Anti-Tax Tea Parties Held Across U.S.

[INDY500]

Originally Posted by BVS

We've been begging that of you all from the beginning of this movement.

Actually, at the beginning of the movement it was mocked as "astroturf." Something ginned up by Dick Armey and Fox. Then we were warned it was hatching the next antigovernment militias and Tim McVeighs. Nancy Pelosi cried “I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw... in the late ’70s in San Francisco, this kind of — of rhetoric was very frightening and it gave — it created a climate in which we — violence took place.”
So, (point of sarcasm) maybe to Democrats credit it was only after all that and the plane crashing into the IRS building and the Times Square bomber couldn't be pinned on Tea Baggers that the race card got played.

But let's face it, we have two diametrically opposed views as to what racism is.

We've showed you the signs, we've showed you the quotes, and with a straight face you type out with all sincerity that you can't see it.

How do you show a blind man?

And what percentage of participants is that? >1% There are way more Obama voters with buyers remorse I assure you.

Racism is a distraction.

[A_Wanderer]

“Tea partier” Mark Williams writes ‘letter to Abe Lincoln’ … from the ‘coloreds’ : The Reid Report

No racism here.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Actually, at the beginning of the movement it was mocked as "astroturf." Something ginned up by Dick Armey and Fox. Then we were warned it was hatching the next antigovernment militias and Tim McVeighs. Nancy Pelosi cried “I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw... in the late ’70s in San Francisco, this kind of — of rhetoric was very frightening and it gave — it created a climate in which we — violence took place.”
So, (point of sarcasm) maybe to Democrats credit it was only after all that and the plane crashing into the IRS building and the Times Square bomber couldn't be pinned on Tea Baggers that the race card got played.

Talk about distraction.

Originally Posted by INDY500

And what percentage of participants is that? >1% There are way more Obama voters with buyers remorse I assure you.

You admit to not being at any rally. I've been to two and talked to MANY, much larger than 1%. It's enough that requires notice from someone on the same side, it's very telling that NO ONE has...

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by nathan1977

True.

I think the real question here -- the white elephant, the one we're all dancing around -- is, what do we do about the fact that the Dukes of Hazzard's car is plastered with the Confederate Flag (and called the General Lee)?

Or Lynrd Skynrd for that matter. Some how both seem to get a pass. I don't know why. But even I'm not incensed about those examples and I have no good explanation for that.

Originally Posted by nathan1977

I've never seen "derogatory" spelled quite that way before. (Did you attend the Benji Schul for Peepul Who Spel Gud? 'Cause I'm currently enrolled in his Punct'iuatshun.,*Clas.)

I knew it was spelled wrong but I was too lazy to correct it. I've been kind of ruined by spell check and they don't have it on hear.

Whatever happened to Benji anyway? He disappeared as suddenly as he arrived.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by INDY500

I've never been to a rally, never received any info in the mail or given a dime to any organization, but I'll gladly be a "tea bagger" this fall voting only for candidates that promise to restore fiscal responsibility, repeal Obamacare and require that each new bill identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the authority to pass said law.

I know, bigoted isn't it?

None of the above has anything to do with racism. Surely you must understand that any concerns about racism in the Tea Party have nothing to do with those issues.

I'll be honest, I wish the NAACP hadn't decided to speak out on this. The racist undertones that sometimes pop up in the Tea Party are just that by and large--undertones--and too difficult to prove. Most racism is that way today--it can't be legislated away--but it is still problamatic.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by A_Wanderer

“Tea partier” Mark Williams writes ‘letter to Abe Lincoln’ … from the ‘coloreds’ : The Reid Report

The sentiments expressed here are more likely what the NAACP was concerned about.

I suppose this will be defended as satire? Some thing along the lines of "Not for a minute was Williams implying that all black people are like this. We respect the hard-working, conservative African Americans who support our cause. However, we do believe this represents the views of the blacks running the NAACP."

Or, more succinctly, as my 8th grade math teacher put it:

"I hate niggers. Now, not all black people are niggers, but the ones who are--I don't like them."

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Fine, let's just have that debate without the race card thrown in at every turn.

except when it's white people who are the victims?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

"I hate niggers. Now, not all black people are niggers, but the ones who are--I don't like them."

it's hard to explain how much i hate that word. how uncomfortable it makes me. how i feel like the next sound i hear will be the crack of a skull or worse. it really is a wretched, wretched word that always connotes violence to me.

but, anyway, here's a great blogger who finds himself surprised that he agrees with the NAACP on this whole Tea Party thing:

The NAACP Is Right
JUL 15 2010, 10:00 AM ET | Comment

The NAACP on the Tea Party:

The reaction to this announcement has been swift and, in the main, negative. Next door, Dave Weigel, whose knowledge of the Tea Party is formidable, dismisses the resolution as "silliness" and "a stunt," and Chris Bodenner bemoans the fact that he ended Monday praising the Tea Party over the NAACP. If I'm reading this right, Michael Tomasky believes Obama should attack the NAACP because their resolution "heightens division." I think Michael McGough captures the spirit of "sensible" criticism:

.

The NAACP's announcement initially struck me in much the same the way. But some hours of considering this have proven to me that my initial skepticism says more about the broad American narrative of race and racism, then it does about the justness of the NAACP's charge.

I think it's worth, first, considering the record of American racism, and then the record of the Tea Party and its allies. Racism tends to attract attention when it's flagrant and filled with invective. But like all bigotry, the most potent component of racism is frame-flipping--positioning the bigot as the actual victim. So the gay do not simply want to marry, they want to convert our children into sin. The Jews do not merely want to be left in peace, they actually are plotting world take-over. And the blacks are not actually victims of American power, but beneficiaries of the war against hard-working whites. This is a respectable, more sensible, bigotry, one that does not seek to name-call, preferring instead change the subject and strawman. Thus segregation wasn't necessary to keep the niggers in line, it was necessary to protect the honor of white women.

In that same vein we confront Glenn Beck, arguably the movement's greatest and most full-throated advocate in the media. Here is Glenn Beck discussing President Barack Obama's attempt to convene Officer Michael Crowley and Henry Louis Gates for a beer-summit:

Here is Glenn Beck discussing President Barack Obama's push for health care reform:

Perhaps one considers Glenn Beck merely a minor associate of the Tea Party. I don't agree, but fair enough. It's probably better to consider those politicians which the Tea Party has embraced, presumably, as embodying their values.

Steve King has long been an ally of the Tea Party and was the keynote speaker at the Tennessee Tea Party Coalition's Convention. Here isKing on President Barack Obama:

I think it's worth acknowledging that the Colorado Tea Party canceled an appearance with King after this statement. And perhaps this is still too much distance, in which case it's worth looking at the events which took place at the Tea Party's own convention. The Tea Party selected Tom Tancredo, a politician who once called Miami "a third world country," to give an opening night speech. Tancredo, true to form, claimed that Obama was elected "because we do not have a civics literacy test before people can vote in this country," and went on to assert that..

Tancredo was roundly cheered, and afterward, lauded by Tea Party Nation organizer Judson Phillips, for giving "a fantastic speech."

Given this record, I am at a loss to understand the criticism directed at the NAACP. This is a Civil Right organization who's taken as part of its mission opposing any attempt to inject racism into American politics. When the Tea Party's media advocates, when the politicians the movement embraces, when the speakers at its conventions do precisely that, and the NAACP responds by "calling on Tea Party leaders to repudiate those in their ranks who use racist language in their signs and speeches," I have trouble finding the actual problem.

Given my own initial skepticism, I'm left with the notion that many of us that like to consider ourselves sober-minded and fair, have forgotten the history of this country we love. No matter. I cannot speak for others, but I was immediately jogged back to reality by the Tea Party's response:

This is not some deluded crazy, who has infiltrated the Tea Party with an offensive sign. This is the national spokesman for the Tea Party Express claiming that one of the authors of the 20th century American revolution is actually a "vile racist" organization. This is who they are--America's far right-wing, speaking with all the emboldened ignorance that is fast becoming their stock in trade. I have had, and continue to have, my criticism of the NAACP. But the notion that they are somehow being unfair to the Tea Party, that President Obama should denounce the NAACP, says a lot about our desire to forget and their insistence that we do no such thing.

I have long been one to question the NAACP's relevance. Moments like these remind me that I have been very wrong. It is not my style to spend my days attempting to enlighten or embarrass the Tea Party. But someone has to do it. Someone has to say, "It's not OK." That is not work for "sensible" people. But it's work that has to be done. Someone must hold the line.

i think it's absolutely dead-on that the subtext of "socialism" is really "reparations" for many.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

it's hard to explain how much i hate that word. how uncomfortable it makes me. how i feel like the next sound i hear will be the crack of a skull or worse. it really is a wretched, wretched word that always connotes violence to me.

Imagine being black and hearing it. Make that a black 8th grade student hearing it from your teacher.

I don't know how many times I heard, growing up, teachers, classmates, church leaders say things like this and worse and then add, "Oh, we don't mean you, Sean. You're all right." Or even worse ("Don't worry, Sean. You're not REALLY black.")

Reading the comments from Glenn Beck, Tancredo, and others. . .it's really scary to me that so many people are buying into this stuff. I really hate to see this movement gaining so much traction in this country.

[INDY500]

Ironic discussion given which community is being hit hardest by Obama's anti-business rhetoric and, as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said Wed, his "ill-advised course of government expansion, major tax increases, massive deficits and job-destroying regulations."

Sounds like the same things the Tax Parties are angry about actually. Pretty important issues.

Let me know if the thread ever returns from its "spot the racist" rut.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Let me know if the thread ever returns from its "spot the racist" rut.

And YOU let us know if and when you are ever ready to recognise and discuss racism without your incessant flippant denial.

Originally Posted by INDY500

Ironic discussion given which community is being hit hardest by Obama's anti-business rhetoric and, as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said Wed, his "ill-advised course of government expansion, major tax increases, massive deficits and job-destroying regulations."

Who?

Who has he hit hard by rhetoric? I didn't even know rhetoric could do such a thing. Anti-business rhetoric? Really? Quit listening to the idealouges they are turning your brain to mush.

Who? Who has already been hit by major active tax increases?

Yes, you have proven why we don't need regulations Even Ann Coulter got this one right, "conservatives don't need to defend or be pro-BP just because the Dems are against it, we need to get away from that mentality".

[anitram]

Originally Posted by A_Wanderer

“Tea partier” Mark Williams writes ‘letter to Abe Lincoln’ … from the ‘coloreds’ : The Reid Report

No racism here.

If only he had the class to actually be embarrassed.

[INDY500]

July 16, 2010 12:00 A.M.
The NAACP’s Descent
The glory days of the NAACP are long gone.

Mona Charen

The NAACP’s decision to condemn “racist” elements within the tea-party movement is about as surprising as the U.N. Human Rights Council voting to condemn Israel. Still, there’s a difference. The U.N. Human Rights Council never had any moral authority to lose. The NAACP did.

The NAACP was formed on the centennial of Abraham Lincoln’s birthday, in 1909, in a small New York apartment. “The Call” proclaimed the organization’s mission:

"If Mr. Lincoln could revisit this country in the flesh, he would be disheartened and discouraged. He would learn that on January 1, 1909, Georgia had rounded out a new confederacy by disfranchising the Negro, after the manner of all the other Southern States. . . . Added to this, the spread of lawless attacks upon the Negro, North, South and West — even in the Springfield made famous by Lincoln — often accompanied by revolting brutalities, sparing neither sex nor age nor youth, could but shock the author of the sentiment that "government of the people, by the people, for the people; should not perish from the earth."

The NAACP’s role in fighting racism was a noble one. The organization was the moving force behind anti-lynching laws. Thurgood Marshall, of the Legal Defense Fund, argued and won the case of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, marking a new legal era in the United States.

But the glory days are long gone. In recent decades, the NAACP has transformed itself into just another liberal advocacy group, absurdly dragging “racial justice” into nearly every public-policy argument. In 1994, the NAACP filed suit against the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority claiming that a proposed fare increase would discriminate against minorities. That same year, an NAACP spokesman suggested that raising the retirement age for Social Security could “exacerbate racial divisions” because blacks tend to have shorter life expectancies. When Ohio passed a law requiring high-school students to pass a 9th-grade-level exam in order to get a high-school diploma (yes, sad), the NAACP sued. Julian Bond, the organization’s chairman, described the Reagan administration as “crazed locusts” waging “an assault on the rule of law.”

If the NAACP were to make its case on honest grounds — that it likes and believes in big-government liberalism — that would be inoffensive. But the NAACP frames its policy preferences in the language of fighting racism and bigotry, and accordingly engages in serial slanders.

In 2000, the NAACP ran scurrilous, highly inflammatory radio and television ads against George W. Bush, suggesting that he tolerated the horribly brutal lynching of James Byrd in Texas. The rationale, if you can call it that, was that Bush declined to sign a hate-crimes bill. But 1) Texas already had a hate-crimes bill; and 2) of the three perpetrators, two were sentenced to death and one to life imprisonment on Bush’s watch.

Now come the tea parties — overwhelmingly peaceful, orderly, and spontaneous demonstrations against overweening government, Obamacare, accumulating debt, and federal bailouts. Though tens of thousands of Americans have rallied and marched, there has been almost no violence or vandalism. Of thousands upon thousands of signs and banners, a tiny handful have been offensive, and an even smaller percentage of those — maybe one or two, which I’ve seen on the web — have been arguably racist.

So what is the NAACP talking about? Many of the signs mentioned as racist refer to Barack Obama as a Nazi. While it is no more acceptable to fling the accusation of Nazism at Obama than it was to use it against Bush (which was commonplace), how exactly does it amount to racism?

Worse, the resolution (the text of which has not, as of this writing, been released by the NAACP) reportedly cites the bogus name-calling alleged by members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

This charade has been amply exposed by bloggers (see for example Power Line Blog). Alas, for the congressmen who claimed that the tea-party crowd shouted racial epithets at them, a number of videos from different angles have captured the events of that evening. None of them recorded the N-word or anything similar. All of the evidence suggests that the congressmen lied in order to libel as racists those who opposed Obamacare.

Racism was a stain on the American character. But the wanton smear of racism against your political opponents when you are losing the argument on points is pretty ugly, as well.

Mrs Charen could also have pointed out that at that same NAACP meeting current chairman Ben Jealous asserted, "And in the middle of this great American nightmare, here comes the genetic descendent of the White Citizens' Council, burst from its coffin, carrying signs with slogans like "lynch Barack Hussein Obama" and "lynch Eric Holder."

Pretty serious charges... and naturally no evidence of it actually happening exists either.

One could also point out how they opposed the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court and threatened to suspend local NAACP officers that didn't rescind their earlier endorsements.

That long time chairman Julian Bond said here in Indiana in 2004 speech, "Their [Republicans] idea of equal rights is the American flag and Confederate swastika flying side by side." Nice.

And that you won't find condemnation from the NAACP for the hate espoused by the likes of Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright or the Black Panthers. New or old.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Mrs Charen could also have pointed out that at that same NAACP meeting current chairman Ben Jealous asserted, "And in the middle of this great American nightmare, here comes the genetic descendent of the White Citizens' Council, burst from its coffin, carrying signs with slogans like "lynch Barack Hussein Obama" and "lynch Eric Holder."

Pretty serious charges... and naturally no evidence of it actually happening exists either.

Well I know for sure we posted a sign in here that had a noose and a reference to Obama(but maybe implied isn't enough evidence for you). But I would have to do a little research about actually using the word "lynch".

Originally Posted by INDY500

And that you won't find condemnation from the NAACP for the hate espoused by the likes of Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright or the Black Panthers. New or old.

I do agree that they are a lot like you in the sense that they turn a blind eye to what's going on with their own "group". This is true.

[Benji2112]

Originally Posted by BVS

Talk about distraction.



You admit to not being at any rally. I've been to two and talked to MANY, much larger than 1%. It's enough that requires notice from someone on the same side, it's very telling that NO ONE has...

Did you go to the Glenn Beck Rally at the Alamo, the one in Ft Worth?

still waiting for that one.


PSST He wasn't there . Alamo is in San Antonio


in ALL the Tea Party Rally's... 1 single arrest. 1 . It was for a union Obama supporter beating up a black man in a wheelchair for selling american flags.


1 arrest.


You sure as hell didn't go to a rally with Glenn Beck in Ft Worth, at the Alamo. Didn't happen.


show me anything besides the 1 single arrest at a Tea Party rally. You keep ignoring the requests.

show me 1 single arrest, besides the SEIU guy who beat up the black guy in the wheel chair.

You can't. There isn't another.

g20. 600 in a day? But they are freedom fighters right?


I have been to 100's of Tea Party rally, I can pull every record. Not a single tea party arrest so sorce your claim.


Nany Pelosi and angry mobs... Is this the same Nancy Pelosi who gave Jim Jones ( the Rev) because he was such a wonderfull spiritual guide , a ton of money which he promptly used to Murder a congressman and made 900 people drink the "koolaide"

That Nancy Pelosi?

[BVS]

Benji, you seem to be having a reading comprehension problem.

For the last time I went to the San Antonio one, how many times do I have to tell you?

Where have I mentioned anything about arrests? No where.

Where have I mentioned anything about supporting the G20 protestors? No where.

I'm just going to answer my questions myself for now on, because you don't seem to understand.

[Bluer White]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

I don't know how many times I heard, growing up, teachers, classmates, church leaders say things like this and worse and then add, "Oh, we don't mean you, Sean. You're all right." Or even worse ("Don't worry, Sean. You're not REALLY black.")

Reading the comments from Glenn Beck, Tancredo, and others. . .it's really scary to me that so many people are buying into this stuff. I really hate to see this movement gaining so much traction in this country.

Yes, like when presidential candidate Biden said Obama was "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Or when the Senate majority leader said that Obama was successful in part due to his "light-skinned appearance, with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

That kind of black.

[BVS]

Yeah, it just goes to show you we have a long ways to go...

Some much longer than others...

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Bluer White

Yes, like when presidential candidate Biden said Obama was "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy."

Or when the Senate majority leader said that Obama was successful in part due to his "light-skinned appearance, with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

That kind of black.

That kind of black, yes.

I'm not sure what your point is. That Democrats are capable of racism too? Is that news to anyone? You don't think we're aware the Clinton machine was pulling some of the same tricks during the primaries?

Are you suggesting that there's a double standard, is that what it is? That the Dems always get a pass when they express hatred (though lets be honest, racism is more complicated than simply "hatred" and the above examples don't express hatred so much as a clumsy stereotyping and generalization)? Because, they don't. At least in my book.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Ironic discussion given which community is being hit hardest by Obama's anti-business rhetoric and, as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said Wed, his "ill-advised course of government expansion, major tax increases, massive deficits and job-destroying regulations."

Sounds like the same things the Tax Parties are angry about actually. Pretty important issues.

Let me know if the thread ever returns from its "spot the racist" rut.

Are you being purposely obtuse, INDY?

Go back and read the posts. How many were saying that opposition to tax increases, massive deficits constitutes racism. Read the article by Mark Williams that prompted the discussion. How much of that article was unrelated to race?

Which community is being hardest hit by Obama's anti-business rhetoric?

Don't give us this BS about how you've been nobly trying to talk about the issues while the rest of us dither about race. All you've brought to the table is cheap shots, admittedly funny one-liners, and straw man arguments. Whenever I've asked you a real question, like the still unanswered one about why buisnesses would choose to pay the fine rather than purchase healthcare for thier , you just go mysteriously silent.

I would LOVE to have a real discussion about the deficit, taxes, healthcare, but you haven't been willing to engage.

You know it really is as simple as this. If the right would simply say that Obama is misguided as opposed to "actively seeking to destroy the American way of life" then we could talk. But "I know the Democrats want what's best for the country too, they just happen to be mistaken as to how to get there" just isn't sexy on talk radio and TV. The sad thing is you're not a media personality making big bucks from saying bombastic nonsense on the air--so you have no excuse for peddling the same crap.