Saturday, July 17, 2010

Tea Party and racism charges

 Here is an interesting blog I ran across about the Tea Party. This is a "liberal" post, but truth is truth is truth. You can read the whole thing here.

The thing I thought was interesting is the quote below. This is the point I was making - that if they do not agree with racist remarks, they should say so.. I would like for Tea Partiers to tell me what is wrong with this request?  It is a quote from the article I linked to above.


"The resolution was amended during the debate to specifically ask the Tea Party itself to repudiate the racist elements and activities of the Tea Party." As NAACP President and CEO Ben Jealous said, "We're simply asking them to repudiate racist acts and bigotry in their ranks or accept responsibility."

34 comments:

  1. I have been a long time reader, and I see a pattern forming.

    You go on vacation, or simply ignore the blog for a couple of weeks, and then the posts and visits come to a standstill, and then you come back on here and say provacative things to get people arguing and spewing venom at one another so you can get more posts and hits.

    I find it disgusting that a man who proclaims to be a man of God would stoop to these tactics of piting man against his fellow man. And when the arguing dies down a little you stoke the flames and make people like Jim angry enough to hate. All for monetary gain.

    Repent your sins and stop your evil ways. God is watching.

    I will not be back.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow. This is currently in the news, and is certainly a hot button issue. People have strong opinions on both sides. What else would you have us talk about, the Garden Clubs choice of flowers for the downtown boxes?

    And, no one can make anyone angry enough to hate. It is either in your nature or not. If you cant civilly discuss a topic like this, maybe you should stay off the bulletin board...

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I have been a long time reader, and I see a pattern forming."

    It took you a long time to see that pattern? Learn how blogs work. How would someone know to come spew venom if they don't regularly visit?? JJ doesn't get paid based on posts. Just like Brand X doesn't get paid if you take 5 mins to read it at the newspaper stand.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Im seeing a pattern emerging.
    When accused of being associated with racism, tea party people turn the tables and attack those that question them.
    When questioned about anything. . tea party people attack the questioner ..

    ReplyDelete
  6. Go visit some right-wing blogs. It's par for the coast.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You liberals pukes wouldn't know what the tea party was if it bit you on the ass. And it will in November. Even if it has to bite through the couch cushions to get to it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Par for the coast? hahahahaha

    ReplyDelete
  9. tea party was if it bit you on the ass.
    >>
    You will know them by their fruits...

    ReplyDelete
  10. "When accused of being associated with racism, tea party people turn the tables and attack those that question them.
    When questioned about anything. . tea party people attack the questioner .."


    You are an idiot. Never have I seen someone stick to the same message after being shown wrong so many times. How many times did the poster on the other page say that there is a fringe element on both sides, and that they cannot be kept from saying inciteful things at rallies of any group. Yet you keep repeating that everyone in the tea party is a racist. You are a PISS POOR excuse for a journalist, and I can see why the Traveler took the opportunity they were handed when you plagarized an article and kicked you to the curb.
    The racism argument is so tired and worn out. You can't argue the president's failings, and you can't argue against what the tea party stands for, because the majority of Americans feels the same way, so you yell "RACISM" because it is all you and the left have to play.
    The conservative movement that is happening in this country is going to speak at the polls in November. And we will not be voting for race, we will be voting to end Obama's radical left agenda. We would be rising up the exact same way if Hillary had won the White House and carried out the same agenda Obama has. What's sad is that she would actually be too smart to pull half of the idiotic stunts he has.

    Fact: When George Bush took 5 days to suspend the Jones Act to use foreign aid after Katrina, liberals were screaming about how he hated black people. Obama has still not suspended the Jones act to allow foreign aid for the disaster in the gulf.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The problem is. Your leadership CAN reject certain types of behavior, and call it down when it happens in a meeting. When asked why it did not do so, it just attacks. Why did they just not say ... "that isnt who we are, we dont agree with that" Why is power not shut off from microphones when people say racist things ?.. that would have ended it right there.

    Here is something to think about.
    You know the band of idiots in topeka who go around hurting people who have lost children in the war .. they claim to be christians .. even baptists.
    But. EVERY christian organization and every baptist organization, rejected them out of hand immediately.

    Even though they use the name, even anti christians don't seriously try to use that against christians because immediately, Christians took a stand against them
    They cannot be prevented from doing what they do, and they cannot be prevented from claiming to be christian or baptist.... but the christian and baptist reaction immediately destroyed their credibility ..

    why has the tea party not done the same with their radical fringe of racists ... just seems like they had such a simple solution in front of them, but they refused to take it, and are still refusing to take it..

    that is my problem with it .. If they reject racism, they should say so. the leadership should say so...
    their anti liberal rants just make it look like maybe there is a problem ..

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have never seen a church here in AC or anywhere else for that matter, make a public stance against the WBC. The preacher at my church does not say every Sunday "Oh, and by the way, we are against what the WBC stands for". You know why? Because it goes without saying that just because a few people in a large group feel one way does not mean all of them do. Any person who makes that jump is just trying to cause trouble, or draw attention away from something else. Much like you liberals are doing now. You don't want anyone to focus too much on Obama's spectacular failing with the oil spill, or any social issue that is important to the country, so you start yelling RACIST as loud as you can to call attention away from Obama's failings. It's too bad the American people can see through it, and we will be getting out to vote all these bums out of office. No more super majority. No more passing BS laws against the will of the people.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Why don't we just let Arizona succeed from the Union, and let all the TP'ers move there?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well it is SAD that we have a country made up of 50 unique states. All with different characteristics, geographies, and demograhics.
    Who want to be the SAME!

    or

    At least be governed the Same! By a few people in Washington D.C.! You would think those States could solve most of their own problems!

    but

    The fact that SO Many are willing to be Governed by So Few is probably the true definition of Socialism! Look at all the National agendas and programs (Education, Healthcare, Finance, Business, Labor etc.)
    all who want to provide ideas or solutions for how the Federal Government should operate! (It's really all about money and who pays! Right now its going to be the future generations!)

    then

    In the End it all comes down to what we VALUE and what that is WORTH!

    Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness!
    (I didn't recall seeing anything about the Pursuit of Money!)

    I am sure they can get that changed or maybe even added!

    and

    I think that is what the Tea Party is trying to Stop!

    Ps: 21-22

    The wicked borrow and do not repay,
    but the righteous give generously;
    those the Lord blesses will inherit the land,
    but those he curses will be cut off.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The lord curses people?

    Nice god you got there!

    ReplyDelete
  16. @3:58, @8:43, That's what I've been trying to get across to jj. For some strange reason he seems hell bent on getting every person who is affiliated with the tea party to renounce racism. It seems to be a no-brainer to me. Who is racist? not me. I still say it's designed to detract from questioning the present administration. Why can't we talk about the taxes that are spent willy nilly on stupid agenda? Why can't we talk about why when we have the worst natural catastrophe in human history we spend our efforts trying to force homosexuals into military? Why was the giant skimmers from France not accepted? Why can't we talk about why the U.S. is suing a State? Why? Why? Why? I mean we've put up several threads here on tea party racism. Want to talk about racism? Why were the Black Panthers not charged? Why can't we start a thread on one of these issues? Designed to distract the sheeple from the real issues at hand. No matter. Nov. will be a referendum on Obama's agenda. If the people turn out en mass to confirm it, I will stand corrected. Though, I think it's going to be the biggest shakeup since 1994.

    ReplyDelete
  17. All ive said is that if the tea party rejects racism, it should say so. It is you that is bent out of shape. You, and tea party leadership, could have said "oh we dont agree with that racist talk" at the very beginning and it never would have been an issue.
    The leadership had done so, and there is a post to that effect.

    You need to be a little realistic about the panthers. There are 8 members. Not hardly a movement, even Fox said that.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Whay to hold your ground, James. When baggers are wrong, they can't admit it, then go to name calling and "wait til Nov" nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Whay to hold your ground? Got any curds to go with that?

    What were they wrong about? Were they wrong that we are spending this country into deeper debt than we have ever seen? Are they wrong that we are paying to many taxes, and Obama just keeps piling on? He admitted today that they were raising taxes for Obamacare. Were they wrong that Obama is the most radical president in the history of the United States, and that he need to have his agenda stopped before we reach a point of not being able to recover? Please tell me, since you are such a smart liberal, what exactly were they wrong about? And don't cry racist, because we have been down that road already. The vast majority of Tea party people care nothing about race. There are fringes on both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  20. what exactly were they wrong about?

    For the 87 bajillionth time ... they were wrong about lying about there being extremists among them who were saying racist things.
    and YOU were wrong to lie about that as well, and to blame it on liberal spies...

    why cant you get it.
    if at first they (or you) had just said ,. we dont agree with that kind of talk .. then no one would have said anything else about it.

    The problem is that the national organization had to be shamed into it .. and you still wont admit that those people were there .. will you at least admit that the racist guy who was booted out, was booted out??

    You are losing your message by being angry about something that you could have made a non issue very easily..

    ReplyDelete
  21. @6:06 you just don't get it. SHEESH!! Do you even have the ability to think? Like talkin' to a wall. YOU sir, really need to look around. Of all the issues @6:02 raised, you can't answer even one. All you got left is race. Because in your heart you know it's the truth. Can't even raise an answer to ONE issue. So, what do you do? Scream RACE! as loud as you can. I'm done with you.

    ReplyDelete
  22. You're the only one screaming.
    Don't let the screen door hit ya
    where the good Lord split ya.

    ReplyDelete
  23. What 6:19 said is exactly right. People on here from the beginning of this whole race issue have said that just because there may be a fringe element in any group the vast majority of tea party people do not care about race.

    IT IS A SMOKESCREEN. This is an election year. An election year in which the people of this country are FED UP! The democrats stand to take a major beating in November, and whenever issues are brought up, like the poster at 6:02 brought up, you liberals scream RACIST as loud as you can to draw attention away from the real issues. Why don't you aregue some of the other issuesand tell us how Obama has done so well? Because you can't! All you have is racist racist racist. And you have the mainstream media on your side. At least be honest about your motives.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Not really a "major beating."
    http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/07/senate-forecast-718-republican-outlook.html

    ReplyDelete
  25. Take a look at this JJ.

    http://www.breitbart.tv/glenn-beck-exposes-phony-racist-charge-help-us-identify-this-man/

    ReplyDelete
  26. Fact: When George Bush took 5 days to suspend the Jones Act to use foreign aid after Katrina, liberals were screaming about how he hated black people. Obama has still not suspended the Jones act to allow foreign aid for the disaster in the gulf.

    July 18, 2010 3:58 PM


    Katrina (if you are talking about the hurricane) hit the gulf and was gone in a day or two. If I am not mistaken, they are still waiting for BP to stop the flow of oil (now leaks) into the gulf.

    Can we at least get through the disaster before we condemn the current President for not sending relief. In fact, Obama has already liberated $20billion from BP prior to knowing how far this would go.

    Bush didn't even go to the gulf for several days after the hurricane had ravaged major cities and crippled industry and commerce.

    Apples to oranges.

    ReplyDelete
  27. How is it apples and oranges? Why have foreign countries been offering aid for cleaning up oil since day one, yet Obama will not let them help?

    You say that Bush didn't visit the coast for several days after Katrina? Care to guess how long it was before Obama went to the coast affected by the oil spill?

    April 20, 2010

    In the Gulf: An offshore oil drilling rig owned by Transocean and operated by BP explodes in the Gulf of Mexico nearly 50 miles of the Louisiana coast.

    May 28

    Obama tours the Louisiana coastline. He says the federal government is treating the spill as its highest priority -- he says the government has deployed 1,400 National Guard troops, 1,400 vessels and 3 million feet of boom. The next day he went on vacation with his family.

    WOW. That sure puts Bush's five day delay after Katrina to shame huh.

    Here is a complete timeline: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/28/disaster-gulf-days-counting/

    ReplyDelete
  28. ok Mr. Brilliant. Care to check the current news to learn when the oil spill was stopped. Oh, that 's right. It hasn't completely! Oops! That actually means President Obama visited a happening event rather than wait until the hazard was past. Think it through next time.

    An event that occured and the remediation started = apples. An event that is ongoing and takes months to even get under control = oranges.

    Sending food to people whose food and water supply is completely decimated = apples. Beginning to plan for corective action and remediation before the results of the disaster hit the shores of USA soil - oranges.

    White leader = apples black leader = oranges

    get it?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Okay genius, maybe you missed the president's own people, by which I mean DEMOCRATS like that big mouth James Carville and others. Were begging him to come to the gulf for weeks before he finally decided to go. The fact that a hurricane happens in one day and an oil spill happens in months makes no difference. People's lives and livelihoods were effected from day one. Tell the families of the 11 people killed that it wasn't a disaster. Tell all the people on the coast who's business has gone under. The simple fact that the Jones act is still in place speaks volumes. The spill could have been burned off when it was still out to sea, but the white house caved to environmentalists who were worried about how many fish it would kill. This was handled way worse than Katrina as far as the POTUS's part in it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  30. get it?

    The Katrina event and the current oil spill aren't even on the same scale in terms of damage to the infrastructure and threat to life.
    The failure of the local governments to be prepared or respond was one of the greatest tradgedies of Katrina!
    While the Hurricane set in the Gulf of Mexico and built in strength the decision was made to just ride it out - fully knowing the warnings of the past and that places like New orleans were 3 ft. below sea level! No match for a Cat 5 hurricane!
    All those busses set idol!
    I actually know of semi load of ice that was loaded in Arkansas - sent to New Orleans set for three days and retuned to the same shipper!
    There was no infrastructure (no electricity) to support the refrigeration of many of the products donated for relief!
    Bush got the blame - but it was really the failure of the local Governments to be prepared!
    We simply take our modern lifestyles for granted!
    It takes a tragedy to remind us that all those things we depend on each and everyday are the result of someone elses continued efforts!

    The oil spill will certainly have an effect on the economies of that region and possibly beyond!

    In terms of immediate danger and potential for loss of life it doesn't even compare to Katrina!

    Another example of people looking to the top for answers that can only be found and executed at the local levels!

    ReplyDelete
  31. That timeline is very interesting. I had no idea it took Obama that long to respond.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The spill could have been burned off when it was still out to sea, but the white house caved to environmentalists who were worried about how many fish it would kill.

    Thats a tad bit polly anna and pie in the sky.

    Bak up and consider how many environmental effects could come from burning hydrocarbon. They thought that Asbestos was the insi=ualtion fo choice for electricians. They never considered that miners, decades ago, needed specific and effective respiratory protection.

    Think of feeble minded one of how many people may have eventually been exposed to the elemental compounds of oxidized crude oil.
    What about carcinogens. Stuff that is burned doesn't just disappear.

    Take 1st year college science. Matter is neither created or destroyed. It is simply changed in its form. Now it's crude. Ask a chemical engineer what it becomes when we burn it. In fact, stand behind the exhaust of a runnning automobile while you are having the discussion. Your next of kin can explain what happened.

    Combusiotn may have appeared to be an easy answer but there is another physical science law: For every action there is an equal AND OPPOSITE reaction. Maybe they actually gave a bit more thought than what might happen to a few fish.

    Maybe they even thought through what disrupting the eco system would do to higher life forms over time. You want it fixed in weeks. It's gonna take a few years to fix this one. But Bush III may be able to take credit for it.

    Good one lol. Just go burn it up. Really good one there rotfl.

    ReplyDelete
  33. can anyone else read that last post? I gave up after the first two sentences.

    Learn to write before you vent.

    ReplyDelete