NAACP Cries Racist at the Tea Party

[Neoteny]

Failthread is fail.

[King Doctor]

He's as clearly ignorant and uninformed as the NCAAP would like him to be.

... said the man so ignorant and uninformed that he didn't once spell 'NAACP' correctly in either of his two posts ranting about it.


Clearly, this is an intellectual opponent whom I need to be very wary of.

I did not give thought 1 to anything racial when I was proud to see the tea party movement under way.

lol wut?

It's merely a matter of having fundamental beliefs and the race card (once again) has been used by ignoramuses to try and marginalize proper beliefs. I do not have to be racist to believe that the government should be taking so much of my money.

Oh, I see, you're another of these people who think that telling me what the Tea Party means to you personally, is proof of what the Tea Party means to every single other one of its members; including the ones that chant racist slogans at its rallies.

Seriously, Tzor has cracked this puzzle already kids. The best way forward isn't to try and defend your movement as spotless and perfect (no movement is), doing that is just banging your head against a brick-wall (while wilfully ignoring the unpleasant truth). It's to acknowledge that your broad church has, while not being racist in and of itself, attracted some unpleasant and ugly elements, from whom you are keen to distance yourselves and your central message.

But apparently, for the majority of Tea Party lovers responding to this thread, that kind of nuanced political discussion is something that they're unable to engage in. Which, and I'm purely speculating here, might seem to confirm several commonly expressed opinions about the underlying level of sophistication behind the average Tea Party attendees beliefs.




Also, final 'lul wut' moment. Check out the 'pro-tax' message that ViperOverlord believes the Tea Party is advocating:

I do not have to be racist to believe that the government should be taking so much of my money.

[tzor]

... said the man so ignorant and uninformed that he didn't once spell 'NAACP' correctly in either of his two posts ranting about it.

You know, arguing about typo errors on the internet is another way of saying you don't have an argument in the first place.

[Borderdawg]

I was looking for info on the $100K Andrew Breitbart is offering for video/audio proof of the alleged racist behavior of the Tea Party towards Rep. John Lewis D-Ga. (which has yet to be claimed) and ran across this. Interesting reading!

http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/07/naa ... party.html

[King Doctor]

... said the man so ignorant and uninformed that he didn't once spell 'NAACP' correctly in either of his two posts ranting about it.

You know, arguing about typo errors on the internet is another way of saying you don't have an argument in the first place.

... is the kind of trite recieved wisdom that you could have trotted out effectively if I hadn't written all of the rest of the text around that comment.


Also, given that so much of this thread has been dedicated to moaning that the NAACP have only criticised one particular group of racists, it's mildly amusing to see you nagging me about my ad hominem jabs (focusing on typos) while turning a blind eye to the ad homiem jabs of ViperDunderhead.

[thegreekdog]

But apparently, for the majority of Tea Party lovers responding to this thread, that kind of nuanced political discussion is something that they're unable to engage in. Which, and I'm purely speculating here, might seem to confirm several commonly expressed opinions about the underlying level of sophistication behind the average Tea Party attendees beliefs.

Do you not find these sentences ironic? Or do you find cries of "racism" to be nuanced political discussion?

[Night Strike]

I was looking for info on the $100K Andrew Breitbart is offering for video/audio proof of the alleged racist behavior of the Tea Party towards Rep. John Lewis D-Ga. (which has yet to be claimed) and ran across this. Interesting reading!

http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/07/naa ... party.html

Cool blog post. And even better, we now have the true race card to post any time liberals illegitimately cry racism:

[Phatscotty]

I was looking for info on the $100K Andrew Breitbart is offering for video/audio proof of the alleged racist behavior of the Tea Party towards Rep. John Lewis D-Ga. (which has yet to be claimed) and ran across this. Interesting reading!

http://www.bookerrising.net/2010/07/naa ... party.html

We don't need evidence. It is clear since a politician said one guy called him a slur, millions of Tea Baggers acted stupidly...

[thegreekdog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFeUhSlH ... re=related

I'm looking forward to the NAACP's statement regarding the racism in the SEIU.

But NO! Racist Tea Party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Eib2di9 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1CLPhz0 ... ature=fvwp

[Phatscotty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFeUhSlH ... re=related

I'm looking forward to the NAACP's statement regarding the racism in the SEIU.

But NO! Racist Tea Party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Eib2di9 ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1CLPhz0 ... ature=fvwp

Greek, this is what it looks like when they throw the race card in the air as high as they can. They don't even care where it falls or if it falls at all. Just the mere fact that it is played as all that matters. They want us to get twisted and bent out of shape over the ridiculousness. We are watching the wrong hand. What is in naacp/black panthers/ogletree/van jones/seiu/Obama's other hand?

What do they hope to accomplish? What is on the other side of the race card smoke-screen?? Just elections or is there more?

[Woodruff]

... said the man so ignorant and uninformed that he didn't once spell 'NAACP' correctly in either of his two posts ranting about it.

You know, arguing about typo errors on the internet is another way of saying you don't have an argument in the first place.

When someone mistypes an acronym every single time they use it, it becomes pretty reasonable to believe that individual doesn't know what the acronym even stands for.

We are watching the wrong hand. What is in naacp/black panthers/ogletree/van jones/seiu/Obama's other hand?

That you equate all of these together tells me that you're really not interested in rationally looking at the subject.

What do they hope to accomplish? What is on the other side of the race card smoke-screen?? Just elections or is there more?

As opposed to the smokescreen I just quoted from you, I suppose...

[King Doctor]

Do you not find these sentences ironic? Or do you find cries of "racism" to be nuanced political discussion?

No and No.

But, and it's important that we don't lose sight of this, this whole thread was not kicked off by an organisation applying a blanket label of 'racism', that's a myth that has been spun into existence over the ensuing debate by users who are simply unable to admit that there is truth to the allegations that the 'Tea Party' harbours several undesirable race-motivated elements.

Which is precisely the kind of nuanced point that those who would blindly defend a flawed organisation to the death seem unable to grasp here.



It's really not that unreasonable a point to make... don't you think?

[john9blue]

King Doctor. There are "racists" (I would wager) in every organization exceeding 1,000 members. In fact, you could make a case that everybody is racist to some extent. The only reason anyone would place the label of racism on the Tea Party is if they ALREADY disagreed with their policies. Either that, or you demonstrate how supporting the Tea Party's policies leads to racial prejudice. You can't say that we're denying the truth of racist elements when THERE ARE NONE. Just because you see a few signs that are racist doesn't mean the organization is racist. How about the signs insulting Bush's intelligence? His big ears even? He was just born that way, wasn't he? Doesn't mean that the Bush haters despise people with low intelligence or small ears, they're just finding irrelevant crap to insult someone about.

Either our society loses touch with reality completely, or this will go down as one of the sorriest chapters of the American Left to date.

[Phatscotty]

We are watching the wrong hand. What is in naacp/black panthers/ogletree/van jones/seiu/Obama's other hand?

That you equate all of these together tells me that you're really not interested in rationally looking at the subject.

I have a while ago rationally concluded they are all working together on this one, and have been for a while....

All of them have attacked the Tea Party. Where am I wrong?

What do they hope to accomplish? What is on the other side of the race card smoke-screen?? Just elections or is there more?

As opposed to the smokescreen I just quoted from you, I suppose...[/quote]

we'll see once we hash out the prior...

[Phatscotty]

King Doctor. There are "racists" (I would wager) in every organization exceeding 1,000 members. In fact, you could make a case that everybody is racist to some extent. The only reason anyone would place the label of racism on the Tea Party is if they ALREADY disagreed with their policies. Either that, or you demonstrate how supporting the Tea Party's policies leads to racial prejudice. You can't say that we're denying the truth of racist elements when THERE ARE NONE. Just because you see a few signs that are racist doesn't mean the organization is racist. How about the signs insulting Bush's intelligence? His big ears even? He was just born that way, wasn't he? Doesn't mean that the Bush haters despise people with low intelligence or small ears, they're just finding irrelevant crap to insult someone about.

Either our society loses touch with reality completely, or this will go down as one of the sorriest chapters of the American Left to date.

Racism is the least racist thing in the world, (there is no race that does not have racists)...Doctor has been disqualified for a while now, but I can not resist these easy ones

[thegreekdog]

Do you not find these sentences ironic? Or do you find cries of "racism" to be nuanced political discussion?

No and No.

But, and it's important that we don't lose sight of this, this whole thread was not kicked off by an organisation applying a blanket label of 'racism', that's a myth that has been spun into existence over the ensuing debate by users who are simply unable to admit that there is truth to the allegations that the 'Tea Party' harbours several undesirable race-motivated elements.

Which is precisely the kind of nuanced point that those who would blindly defend a flawed organisation to the death seem unable to grasp here.

It's really not that unreasonable a point to make... don't you think?

It is a fairly unreasonable point to make. First, there is no truth to the allegations that the Tea Party harbors several undesirable race-motiviated elements. The word "harbor," when used as a verb, is defined as follows:

–verb (used with object)
4. to give shelter to; offer refuge to: They harbored the refugees who streamed across the borders.
5. to conceal; hide: to harbor fugitives.
6. to keep or hold in the mind; maintain; entertain: to harbor suspicion.
7. to house or contain.
8. to shelter (a vessel), as in a harbor.

So, there is no truth to the allegations that the Tea Party harbors several undesirable race-motivated elements because the Tea Party does not give shelter or refuge to such elements, and the Tea Party does not conceal, hide, house or contain such elements. As I said before, it's fine and dandy for the NAACP to indicate that certain people within the Tea Party are racist and denounce those people; however, if the NAACP was being consistent and were to apply the same standards to all groups, I would have expected denouncements of a number of other parties, movements, and groups, including, but not limited to the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, the Black Panthers, etc., etc. However, we do not see such denouncements. Why not? Because the NAACP's denouncement of the Tea Party was purely politically motivated and was meant to continue to demean the Tea Party movement without answering the questions and issues brought up by the movement related to economics and individual rights.

While I appreciate that some posters might not be as cogent as you (most of us aren't doctors after all), you're probably about as off-base as most of them are... just in the other direction.

[jimboston]

The NAACP calling the Tea Party Racist, is like the Pot calling the Kettle Black... however in this case the Kettle would be RED.

There are more racists who are members of the NAACP then there are who are members of (or affiliated with) the Tea Party. A higher percentage of NAACP members are recist as compared with the Tea Party.

The whole premise of the NAACP is racist. The premise of the Tea Party is not.

The NAACP started as an organization to promote equality... it has morphed into an organization that promoted inequlity.

The Tea Party was formed to fight taxes and wasteful spending... that is still the goal. If (at some future date) it morphs to something so diametrically opposed to its' original purpose, then I will be first in line to state as much.

[Phatscotty]

The NAACP calling the Tea Party Racist, is like the Pot calling the Kettle Black... however in this case the Kettle would be RED.

There are more racists who are members of the NAACP then there are who are members of (or affiliated with) the Tea Party. A higher percentage of NAACP members are recist as compared with the Tea Party.

The whole premise of the NAACP is racist. The premise of the Tea Party is not.

The NAACP started as an organization to promote equality... it has morphed into an organization that promoted inequlity.

The Tea Party was formed to fight taxes and wasteful spending... that is still the goal. If (at some future date) it morphs to something so diametrically opposed to its' original purpose, then I will be first in line to state as much.

in fact, that is exactly what a racist group would do! Shame on naacp

[gatoraubrey2]

The word "harbor," when used as a verb, is defined as follows:

–verb (used with object)
4. to give shelter to; offer refuge to: They harbored the refugees who streamed across the borders.
5. to conceal; hide: to harbor fugitives.
6. to keep or hold in the mind; maintain; entertain: to harbor suspicion.
7. to house or contain.
8. to shelter (a vessel), as in a harbor.

Bravo! Defining words and insisting that all members of the discussion abide by their meanings infuriates relativists!!

As to the earlier argument about "proving" that a racist incident didn't happen: anyone who has studied philosophy or even gotten into a few real-world disagreements knows that it's impossible to prove a negative. Thus, it is generally accepted that without proof that an event did occur, it is reasonable to assume that it didn't, and irrational and irresponsible to claim that it did.

And, getting to the general point of the thread, yes, there are some racists at Tea Party events. Yes, most rational people denounce those racists. The leaders of the Tea Party itself have denounced those racists, long before the NAACP got involved. Nothing in the Tea Party agenda supports or promotes racism, but the events are open to the public and all types may show up.

The negative talk about the NAACP is not an effort to divert the discussion from the fact that there are racists at Tea Party events. We all know that. There are racists at every event, including those of major political parties and major civil rights groups. We all know it, and there's no need to discuss it. The anger at the NAACP stems from the fact that they only choose to condemn the racist members of groups that oppose their political agenda. No one disagrees with their stance that racism is wrong, we just wish that they would publicly denounce the racist members of left-wing groups, and demand action from their leaders. Racism is racism. Be equal opportunity racist haters. To do otherwise is just discriminatory.

[King Doctor]

It is a fairly unreasonable point to make. First, there is no truth to the allegations that the Tea Party harbors several undesirable race-motiviated elements. The word "harbor," when used as a verb, is defined as follows:

–verb (used with object)
4. to give shelter to; offer refuge to: They harbored the refugees who streamed across the borders.
5. to conceal; hide: to harbor fugitives.
6. to keep or hold in the mind; maintain; entertain: to harbor suspicion.
7. to house or contain.
8. to shelter (a vessel), as in a harbor.

A very interesting point, however I would still argue that the TP 'harbours' racists in senses 4, 5, 7 and 8. Namely by providing a legitimising umberella organisation from which racists are able to espouse their reprehensible views.

By providing an organisation and a brand, then permitting almost all comers to use it to dress up their message with, is to lend a veneer of legitimacy and political engagement to racist fringe groups that we all ought to be denying that kind of validation. If racist groups wish to preach race motivated politics, then they ought to be forced to do it under their own banners, rather than being freely given the opportunity to conceal themselves within more mainstream organisations and preaching from their pulpit.

The point here is essentially that the fact that Tea Partiers have been so unwilling to do anything to stop their organisation from being hijacked and used as a smokescreen for racists to hide behind, makes it legitimate to (1) question why they have been so sluggish to react to behaviour that most people would agree is reprehensible, and (2) to denounce their unwillingness to act as essentially harbouring racism.

if the NAACP was being consistent and were to apply the same standards to all groups, I would have expected denouncements of a number of other parties, movements, and groups, including, but not limited to the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, the Black Panthers, etc., etc. However, we do not see such denouncements. Why not?

Because the fact that a group does not simultaneoulsy denounce every action in the world, does not ilegitimise its denouncement of the racist action at hand.

The NAACP isn't a perfect organisation, we all know that. It has finite resources, dependencies on other groups for funding and has to pick its battles accordingly. It simply isn't in a position whereby it can criticise every racist action on the planet (indeed, no group that I can think of is). So of course you're going to find some gaps in its coverage.

But the fact is that simply finding organisations that it has not criticised, does not invalidate the criticisms that it does make. That's like claiming that because a policeman hasn't arrested every burglar on the planet, that it's not ok for him to arrest the one that he's just found climbing out of his neighbours house with a television under his arm.

the NAACP's denouncement of the Tea Party was purely politically motivated and was meant to continue to demean the Tea Party movement without answering the questions and issues brought up by the movement related to economics and individual rights.

Not so much.

This 'persecution complex' mythology gets wheeled out whenever the Tea Party is engaged in an argument other than the one that it wants to have (and often when it starts losing that particular argument). It is frankly ridicuous.

you're probably about as off-base as most of them are... just in the other direction.

I think that the process of hurling allegations about who is/isn't off-base and who does/doesn't represent the true centre ground are doomed to end up in a territory both dangerous and spurious. Let us leave them for the children playing in the shallower end of the debating pool.

[Frigidus]

So what I'm getting is that the NAACP is condemning some of the open racists in the Tea Party, and the Tea Party is saying NO U? Can't we all agree that racists are bad?

[King Doctor]

So what I'm getting is that the NAACP is condemning some of the open racists in the Tea Party, and the Tea Party is saying NO U? Can't we all agree that racists are bad?

Pretty much, except that from some particularly fervent sectors of the party 'NO U' actually seems to be 'NO problems here at all, we are cleaner than God's fingers. U have all the problems in your house and have to condemn all of the other racists in the world first before you can come and point out ours'.

Also, while the great majority of reasonable posters here have condemned racism, there are some notable exceptions who have studiously avoided making any such condemning noises even when directly asked whether they feel that racism is unacceptable.

[PLAYER57832]

It seems that the Tea Party is now moving to remove certain racist elements. So, whilst the party has never been fully racist, they are now acknowledging that they did allow , or simply did not prohibit racist elements from using their banner for racist causes and comments.

This pretty much puts them on the footing of most large political parties, in fact just about any large organization, in that there are always going to be some idiots who attach themselves along with (generaly) a heavy majority who are not. However, so long as the party/organnization itself takes strides to curb, reprimand, exclude such outward activity, the organization is acting appropriately.

[King Doctor]

just about any large organization, in that there are always going to be some idiots who attach themselves along with (generaly) a heavy majority who are not. However, so long as the party/organnization itself takes strides to curb, reprimand, exclude such outward activity, the organization is acting appropriately.

I could not agree more.

[Woodruff]

We are watching the wrong hand. What is in naacp/black panthers/ogletree/van jones/seiu/Obama's other hand?

That you equate all of these together tells me that you're really not interested in rationally looking at the subject.

I have a while ago rationally concluded they are all working together on this one, and have been for a while....
All of them have attacked the Tea Party. Where am I wrong?

In making them equivalent and implying that "they're all working together", AS I CLEARLY POINTED OUT.

What do they hope to accomplish? What is on the other side of the race card smoke-screen?? Just elections or is there more?

As opposed to the smokescreen I just quoted from you, I suppose...

we'll see once we hash out the prior...

Hashed.