NAACP Cries Racist at the Tea Party

[PLAYER57832]

By the way, there is a Democrat memorandum out there somewhere that indicated that the best strategy to beat the Republicans in 2010 and 2012 is to make the Tea Party movement address racism and not the real economic issues. I believe the memo actually had something like, "even though there is no tangible proof or evidence." When I have some more time, I'll try to find it. My initial foray did not yield any results (although I heard it on a news program yesterday).

I would be interested in that.

Even so, I have to say that is the exact type of "debate" all too many right wingers and hard-core conservative (particularly the so-called "Christian" conservatives) have been using. I disdained it when they did it and I disdain it if the Democrats are doing it.

The Bush administration used the "you're not patriotic" argument (which I ignored). The "you're racist" argument is a whole lot worse (and which, apparently intelligent people are not ignoring).

The upper politicians usually distance them from this type of rhetoric, at least directly (double-speak or "political speak" is another issue). I am referring to commentators and such.

Anyway, this reminds me of a story on NPR. I believe I will post it.

[Phatscotty]

What I have Been Trying to say this entire time.....is exactly what this man says

Woody, JMPH, Symmetry, Obama, NAACP, you are the ones who are on the other side of Morgan Freemans statement. I have said, over and over again, the only thing that is racist is the left's propagation of it, their continual obsession with race and pointing the finger in blame games and hardcore race-baiting. The only thing that comforts me after all these mud and slime allegations, is that I do not actually know any people like you in real life.

We Shall Overcome

The Truth will set you Free

[jimboston]

Player... you talk/type too much.
I thought I was long-winded... God!

I am only responding to points I have serious contention with...

1) Sorry, but no. And, you may only know of those few, but there have been a good many more, in NY, in PA, Maryland, etc.

Yeah... um again I was talking about what I have seen in New England. NY, PA, Maryland are NOT New England.

2) Even so, it could be that the 2 rallies you went to were somehow void of the racist elements that very much have been a part of not just every rally I have seen, but have heard about... I say there are and were racists there because I know this for a fact, having talked to people/knowing people involved.

Yeah... again we are talking about the overt racism portrayed by the media (and this forum). I can't look into people's hearts. The two rallies I went to WERE void of the overt racism we are discussion here.

3) If the real and true motives of many people within the movement are racist, then the results of their actions, need to be examed much more harshly for hints of racism.

If a group of people get together and say... "we want lower taxes"... and a small percentage of those people are racist... how does racism factor into the fact that the people protesting want lower taxes? I am confused.

I want lower taxes. Period. Since the tax system must be equal, that means I want you to have lower taxes too. I don't think the Tea Party is saying "we want white people to have lower taxes"... are they???

Now the NAACP says "we want people to be treated equal... regardless of race". Then, a minute later they say "we want preference treatment in hiring based on race". Isn't that (by definition) a more racist (and hypocritical) view?

If they 1st group (Tea Party) said "we want lower taxes"... and then a minute later said "we want more gov't services"... I would say there is an issue with hypocracy there. That ain't the case though.

4) Again, Boston is in many ways less overtly racist than other areas (it absolutely exists, but tends to meld more into "classism" or a kind of "other elitism" (my ggggg... grandfather came over on the Mayflower and yours didn't! We have been a part of "real Boston society" for generations, not like these new money types."

Yet we have a reputation for being extremely racist... due to history with busing... which I could argue was only partially a race issue.

We are also super Liberal [in general]... and that conflicts with the idea that we are racist... very confusing.

BTW... you're very wrong about the classism/elitism. This exists... but the Blue Bloods have very little political power in Boston... and the percentage or BB's is so tiny.

5) "liberal media".. Oh, you mean "Democracy Now" and "Alternative Radio" ? I did not know you were even aware of those programs. They hardly represent a large portion of the media, at any rate.

No... I mean ABC, NBC, CBS, the Boston Globe. etc.

6) It seems you just equate being "liberal" with anything you oppose. (except, perhaps, countering racism and a couple of other big topics, all pretty mainstream now).

No... you are wrong and don't know me. My views are libertarian (moderate)... with some Constitutionalism and conseravativism mixes in. So no... you're wrong. On money issues I am libertean/conservative yes.

On social issues (unless they involve taxing me)... I am liberal or moderate.

7) Well, I cannot say if you are or are not racist. It's just not possible to prove. I cannot say that I have seen posts showing you are. I believe you are opposed to Obama because you listen exclusively or almost exclusively to incredibly conservative and right wing sources. I say that because the information and knowledge you put forward makes that evident. Your repeated references to this or that idea "being liberal", etc. show you really have little understanding of liberalism or even much of other political positions. You just don't right now. (hope that changes).

You are wrong again. I actually stopped listening to the radio news as it was frustrating me during my hour commute (1hr in an 1hr out). I now listen to audio books and avoid news as much as possible.

That said... prior to this I did listen to Conservative Talk Radio WTKK 96.9 in Boston. That was typically my ride home... my typical ride in was WBUR an NPR Station. Probably one of the best produced public radio stations in the country. This station is EXTREMELY liberal. if you disagree you are lying to yourself. So yes... you are wrong... as I likley listened to 5+ hours of NPR a week for 10-11 years, up until a couple months ago.

Also... living on Boston you cannot help but be bombarded by Liberal Media. The Boston Globe is one of the most liberal mainstream city newspapers in the country.

Oh, I am QUITE sure that many, many people associated with the Tea Party are not racist (at least intentionally so), and that more might be racist, but don't show it in any way at the rallies.

"not racist... or at least not intentionally so"

??????

9) but my 9 year old seems to think Ninjas are pretty cool.

Yes... but he doesn't deal with the Ninja's we deal with in this Forum.

[gatoraubrey2]

I've been silent in this thread for a while, but I just can't keep quiet any longer.

7) Well, I cannot say if you are or are not racist. It's just not possible to prove. I cannot say that I have seen posts showing you are. I believe you are opposed to Obama because you listen exclusively or almost exclusively to incredibly conservative and right wing sources. I say that because the information and knowledge you put forward makes that evident. Your repeated references to this or that idea "being liberal", etc. show you really have little understanding of liberalism or even much of other political positions. You just don't right now. (hope that changes).

So you, too, are being hit with the "If you don't agree with me, you're uneducated" attack.

Don't be taken in by this classic liberal argument that all "educated" people believe as they do, and that if you don't, it's just because your brain isn't as highly evolved as theirs. This is nothing more than a distraction from the actual issues. Liberals are masters of distraction when they're losing. Can't we all agree that it's possible to be opposed to Obama simply because he's wrong?

The answer to this problem is posts like this:

Where did these many rallies take place?? Why aren't these videos all over the web and news?? Show us the proof player. Otherwise, it's a lie.

And, we've yet to see proof, even though it supposedly exists in such vast quantities. All we've heard is a personal testament from someone who follows up by saying that we won't be able to verify that testament because she will remain anonymous. Sorry, that's not proof.

[King Doctor]

Liberals are masters of distraction when they're losing

... ah yes, well when they're faced with sweeping generalisations and inane speculative insults like that, how on earth could they hope to do anything other than lose?


Seriously, parroting ridiculous 'liberals = hive mind' paranoia isn't the best way to come back from the contention that you've become a lazy and blinkered thinker as a result of only watching the very narrow band of media that you know will tell you what you want to hear. Indeed, it actually confirms precisely what Player was saying, because it shows that you're (1) in need of some kind of cheap aspersion to fall back on at this point in the debate, and (2) it suggests that your attempts to self-censor alternative points of view from your media intake might have been successful enough to result in you actually believing the absurd 'them/us' generalisations that you're spouting.

[thegreekdog]

Liberals are masters of distraction when they're losing

... ah yes, well when they're faced with sweeping generalisations and inane speculative insults like that, how on earth could they hope to do anything other than lose?


Seriously, parroting ridiculous 'liberals = hive mind' paranoia isn't the best way to come back from the contention that you've become a lazy and blinkered thinker as a result of only watching the very narrow band of media that you know will tell you what you want to hear. Indeed, it actually confirms precisely what Player was saying, because it shows that you're (1) in need of some kind of cheap aspersion to fall back on at this point in the debate, and (2) it suggests that your attempts to self-censor alternative points of viewfrom your media intake might have been successful enough to result in you actually believing the absurd 'them/us' generalisations that you're spouting.

Is this the irony thread? Let me check the subject... no, definitely not the irony thread.

My favorites are "inane speculative insults" and "cheap asperson to fall back on at this point in the debate." So much irony I didn't have to take my vitamins this morning.

[Woodruff]

Can one of you please find a Tea Party website that provides a racist message or platform to the public? I can't seem to find one. Maybe my google isn't working correctly. I'm looking for something like, "We hate President Obama's economic policies because he's black," or something like that. I assume that those items exist somewhere... the Tea Party movement being racist after all.

I don't consider the Tea Party to be racist. I'm simply arguing against what I see as logic errors.

[Woodruff]

As a non-racist person who dislikes Obama and his adgenda, I take exception to the idea that I am "likely" racist because my political views disagree with his. I also do not believe that it is my job to "prove" that I am not racist. That is stupid.

Well, I cannot say if you are or are not racist. It's just not possible to prove. I cannot say that I have seen posts showing you are. I have certainly never said anything like "you are just opposed to Obama because he is black". I believe you are opposed to Obama because you listen exclusively or almost exclusively to incredibly conservative and right wing sources. I say that because the information and knowledge you put forward makes that evident. Your repeated references to this or that idea "being liberal", etc. show you really have little understanding of liberalism or even much of other political positions. You just don't right now. (hope that changes).

I am now starting to lean toward opposing Obama, and it has nothing at all to do with listening to right wing sources. It has everything to do with what he has and has not done. I think he's done a pretty shitty job, and that is absolutely taking into account what he started out with, but also inclusive of the things he claimed he would do while campaigning for the position.

[Woodruff]

Can one of you please find a Tea Party website that provides a racist message or platform to the public? I can't seem to find one. Maybe my google isn't working correctly. I'm looking for something like, "We hate President Obama's economic policies because he's black," or something like that. I assume that those items exist somewhere... the Tea Party movement being racist after all.

Come on greekdog, it doesn't have to be an "official position" for it to be a real problem. If they allow the racists to be a part of the group without condemning the racism, then it is a problem.

thegreekdog's statements actually sound very similar to the ones you were making regarding the NAACP and the Black Panthers, to be honest.

[Woodruff]

What I have Been Trying to say this entire time.....is exactly what this man says

Woody, JMPH, Symmetry, Obama, NAACP, you are the ones who are on the other side of Morgan Freemans statement. I have said, over and over again, the only thing that is racist is the left's propagation of it, their continual obsession with race and pointing the finger in blame games and hardcore race-baiting. The only thing that comforts me after all these mud and slime allegations, is that I do not actually know any people like you in real life.

We Shall Overcome

The Truth will set you Free

That you consider me to be a hardcore race-baiter shows only your own ignorance and ability to see only what you want to see. And I don't think Symmetry has posted in here, has he?

[thegreekdog]

Can one of you please find a Tea Party website that provides a racist message or platform to the public? I can't seem to find one. Maybe my google isn't working correctly. I'm looking for something like, "We hate President Obama's economic policies because he's black," or something like that. I assume that those items exist somewhere... the Tea Party movement being racist after all.

Come on greekdog, it doesn't have to be an "official position" for it to be a real problem. If they allow the racists to be a part of the group without condemning the racism, then it is a problem.

thegreekdog's statements actually sound very similar to the ones you were making regarding the NAACP and the Black Panthers, to be honest.

Thanks, at least someone who is not an ardent conservative is picking up what I'm throwing down.

[PLAYER57832]

As a non-racist person who dislikes Obama and his adgenda, I take exception to the idea that I am "likely" racist because my political views disagree with his. I also do not believe that it is my job to "prove" that I am not racist. That is stupid.

Well, I cannot say if you are or are not racist. It's just not possible to prove. I cannot say that I have seen posts showing you are. I have certainly never said anything like "you are just opposed to Obama because he is black". I believe you are opposed to Obama because you listen exclusively or almost exclusively to incredibly conservative and right wing sources. I say that because the information and knowledge you put forward makes that evident. Your repeated references to this or that idea "being liberal", etc. show you really have little understanding of liberalism or even much of other political positions. You just don't right now. (hope that changes).

I am now starting to lean toward opposing Obama, and it has nothing at all to do with listening to right wing sources. It has everything to do with what he has and has not done. I think he's done a pretty shitty job, and that is absolutely taking into account what he started out with, but also inclusive of the things he claimed he would do while campaigning for the position.

I am on the fence. A politician is always the better of bad choices, as far as I am concerned. So, endorsing Obama doesn't mean I think he is doing the best job he could, its just that I think other choices are worse.

That said, there are a LOT of reasons to oppose Obama. My comment is not because people oppose Obama or oppose any other specific legislation or idea (a few exceptions on the "idea" part). My comment is this idea that anything except the far right is supposed to automatically be "liberal", along with utter distortions of what liberals actually want or the views they express. In fact, Obama is no friend to the true liberals. (they tend to be in opposition to just about any standard politician)

Yet, in this forum, there are many people who label him "liberal". In fact, he is pretty conservative.

Basically, this whole deal is far less about any true bias and far more about certain strongly right wing talk hosts deciding to lash out with opinions on anything even slightly liberal... and, the fault is that far, far too many people seem to simply listen and to be unable to differentiate truth from opinion.

[PLAYER57832]

Can one of you please find a Tea Party website that provides a racist message or platform to the public? I can't seem to find one. Maybe my google isn't working correctly. I'm looking for something like, "We hate President Obama's economic policies because he's black," or something like that. I assume that those items exist somewhere... the Tea Party movement being racist after all.

Come on greekdog, it doesn't have to be an "official position" for it to be a real problem. If they allow the racists to be a part of the group without condemning the racism, then it is a problem.

thegreekdog's statements actually sound very similar to the ones you were making regarding the NAACP and the Black Panthers, to be honest.

Thanks, at least someone who is not an ardent conservative is picking up what I'm throwing down.

Come again?

What I said about the Black Panthers and the NAACP was largely because I had the impression folks were talking about the OLD Black Panthers, who's members (in some cases) are and have been a part of the NAACP. Even so, The NEW Black Panthers are not a part of the NAACP, so the NAACP is not obligated to react against them in the same way that the Tea Party is obligated to police their own members.

The obligation the NAACP has against the Black Panthers is similar to their interest in the Tea Party. That is, they have an interest in pointing out if any racist group begins to have power/show power. My impression of the New Black Panthers is that they are limited, for now mostly just in Pittsburgh and Phillidelphia, maybe Maryland. Even so, I believe they did come out locally against the New group for blocking polls (and the group faces a lawsuit, possible criminal charges for that). I am on the fence on whether the NAACP should make a bigger deal of opposing them, because sometimes that alone gives the group more attention that it deserves. Its more like the Republican Party doesn't necessarily come out and officially condemn the KKK or Aryan nation every day. Partly its understood, and partly, they just don't need more attention. Instead, they condemn specific acts if its appropriate. In this case, the NAACP might need to clarify the "understood" part, but if only right wing conservative talkist believe/assert there is a connection... again, answering it would almost give the accusation more power.

The Tea Party, by contrast, is big enough to impact major elections. For that reason, the Tea Party has deserved more scrutiny than the New Black Panthers. Now, on the "is the tea party racist", I have always said that while I never believed racism was a big part of the party, it WAS a strong part in some regions. The main excuse I saw for the Tea Party NOT taking a firm stand was just that they were not truly a unified group.. yet. The trouble was they were using that as an excuse, while at the same time organizing into what more and more does seem to be a true party/group. Now, it seems they have decided to admit they are a group and are taking steps to oust racists. That is all that can be expected. If any future displays of plackards, etc are seen, then I would expect the Tea Party to officially condemn them.

As far as "reverse accusations"... I believe charges that the New Black Panther Party is tied to the NAACP are just false. Second, too many of the examples put forward of "bias" are not truly that. This latest incident of posting a short excerpt from a speech, resulting in a lady being ousted from her job is just wrong. (it was wrong that the head of the Dept of Ag didn't look into it more closely, it was wrong of the NAACP to condemn her without looking into it more and it was definitely wrong to have posted that piece of video as if the truly told a real story). Similarly, demands that blacks be admitted to certain jobs is a complex issue, definitely. However, no one denies that there has been a long history of bias and racism in this country. At some point, asking for things to "change nicely" just doesn't work. At some point, things have to be mandated. Now, I am definitely of the belief that time for affirmative action in most cases is over (a few exceptions might exist) and yes, we have to be careful because sometimes it has become "reverse" racism/discrimination. However, that is such a complex topic I don't want to get into that whole bit here and now. The point is that its quite different from the Tea Party actively allowing (that was the original, and just, accusation) racists to be a part of the grouup. Now, the Tea Party does seem to have taken steps and.. life goes on.

[thegreekdog]

The Tea Party, by contrast, is big enough to impact major elections. For that reason, the Tea Party has deserved more scrutiny than the New Black Panthers. Now, on the "is the tea party racist", I have always said that while I never believed racism was a big part of the party, it WAS a strong part in some regions. The main excuse I saw for the Tea Party NOT taking a firm stand was just that they were not truly a unified group.. yet. The trouble was they were using that as an excuse, while at the same time organizing into what more and more does seem to be a true party/group. Now, it seems they have decided to admit they are a group and are taking steps to oust racists. That is all that can be expected. If any future displays of plackards, etc are seen, then I would expect the Tea Party to officially condemn them.

Good, that's two people.

[gatoraubrey2]

Liberals are masters of distraction when they're losing

... ah yes, well when they're faced with sweeping generalisations and inane speculative insults like that, how on earth could they hope to do anything other than lose?


Seriously, parroting ridiculous 'liberals = hive mind' paranoia isn't the best way to come back from the contention that you've become a lazy and blinkered thinker as a result of only watching the very narrow band of media that you know will tell you what you want to hear. Indeed, it actually confirms precisely what Player was saying, because it shows that you're (1) in need of some kind of cheap aspersion to fall back on at this point in the debate, and (2) it suggests that your attempts to self-censor alternative points of viewfrom your media intake might have been successful enough to result in you actually believing the absurd 'them/us' generalisations that you're spouting.

Is this the irony thread? Let me check the subject... no, definitely not the irony thread.

My favorites are "inane speculative insults" and "cheap asperson to fall back on at this point in the debate." So much irony I didn't have to take my vitamins this morning.

Do I even have to argue this point further? He condemns me for throwing out insults, then comes back twice as hard, while completely ignoring my challenge to post links to racist Tea Party events...

Could we rename him Doctor Distraction?

[Night Strike]

Alright, it's time to get the truth out about the Tea Party Federation. The organization was founded on or about April 8, 2010 (Clicky). There are several references to their charter stating that the organization condemns racism, but I was unable to find the actual charter on their site. I did find their membership requirements though. In order to join the federation, an organization must agree to ALL of the following issues:

• Our organization rejects Birthers
• Our organization rejects 9/11 Truthers
• Our organization rejects racial discrimination
• Our organization rejects hate speech
• Our organization rejects acts of violence or subversive behavior

If member organizations are found in violation of these, that group may be removed from the Federation by a majority vote. This happened on July 17, 2010, by a unanimous vote when the Tea Party Express refused to remove Mark Williams from their membership (Clicky).

Now, for the TRUTH about the Federation's stance on the accusations about racism by the Congressman. The Tea Party Federation requested the Congressional Black Caucus to turn over their relevant material so that the Federation could condemn any of the alleged actions. This was 1 month after the alleged incident as the Federation had been researching the incident on their own but had found no evidence. Apparently no evidence was ever presented as there have been no other press releases on the incident (Clicky - The in-text url should be press_room).

The Tea Party Federation also roundly decried the NAACP resolution of the group being racist on July 14, 2010 (Clicky), with some claiming the false accusation was itself racist.

[PLAYER57832]

I see, so 3 days BEFORE the Tea Party ejected a racist group, the NAACP makes statements that the Tea Party includes racists, and that is reason to consider the NAACP racist?

Well, either the original NAACP accusation was correct OR the Tea Party ousting that group was racist/unfounded/etc.

[Phatscotty]

Player, get out there and get in their face!

race race race race race race race!!!

Player is 180 degrees from Morgan Freeman

[Night Strike]

I see, so 3 days BEFORE the Tea Party ejected a racist group, the NAACP makes statements that the Tea Party includes racists, and that is reason to consider the NAACP racist?

Well, either the original NAACP accusation was correct OR the Tea Party ousting that group was racist/unfounded/etc.

No, the NAACP originally put forward language that the entire organization was racist. That has apparently been toned down (they haven't published the official statement - how that works I have no idea), but it's irrelevant. The Tea Party Federation found out that one of their member groups was breaking the rules, so they expelled them. And they would have expelled them even if the NAACP had said nothing.

[King Doctor]

No, the NAACP originally put forward language that the entire organization was racist.

Rubbish. Total and unmitigated falsehood.


Tell you what: Link us to it.


The NAACP only ever decried racist elements of the Tea Party. Trying to re-write history to make out that they said something completely different, now that you've been forced to concede that some elements within the Tea Party were indeed racist, isn't going to fool anybody.

[Night Strike]

No, the NAACP originally put forward language that the entire organization was racist.

Rubbish. Total and unmitigated falsehood.


Tell you what: Link us to it.


The NAACP only ever decried racist elements of the Tea Party. Trying to re-write history to make out that they said something completely different, now that you've been forced to concede that some elements within the Tea Party were indeed racist, isn't going to fool anybody.

The resolution initially said the NAACP would "repudiate the racism of the Tea Parties" and stand against the movement's attempt to "push our country back to the pre-civil rights era," though the wording was amended to downplay criticism of all Tea Partiers while asking them to repudiate bigots in their own ranks.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07 ... ted-naacp/

[Woodruff]

No, the NAACP originally put forward language that the entire organization was racist.

Rubbish. Total and unmitigated falsehood.
Tell you what: Link us to it.
The NAACP only ever decried racist elements of the Tea Party. Trying to re-write history to make out that they said something completely different, now that you've been forced to concede that some elements within the Tea Party were indeed racist, isn't going to fool anybody.

The resolution initially said the NAACP would "repudiate the racism of the Tea Parties" and stand against the movement's attempt to "push our country back to the pre-civil rights era," though the wording was amended to downplay criticism of all Tea Partiers while asking them to repudiate bigots in their own ranks.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07 ... ted-naacp/

So someone asked for a link to the resolution itself and, instead of doing that, you linked us to a FOX NEWS ARTICLE? Egads, man.

[King Doctor]

Quick, where's Gator to moan about how Night Strike is dishonestly misrepresenting a statement by showing only selectively edited chunks of it!!!


Oh, but of course, I suspect that he won't show up for this one...



Also, does anybody else think that it's strange that Night Strike suddenly chose to omit a section of that Fox News article which he found fit to include on the first page (before being forced to concede that the TP did indeed harbour racist elements)?

Hey, tell you what, let me point you to it:

Hilary Shelton, senior vice president of advocacy and policy for the NAACP, said the group has serious concerns about Tea Party behavior. He referenced an incident in March when Tea Party protesters allegedly hurled racial epithets at black lawmakers on Capitol Hill ahead of a health care vote.

"The Tea Party needs to denounce those racist elements within the Tea Party," Shelton told Fox News.

[thegreekdog]

Two things:

(1) The Tea Party is not one party, it is multiple movements. There are at least 30 Tea Party organizations in the Philadelphia area.

(2) The Tea Party organizations should get together, pick a committee, and denounce racist elements in a public document.

Then maybe people will leave the Tea Party organizations alone (with respect to racism at least).

[Woodruff]

Two things:

(1) The Tea Party is not one party, it is multiple movements. There are at least 30 Tea Party organizations in the Philadelphia area.

Serious question here...why? I don't get this. But it does lead me back to my concerns regarding "who gets to choose" when it comes to pork spending eliminations and that sort of thing. If these folks can't even agree enough to be within the same local organization, then they're frankly screwed on their ideals.