nut as he is, with the KKK, you're only undermining your credibility even more.
I didn't equate any one or any thing with the KKK, that must be your own thinking. I make it a point to ignore references to the KKK, and am surprised you have them on your mind when you think of Rev. Wright types; as well, you discount the Weather Underground as a long time ago and not relevant, yet you bring up the really old KKK not once, but twice now, hmmmm. You should have that conversation with yourself.
Did you watch the video? Have you been following this thread?
The KKK is actively recruiting all over the country. I went to protest them several times a few years back at public rallies. They threatened me, attacked a girl I was with (yes a girl) and tried to follow me home. They are not 'really old'.
A couple of young people with Lyndon LaRouche and Impeach Obama signs (with a Hitler mustache) were picketing at the Birmingham, Michigan U.S. Post Office this morning. I won't repeat what I shouted at them as I drove by (no profanity).
I had no idea they were actively recruiting or even of any consequence anymore except as an embarrassing remnant of American history. But, regardless of the continued existence of any overt white racists, which they would be, that white brush of racism should not be applied in generalities to anyone who opposes the policies of a politician who happens to be black. Black racism is alive and well, that does not mean I expect all black people to be racists and make lewd skinny ass honky white bitch comments to me on a daily basis, or break my legs, or force me off the sidewalk in New Orleans during the Jazz Festival.
The whole issue of racism in the discussion and analysis and interpretation of politics in the USA today is a farce and a bait and an orchestration in the interests of furthering left wing liberal Democratic retribution and redistribution policies. Bill Clinton would have even agreed with that when Hilary was still in the running.
Now, Clinton is giving lip service to classic take the high road rhetoric, oh woe is us, this kind of talk will create violence, another OK City type event. I think it's what they want at this point, it will be another "teaching moment" and another "good crisis" not to waste. It scares me more than anything that's happened thus far.
LOL. Good one.
There is a thing called white privilege. White racist groups can get away with a lot more than black racist groups before the state comes down on them.
And did Wright call for violent acts against Whites? Do members of his church go around beating up white people? Have they dragged any white folks behind a truck lately? Are they arming themselves to prepare for apocalypse?
Watch this, Livelonger. Why do you think the BP are extinct??
Ummm, no! The New Black Panthers even had a link from Obama's website until he pulled the plug for political reasons, and they strongly endorsed him for president.
What if W had had a link to the New KKK on his website? How would that make you feel?
Livelonger, the point I'm trying to make is that every political party attracts loons. You can't say the Tea Party attracts nazis because they see their views reflected there unless you say the dems attract hate groups for the same reason. That is, unless you're totally unfair and disingenuous, which I don't think you are.
Absolutely. I do think, however, there is a difference between tiny hate groups that don't have a history of violence (just, admittedly, a lot of hateful rhetoric), and much larger hate groups that have been known to lynch people over the past hundred years or so. And Farrakhan enjoys far less support among Democrats, than David Duke does among Republicans, just to illustrate via example.
And knowing that the Tea Party can draw in some unsavory racists, they should do more of calling out people like them, and making the relatively few non-white people feel a bit more welcome.
To be clear, as a left-of-center person myself, I prefer right-of-center over extreme-left any day. I would hope the converse would be true, as well, for right-of-center people.
I agree with that. I've never been to a TP rally, but my husband has been to two. There were local blacks at both, but hubby didn't see any Hispanics or Asians.
I'm right of center, kind of a moderate conservative, I suppose, and I agree with your last statement, also. I would NEVER want the KKK, the Skinheads, or the Aryan Nation in charge of anything!!
I'm with you there. Unfortunately, David Duke won office once (in Louisiana).
Who writes this crap? white privilege? WOW! I dont remember whites having a million man white march! I dont see whites telling black racist jokes like the black comedians do every night on stage! My pastor never says GD america, he talks about loving thy neighbor! wanna bring up draggin behind the truck do ya? do your homework and you will find its Sooooo rare that a white man kills a black man it becomes news worthy! wanny know how many blacks kill one of MY RACE EACH YEAR! whovever wrote the above comment is full of shit and a full blown racist!
I'm just curious how most of them justify that they paid less taxes this year than they had done with Bush? They didn't seem to protest taxes then. Nor spending... like in Iraq. Not a peep about the burden that was going to place on our children. But hell, give the nation healthcare and it is time to revolt. The fact that they think Palin is a good candidate for President makes me feel they have to be about as whacked out as they look in the youtube videos.
They only care about fiscal responsibility when it's a Democrat doing the spending.
That's not even true.
I remember when Bush approved the first "bailout" and it made me and other conservatives I know very mad. But at least Bush was trying to do the right thing. His advisers, after all, had told him the sky was falling.
All Obama would've had to do was to STOP the rest of the bailouts and crap as soon as he took Office. Yet he didn't! Instead, he not only approved, but PUSHED for more and more bailouts. WHY is that, do ya think?
Obviously, because he saw a great opportunity to perpetuate his socialist agenda and blame it all on Bush startin' it.
What a bunch of crap! Those on the left always try to justify their wrong with the wrongs of the previous administration. It isn't hard to find right wing publications admonishing Bush for his economic policies.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnist … =110007291
So when you say "they" didn't complain about spending under Bush, that's just not a true statement.
Oh my god....will one of you people please tell me how you believe Obama hates his mother and his grandparents....who are white!
He is the most balanced man I've ever seen.
And Farrahkan I used to listen to a lot on the radio, before there was a GOP take-over, and he talked about a lot of things...from the perspective of being a black person in America--something white people will never know or understand.
I see it just a little with my grandson, who is mixed. He still gets called a nigger, and how do you think that makes him feel? And who in holy hell is saying that around their kids to repeat it like that?
Yes, I see hatred towards white people too. And if a white person is the only white in a black school or something, I'm sure they get it bad too. But it has to start with someone....how about THE GROWN-UPS???
All this crap about Obama being racist is stupid and wrong. He's black and blacks have been on the down-side of America, so they deserve some attention. Poor people deserve attention. Immigrants deserve attention. The people on top need to just realize that America is not a playground for their enjoyment.
It's a society that is in deep trouble.
Where were the Tea Party protests when BUSH expanded government spending by $2 trillion? Please don't point to articles in newspapers. Where were the PROTESTS?
The Tea Party movement actually grew out of Bush's policies especially the bail outs. That was the proverbial straw that broke the camels back. His medicare drug plan which wasn't paid for and the unending war in Iraq. The Tea Party isn't just about Obama or the democrats, it's about unrestrained government and uncontrolled spending which we all know, is leading to higher taxes and a burden on future generations that is simply irresponsible.
The Bush budget deficit in 2008 was a half trillion dollars, Obama quadrupled that deficit in one year! So you want to justify Obama's spending with that of Bush??? I think the American people have had enough. They'rr taking it out on Obama because he promised to be different, but they didn't know different meant he'd be worse!
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bus … -pictures/
It wasn't Dumbya's fault.t was his "advisers." LOL!
??? Protests on a grand scale were apparently not necessary, after all, they could cast their vote at the polls for hope and change and a more centered and balanced President -- and they did, that is how Obama was elected. If America was so darned racist, if those Tea Partiers were so darned racist, that would never have happened, Obama kind of needed middle America's vote, ya know.
Now, the stated policies and politics of the Obama platform are being implemented with clear tones of socialism, he has put many left wing extremists with truly seditious connections and beliefs in positions of influence and power, and he never seems to be actually working either. I personally don't think he is even in charge, and I was shocked and sad to see him making a joke out of a group of Americans who are expressing their concerns via the Tea Party. I can only hope he didn't write the joke.
How many of the Tea Party protestors voted for Obama? I'm not talking about an anecdote "I heard about a guy who voted for him and he can't stand him now". I'm talking verifiable stats.
My guess is that 99% of them voted for McCain. So Tea Partiers didn't vote for change. They voted for McCain. That includes a few Democrats and many more Independents, but the vast majority of Tea Party protestors seem to be regular Republicans.
Well your guess would be way off! 40% are independents and democrats combined.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/tea- … /id/354703
I'd say a good number of them voted for Obama and are now seeing what he meant by "change" and have decided that isn't the change they were looking for.
Yes, I said probably a number of Democrats and even more Independents are participating in the Tea Party rallies. But I think they voted for McCain. I think it would be interesting to see how many of those comparing Obama to Hitler, Stalin and every other historical tyrant actually voted for the man. I think a negligible percentage did.
Hey guys, Livelonger and I were having a civil debate last night and were finding some middle ground. Please, let's keep it that way. Let's not act like members of Congress! lol
If you go back to the survey that newsmax is quoting, very selectively, you find the people who produced the survey have a few things to say.
'A new University of Washington survey finds that among whites, southerners are 12 percent more likely to support the tea party than whites in other parts of the United States, and that conservatives are 28 percent more likely than liberals to support the group.
"The tea party is not just about politics and size of government. The data suggests it may also be about race,"says Christopher Parker, a UW assistant professor of political science who directed the survey.
The tea party movement has emerged since President Obama entered the White House. Activists in the movement first opposed Obama's economic stimulus plan before shifting to attack the Democrats' healthcare reform plan.
More recently, tea party activists reportedly spat upon and used slurs against prominent African-American lawmakers at the Capitol as the House prepared last month to take its final votes that approved the healthcare reform legislation.'
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pol … m-or-indie
http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2010/ … party.html
As I said previously, Obama took 90% of the black vote, blacks represent 13% of the population, it's not likely that you will find many balcks in a group opposed to Obama. If you want to attribute that to race, then you could say it is the blacks that are the racists since they refused to vote for the white candidate just as easily as you could claim the Tea Party is racist because it doesn't have many black members.
I wonder how many Mormons voted for Mitt? If a large percentage did so, are they racists too? Or do you think they identified with him because of his religion? Or perhaps they wanted a Mormon representative in the oval office. There are reasons rather than race which influences a person's vote. At least for some of us, IMHO!
I agree. The same can be said for opposing the policies of a president. Maybe, just maybe the Tea Party doesn't like Obama's policies. Maybe, just maybe there's a slight chance they don't give a damn what his color is, or maybe they don't like red.
When you're a member of a historically-persecuted group, it is completely understandable why you'd vote for someone with the same ethnic or religious background. You could say "At least I know he doesn't hate Mormons, since he's a Mormon himself."
I was going to say the same thing about gay politicians, but they're often the most homophobic of all - esp the closeted Republican ones!
The level of hatred in the Tea Party (just check the vids) needs an explanation. The issues that have brought out the tea party don't make sense on their own- a stimulus plan and health care couldn't whip up such a storm unless there were more primitive emotions welling up from somewhere. Resentment of a black president seems the only reasonable explanation.
There is no hatred. Pleas stop watching Olberman and Matthews and stop reading the Huffington post. I've been to Tea Party Rallies in Manhattan and there has been plenty of blacks in the crowd. You just don't have the facts, and it's obvious that you don't.
There is a deep well of resentment, and I think Obama's race is only a part of it. I think a much larger part of it is simple partisanship. Clinton was bashed just as much as Obama is, and he was white (and most of the bashing then, as it is now, has little to do with policy).
There is a segment of the population that feels comfortable identifying as conservative because it makes them feel masculine and strong. These are the ones that struggle to define what it is exactly about Democratic policies that bothers them, because, I suspect, it's more that a Democrat identity means weak, feminine, PC and other personality characteristics that "conservatives" dislike.
It's very clearly a party identification issue than anything else.
I can appreciate your feelings but can you provide some sort of evidence that supports them?
Do the Tea Party people also hate Codi Rice? Michael Steel? Colin Powell? Thomas Sowell? Clarance Thomas?
I don't think of liberals as effeminate, rather I think of them as misguided in their robin hood approach to achieving equality and social justice. I don't believe in equal rewards for unequal effort, but I do believe in having an equal opportunity to achieve greatness.
PB, although I consider you a strong partisan, I think your views are considerably more grounded in policy than your average right-wing partisan. The ones that can't articulate anything beyond "Obama's a socialist!" or "Obama's a Kenyan!" can't point to any policy disagreements. For them, being conservative is being strong, masculine, and hard-working, and being liberal is feminine, lazy and PC.
Besides, why are you bringing up Sowell, Powell, Steele, etc when I said that I don't think the crux of this issue is a racial one?
That's why I brought up race, because you did.
No, I was saying that Will Apse's point about race as being the most obvious cause for anti-Obamaism was not correct, in my opinion. His race is clearly a problem for some people, but I think the bigger problem (i.e. among a greater swathe of Tea Partiers) is classic partisanship. Reread my post.
Point taken. I wouldn't call it partisanship, but the Tea Party is overwhelmingly conservative. I look at it as more of a difference in philosophy in what the role of government should be as defined by the constitution, compared to the role of government as defined by progressives, since they believe the constitution to be obsolete.
That is a gross mischaracterization of what progressives believe about the Constitution.
Do conservatives believe that the 14th amendment is obsolete? If not, why are they fighting, tooth-and-nail, for it to not cover gay and lesbian Americans?
Besides, the Patriot Act is a much bigger violation of the Constitution than anything progressives are fighting for. Not a peep from "conservatives."
Then again, "conservatives" has to be put in quotes because nowadays they are honestly lost. Their 180-degree turnaround on matters of government interference in private lives makes them unfit to use the word.
I don't think so. It's up to the states to define marriage, but I think the complaint there is that government shouldn't redefine the meaning otherwise you'll open the floodgates to a whole realm of socially unacceptable consequences. Personally I don't care what consenting adults do.
I don't believe that my characterization of the progressive view of the constitution is gross at all. I've seen it mentioned many a time that the constitution is a "living" document, and that it should be interpreted differently depending on were we are as a society. I view it as a living document in that it can be amended.
The government was the one that redefined marriage, in the Defense of Marriage Act. It set the definition at the federal level, which hadn't been defined before, so it's clearly not a states-only matter. Even for those 5 states that allow same-sex couples to marry, their marriage is not recognized at the federal level due to DOMA, so they are denied some 1,100 rights and benefits according to the GAO.
Of course the Constitution is open to interpretation. If it were all cut-and-dry, then there would be no need for the Supreme Court, right (or all 9 justices would agree every time)?
And what's your opinion of the Patriot Act?
As many of you learned gentlemen and ladies no doubt know, the battle over how to interpret the constitution.. broadly or narrowly… goes all the way back to Hamilton vs. Jefferson.
Judging by the developments over the last 200+ years and the size and scope of the US government and the Executive branch… supreme court rulings.. . the civil war results.. etc... i think it is safe to say which side has, for the most part, won
Yes! A voice of reason from a liberal! See, this is why Livelonger and I can have a civil debate!
I fully agree that some are against Obama largely due to his race - but if he were a black conservative, his race wouldn't be a problem. His being black only adds fuel to their fire. These same people had "names" for Clinton, and if Hillary were POTUS, I can only imagine what she'd be called. And yes, the far left called W many vile names, too, and carried signs with Bush depicted as Hitler. Some had a bullet hole through Bush's head.
People get irrational when they're scared and feel powerless. The far left acted accordingly when the right was in power, and now the far right is reacting because the left is in charge. I would really like to find out if it were any different if an independent moderate were POTUS! I can dream, right?
I agree (as I often do with you)...to a point.
The Left, despite a very, very controversial election in 2000, did not display the same antipathy towards Bush (until the runup to the Iraq War) that the Right has had towards Clinton and Obama from the get-go. The Right was already fuming about Obama...before he was inaugurated! Most of the anger towards Bush began with the Iraq War, and that anger has been vindicated since none of the reasons for the very, very, very expensive war (in terms of lives and tax dollars) was found to be valid.
That said, I have a very, very tough time imagining a black conservative winning a primary for President within the GOP. Would absolutely love to be proven wrong.
I know race plays a role here in southern Georgia. I have heard the president called the "N" word on many occasions as if that explained the problems we encounter now. Obama inherited a mess from the previous administration which was elected by many of those now criticizing the president. Nothing new of course, short memories are the basis for reelections of those who failed before.
For a more accurate picture, just Google Black Teabaggers.
In a country like the US which is so polarized I don't trust any media. I would rather get the raw footage from youtube or use reliable foreign media.
"There is no hatred."
That is a lie. You don't spit on someone unless there is hatred there.
I don't understand why you can never admit to hate!
It's a human emotion...it won't make lightning strike you to say it!
But to deny it and then act in such admission of it is really nuts.
Anyone on the receiving end of that shit will tell you it is hatred. Shame you can't admit it.
And yes, there's a lot of hate coming from the party who say they stand for values.
Those who claim religion should really start applying the principles.
I see much more brotherly love coming from Obama.
I'm not saying hate doesn't exist or racism for that matter. I'm sure they do exist and will always. Hell, even in Africa there is racism among blacks. What I'm saying is, those on the left continually attribute racism to ALL of the Tea Party and that is simply NOT TRUE, and it's wrong. I have time after time supported my argument with evidence and that evidence is brushed aside and ignored. The fact is it is those on the left that continue to use the issue of racism to squash dissent and I am deeply disturbed and insulted by that tactic.
By the way, I've seen the "spitting" video and from what I saw no one was spitting in the sense that you imply, so please don't use that to support your "hate" argument.
Oh yeah and Obama has plenty of brotherly love, like the love he had for the white cop that was doing his duty responding to a burglary call, that "stupid" "racist" cop that Obama invited for a beer after he realized he was the one that was stupid.
HUH? revision alert! revision alert!
There was nothing wrong about what Obama did. As a matter of fact, the cops did lie on the report. google it.
Any black person in Boston is completely justified in wondering if they are targeted for being black.
It's notoriously racist around here.
Obama never called the cop racist or stupid, and that meeting was a good thing.
It was meant to bring people together and try to understand each other.
You know, until we start being real about this country, things will never change.
Whites will be in the minority one day...would you like to be treated the way people of color have been treated?
And yes, people should not put the tea-baggers down as a bunch of racists pigs. But they have to put an end to it then...and I mean the LEADERS who make big bucks to speak. Or on tv Or the radio. Until you call them out, we will have to assume you agree with them!
Ya know, Pandora, I often feel like a woman without a party! I like some things about all of them! I guess I'm more closely represented by moderate republicans, but there aren't many of them now, it seems. I like intelligent debate, small government, religious freedom, separation of Church and State, the Second Amendment, tolerance, personal responsibility, and reward for hard work. I think we should help those who cannot help themselves, and I am against the death penalty. I hate abortion, but I don't think Roe v Wade should ever be overturned. See? Where do I fit in??
You fit in in America, you are like me, and lots of your neighbors, lots more than you realize, you're normal and even, not an extremist, and you've not yet lost your patience with extremists from either side, you're to be applauded for trying to wade through the muck and understand it in a civil manner without being reactionary to clearly blustering bumbleheads from either side of the questions you explore. Just my thoughts right off the top of my conservative, very open-minded, but now impatient and fearful head.
Thanks, JWest - that makes me feel better! I've been meaning to ask, what kind of cow/steer/bull is that? I used to be married to a big beef producer of Polled Herefords and Brafords.
You are welcome! It's a British White bull, his name is High Noon, and they are a polled breed, and the gentlest of bovines, and cross real well with Herefords. Before some point in the 40's they were still called Park cattle, I wish they still were. I had to pull my cell phone number from my web site a few months back, after it being there for years, because I started getting really weird text messages when I posted some ads for over-marked or black-sided cows I had for sale, and one was named Black Sapphire. And that is a frightening indication of the extent of the .... distress in America today.
Actually, I had heard of Amos and Andy, but really didn't know a thing about the show. Had to Google it, and read up, and apparently it was a hit radio show put together by black people and then brought to tv played by white people in black face, at first, and then redone in the early 50's with black actors. But, for the life of me, and I am notoriously slow to get jokes and jibes, I can't figure what you mean by your reference to Amos n' Andy.
"Like most Fifties' sitcoms, 'Amos 'n' Andy' had broad, comic characterizations and outlandish plotlines. None of the stories had anything to do with race, and on a positive note, introduced the concept of black doctors, business leaders and lawyers in dignified roles - a first for any mass medium."
This show was particularly disliked (understandably) by black people because of the obvious racist overtones around which the show was produced. One of the "black" female characters was named "Sapphire." Now do you get it?
Moderate republican, conservative dem, or independent. Shoot, you might even be libertarian. Care about the environment? Try the green party! Who knows these days...
They're all half right! LOL
I think most moderate repubs are just in hiding.
They say that to everyone. It's a recruiting tool. I reckon you know the problems with the lib party, since yer a regular here in the political forums.
Yes, we do say that to everyone. And it works wonders for recruiting! haha
I know of some problems, though not forum ones, I think. I'm not sure of which ones you're referring to.
I thought Libertarians were against ALL government programs?? I'm not against all of them.
You're hard to put in one box.
In our non-parliamentary system, coalition building happens before an election, rather than after. At least you know which other "parties" you'll have to live with before casting a vote.
They are, and against all government regulation as well. But they sucker in alot of people by saying no income tax and everyone gets to do what they want.
Woah, woah, woah. No. Not necessarily against all government programs and not against all government regulation. They want to minimize the state, not get rid of it. What you're describing is almost anarchy. Very few libertarians swing that far.
Since people can't seem to understand why most Americans think the Teabaggers are racist and violent, I collected a few images.
Those pants are assaulting my eyes...
Not racist or violent, just dumb.
Because we all know that only black people are poor
I bet they don't really care what anyone thinks of them, being popular isn't that important to adults, well most adults.
I'm not impressed. Not a single thing presented is in any way equivalent to 'words' from the likes of Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, or any number of other racists or socialists, and for sure not even close to the Black Panthers manning the voting locations in the last election with the clear menace of violence.
“We will be at the polls in the cities and counties in many states to ensure that the enemy does not sabotage the black vote, which was won through the blood of the martyrs of our people” http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/04/bl … the-polls/
"Those pants are assaulting my eyes..." Blue jeans?
"Not racist or violent, just dumb." Agree
"Because we all know that only black people are poor" Did anybody said black? Ahh, that was you William...
Misha, perhaps you don't understand American cultural references. It's ok.
Yeah I agree. Those flag pants were hard on the eyes, weren't they? But maybe we shouldn't say that out loud. Someone might call you anti-america.
Umm, ok, next time I will try to be more - umm - clear. But then it kills the humor, so may be not
The Black Panthers might have been at a few polling places in a few cities. But this sort of thing has been going on for years in the reverse: white people intimidating black voters.
http://dir.salon.com/news/feature/2004/ … index.html
That's just one example, there are many more.
"The Black Panthers might have been at a few polling places in a few cities. But this sort of thing has been going on for years in the reverse: white people intimidating black voters."
You can say that all day long and into the next decade, and it is bunk -- unless you want to go back to some very long ago days that share a bed with the Weather Underground. I can assure you it is pure bunk to find any effort to stop black voters that is in ANY way comparable to courting black voters, or any other minority group, or white niche group of any kind or description seen as valuable by ANY political party. Furthermore, a group like the Black Panthers with white or pink or purple or polka dotted skin would have been locked up in short order.
Black and poor people naturally have less access. We can say oh well tuff for them, in which case politicians can pretty much just entirely dismiss them and their interests from any consideration. Or we can reach out to help include them in the system.
LOL. You assure me? How? Why don't you research it. Believe me, it's been going on for a very long time and whites have done it to blacks much more than blacks to whites. If you believe otherwise you're not being honest with yourself.
I've discussed this with a few black people who tried to vote in Florida during Dumbya's first run. They disagree with JWC!
And of course you know it happened that way because they told you it did nobody ever lies , thanks for the laugh.
Did I hear a troll? Anyone else hear that?
Perhaps you work too much William? Get some rest, would you?
No, no you didn't! Is that how you make yourself more relevant by claiming anyone who disagrees with you is a troll?
Pretty pathetic on your part.
Is that true, William? You think all the moderates and conservatives here are trolls? I don't think you've ever called me a troll, but I could have missed it.
Sab and Padrino are trolls. Most of the other people here are not. Habee, you most definitely are not.
Have you considered that calling people "troll" over and over and over and over again is a kind of trolling? How much space do you intend to fill just repeating this pointless charge and playing 'who is really who?' silly games?
Heh. I don't call "people" troll over and over. I call you and Padrino trolls. There are others here who will have a substantive discussion and base their arguments in facts and reason. You like to twist things, make personal attacks, and unverified assertions.
You are a troll.
"You like to twist things, make personal attacks, and unverified assertions. "
He says while making personal attacks and unverified assertions... "rolleyes:
"You are a troll."
But that's not a personal attack, is it?
Glad to entertain you TK! I suppose they all could have lied. Do you think all black people lie? Never mind, I don't want YOU to lie!
Still not TK, you didn't respond to what I said, you insinuated I must be a racist and then ran away. Interesting debate skills.
What did you say that I didn't respond to, Sab Oh? And rest assured, I do not run from trolls!
Not Saboh either, you believe that blacks were intimidated in the Presidential race of 2000 because you talked to somebody who said they were? I've got this property on the ocean in Arizona, believe me?
I can believe you bought that property with no surprise. And I talked to more than one person about the incidents in Florida. But you don't really care if it's true or not, do you?
Sure I care, but you provide nothing more than hearsay, if that.
Call me a liar if you like, I will lose no sleep over your opinion, TK
Race baiting and claims of insults that never occurred!
You honor the liberal traditions well.
Oh yeah, no matter how many times you call me TK or saboh, it still won't be true.
I claimed no insults, especially from you. You do not have that ability. ETA : I was insulting them!
I wouldn't want to posses the ability to insult you, that is the difference between you and I, I'll let your words speak for themselves.
And again, thanks for the laugh!
You have no power to control my words, therefore you do not "let" me do anything. And the "laughs" are mutual!
Well, do give us the gory factual details, we all really need to hear these personal accounts of recent voter intimidation, you could convert every conservative who reads this thread. Share with us, tell us ......everything. I'll look for it tomorrow as I'm tired now and had a late "supper" -- is it possible using the word supper is now southern racism? It would not surprise me.
Google voter intimidation and see what comes up first and more often, you won't find a lot of stories on the Klan!
No, you are not the sort I wish to convert. You help my argument enough right where you are!
He helped your argument? Did you actually have an argument?
"I've discussed this with a few black people who tried to vote in Florida during Dumbya's first run. They disagree with JWC"
Not really an argument there.
Why don't you research it, you made reference to numerous instances, back it up. Have you worked on Democratic or Republican political campaigns, actually witnessed this rampant voter intimidation? I thought not. If so, you would be thoroughly familiar with minority groups being courted. If you want to go back to the 'weather underground' days, we both would have to do some research, but then it's just an old group in an old era....right?
I posted two links describing voter intimidation. Did you miss that? And the Weather Underground never engaged in voter intimidation, I don't know why you keep bringing that up.
"The Black Panthers might have been at a few polling places in a few cities. But this sort of thing has been going on for years in the reverse: white people intimidating black voters. "
So that makes it ok? Revenge? Affirmative Action Intimidation?
Let's be clear about this. This is the "New Black Panther Party" - they're so bad that even the old Black Panthers disavow them. NO ONE IS SUPPORTING THEM, only a liberal caricature that exists in some conservatives' minds.
Well, I didn't say that, troll, but maybe it does. Maybe black people need to have their ability to vote protected by a militant group of black citizens.
I don't know the whole story about the Philly Panthers so I won't say one way or the other. But I have to ask: why is a group of armed black men scary to you, but a group of armed white men who are talking about revolution not scary to you?
I find both groups pretty scary! However, I do like a man with arms...and hands! There's just sooo much they can do with them!
Randy, I'm surprised you didn't respond to my "box" post above.
"Maybe black people need to have their ability to vote protected by a militant group of black citizens"
Well, now we see you are a fan of lawlessness and violent racial division. Congratulations. Make no mistake, your thinking is exactly as bad as any white a**h*le who ever kept an African American from voting, does nothing to make anything better and everything to make things worse.No one suffers worse from your way of thinking than minorities. I hope you're 'proud' of yourself.
"But I have to ask: why is a group of armed black men scary to you, but a group of armed white men who are talking about revolution not scary to you?"
I didn't say either one was 'scary,' did I, tough guy?
I will say that at this point if you make one peep about intimidation or political speech inciting violence you are a monumental hypocrite.
Sab, maybe I should just be straight with you: your opinion matters absolutely zilch to me. If you want to continue to try and waste your time taking my words out of context and deliberately misunderstanding what I say, be my guest.
If you are not comfortable with what your words mean you should choose them more carefully.
Hm. What I said was, maybe black people need to have their votes protected by militant citizens. I said I did not know all the facts of the Panther case, and I would not say one way or another.
How does that make me "a fan of lawlessness and violent racial division"?
"What I said was, maybe black people need to have their votes protected by militant black citizens.
How does that make me "a fan of lawlessness and violent racial division"?"
Um, because that is exactly what it means! How is it possible you can write but cannot read your own words?
Understandable Holle, but I do remember it and can understand why the term "Black Sapphire' would anger some people. The problem is some people do these type of things intentionally and then say "I didn't know this." How are those insulted expected to know the difference?
I know, political correctness is often difficult to achieve and can be downright impossible in some cases. In others, it's intentionally dismissed.
On the thread of voter suppression by Black Panthers and whites against minorities - I wonder if all the hysteria about ACORN and voter fraud is leading up to more voter intimidation in the upcoming elections?
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Ji … 6aug04.htm
.....you mean intimidation by ACORN employees or Black Panthers? It is certainly possible.
" I wonder if all the hysteria about ACORN and voter fraud is leading up to more voter intimidation in the upcoming elections? "
Sure sounds as if that is what you're hoping for.
I think the ideas of the Lib party -despite its emphasis on extremely small government and individual freedoms- serves big business the most. In effect, were the ideas of the lib party to be realized, I believe it would equate to individuals' freedom to be screwed by the new powers that would be -big business.
Can we all just agree that voter intimidation has happened on both sides? And that it's wrong??
What's a troll? Am I a troll? Can a liberal be a troll? Is it just reserved for conservatives and moderates? Do they live under bridges? Are they afraid of billy goats?
Randy is only interested in converting the wemmings. I'm assuming JWest is male?
I'm going to research incidents of voter intimidation.
This writer articulates what I think about the Tea Party very well. The article is well worth reading. Start here:
"1. These people do not know what fascism, socialism or communism are, other than the fact that they're all bad.
These three isms are essentially interchangeable, and you can combine them in a single sentence that explicates the thought process driving most attendees. To wit: "Anything I don't like is the worst evil in the world, like Hitler, and the reason I don't like it is because it reminds me of Stalin, who was bad because he was a socialist." There you go. Socialism is Stalin, and how bad is that? That's Hitler bad."
http://www.mrdestructo.com/2009/09/whit … ntrum.html
For real. If you're honestly wondering why "liberals" have a problem with the Tea Party, read this blog post.
"But I have to ask: why is a group of armed black men scary to you, but a group of armed white men who are talking about revolution not scary to you?"
That's a fair question.
No, it is THE question!!
It's the same thing as asking, "how come they could call Bush protesters america haters, but now the baggers are patriots?
face your demons sabby....we all see them!
This made me chuckle this morning:
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/arc … sts/38296/
by Ralph Deeds 9 years ago
Last week, Matt Continetti published a long essay in The Weekly Standard arguing that we should understand the Tea Party as a movement that’s torn between two competing political instincts — one reformist and one reactionary, one that “wants to repair deformities in the American political...
by Credence2 6 years ago
Excellent op-ed page that discusses conservatism taking two distinct tracts. Have a read and share your opinion, please. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/20 … /?src=recg
by Lady Liberty 9 years ago
Why is it that Tea Party type hubs won't post comments from anyone that doesn't see things their...way? Everytime I got to a right wing conservative hub and make a valid arguement about a topic, they won't post my comment. It's like a love fest on those sights, surely not everyone on this site is a...
by Ken R. Abell 9 years ago
Is the Tea Party movement good or bad for the Republicans in this election cycle?
by lady_love158 9 years ago
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 … s_sub.htmlBeck once called Obama a racist and I disagreed. Beck later apologized for his remarks but now I wonder was he right? If Obama isn't a racist he sure likes to use race to his political advantage!
by Ralph Deeds 9 years ago
This week in Michigan enough Tea Party delegates showed up at a Republican meeting to elect delegates to the party's nominating convention for the election in November to defeat the current Republican party chairman's bid to be elected a delegate. This strikes me as a cataclysmic event for the...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|