• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NAACP backs report that ties racist groups to tea party

Status
Not open for further replies.
Barbbtx said:
If liberals are for liberty, why do they do everything they can to discredit the tea party?
Why do they want to restrict individual freedom?
Click to expand...

Because the Tea-Party is the American Right Wing trying to rebrand itself as something else. Evidence has shown where Tea Party members stand in terms of ideological and sociological beliefs. And that is squarely within the same religious right wing that pushed Reagan to the forefront in the 80s. The Tea Party doesn't stand for 'freedom' anymore than white people stand for slavery. They're simply far more vocal in their beliefs than their less radicalized cousins in the Republican party. Nice emotional argument though.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Again with the hyperbole? 10,000 active members? please hatuey.
Click to expand...

You've just stated that there are 33 members on this forum who are Tea Party supporters. That is 33 out of 10,000. Whethere they are active or not is quite irrelevant. DP is not a cross section of the American political community anymore than the millions of people who go to Starbucks are.

My views on race? I am not a racist, I think all folks are equal. I abhor racism. I hope that clears things up for you chief.
Click to expand...

And yet this is exatcly why I state that your logic is flawed. You're relying on mostly anecdotal claims to make a claim on a national group. That's where your argument is flawed. 33 people supporting a party on a political forum do not represent the millions outside of the forum who also support it anymore than 33 dead cat represents the millions who are alive and well outside.

There are no more racist elements in the teaparty than there is in the democrat party. and just like you alluded to in another thread about muslims and airplanes, folks are just reacting to what the media is making up about us. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Only if you actually READ my argument you'd see what I said has nothing to do with what you're saying and is nothing more than a red herring. The fact that I admit that I'm unfoundedly apprehensive about dying in a terrorist attack does not mean that there is no terrorism in Islam. Matter of fact I have stated MANY times and even made threads on the matter where I have said that Islam DOES have a problem with terrorism. Here is one of them:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/history/41136-liberals-wrong-issue.html

Hatuey said:
I read a lot. I'm not afraid to read opposing points of views on different issues. Lately, I've been reading a lot of books regarding Islamic expansion, terrorism and Christian history. After a lot of reflection, I've come to a single conclusion : Liberals are wrong in the way they approach the debate on Islamic terrorism.

Since 9.11.2001 terrorism has become a hotly debated issue in America and many other nations. Not because of the attacks themselves but because of how dormant the West remained as Islamic terrorism expanded. It pains me to admit it but my fellow liberals have taken the wrong road on this issue. Instead of addressing the problems within Islam which would be obvious to anybody who regards the issue, we have chosen to divert attention from the issue by pointing at the misdeeds of other religions. Mostly pointing at examples of Christian terrorism that while horrible in themselves are not anywhere near the type of threat Islamic terrorism posses.

I've come up with a single reason as to why we as liberals have chosen to do this. We are under the false impression that when people attack Islamic radicalism they're attacking Islam itself. This is not true. Islam doesn't need change as far as religion goes. Islam needs religion as far as radicalism and certain groups within it go. While peace loving Muslims number in the hundreds of millions worldwide one CAN NOT ignore the significant but minute percentage that promote hate and violence. This minority is important because it is growing like a cancer. We are seeing more and more signs of home grown terrorism which were not obvious before because of how sheltered we were. No more.

Liberals we must realize that when people say that Islamic terrorism is a problem they're not talking about Islam being the problem but those who misinterpret and radicalize the scripture to fit an agenda that wants social regression. The Koran, like the Bible has many radical passages but we are not seeing thousands of Christian youths become enamored by the thought of killing in the name of Christianity.

As a proud liberal I beg many of you to reconsider your positions on this issue. I'm not talking about moving to the left or the right. I'm asking you to realize that Radical Islamics are a plague and we're doing a disservice to peaceful Muslims by choosing to ignore the issue and putting up smoke screens on an issue that requires common sense and strength in character.

When I say 'Liberals' you all know who I'm talking about. If you don't then you probably be offended by my use of the word.
Click to expand...

So my answers are not only coherent but incredibly consistent.


A coherent thought please.

I think there are racists who consider themselves tea party folk, I think there are racists who think themselves as democrats. Yet I'm not starting 5 threads a day smearing democrats for having racist elements in thier party.
Click to expand...

Yes because Democrats don't push these people to the forefront. As a matter of fact just the mere suggestion that a Democratic candidate or a Democrat is racist is enough to get them fired. Look at what happened to that NPR fellow and that lady who talked about being apprehensive about helping a white farmer. The Tea Party on the other hand has held itself above accountability. While most Democrats with a racist past have apologize for it, the Tea Party keeps playing a catch 22 with the matter. If they're member of the Tea Party and hold racist views then these views are also held by other people and nobody is allowed to criticize it and it doesn't reflect on them. If they're associates of the Tea Party then they're not the same as members and the Tea Party should not be criticized for such allegiances even though their members actively seek these allegiances. See what I'm getting at?

1. The Tea Party takes absolutely no responsibility for the actions of its members even though they supposedly speak in one voice.

2. The Tea Party is allowed to criticize whatever it sees wrong within the establishment and when these same concerns are raised about their party they simply say that they're not really part of the party and they're all loosely associated groups with different ideas under a basic banner.

You have to pick a side in how you're going to play politics Reverend and it simply does not allow for the *****footing of the Tea Party. Either you speak with one voice or you do not. Either tea party groups, associates etc can be called out for the incoherence they've shown in terms of how they're organized or they can't. Seriously, it's not rocket science.

So people answer the question without anymore squirming:

Are there racist elements within the Tea Party or not?

The possible answers are :

A) Yes

and

B) No.

Which one is it?
 
Last edited:
EnigmaO01 said:
Example please? I won't be holding my breath though.
Click to expand...

WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 — The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has threatened to suspend officers of its branch in Compton, Calif., unless they rescind their endorsement of the nomination of Judge Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.

On Wednesday the national office of the N.A.A.C.P., which opposes the nomination, told officials of the branch that they had until Friday at 3 P.M. Eastern daylight time to withdraw their support for Judge Thomas.

If they fail to do so, the national office said, the branch president and all those who signed a resolution supporting the judge will have to resign. The office added that if the Compton officials refused to take either action, it would begin disciplinary procedures that could lead to the removal or suspension of the officials.
Click to expand...


N.A.A.C.P. Battle Over Thomas - New York Times
 
Barbbtx said:
If liberals are for liberty, why do they do everything they can to discredit the tea party?
Why do they want to restrict individual freedom?
Click to expand...

Arguing against a group is not restricting their freedom.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
hatuey basically just called adpst an uncle tom. :shrug:
Click to expand...

You can keep calling it that and I welcome the first mod who tries to gig me for it. I'll gladly go straight to vauge and we'll see what the outcome is. I have absolutely no doubt that I will win the argument as the post itself shows that I admitted calling apdst a slave to his white masters was HYPERBOLE as much as his comment about slavery being better than liberalism was.
 
Hatuey said:
You can keep calling it that and I welcome the first mod who tries to gig me for it. I'll gladly go straight to vauge and we'll see what the outcome is. I have absolutely no doubt that I will win the argument as the post itself shows that I admitted calling apdst a slave to his white masters was HYPERBOLE as much as his comment about slavery being better than liberalism was.
Click to expand...



hence the basically. but i like the hysterics. :thumbs:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
hence the basically. but i like the hysterics. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Only that's not what basically is used for if I didn't basically call him an uncle tom. I like that you avoided my question:

Does the Tea Party have racist elements?

Yes or No?

Simple answers buddy, simple answers.
 
Hatuey said:
Only that's not what basically is used for if I didn't basically call him an uncle tom. I like that you avoided my question:

Does the Tea Party have racist elements?

Yes or No?

Simple answers buddy, simple answers.
Click to expand...



uhm, you ok man? I answered you already. Post #75, What? Did you think that since you ignored that post you can ask the question 2 more times? :lol:
 
liblady said:
clarence thomas' wife is actively engaging is conduct that is at best questionable. thomas should resign.
Click to expand...

Even if Thomas's wife had anything to do with his tenure on the Court, it factors into the point not in the slightest.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
uhm, you ok man? I answered you already. Post #75, What? Did you think that since you ignored that post you can ask the question 2 more times? :lol:
Click to expand...

The only part where you even addressed the question was here:

ReverendHellh0und said:
There are no more racist elements in the teaparty than there is in the democrat party.
Click to expand...

So should I take that to mean that :

Yes, there are racist elements within the Tea Party.

or

No, there are racist elements within the Tea Party.
 
Hatuey said:
The only part where you even addressed the question was here:



So should I take that to mean that :

Yes, there are racist elements within the Tea Party.

or

No, there are racist elements within the Tea Party.
Click to expand...




Seriously? Is this what you wish to reduce the debate to? Sure there are, as I said before, there are racist elements in all types of groups, including the tea party, and including the democrat party.

Point is, it is dishonest smearing to associate the tea party with racism as the racist group the NAACP is doing. Have you visited the site? They list the supposed racist ones right along with the ones that have denounced any racism.





Did you think you just won something or what? :lol:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Seriously? Is this what you wish to reduce the debate to? Sure there are, as I said before, there are racist elements in all types of groups, including the tea party, and including the democrat party.
Click to expand...

So then this is not unfounded:

washingtonpost.com

A new report, backed by the NAACP, has found what it says are efforts by white nationalist groups and militias to link themselves to the tea party movement, even as some tea party leaders have expelled members who have expressed racist sentiment.
Click to expand...

For once in your life show some consistency in your arguments. There are racist groups which link themselves to the Tea Party. Is that a fact or not?

Point is, it is dishonest smearing to associate the tea party with racism as the racist group the NAACP is doing. Have you visited the site? They list the supposed racist ones right along with the ones that have denounced any racism.
Click to expand...

Dishonest? How is it dishonest? Is it not a fact that there are racist elements within the Tea Party? Is it not a fact that there are racist groups seeking to associate themselves with the Tea Party? Which part of this is a smear on the Tea Party if the facts support the assertions being made?

Did you think you just won something or what? :lol:
Click to expand...

No, I'm simply showing what hypocrites the most ardent supporters of the Tea Party are. You have absolutely no problem in saying that the Democratic Party has racist elements while ignoring the fact that it has worked tirelessly for decades to correct the wrongs of the past. The Tea Party has only existed for what? 2 years? And yet we're seeing the underlying sociological groups which support it as being verfiably associated with radical right wing racist groups. The difference is the average Democrat who's read a book or two on the history of the party will admit what are facts about the party. The Tea Party refuses to accept any kind of responsability for the associations it creates while claiming to speak in one voice. Either it's one voice or it's many. Which is it?
 
Last edited:
ALL political parties have racist elements. ALL parties should work to pruge those elements.

Can we move on now, please?
 
When have we claimed to speak in one voice?


It's sad all the vitriol you spout, embarrassing actually.


Lower taxes
smaller government
More accountable representatives.


That's the tea party. Race has nothing to do with it. You want to lie and define the tea party by a select few racists who claim to be tea party folk.


It's funny, I can demonstrate btw, that most white power movements are closer to the liberal side of things than they are conservative, at least for thier fellow white folk.

Should I start 200 threads on that?


Maybe I will. :gunsmilie:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
It's funny, I can demonstrate btw, that most white power movements are closer to the liberal side of things than they are conservative, at least for thier fellow white folk.

Should I start 200 threads on that?
Click to expand...

If you actually could do that I have no doubt that you would. And I would love to see it. But we all know you're just blowing smoke.
 
I take this study more seriously:

By Amy Gardner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 14, 2010; 6:00 AM

A new analysis of political signs displayed at a tea party rally in Washington last month reveals that the vast majority of activists expressed narrow concerns about the government's economic and spending policies and steered clear of the racially charged anti-Obama messages that have helped define some media coverage of such events.

Emily Ekins, a graduate student at UCLA, conducted the survey at the 9/12 Taxpayer March on Washington last month by scouring the crowd, row by row and hour by hour, and taking a picture of every sign she passed.

Ekins photographed about 250 signs, and more than half of those she saw reflected a "limited government ethos," she found - touching on such topics as the role of government, liberty, taxes, spending, deficit and concern about socialism. Examples ranged from the simple message "$top the $pending" scrawled in black-marker block letters to more elaborate drawings of bar charts, stop signs and one poster with the slogan "Socialism is Legal Theft" and a stick-figure socialist pointing a gun at the head of a taxpayer.

There were uglier messages, too - including "Obama Bin Lyin' - Impeach Now" and "Somewhere in Kenya a Village is Missing its Idiot." But Ekins's analysis showed that only about a quarter of all signs reflected direct anger with Obama. Only 5 percent of the total mentioned the president's race or religion, and slightly more than 1 percent questioned his American citizenship.

Ekins's conclusion is not that the racially charged messages are unimportant but that media coverage of tea party rallies over the past year have focused so heavily on the more controversial signs that it has contributed to the perception that such content dominates the tea party movement more than it actually does.
Click to expand...

washingtonpost.com
 
Gill said:
I take this study more seriously:
By Amy Gardner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 14, 2010; 6:00 AM

A new analysis of political signs displayed at a tea party rally in Washington last month reveals that the vast majority of activists expressed narrow concerns about the government's economic and spending policies and steered clear of the racially charged anti-Obama messages that have helped define some media coverage of such events.

Emily Ekins, a graduate student at UCLA, conducted the survey at the 9/12 Taxpayer March on Washington last month by scouring the crowd, row by row and hour by hour, and taking a picture of every sign she passed.

Ekins photographed about 250 signs, and more than half of those she saw reflected a "limited government ethos," she found - touching on such topics as the role of government, liberty, taxes, spending, deficit and concern about socialism. Examples ranged from the simple message "$top the $pending" scrawled in black-marker block letters to more elaborate drawings of bar charts, stop signs and one poster with the slogan "Socialism is Legal Theft" and a stick-figure socialist pointing a gun at the head of a taxpayer.

There were uglier messages, too - including "Obama Bin Lyin' - Impeach Now" and "Somewhere in Kenya a Village is Missing its Idiot." But Ekins's analysis showed that only about a quarter of all signs reflected direct anger with Obama. Only 5 percent of the total mentioned the president's race or religion, and slightly more than 1 percent questioned his American citizenship.

Ekins's conclusion is not that the racially charged messages are unimportant but that media coverage of tea party rallies over the past year have focused so heavily on the more controversial signs that it has contributed to the perception that such content dominates the tea party movement more than it actually does.
Click to expand...


washingtonpost.com
Click to expand...

How dare you bring facts into the discussion!
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
It's funny, I can demonstrate btw, that most white power movements are closer to the liberal side of things than they are conservative, at least for thier fellow white folk.
Click to expand...

most members of the KKK are southern democrats. :shrug: but it's the republicans who are racists. go figure.
 
Gill said:
Ekins's conclusion is not that the racially charged messages are unimportant but that media coverage of tea party rallies over the past year have focused so heavily on the more controversial signs that it has contributed to the perception that such content dominates the tea party movement more than it actually does.
Click to expand...
Oh, but there's no bias in the media.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
are you kidding me? They wont be happy until they brand us all as racists.
Click to expand...

That may be the goal, and it is rather dishonest. It may be that some racist groups try to tie themselves to political parties or movements. But does that mean the party or movement is then racist? Not really, I mean it is possible but it does not necessitate it. And I think the Tea Party isn't a racist platform; but rather one of pissed off people that was well captured by the Republican arm of the Republocrats and turned into political propaganda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom