• 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!

Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree'

Hell son...you are using descriptive words seen here by Hatuey describing other 'blacks'. His comments were 'racist' because you WANT them to be. But seriosuly...THATS your defense? A congressman from Colorado uses the term Tar baby and you use TAHT to justify your defense that Tea Party Members want to Lynch black folk? Pathetic.

My "defense" where the ColoradoSprings article is concerned was merely to show how one derogatory term has a racial sting to it when espoused to African Americans. You, on the other hand, have attempted to claim that I've used the phrase as evidence that they were spoken by a member of the Tea Party whom Rep. Carson has raised racial allegations against. I have done no such thing where this particular article is concerned.
 
Is it possible. Now...work with me here...is it POSSIBLE that the term "Tar Baby" DOESNT mean the same thing to some people as apparently it does to you and others? You used it and this one instance as your defense of "Tea Party politicians are racist" (the only reasin we are talking about it...you brought it up). But could it be that he WASNT being racist? I cited two other examples in YOUR cited story that OBVIOUSLY arent racist uses of the term.

You want to have a discussion of what the "Tea Party" is? Fine. Great. having that discussion within a thread where Tea Party members are accused of wanting to see black folks strung up might not be the best venue. But based on what and who I know...Tea Party people believe in LEGAL immigration (and site 20-30 million illegal immigrants, 14 million jobless Americans, etc) and enforcement of laws. They believe in smaller and more fiscally conservative federal government (and use as their justification a 15.5 trillion dollar and climbing debt). Thats pretty much the extent of it. Do YOU believe in legal immigration and enforcement of existing laws? Do YOU believe the government should be fiscally conservative? Good lord, SB...is it possible you are a xenophobe too?
 
I'm not sure where SB is going but labels are a problem. Both in the use and the reaction. Both words simply mean that people feel more comfortable around people they are used to. That would describe the vast majority of people. In that regard it's a perfectly benign statement that really doesn't mean much. If SB is saying that those who are Tea Party members are likely more at ease with the known as opposed to change, then really, I wouldn't disagree. Sometimes that can be positive and sometimes not.

Sometimes people use these terms as blanket bitter statements with intent to inflame as their meaning can expand beyond that. Ask for context.

Thanks Perry.

For the record, I don't mean nativism and xenophobia to have negative connotations (but I admit that often they do). To me, those attitudes generally signify an aversion to societal change, fear unease, or concern about immigration both legal and illegal, and in general a change to what it means to "be American," fear of a change of a shifting American identity. That is what I mean.

I don't know if MOST Tea Party members exhibit these characteristics, but I believe they exhibit these attitudes more so than the rest of the population.

And obviously, even if we're not talking about the Tea Party, these attitudes still exist at large among the American population - just look at all the comments about Obama not being truly American, etc. This is what I mean by nativism.
 
I'm not sure where SB is going but labels are a problem. Both in the use and the reaction. Both words simply mean that people feel more comfortable around people they are used to. That would describe the vast majority of people. In that regard it's a perfectly benign statement that really doesn't mean much. If SB is saying that those who are Tea Party members are likely more at ease with the known as opposed to change, then really, I wouldn't disagree. Sometimes that can be positive and sometimes not.

Sometimes people use these terms as blanket bitter statements with intent to inflame as their meaning can expand beyond that. Ask for context.

Thanks Perry.

For the record, I don't mean nativism and xenophobia to have negative connotations (but I admit that often they do). To me, those attitudes generally signify an aversion to societal change, fear unease, or concern about immigration both legal and illegal, and in general a change to what it means to "be American," fear of a change of a shifting American identity. That is what I mean.

I don't know if MOST Tea Party members exhibit these characteristics, but I believe they exhibit these attitudes more so than the rest of the population.

And obviously, even if we're not talking about the Tea Party, these attitudes still exist at large among the American population - just look at all the comments about Obama not being truly American, etc. This is what I mean by nativism.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Liberal politicians do it. People like you defend their use of it. Common liberal tactic. Its no different than the Gabby Giffords aftermath. People blamed the shooter on conservatives....then when it was proven that there was no connection instead of just saying...yeah...you are right...that was a bull**** kneejerk stretch people like you said "yeah...well...still...maybe not in this case, but its still a problem because of conservative talk show hosts". You dont have the honesty, grace, or just good sense to say..."yeah...that was wrong...sorry". You are still doing it in this thread.
Okay whatever you say. I tried to explain to you that the actions of some do not characterize the actions of the many, but as usual, you are being overly emotional and not responding to reason and have resorted to personal attacks as your only means of defense.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Okay whatever you say. I tried to explain to you that the actions of some do not characterize the actions of the many, but as usual, you are being overly emotional and not responding to reason and have resorted to personal attacks as your only means of defense.
Well...there you go again. In other words...you defend the comments...excuse the comments...justify the comments...may not agree with the comments but they are still right...and shame on me for pointing out that you and others here defend the comments. I gotcha...
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

However, all one has to do is watch a little MSNBC, or any of the three lemming news broadcasts to see these memes develop and be put out there as the narrative....It's Bull.

j-mac
I don't watch cable news much so I wouldn't know, but I suspect while some may throw in race out of nowhere, others probably just talk about it when race is relevant. Usually when I turn on those stations, they're just mocking conservatives and Fox News.
 
My "defense" where the ColoradoSprings article is concerned was merely to show how one derogatory term has a racial sting to it when espoused to African Americans. You, on the other hand, have attempted to claim that I've used the phrase as evidence that they were spoken by a member of the Tea Party whom Rep. Carson has raised racial allegations against. I have done no such thing where this particular article is concerned.
I get it...you, like others...simply cant understand how I can post your comments that the idiotic race baiting ramblings of a congressman are 'true' but you, like he, shouldnt have to justify them. Then you post a poorly chosed word that may or may not be construed as racist to justify that indeed...Tea PArty politicians are in fact racist and want to see black people lynched. You STILL dont have the grace to simply say...yes...the congressmans comments were idiotic and race baiting and rtepresent the worst of what poltiicians are and do.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Well...there you go again. In other words...you defend the comments...excuse the comments...justify the comments...may not agree with the comments but they are still right...and shame on me for pointing out that you and others here defend the comments. I gotcha...
Okay, whatever you say man.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Okay, whatever you say man.
Thats NOT precisely what you did? Of course it is. And You STILL cant bring yourself to simply say "Carson and the other politicians whyo made similar comments were simply wrong."
 
Is it possible. Now...work with me here...is it POSSIBLE that the term "Tar Baby" DOESNT mean the same thing to some people as apparently it does to you and others? You used it and this one instance as your defense of "Tea Party politicians are racist" (the only reasin we are talking about it...you brought it up). But could it be that he WASNT being racist? I cited two other examples in YOUR cited story that OBVIOUSLY arent racist uses of the term.

It's completely possible that representative Lamborn used it merely to refer to "a sticky situation." But, once again, the term has well-known racial connotations. We'll never know what was actually going through his mind when he said that, but to his credit, he did apologize.

I should also mention - and I feel like I've repeated myself too many times on this issue - racism and racial prejudice, these days, mostly occur on a subtle, subconscious level. I'm guilty of it, almost all of us are guilty of it to some extent or another, of pre-judging people based on their skin color, or how they dress, or their appearance, or whatnot. It's simply how the mind works. The problem is that racial prejudice has been reinforced by the media. Gone are the days of Jim Crow, blatant, in-your-face, racism. So people who harbor racially prejudiced attitudes usually don't put them "out there," or worse, might not even be aware that they hold such attitudes. Such is how subtle racism operates; on the subconscious level.

You want to have a discussion of what the "Tea Party" is? Fine. Great. having that discussion within a thread where Tea Party members are accused of wanting to see black folks strung up might not be the best venue. But based on what and who I know...Tea Party people believe in LEGAL immigration (and site 20-30 million illegal immigrants, 14 million jobless Americans, etc) and enforcement of laws. They believe in smaller and more fiscally conservative federal government (and use as their justification a 15.5 trillion dollar and climbing debt). Thats pretty much the extent of it. Do YOU believe in legal immigration and enforcement of existing laws? Do YOU believe the government should be fiscally conservative? Good lord, SB...is it possible you are a xenophobe too?

I agree with Perry's bit about the use of labels, and I apologize if you felt that I meant them to have any negative connotation. Saying that Tea Party members hold nativist attitudes is qualitatively and substantively no different than saying liberals generally critical of corporations or concentration of money. They are simply attitudes.

As for my own views - I am a liberal. I believe in an activist government ("big government" if you will). That does not mean that I don't believe in a fiscally prudent government. I think the government should pay its bills and cut deficits. I believe in the role of government as problem-solver. It can't solve all of society's ills, but in many cases it is the institution that is most suited to do so. Some problems are better left to the states, some better left to the federal gov't.

I believe the conversation about illegal immigration to be misguided - the root of the problem lies with the push factors that are causing people to cross our border illegally, and laws that inadequalely take into account the situations of people, who for whatever reason, overstay their visa. Everything else we talk about afterwards is just talking about what the bandaid should look like rather than what the cause of the illness is. Anyway, this is for another discussion.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Thats NOT precisely what you did? Of course it is. And You STILL cant bring yourself to simply say "Carson and the other politicians whyo made similar comments were simply wrong."
Like I said, whatever you say. I'm not here to repeat after you.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

I get it...you, like others...simply cant understand how I can post your comments that the idiotic race baiting ramblings of a congressman are 'true' but you, like he, shouldnt have to justify them. Then you post a poorly chosed word that may or may not be construed as racist to justify that indeed...Tea PArty politicians are in fact racist and want to see black people lynched. You STILL dont have the grace to simply say...yes...the congressmans comments were idiotic and race baiting and rtepresent the worst of what poltiicians are and do.

I did not paint anyone other than the man who linked the President with the term "tar-baby" as utterring a term known to African Americans to be a racial slur. You are the one attempting to put words in my mouth. Moreover, I suggest you go back and re-read my initial post to this thread on page 60, post #596 to truly guage where I've been coming from since that post related to the thread topic.
 
It's completely possible that representative Lamborn used it merely to refer to "a sticky situation." But, once again, the term has well-known racial connotations. We'll never know what was actually going through his mind when he said that, but to his credit, he did apologize.

I should also mention - and I feel like I've repeated myself too many times on this issue - racism and racial prejudice, these days, mostly occur on a subtle, subconscious level. I'm guilty of it, almost all of us are guilty of it to some extent or another, of pre-judging people based on their skin color, or how they dress, or their appearance, or whatnot. It's simply how the mind works. The problem is that racial prejudice has been reinforced by the media. Gone are the days of Jim Crow, blatant, in-your-face, racism. So people who harbor racially prejudiced attitudes usually don't put them "out there," or worse, might not even be aware that they hold such attitudes. Such is how subtle racism operates; on the subconscious level.

I agree with Perry's bit about the use of labels, and I apologize if you felt that I meant them to have any negative connotation. Saying that Tea Party members hold nativist attitudes is qualitatively and substantively no different than saying liberals generally critical of corporations or concentration of money. They are simply attitudes.

As for my own views - I am a liberal. I believe in an activist government ("big government" if you will). That does not mean that I don't believe in a fiscally prudent government. I think the government should pay its bills and cut deficits. I believe in the role of government as problem-solver. It can't solve all of society's ills, but in many cases it is the institution that is most suited to do so. Some problems are better left to the states, some better left to the federal gov't.

I believe the conversation about illegal immigration to be misguided - the root of the problem lies with the push factors that are causing people to cross our border illegally, and laws that inadequalely take into account the situations of people, who for whatever reason, overstay their visa. Everything else we talk about afterwards is just talking about what the bandaid should look like rather than what the cause of the illness is. Anyway, this is for another discussion.
My objection is the frequency which these kinds of arguments (race baiting comments, blanket attacks)are made and then, instead of laying waste to the arguments, they are justified and used as a springboard attack. I see a day in the not to near future that our streets are going to experience similar events to what we have seen recently in Europe. Its repulsive. People like congressman Carson will bear responsibility and the truly sad part is that it wont make things better...it will make things worse. Things in this country HAVE gotten better with regard to race relationships. Still have a way to go, but race baiting isnt going to help.

Honest disagreements about fiscal responsibility are not a foundation for racial attacks. I find the congressmans words and actions repugnant and irresponsible. When the nation is facing continued debt, climbing unemployment, and no solutions in site and race rhetoric is all you have...then maybe its time for new representation.
 
My objection is the frequency which these kinds of arguments (race baiting comments, blanket attacks)are made and then, instead of laying waste to the arguments, they are justified and used as a springboard attack. I see a day in the not to near future that our streets are going to experience similar events to what we have seen recently in Europe. Its repulsive. People like congressman Carson will bear responsibility and the truly sad part is that it wont make things better...it will make things worse. Things in this country HAVE gotten better with regard to race relationships. Still have a way to go, but race baiting isnt going to help.

Honest disagreements about fiscal responsibility are not a foundation for racial attacks. I find the congressmans words and actions repugnant and irresponsible. When the nation is facing continued debt, climbing unemployment, and no solutions in site and race rhetoric is all you have...then maybe its time for new representation.

Race baiting...happens on both sides, honestly. Still, I see it as one would view contact sports...the ref rarely sees the guy who committed the initial illegal hit, but he'll throw the red flag the moment he sees someone retaliate. Same goes for Rep. Carson's comments. Was he wrong? Over the top? I'd say he was if he can't ponit directly to whomever within the congressional Tea Party membership made the "lynching" statement. Otherwise, his words were indeed inflamatory in that regard. However, I do believe there are elements of racism within the Tea Party movement. We've all seen evidence of this in the various media clips. To think otherwise is to believe there's not a racist among us. Liberal plants you say? It's possible, but I find it difficult for the Democrat party to subvert every localized Tea Party organization out there. So, my question to the readers is isn't it just as possible that some within the movement are acting alone as it is that there have been liberal plants out there?

Race baiting happens on both sides. We do more to stop it when ban together and point it out whoever does it than we do by pointing fingers at each other.
 
Thanks Perry.

For the record, I don't mean nativism and xenophobia to have negative connotations (but I admit that often they do). To me, those attitudes generally signify an aversion to societal change, fear unease, or concern about immigration both legal and illegal, and in general a change to what it means to "be American," fear of a change of a shifting American identity. That is what I mean.

Outside of a discussion around legal immigration, I wouldn't say that was far off.

I don't know if MOST Tea Party members exhibit these characteristics, but I believe they exhibit these attitudes more so than the rest of the population.

And obviously, even if we're not talking about the Tea Party, these attitudes still exist at large among the American population - just look at all the comments about Obama not being truly American, etc. This is what I mean by nativism.

I don't disagree.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

But again, somewhere along the line for a time, the Republican party stopped being inclusives and took a more separatist stance on issues of race.

Your misunderstanding of the political landscape stems from your misunderstanding of the word inclusive. Republicans are more inclusive than Democrats because they support race-blind policies, meaning everything that Republicans advocate applies equally to every American citizens. The Democrats however support race/culture/gender-focused policies which by their very nature exclude all citizens who don't qualify on the basis of race/culture/gender.

Now, here's a shocker...there have been Black presidential candidates long before the Rev. Jesse Jackson. The first was Clennon King in 1960; the first Black female, Charlene Mitchell. But the first to run and actully win the primary nomination of a major political party (Democrat) was Shirley Chisholm. The first Black Republican to ever be placed on the ballot for the presidency was also a female, Margaret Chase Smith. She lost to Barry Goldwater.

The difference between Obama and his predecessors is that the predecessors never stood a chance because they were too authentically African-American. Obama doesn't have the accent/cadence of most African-Americans, he wasn't raised in the African-American community - he was/is a man apart. I recall that early in his campaign, when black vote was still solidly behind Clinton there was discussion within the AA community about whether Obama was authentically black. Clearly that was decided in his favor.

What I find crazy about this whole "Blacks voted for one of their own kind" argument is that African Americans have been voting for White presidents since they first were given the right to vote. But suddenly when a viable Black presidential candiate burst upon the sceen and takes the country by storm suddenly we're all racist because we put the power of our vote to work for one of our own?

There were a lot of complaints directed toward Catholics back in the 1960 election because they too voted as a bloc for the first Catholic candidate. The troubling part of this dynamic is when people identify more with a religion or race than they do with being American. This is going to lead us into very bad territory as we progress to the future. As blacks and Hispanics gravitate towards the Democrats the natural response will be to set in motion a greater white migration towards the Republicans. Why? The appeal of the Democrats is that they promise a racial spoils system and wealth redistribution and because there is wealth disparity between whites and blacks/Hispanics, this means that there will be a wealth transfer from whites towards minorities. Whites who stand today with the Democrats will be less likely to do so in the future as they are penalized by such policies. A far healthier political distribution would see racial/gender/culture random distributions between the political parties so that we avoid the overlap of race and political party.

What does that say about the millions of White people who have voted for nothing but White presidential hopefuls throughout this country's history?

Whites are not yet a solidified racial voting bloc like blacks.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

So liberals are the arbiters of what is racist, and what isn't? I don't buy that for a second. See, I don't want blacks to be unduly disadvantaged because of the color of their skin, but in many cases the unintended consequence of what you are proposing through the force of law, goes beyond leveling the playing field to skewing it.

Right now you have businesses out there that have black employees that are not pulling their weight, that other white employees in the same position would have been let go, but the employer is hesitant to do such with the black employee due to litigation, and fines. The unintended consequence here is that the employer must keep on the substandard employee out of racism, not his, but liberal laws that cede power to the employee to ruin the man's business.

I understand many conservatives believe that to be true, but again, the actual scientific studies show unequivocally that the economy as a whole is still dramatically biased in favor of white people, not black people. So that belief is false.

Nonsense, most people don't give two craps what color Obama is, as evidenced by the huge white independent turn out to elect him. Are you really trying the Geraffalo (sic) gambit, because she is just one huge ass hole that has no idea what she is talking about, she just spews hate.

Er what are you talking about? You claimed that liberals point out racism when they see it because of something to do with Obama. I'm saying it doesn't have anything to do with Obama. Most the times they call somebody out for saying something racist the person they call out isn't talking about Obama or anything... So I don't think that theory of your is true at all. Not sure what you're talking about with Garofalo and all that...
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

Apparently, Carson has guidance. If you are a poor country boy just trying to get elected

Democrat Byrd joined an organization who had absolutely no problem hanging a person of color to include someone who voluntarily served this country during WWII. That is who he is and that is who he will forever be. He cannot absolve himself of that organizations core beliefs anymore than can he bring its victims back to life.


 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p



OMG instate third or unlimited terms, I want clinton back now.

Anyways...

Im listening to a malcom X speech. Are you all familiar with the term House Negro? This guy is like super george carlin awesomeman.
 
Re: Andre Carson: Tea party wants blacks 'hanging on a tree' Read more: http://www.p

OMG instate third or unlimited terms, I want clinton back now.

Anyways...

Im listening to a malcom X speech. Are you all familiar with the term House Negro? This guy is like super george carlin awesomeman.

You do realize that Byrd voted against the civil rights act of 1965 and every other civil rights act that went before the Senate?

A lot of people believe things, it doesn't mean that you join up with an organization that participates in illegal activities and recruits for it. The KKK had killed people and were doing things that were in direct violation of the law. For a modern parallel, all Muslims are not Al-Qaeda or Taliban. I can understand someone disliking another race due to their social upbringing, when you get to the point of violating the most core human rights (like living), you are taking it further than just being a product of society.

Clinton posting a definition of any standard, meaning, policy, practice, philosophy or description of 3d singular verbs... is a joke beyond the limits of reason.
 
Back
Top Bottom