NAACP Plays Race Card on Tea Party

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
Our civil liberties have been slowly chipped away at for the last 50 or so years and government has grown exponentially. Where was the tea party then? What is different now?[/quote]

Are you serious? That’s like asking where was Rosa Parks the first 100 times she was forced to sit at the back of the bus.

There comes a point where enough is enough.[/quote]

It just has to be at a point when a country that had historically oppressed colored people had just elected one as a leader and had to be in the form of a movement that has a lot of racist people in it.[/quote]

Do you honestly believe the tea party was formed because we have a black president?[/quote]

Yes. Partially. People are projecting some pretty crazy fears. I think that comes partially from racial discomfort.

You know whats a really fucking stupid argument…“Its not ignorant because they did the same thing to bush.”

No both were ignorant. Only one was related to race though.

People are so touchy about being racist. People react to it like they’re being called child molestors. Guess what? Im racist, you’re racist we’re all racist. Own up to it.

Until then Obama had no choice but to institute bail outs and stimulus spending. Political suicide not to.

Health care has been a democratic platform plank since Lyndon Johnson. Fuck off.

All this wire tap shit i’m not thrilled about but its bush stuff. Where was the tea party then? I think thats a valid question.

Until someone can answer that question for me I think the tea party is 5% libertarians/‘true conservatives’ 90% Pissed off republicans who supported bush and 5% lunatics.

100% of those people are racist because 100% of people are racist.[/quote]

Yeah, but Obama is half white. What’s your point?

162

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]carbiduis wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
Our civil liberties have been slowly chipped away at for the last 50 or so years and government has grown exponentially. Where was the tea party then? What is different now?[/quote]

Are you serious? That’s like asking where was Rosa Parks the first 100 times she was forced to sit at the back of the bus.

There comes a point where enough is enough.[/quote]

It just has to be at a point when a country that had historically oppressed colored people had just elected one as a leader and had to be in the form of a movement that has a lot of racist people in it.[/quote]

Think of it this way…A lot of times bills are passed with goofy add-ons, that dont make sense. But the bill gets passed anyway, so the bullshit is put in place. On the other hand often times bills are combined to where the logical side wont be implemented because the other part of the bill is just ridiculous.

(one example is when the were going to legalize up to 3oz of pot in Reno but it didnt pass cause it was paired up with another bill that didnt make sense so not enough people voted for it).

How does this relate to Obama?

Ok, well he is paired up with a lot of bull-shit. He was/is USED by the Democrats as a shield, so they are able to pass FUCKED UP SHIT like the healthcare bill. So when you start bitching about the STUPID shit he passes, you’re called a racist. Its like people voted for Obama cause he was so appealing/etc. but on the other side of the coin, the one that really matters is all bullshit.

All the idiots that support obama are swept up in his appeal, not realizing the other side of the coin, the democrats know this, and that is why he’s been able to pass so much bullshit, which results in the rest of the people (non-supporters) gettting fucking pissed. The people who are mad right now are focusing on the ACTIONS and BILLS PASSED. All the idiots that are still stuck with obamas dick in their mouth are focusiong SOLELY ON RACE.

Race plays a role here, but it is in Obamas favor…So many white poeple voted for him cause he is black and they thought they could redeem themselves of the guilt that is layed upon them naturally by American society, cause lets face it, every white person in America is a racist.

Supporters of Obama -----> Racist

Opponents of Obama -----> focus on actions/bills, not racist[/quote]

…rational…irrational…Fucking idiot.
[/quote]

We got a rational one here.

163

[quote]OTS1 wrote:
I really hate when people use the word “socialism” to describe things that have nothing to do with socialism.

Socialism = a system where the means of production (factories, for the most part) are owned by the people who do the production (laborers, or classically the Proletariat).

Regulation of the financial system isn’t socialism. Health insurance reform isn’t socialism. Unemployment insurance, welfare, and any other social programs are not socialism. They are well within the scope of classic liberal democracy. Don’t believe me? Read Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man. Progressive taxation, social safety nets… its all there.

PERHAPS one could say that the government-backed settlement between GM and the UAW is socialist. I could buy that.

Socialism is just a scary word that some people use to scare and manipulate other people into doing things.

Also, we should be clear that the Tea Party movement is solely a reaction to the Democratic power in Washington, and throughout the country. When the pendulum swings the other way again (and it will), the Tea Partyers will magically disappear. As long as the government gets more power in a Republican way, these people will shut up.

Also, I don’t want to hear another damn thing about 9-11. I live in NY. People I know died on that day. If you live in friggin Nebraska, 9-11 changed nothing for you. Your life went on as planned, except that you got riled up for a war.

Edit to last statement: Unless you are one of the rare people who actually honor your country by picking up a weapon and serving. As my over-educated, northeast, liberal, Jewish ass has
(hooah!).
[/quote]

Wow, that is some ironic writing there.

164

[quote]OTS1 wrote:
I really hate when people use the word “socialism” to describe things that have nothing to do with socialism.

Socialism = a system where the means of production (factories, for the most part) are owned by the people who do the production (laborers, or classically the Proletariat).

Regulation of the financial system isn’t socialism. Health insurance reform isn’t socialism. Unemployment insurance, welfare, and any other social programs are not socialism. They are well within the scope of classic liberal democracy. Don’t believe me? Read Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man. Progressive taxation, social safety nets… its all there.

PERHAPS one could say that the government-backed settlement between GM and the UAW is socialist. I could buy that.

Socialism is just a scary word that some people use to scare and manipulate other people into doing things.

Also, we should be clear that the Tea Party movement is solely a reaction to the Democratic power in Washington, and throughout the country. When the pendulum swings the other way again (and it will), the Tea Partyers will magically disappear. As long as the government gets more power in a Republican way, these people will shut up.

Also, I don’t want to hear another damn thing about 9-11. I live in NY. People I know died on that day. If you live in friggin Nebraska, 9-11 changed nothing for you. Your life went on as planned, except that you got riled up for a war. END QUOTE

First of all thank you for your service. 9/11 affected everyone. I am from GA and was devistated. Maybe not on the level you were, but anyone that was not crying that day should be ashamed. About socialism show me a socialist country where the people own any thing it is the gov that owns it. You mentioned GM and UAW, but what about GE, AIG, the student loan business, and fannie and freddie. I realize some of this is bush and I spoke up then. The finance reform gives the gov power to take over any firm that THEY find risky, so that is socialism or collectivism, what ever you call it it sure is not american. Maybe a better term is want to be dictator.

165

[quote]OTS1 wrote:

Also, I don’t want to hear another damn thing about 9-11. I live in NY. People I know died on that day. If you live in friggin Nebraska, 9-11 changed nothing for you. Your life went on as planned, except that you got riled up for a war.

Edit to last statement: Unless you are one of the rare people who actually honor your country by picking up a weapon and serving. As my over-educated, northeast, liberal, Jewish ass has
(hooah!).
[/quote]

This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read. Some of us care about this country beyond those matters that directly affect us. I’d even say those that don’t care about this country beyond matters that effect them are doing this country a disservice.

166

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]OTS1 wrote:

Also, I don’t want to hear another damn thing about 9-11. I live in NY. People I know died on that day. If you live in friggin Nebraska, 9-11 changed nothing for you. Your life went on as planned, except that you got riled up for a war.

Edit to last statement: Unless you are one of the rare people who actually honor your country by picking up a weapon and serving. As my over-educated, northeast, liberal, Jewish ass has
(hooah!).
[/quote]

This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read. Some of us care about this country beyond those matters that directly affect us. I’d even say those that don’t care about this country beyond matters that effect them are doing this country a disservice.[/quote]

In one part he tells us our Brotherhood under Ol’ Glory is not needed and we are pretenders (because of proximity), and the other tells us he’s in that Brotherhood because he picked up a rifle?

Well, I paid for that rifle, so did a lot of people. Guess what, even if those buildings were in Canada, I would still have been pissed because it fucked up my family financially. Guess what Britain was pissed off as well, they had air support over NY, should we tell them to fuck off because you know they aren’t even part of this country?

167

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
Our civil liberties have been slowly chipped away at for the last 50 or so years and government has grown exponentially. Where was the tea party then? What is different now?[/quote]

Are you serious? That’s like asking where was Rosa Parks the first 100 times she was forced to sit at the back of the bus.

There comes a point where enough is enough.[/quote]

It just has to be at a point when a country that had historically oppressed colored people had just elected one as a leader and had to be in the form of a movement that has a lot of racist people in it.[/quote]

Do you honestly believe the tea party was formed because we have a black president?[/quote]

Yes. Partially. People are projecting some pretty crazy fears. I think that comes partially from racial discomfort.

You know whats a really fucking stupid argument…“Its not ignorant because they did the same thing to bush.”

No both were ignorant. Only one was related to race though.[/quote]

Ignorant? What do you mean ignorant? Are you sure you know what ignorant means?

[quote]People are so touchy about being racist. People react to it like they’re being called child molestors. Guess what? Im racist, you’re racist we’re all racist. Own up to it.

Until then Obama had no choice but to institute bail outs and stimulus spending. Political suicide not to.

Health care has been a democratic platform plank since Lyndon Johnson. Fuck off.

All this wire tap shit i’m not thrilled about but its bush stuff. Where was the tea party then? I think thats a valid question.

Until someone can answer that question for me I think the tea party is 5% libertarians/‘true conservatives’ 90% Pissed off republicans who supported bush and 5% lunatics.

100% of those people are racist because 100% of people are racist.[/quote]

Most of this had nothing to do with my question about racism. But I’ll say that if you believe 100% of people are racist than it serves absolutely NO PURPOSE to even mention that the tea party is racist. It would make just as much sense if I went around everywhere shouting how racist Al Franken is.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
Our civil liberties have been slowly chipped away at for the last 50 or so years and government has grown exponentially. Where was the tea party then? What is different now?[/quote]

Are you serious? That’s like asking where was Rosa Parks the first 100 times she was forced to sit at the back of the bus.

There comes a point where enough is enough.[/quote]

It just has to be at a point when a country that had historically oppressed colored people had just elected one as a leader and had to be in the form of a movement that has a lot of racist people in it.[/quote]

Do you honestly believe the tea party was formed because we have a black president?[/quote]

It’s not the sole reason, but to suggest that it isn’t a part of it is just plain stupid.[/quote]

Well I think it’s pretty stupid to suggest it’s about race. Ultimately, the race card is pretty tired and worn out.
[/quote]

Ignorant but not racist: Portraying bush as a nazi
Ignorant and racist: Obama with a bone through his nose.

I dont know of anything inflammatory I wrote…I even agreed that the NAACP making this statemnt was stupid and counterproductive.

Edit: And I don’t think the tea party movement is fundamentally racist. I respect the fundamental greivances voiced. I, unlike some in this thread, understand that reasonable men can disagree ESPECIALLY on issues of politics.

I too love my country and I want what is best for it.

168

[quote]carbiduis wrote:

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]carbiduis wrote:

“I guess he was scared of the Unbeleivably impressive campaign Barry ran.”

Did you jerk it to the 1/2 hour commercial that he aired?
[/quote]

No.

Nobel prize was tarded.
14th best president tarded.
Its too early.

Just cause I voted for him doesnt mean im elated by everything he does. Lets face it hes facing a shitstorm. I voted my conscience and now I have to see how it plays out. So far mildly dissapointed but I havent seen a better candidate. When I do I’ll vote for him.[/quote]

You’re Honestly going to tell me that ITS TOO EARLY??? In the crazy 1.5 yrs hes been president he hasn’t made enough decisions for you to decide whether or not you dig his work? This is probably worse than saying “he the best president ever”. If you aren’t gonna evaluate him yet, when will you evaluate him? Maybe you’re a little more disappointed than you think and you’re just hoping that he does something amazing tomorrow…or the next day…or the day after that[/quote]

Reagan had striingly similar popularity numbers at this point in his presidency. Lost ground in congress and then was re-elected.

Im gonna think real hard about how I feel about Barry at election time. Until then I think hes doing an ok job. I also want to see how healthcare plays out. And how the economy fares.

169

[quote]dk44 wrote:

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]SUPER-T wrote:

What made him qualified. His small stint as a senator in which most of his votes were present. Or was it the fact he can read a teleprompter better than anyone. Enjoy your socialism. As for Palin what was wrong with her. Obama was threatened so she was attacked from every angle, and Mccain being passive would not let her talk. I believe if he would have shut up and let her talk mccain would be sound asleep at 1600 penn ave.
[/quote]

Senator, Constitutional law professor, lawyer, Colubmia, Harvard, Law Review, Charisma, centrist

[/quote]

Those are all nice titles, but what has he actually done? You have no clue what he did…hardly anything but “present” in senate, can’t access most of his past, school records, reviews. So you went solely off Charisma I guess. Good job being a responsible voter P Diddy Jr. Vote or die, next time chose option 2 please and stop fucking up our country.[/quote]

It indicates to me he has a brain, understands the law, and is a hard worker. Charisma is important too. His campaign suggested to me that hed make a fine executive. I think thats fair. Reasonable men may differ.

P diddy jr??

170

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]OTS1 wrote:

Also, I don’t want to hear another damn thing about 9-11. I live in NY. People I know died on that day. If you live in friggin Nebraska, 9-11 changed nothing for you. Your life went on as planned, except that you got riled up for a war.

Edit to last statement: Unless you are one of the rare people who actually honor your country by picking up a weapon and serving. As my over-educated, northeast, liberal, Jewish ass has
(hooah!).
[/quote]

This is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever read. Some of us care about this country beyond those matters that directly affect us. I’d even say those that don’t care about this country beyond matters that effect them are doing this country a disservice.[/quote]

I agree.

171

[quote]SUPER-T wrote:

[quote]Eli B wrote:

[quote]SUPER-T wrote:

What made him qualified. His small stint as a senator in which most of his votes were present. Or was it the fact he can read a teleprompter better than anyone. Enjoy your socialism. As for Palin what was wrong with her. Obama was threatened so she was attacked from every angle, and Mccain being passive would not let her talk. I believe if he would have shut up and let her talk mccain would be sound asleep at 1600 penn ave.
[/quote]

Senator, Constitutional law professor, lawyer, Colubmia, Harvard, Law Review, Charisma, centrist

.

Telepromptor thing is a red herring. They all use teleprompters. Obama no more no less.
Democrats beleive in a social safety net. Its not socialism.

Palin stank it up. You may like her, undecideds sure didn’t.[/quote]

So being a constitutional law prof makes him qualified. Listen to what he says about the constitution. Hitler also had charisma, and now lawyers are qualified. They are the sleesiest people you will ever meet.
Obama uses the tele more, he cant talk with out it. Social safety net please it is socialism or collectivism what ever you call it. No one should have to pay for some one elses mistakes. The gov just wants people to be dependent on them.[/quote]

1.I just think that its a plus if someone involved with legislation thoroughly understands the law.

  1. There are differing opinions on how to interpret the constitution.

3.No people are not born racist. They are born with the capacity and acquire it over time.

Im not going to argue the semantics of the word racism. For me there are varying levels below hate including simply making (even subconscious) assumptions about people based on their appearance.

  1. He talks fine without the teleprompter. He is extremely articulate. That teleprompter bs is some unimportant nonsense propogated by right leaning media.

Just like most people are racist, most media is biased.

172

Eli

I guess we will just have to respectfully agree to disagree, which is fine, that is how our system is supposed to work. Lets just pray that the rest of America keeps a level head. I am afraid that this whole situation is headed for a race war that will tear the country apart, and set race relations back a whole lot.

173

[quote]Sloth wrote:
What do you call a gathering of more than one white person in the same place?[/quote]

Statistically likely.

174

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
So because what people in the past do, dictates what we can do now? So because some people have slaves in the past, now other people in the future can’t disagree with someone politically because he’s part black, but not from a family that were even slaves (since we are going off of bloodlines I guess, or are all light skinned people responsible for all other light skinned people’s actions).[/quote]

Timing is too coincidental. Couple that with the signs we see from these people and yes, part of it is racism. I have no doubt there are people in there with genuine grievances, but the majority only popped up AFTER you elected a black man to the White House.

175

[quote]Makavali wrote:

So because what people in the past do, dictates what we can do now? So because some people have slaves in the past, now other people in the future can’t disagree with someone politically because he’s part black, but not from a family that were even slaves (since we are going off of bloodlines I guess, or are all light skinned people responsible for all other light skinned people’s actions).[/quote]

‘Racism behind everything’ is now the new 9-11 truther movement.

176

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

So because what people in the past do, dictates what we can do now? So because some people have slaves in the past, now other people in the future can’t disagree with someone politically because he’s part black, but not from a family that were even slaves (since we are going off of bloodlines I guess, or are all light skinned people responsible for all other light skinned people’s actions).[/quote]

‘Racism behind everything’ is now the new 9-11 truther movement. [/quote]

Maybe you should actually re-read my posts. I didn’t say it was the sole reason, nor did I state it was the primary reason “behind everything”, I’m simply saying that it is PART of the movement.

178

[quote]Sloth wrote:

‘Racism behind everything’ is now the new 9-11 truther movement. [/quote]

I thought the “birthers” were the new 9-11 truther movement.

179

[quote]Chushin wrote:

It’s impressive how you can have so much insight into dynamic American political affairs from way down there in New Zealand. [/quote]

ummm… aren’t you in Japan?

180

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
So because what people in the past do, dictates what we can do now? So because some people have slaves in the past, now other people in the future can’t disagree with someone politically because he’s part black, but not from a family that were even slaves (since we are going off of bloodlines I guess, or are all light skinned people responsible for all other light skinned people’s actions).[/quote]

Timing is too coincidental. Couple that with the signs we see from these people and yes, part of it is racism. I have no doubt there are people in there with genuine grievances, but the majority only popped up AFTER you elected a black man to the White House.[/quote]

Okay, well I do find it funny though that you put a collective statement on a individuals who believing in individualism.