Landslide 2012, the end of the democrat party

[Langston Hughes]

No, it's applying the logic these groups have used to accuse others of voting patterns motivated by racism. As, I've said, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and the attempts to deflect the charges are quite amusing, and will result in more back flips and contortions than we saw during the entire Olympics.

 

that is one of your weakest arguments to date. Surely, your not that dense to think that people who've had the chance to vote for a Caucasian their entire lives are the same as black Americans, quite a few who lived through civil rights when they were not only relegated to separate but equal but various means of disenfranchisement. At times you can be a very astute person yet inside there seems to be a narrow mind that is trapped by some serious issues.

[the_spaniard]

But, look at this way...even if they are racists, so what? Their point about the unsustainable growth rate of federal spending still stands. So does their point that we are all taxed enough, and aren't going to pay any additional taxes to fund pie-in-the-sky spending schemes or ensure that every woman can pop out five future stars of America's Most Wanted by four different baby daddies. As they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

 

Wow. So what if they are racists? I guess you can't fathom that might be a primary motive for some people to be in the group. It's like if the Klan decided to petition for more police on the streets. Yes, more police might be good, but are you saying that message is not damaged by Klan endorsement? That is one of many problems with the TP. They don't tend to call people out for racism or inappropriate behavior. Maybe they think that racism is acceptable if the overall message fits their ideals?

 

No, it's applying the logic these groups have used to accuse others of voting patterns motivated by racism. As, I've said, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Now the shoe is on the other foot, and the attempts to deflect the charges are quite amusing, and will result in more back flips and contortions than we saw during the entire Olympics.

 

Are you seriously comparing making inflammatory racist signs and the actions of some of the racist TP people (never called out by the organization as improper, mind you) to an african american casting a vote for the first african american president in U.S. history?

 

How many times have you voted for a white guy for president? Ohhhhhhh......I see. How many black candidates have black American presidential candidates had to choose from in the past? Name me 10. How many white presidents have their been? Hmmnnn. And conservatives cry racism in voting? So there wasn't any racially-motivated voting until 2008! Thats great news!

 

I understand this country was founded on racist ideals, but really?

 

[cal50]

Over 90% of the black population voted for Obama.

Is it because they all thought he was the better man or was it because of his skin color?

 

I think everyone knows the answer to the question and its an example of the problem with narrow minded people and ethnic, gender, party line voting across the board.

 

Since the Tea Party and its ideas are toxic to liberals and many love to try to link its existence, members or supporters to some negative racial component or issue it's another weak ploy by liberals to feel they are somehow superior and better than that group or people or ideas.

 

No one embraces a true racist hopefully in either party yet liberals love to point the finger and never look in the mirror.

[rn4]

Over 90% of the black population voted for Obama.

Is it because they all thought he was the better man or was it because of his skin color?

 

I think everyone knows the answer to the question and its an example of the problem with narrow minded people and ethnic, gender, party line voting across the board.

 

Since the Tea Party and its ideas are toxic to liberals and many love to try to link its existence, members or supporters to some negative racial component or issue it's another weak ploy by liberals to feel they are somehow superior and better than that group or people or ideas.

 

No one embraces a true racist hopefully in either party yet liberals love to point the finger and never look in the mirror.

 

You do realize that blacks vote for democrats the majority of the time.

 

Blacks' voting patterns have remained fairly consistent for the past 30 years:

 

ELECTION, 1976

Jimmy Carter, Democrat, 85 percent of the black vote (election winner)

Gerald Ford, Republican, 15 percent of the black vote.

 

ELECTION, 1980

Democrat Jimmy Carter—86 percent of the black vote

Republican Ronald Reagan—12 percent (election winner)

 

ELECTION 1984

Democrat Walter Mondale—89 percent of the black vote

Republican Ronald Reagan—9 percent of the black vote(election winner)

 

ELECTION 1988

Democrat Michael Dukakis—88 percent of the black vote

Republican George H.W. Bush—10 percent of the black vote (election winner)

 

ELECTION 1992

Democrat Bill Clinton—82 percent of the black vote

Republican George H.W. Bush—11 percent of the black vote

 

ELECTION 1996

Democrat Bill Clinton—84 percent of the black vote

Republican Bob Dole—12 percent of the black vote

 

ELECTION 2000

Democrat Al Gore: 90 percent of the black vote

Republican George W. Bush: 9 percent of the black vote

 

ELECTION 2004

Democrat John Kerry—88 percent of the black vote

Republican George W. Bush—11 percent of the black vote (election winner)

 

The election results for the past thirty or so years show that African-Americans tend to vote as a bloc in Presidential elections and almost always vote for the Democratic candidat

 

http://www.1droprule.com/2010/01/were-blacks-voting-for-obama-racist.html

[grbeck]

that is one of your weakest arguments to date. Surely, your not that dense to think that people who've had the chance to vote for a Caucasian their entire lives are the same as black Americans, quite a few who lived through civil rights when they were not only relegated to separate but equal but various means of disenfranchisement. At times you can be a very astute person yet inside there seems to be a narrow mind that is trapped by some serious issues.

 

It's the same logic that liberals have used to accuse people who vote against their favorite candidate in elections. As I've said, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

 

You might also check the calendar...it's not 1955 anymore. Like many liberals, you need to move on and realize that it's 2012. And disagreeing with you on the issues is not the sign of a "narrow mind." Squawking about racism as an attempt to deflect from a weak argument no longer works in 2012. People are just going to have to suck it up and actually debate the real issues.

Edited August 22, 2012 by grbeck

[grbeck]

These Tea Party groups have brought froth some of the most idiotic racist behavior in many years and there is no way you can justify it. Tea Party candidates and leaders have openly sent racist emails, supported others who did likewise and generally failed to police themselves. But that's par for the course when you have a group of people who tend to few themselves as victims.

 

Do i have to remind you of Tea Party favorite Carl Paladino?

http://www.cbsnews.c...299-503544.html

 

Please explain how the Tea Party isn't racist, but It promotes and votes for a man who enjoys sending racial jokes to his friends about the president? Trust me I am waiting for that explanation.

 

http://www.cbsnews.c...984-503544.html

 

This wasn't racist either i guess.

 

Look i could go on for pages with all the racist emails and signs attached to the Tea Party. It's time you accept that the message is either intolerant or the intolerant seem to think that they are welcome to share their intolerant views with other Tea Party members because they are still doing it.

 

Carl Paladino is not the Tea Party. Perhaps we can review some of what has been going on in the Justice Department under the Obama Administration? Last time I checked, the President didn't want Eric Holder to resign.

 

And I'm waiting for an explanation of how wanting to restrain government spending and resist tax increases is a sign of racism. If that is the best argument you can bring to the table regarding these issues, I'd suggest hanging it up right now.

Edited August 22, 2012 by grbeck

[grbeck]

Wow. So what if they are racists? I guess you can't fathom that might be a primary motive for some people to be in the group. It's like if the Klan decided to petition for more police on the streets. Yes, more police might be good, but are you saying that message is not damaged by Klan endorsement? That is one of many problems with the TP. They don't tend to call people out for racism or inappropriate behavior. Maybe they think that racism is acceptable if the overall message fits their ideals?

 

And racism against whites has motivated some liberal African-Americans to vote against whites in elections, both at the local level (primarily mayoral races in large cities), as well as at the state and national level. Based on your logic, which declares all Tea Party members racist on the actions of a few people, all Democrats are therefore racists. I've never heard the national party repudiate their actions - in fact, it was quite happy to tally the resulting victory in the "win" column for the party.

 

Incidentally,the New Black Panthers were working at some of the polls for the Obama campaign in Philadelphia in 2008...based on your logic, the entire Obama campaign was therefore racist. Unless you are going to say that this is not a racist group, although one hopes and prays that no one is that stupid in 2012.

 

Considering that the main "ideals" of the Tea Party are restraint of the growth in federal spending, and no tax increases, I'm not quite sure how those ideas can be considered racist, except by those who obviously have no idea how to counter their positions with facts and logic.

 

Are you seriously comparing making inflammatory racist signs and the actions of some of the racist TP people (never called out by the organization as improper, mind you) to an african american casting a vote for the first african american president in U.S. history?

 

No, I've never said that. Read carefully.

 

In the past, conservatives have been accused of racism solely because they failed to vote for either the Democrat, or the African-American candidate, or both. It was therefore suggested that their failure to vote for said candidate was motivated solely by racism. They couldn't possibly have been motivated by differences in policy.

 

Today, 91-92 percent of the African-American population votes for the African-American candidate, so based on the reasoning employed by Democrats and liberals in previous elections, this level of support for the candidate must be motivated by racism. Goose, meet gander...

 

How many times have you voted for a white guy for president? Ohhhhhhh......I see. How many black candidates have black American presidential candidates had to choose from in the past? Name me 10. How many white presidents have their been? Hmmnnn. And conservatives cry racism in voting? So there wasn't any racially-motivated voting until 2008! Thats great news!

 

With that paragraph, you have just proven my initial point. You just admitted that race was the reason that African-Americans voted for Obama in 2008. Which, if you look up the definition in the dictionary, constitutes one of the definitions of "racist" behavior. Thank you.

 

Now, maybe you believe that it's okay for one group to do it, or that past voting patterns by one group mean that it's okay for another group to do the same thing, but plenty of us have moved beyond that level of understanding.(Check the calendar - it's not 1975 anymore. We aren't to roll over and play dead because someone yelps about alleged racism.) And it makes the squawking about alleged racism among Tea Party members disingenuous, at best, not to mention more than a little ignorant of history and what really constitutes "racism."

 

Unless it's not racism when one group engages in this behavior, although, again, one hopes and prays that no one is that stupid in 2012.

Edited August 22, 2012 by grbeck

[the_spaniard]

Based on your logic, which declares all Tea Party members racist on the actions of a few people....<snip>

 

You can tell I meant all TP members by my use of the word "some". As you stated, read carefully.

 

Incidentally,the New Black Panthers were working at some of the polls for the Obama campaign in Philadelphia in 2008...based on your logic, the entire Obama campaign was therefore racist. Unless you are going to say that this is not a racist group, although one hopes and prays that no one is that stupid in 2012.

 

I don't know anything about the new BP party. I do know that the original BP party has basically said the new party does not represent them, so I'm guessing they are probably not a good group.

 

Considering that the main "ideals" of the Tea Party are restraint of the growth in federal spending, and no tax increases, I'm not quite sure how those ideas can be considered racist, except by those who obviously have no idea how to counter their positions with facts and logic.

 

I wish their ideals included reading comprehension. I never said their ideals are racist. Don't lump me in with others here. Again as you said read carefully. The only thing I believe is that there is a racist element to the TP that reflects poorly on the movement. And the failure of some members to condemn these people publicly doesnt help.

 

In the past, conservatives have been accused of racism solely because they failed to vote for either the Democrat, or the African-American candidate, or both. It was therefore suggested that their failure to vote for said candidate was motivated solely by racism. They couldn't possibly have been motivated by differences in policy. Today, 91-92 percent of the African-American population votes for the African-American candidate, so based on the reasoning employed by Democrats and liberals in previous elections, this level of support for the candidate must be motivated by racism. Goose, meet gander...

 

Wow, broad-blanket assumptions sure do digest into easily dismissed rhetoric, huh? Good thing I never said I believed that.

 

With that paragraph, you have just proven my initial point. You just admitted that race was the reason that African-Americans voted for Obama in 2008. Which, if you look up the definition in the dictionary, constitutes one of the definitions of "racist" behavior. Thank you.

 

Wow, that one shot way over your head. Do some people vote based on race? Sure. White and black, democrat and republican. If you don't believe that, I can't help you. It's on both sides. And btw, since you brought it up, is it not possible that some blacks have voted democrat because they agree with the policies (as rn4s links show?) Yes. And some people still voted based on racism.

 

....alleged racism among Tea Party members....

 

Hilarious. "Alleged." :lol:

 

 

Tell you what. Go up to a black man and call him a monkey. Then post from the ER whether he thought it was racist or not.

Edited August 22, 2012 by the_spaniard

[Langston Hughes]

Look, the question isn't why wanting the government out your business is racist. Most of the Tea Party members I know want prayer in school, creationism taught, a constitutional amendment against gay marriage and other assorted big government ideas. There's a few libertarians in the mix but they are not the majority.

 

The question is why does the Tea Party attract so many people who have racial issues and why do they feel that they can get away with such open and blatant displays?

 

Obama's 1st term is almost up and we are still hearing about Tea Party emails that make racial jokes, or worse makes racist comments in public. Some times it goes beyond that and turns into outright violent rhetoric like in this case, where the local Tea Party candidate lets loose with some slightly offensive talk, like assassination.

 

http://www.inquisitr...-assassination/

 

My recent favorite is the Inge Marler speech ice-breaker where she does the stereotypical black voices all for the amusement of the Ozark Tea Party membership at their annual rally. Is it really 2012 because the Tea Party acts like it's 1955 all the time and hasn't yet seemed to learn it's lesson?

 

This is the point, it wasn't a few twisted people who initially said some stupid things, it's coming up on 4 years and the hits keep coming. Why? Why does the Tea Party attract these people, why do they still feel like they can be open about their racial intolerance?

Edited August 22, 2012 by Langston Hughes

[RangerM]

For the same reason you will find it in the OWS crowd--because they can.

 

And if you think I'm trying to change the subject, I'm not. The fact is you will find them in every crowd.

 

If that is something you cannot accept, then I suppose we can fall into a YouTube video/pictures of racists at TP/OWS rallies kind of back-and-forth, but I'm getting tired of it.

 

If you wish to deem all TP'ers racists because you find them in their midst, fine. Consider me a racist and put me on your ignore list, please.

Edited August 22, 2012 by RangerM

[grbeck]

You can tell I meant all TP members by my use of the word "some". As you stated, read carefully.

 

Here is what you posted previously on this subject:

 

That is one of many problems with the TP. They don't tend to call people out for racism or inappropriate behavior. Maybe they think that racism is acceptable if the overall message fits their ideals?

 

I'm missing the word "some" in that quote. Assigning to words their common meaning, and using our reading comprehension skills, we reach the logical conclusion that you believe that the ENTIRE TEA PARTY movement is racist, as "racism allegedly is acceptable to their overall message. " That reads as though you are saying that the entire movement is racist.

 

And you are wrong that the Tea Party has never repudiated racism, as is Langston Hughes. For example, here is what the New York chapter of the Tea Party said about the dreaded Carl Paladino:

 

Representatives of the New York Tea Party dumped tea bags on a photo of Carl Paladino, saying that the Republican nominee for governor, who has described himself as a Tea Partier, does not represent them.

 

In fact, a group calling itself the Tea Party has it s own candidate for governor: Steve Cohn, who petitioned his way onto the general election ballot.

 

Here is the Tea Party's official statement regarding racism:

 

Fresh on the heels of the banishment of Tea Party Express and founder Mark Williams on Sunday, another tea party group is reaffirming opposition to racism.

 

Following Williams's satirical mock letter to Abraham Lincolnfrom NAACP President Ben Jealous in which Williams called slavery a "great gig," Tea Party Nation issued a statement Monday appearing to condemn Williams without mentioning his name. The group says it has a "zero tolerance policy against racism" and "will ban any members who show themselves to be racist."

 

Tea Party Nation is perhaps best known for hosting the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville earlier this year, where the keynote address was delivered by former Alaska governor Sarah Palin. Former CNN host Lou Dobbs has signed onto headline the group's next convention. The issue rose to prominence last week after the NAACP passed a resolution condemning racism within the tea party movement at its national convention.

 

Read Tea Party Nation's full statement after the jump:

 

 

 

 

As most of you are aware, one of the leaders in the tea party movement posted a controversial blog many took to be racist.

The Tea Party Movement is not racist. Tea Party Nation and many other groups have repudiated racism and racists. If you look on our website's FAQ's, you can see we have a no tolerance policy against racism. We have banned members who were racists and will ban any members who show themselves to be racist.

 

Tea Party Nation welcomes all patriots, regardless of gender, ethnicity or national origin to join us and help save this great country.

 

I'm not seeing where the Tea Party has failed to repudiate racism. Please advise.

 

I wish their ideals included reading comprehension. I never said their ideals are racist. Don't lump me in with others here. Again as you said read carefully. The only thing I believe is that there is a racist element to the TP that reflects poorly on the movement. And the failure of some members to condemn these people publicly doesnt help.

 

Here's a suggestion. Don't complain about me or anyone else "lumping you with all of the others here," when you are doing the exact same thing to the entire Tea Party movement, based on the actions of a few people who show up at their rallies.

 

If that is what you are saying, then don't write sentences such as this:

 

That is one of many problems with the TP. They don't tend to call people out for racism or inappropriate behavior. Maybe they think that racism is acceptable if the overall message fits their ideals? (emphasis added)

 

Again, using the principles of logical reasoning, along with basic reading comprehension skills, one can make the logical conclusion that you are saying that their overall ideals are racist (if, in fact, racism is acceptable to them).

 

Wow, broad-blanket assumptions sure do digest into easily dismissed rhetoric, huh? Good thing I never said I believed that.

 

I never said that you did. I merely carried the claims of those who argue that people who don't vote for an African-American candidate or a Democrat are motivated by racism to their logical conclusion - by applying it to a group that votes 91-92 percent for one candidate.

 

It's always fun to watch a group and/or person squirm and deflect when their own arguments are turned against them.

 

Wow, that one shot way over your head. Do some people vote based on race? Sure. White and black, democrat and republican. If you don't believe that, I can't help you. It's on both sides. And btw, since you brought it up, is it not possible that some blacks have voted democrat because they agree with the policies (as rn4s links show?) Yes. And some people still voted based on racism.

 

Yes, and some of the people voting on the basis of racism were the people, including a fair number of African-Americans, who voted for Obama in 2008. But, since they are liberal Democrats, I guess it's okay.

 

Tell you what. Go up to a black man and call him a monkey. Then post from the ER whether he thought it was racist or not.

 

LOL...do you realize what you have just insinuated? That virtually every African-American male will respond to an insult with violence severe enough to land the person dumb enough to utter it in the emergency room. Which plays right into the stereotype of African-Americans as violent thugs who will unthinkingly respond with physical force to any provocation, instead of using reason or merely shaking their head and walking away.

 

(Based on what you posted, should an adult African-American man beat that dumb kid to a pulp for carrying that stupid and hateful sign?)

 

In the future, it might help to think through exactly what you are really saying with this kind of scenario before posting it.

Edited August 22, 2012 by grbeck

[the_spaniard]

I'm missing the word "some" in that quote. Assigning to words their common meaning, and using our reading comprehension skills, we reach the logical conclusion that you believe that the ENTIRE TEA PARTY movement is racist, as "racism allegedly is acceptable to their overall message. " That reads as though you are saying that the entire movement is racist.

 

I guess you missed me saying this in a previous post in this thread. Shame.

 

I'm not claiming they (theTP) are racist

 

Tea Party Nation welcomes all patriots, regardless of gender, ethnicity or national origin to join us and help save this great country.

I'm not seeing where the Tea Party has failed to repudiate racism. Please advise.

 

Have they commented on Inge Marler or Jules Manson? EDIT> If they have, let me know......Marler, maybe?

 

Don't complain...<snip>.... If that is what you are saying, then don't write sentences such as this:

 

Context. See the above. I know how hard it is to get confused when I said:

 

I'm not claiming they (theTP) are racist

 

Although if you want to try to make argument look better because you couldn't be bothered to read the previous posts in the same thread, knock yourself out.

 

It's always fun to watch a group and/or person squirm and deflect when their own arguments are turned against them.

My, you really are an optimist, eh?

 

Yes, and some of the people voting on the basis of racism were the people, including a fair number of African-Americans, who voted for Obama in 2008. But, since they are liberal Democrats, I guess it's okay.

Because I said that. Gotcha. :P

 

LOL...do you realize what you have just insinuated? <snipperz>

 

Awesome. This is what some conservatives don't get.They go straight to trying to reverse the argument (as you stated you were trying to do above) instead of digesting what was said. They just don't get what blacks in this country have been through. It's not about being a "thug." (BTW, that term is thrown around far more by conservatives on this board), but it is about being sensitive to being treated like a sub-human. Maybe being sensitive because your family members were the property of another. Maybe being sensitive because after all this time, they still deal with racism - sometimes on a daily basis. Care to tell me about the oppressed history of white people in this country by comparison?

 

Yes, racism is racism, but maybe (just maybe) some blacks might be a little more sensitive about it than whites? My buddy James (african-american anthropologist, OIF Vet) would lay you (or anyone else) out if you called him a monkey. That doesn't make him a thug, but he is a little sensitive about racism.

I understand that a lot of conservatives think there is a level playing field when it comes to the races, but that doesn't make it so.

 

In the future, it might help to think through exactly what you are really saying with this kind of scenario before posting it.

I would definitely advise you to do the same. Half of your post was about something I covered in a previous post, and the other half was something you think I "insinuated". Also, go look up ethnocentrism when you get a chance. It may prove valuable for you in the future. I understand you are tired of the TP getting a bad racism rep, but there are two groups to blame: Racist tea-party members (who may be the minority, but they are there) and the media blowing it out of proportion.

Edited August 22, 2012 by the_spaniard

[xr7g428]

Langdad, and Spaniard, your problem is that your ear is tuned to hear racism even where it does not exist. Any criticism of Obama that comes from the mouth of a white person is, to your ears, first and foremost racially motivated.

[Langston Hughes]

It doesn't take a trained ear to hear racist jokes and know they are racist, nor does it take a trained eye to see when some sends a racist picture that it's racist, but it takes a special person to deny the obvious. You and your counterparts are being extremely duplicitous concerning race issues in the Tea Party. I have made a good case that there is a racial issue within the Tea Party, not that all are racist, nor that all that are attracted to the message are racist, but that there are problems when people feel so comfortable being openly racist at the events and around other members.

 

Now speaking directly to your accusations, any criticism that attacks his race, his fathers race, suggests that he's a Muslim, that mentions Africa, or uses some stereotypes of Black people is racist. Any criticism that doesn't is not.

[xr7g428]

So when I talk about black guns, you hear racism...

Are all Muslims black? How is that racism?

It is good to know that you are an expert on black stereotypes so that you can spot those so effectively (even when they do not exist).

 

So 92% of blacks vote Obama, and the TEA party almost nominates a black man (Cain), and you call the TEA party racist. Nice to be that flexible.

[goinbroke2]

To break the "glass ceiling" for women in business a lot of guys were thrown under the bus. In effect, men were wrong or didn't "deserve" to be promoted because there weren't enough females at the top. If your a guy = your wrong. It appears to be "anything but white english males" now.

Some are trying SO hard to either (1) not be racist/sexist/etc (including white male opologist's) or have (2) concluded that it's black peoples turn. (reverse racism is ok) that they actively seek area's to "prove" their belief's.

 

Regardless of what is said or done or any proof shown, these people "know" they are right and will not budge. White man, in their eyes IS wrong and MUST pay...even if it includes reverse racism/sexism/etc.

 

However, either all are equal or not. You can't have all equal but this group is a "little more equal".

 

Is there racist's in the Tea Party? Of course. Is there racist's in the black panthers? Of course. Is there racism in the general population? Of course. The question is, is a group or party racist in it's entirety? Is the groups sole purpose to promote a particular race/sex/etc? The Tea Party, no. The black panthers?...well what is there agenda? What do they want as an end result of they're activism/lobbying/etc? Is it based solely on promoting people or issues with regards to race? It would appear to be yes, but I don't know enough about the panthers to make that a confirming conclusion.

 

Bottom line, it's no use wasting your breath arguing with people who will never change their minds. Proof means nothing. They are against the Tea Party and more to the point, the right.

[RangerM]

So when I talk about black guns, you hear racism...

Are all Muslims black? How is that racism?

It is good to know that you are an expert on black stereotypes so that you can spot those so effectively (even when they do not exist).

 

So 92% of blacks vote Obama, and the TEA party almost nominates a black man (Cain), and you call the TEA party racist. Nice to be that flexible.

 

I'm waiting for the accusation that Romney is racist because he's a Mormon, or Ryan even though his sister-in-law and college sweetheart are/were black.

 

If Obama's chances go further south, I expect the rhetoric to follow it.

[grbeck]

I guess you missed me saying this in a previous post in this thread. Shame.

 

Although if you want to try to make argument look better because you couldn't be bothered to read the previous posts in the same thread, knock yourself out.

 

What this shows is that you need to learn to keep your arguments consistent from post to post. That currently isn't happening.

 

Have they commented on Inge Marler or Jules Manson? EDIT> If they have, let me know......Marler, maybe?

 

After searching for those names, I found these interesting facts:

 

Jules Manson was running for the California State Senate as...a Democrat. He is also an atheist and had been a strong supporter of SupportAtheism.com.

 

There is no proof that he was a Tea Party supporter or favorite. He was initially described in the Huffington Post as a Ron Paul supporter, then as a Tea Party supporter and finally as a Tea Party leader...without any evidence to support the latter two claims. (Must be fun to write for the Huffington Post - you can make up the facts as you go along!) And his prior comments were ANTI-Tea Party.

 

Where is the proof? Well, the current editor of SupportAtheism.com had this to say about him:

 

FYI, Jules was removed from his association with SupportAtheism.com and the affiliated Atheist months ago due to similar racist behavior. We have a zero tolerance policy for racism in our community.

 

But, also I can say from knowing Jules a bit in a professional capacity and reviewing some of his submissions that were political – that he was his own weird extreme kind of libertarian – as far as I know – and granted I removed him and blocked him months ago – he does not identify as a Tea Party member, and in fact spoke derisively of them. (emphasis added)

 

His behavior is reprehensible and perhaps deserves the level of pushback he is getting – but unless he has changed in the last few months- the attempt to paint him as a Tea Party enthusiast is dishonest and short sighted. If anything Jules identifies as a libertarian of an individualistic variety.

 

I despise the Tea Party, am disgusted by Jules’ behavior, and find hardcore Libertarians to be as guilty of starry eyed idealistic magical thinking as some theists – but I am a big fan of honesty and getting the facts straight. (emphasis added)

 

Best Wishes,

Jacob Kramer

Senior Editor and Co-Founder.

SupportAtheism.com

 

Don't be gullible enough to believe everything you read, even in the Huffington Post.

 

Inge Marler? That well-known Tea Party organ, the British Daily Mail, had this to say:

 

An elderly Tea party leader has been forced to step down after telling a racist joke during a rally. Inge Marler surprised party members with a quip about black welfare recipients that she said she found online. She was apparently using the inappropriate joke as an ice-breaker prior to her speech on June 9 and had given no warning that she would be telling it. (emphasis added)

 

Now, what else should the Tea Party do to satisfy you? Beat her up?

 

Awesome. This is what some conservatives don't get.They go straight to trying to reverse the argument (as you stated you were trying to do above) instead of digesting what was said.

 

No, what I "get" is that you insinuated that all African-American males respond with violence to any provocation, which is in line with the view that they are unthinking thugs who cannot respond to a provocation with reason or by simply walking away.

 

It's not about being a "thug." (BTW, that term is thrown around far more by conservatives on this board), but it is about being sensitive to being treated like a sub-human.

 

You are the one who suggested that if someone says something offensive to another person, this basically gives him or her the right to severely beat the person who uttered it. Which, for most of us, constitutes thuggish behavior.

 

You made this insinuation, not me or any of the "conservatives" on this board.

 

Maybe being sensitive because your family members were the property of another. Maybe being sensitive because after all this time, they still deal with racism - sometimes on a daily basis. Care to tell me about the oppressed history of white people in this country by comparison?

 

What you don't "get" is that this does not give them or anyone else the right to slug someone or send him or her to the emergency room based on what was said. What happened in the past is irrelevant regarding actions that are acceptable today.

 

Incidentally, the last time I checked, slavery in this country was completely and formally abolished in 1866 (and the northern states had abolished it long before that point). These people must have some really old, still living, relatives if they still get upset over the fact some of them were slaves. At this point, I'm pretty sure that everyone alive in 1866 is now dead. If this is not true, please post their names and ages here. I believe that most of us, however, have moved on from the 1860s or even the 1960s. Those who haven't obviously need to.

 

Yes, racism is racism, but maybe (just maybe) some blacks might be a little more sensitive about it than whites? My buddy James (african-american anthropologist, OIF Vet) would lay you (or anyone else) out if you called him a monkey. That doesn't make him a thug, but he is a little sensitive about racism.

 

James and other individuals - white, African-American, Asian - are not legally entitled to respond with violent physical force to words, no matter how offensive said words are to the listener. I can look up the rules covering self-defense and assault in Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes and post them here. The law covering this scenario is basically the same in other states.

 

James will end up with a record if he does this to me or anyone else, whether he does it because someone called him a racially offensive name or cut in front of him at the amusement park line. It would the same for me if I punched James for calling me a "cracker." So, unless James wants to end up with record, he had better learn to restrain himself in certain situations.

 

I understand that a lot of conservatives think there is a level playing field when it comes to the races, but that doesn't make it so.

 

What you don't understand is that none of this justifies beating someone to a pulp for the words that they utter or racist behavior, even if directed at whites. Any talk of "level playing fields" is irrelevant to this discussion.

 

Also, go look up ethnocentrism when you get a chance. It may prove valuable for you in the future. I

 

Unless "ethnocentrism" deals with people who ignore the current statute covering self defense and respond with greater force when provoked by words, or says that racism is okay when only practiced by certain groups, it really has no bearing on this discussion.

Edited August 23, 2012 by grbeck

[the_spaniard]

What this shows is that you need to learn to keep your arguments consistent from post to post. That currently isn't happening.

 

Or it shows you trying to cover your rear-end after jumping into the middle of discussion after missing my statement that I don't think the TP is a racist organization...because you couldn't be bothered to read a previous post on the topic.

 

Now, what else should the Tea Party do to satisfy you? Beat her up?

 

No, but I would expect that a party experience reputation problems related to racist behavior would jump at the opportunity to publicly denounce said behavior as they did in a couple of your other examples. If for no other reason other than to try and improve said reputation.

 

At this point, I'm pretty sure that everyone alive in 1866 is now dead.

 

Ahhhh...lets go to semantics again. Do you consider your dead great-great-great-great-great-grandfather a relative, or is the proper term ancestor?

And people of color are still effected by slavery today. But thanks for focusing on semantics. I'm fairly sure you got what I meant on this one.

 

Misc EDIT>snippage>and What you don't understand is that none of this justifies beating someone to a pulp for the words that they utter or racist behavior, even if directed at whites. Any talk of "level playing fields" is irrelevant to this discussion.

 

Now you choose to focus on the physical violence instead of looking at all the other things I said. The point was not physical violence, but why the higher levels of racial sensitivity exist. Until you understand why people feel certain ways you can't begin to empathize with them. I don't advocate violence and I don't support my friend James punching anyone out. But I do understand why he would do it. You choose to look at the result on a surface level (as many conservatives do- admittedly its much simpler that way - NOT a shot at conservatives) without looking at the causation. Point missed....again. You are so focused on the act (result) you missed the cause.

 

Unless "ethnocentrism" deals with people who ignore the current statute covering self defense and respond with greater force when provoked by words, or says that racism is okay when only practiced by certain groups, it really has no bearing on this discussion.

 

Shame. Let's just say it covers a bit of everything here. Are you a lawyer, BTW? It would explain quite a bit about why you are missing these points -not a negative, mind you - just that I have friends that are lawyers and they frequently argue semantics or focus on the legality of behavior, referencing statutes - all while missing the bigger picture.

 

EDIT> BTW is there a TP member directory? It would be useful to see if someone was a TP member when the news of this racist behavior hits. You keep referencing the official organization, and I was wondering how many of these racist folks were real TP members? How do you qualify membership? It may save people some trouble.

Edited August 23, 2012 by the_spaniard

[napfirst]

Or it shows you trying to cover your rear-end after jumping into the middle of discussion after missing my statement that I don't think the TP is a racist organization...because you couldn't be bothered to read a previous post on the topic.

 

 

 

No, but I would expect that a party experience reputation problems related to racist behavior would jump at the opportunity to publicly denounce said behavior as they did in a couple of your other examples. If for no other reason other than to try and improve said reputation.

 

 

 

Ahhhh...lets go to semantics again. Do you consider your dead great-great-great-great-great-grandfather a relative, or is the proper term ancestor?

And people of color are still effected by slavery today. But thanks for focusing on semantics. I'm fairly sure you got what I meant on this one.

 

 

 

Now you choose to focus on the physical violence instead of looking at all the other things I said. The point was not physical violence, but why the higher levels of racial sensitivity exist. Until you understand why people feel certain ways you can't begin to empathize with them. I don't advocate violence and I don't support my friend James punching anyone out. But I do understand why he would do it. You choose to look at the result on a surface level (as many conservatives do- admittedly its much simpler that way - NOT a shot at conservatives) without looking at the causation. Point missed....again. You are so focused on the act (result) you missed the cause.

 

 

 

Shame. Let's just say it covers a bit of everything here. Are you a lawyer, BTW? It would explain quite a bit about why you are missing these points -not a negative, mind you - just that I have friends that are lawyers and they frequently argue semantics or focus on the legality of behavior, referencing statutes - all while missing the bigger picture.

 

EDIT> BTW is there a TP member directory? It would be useful to see if someone was a TP member when the news of this racist behavior hits. You keep referencing the official organization, and I was wondering how many of these racist folks were real TP members? How do you qualify membership? It may save people some trouble.

I attended several Tea Party rallies and functions in the run up to the 2010 never saw or experienced any of what you are alledging here..........people like you are scared of the TP because of the results of the 2010 elections....anything to divert from obama's poor record inability to run it.....

[grbeck]

Or it shows you trying to cover your rear-end after jumping into the middle of discussion after missing my statement that I don't think the TP is a racist organization...because you couldn't be bothered to read a previous post on the topic.

 

 

 

No, but I would expect that a party experience reputation problems related to racist behavior would jump at the opportunity to publicly denounce said behavior as they did in a couple of your other examples. If for no other reason other than to try and improve said reputation.

 

 

 

Ahhhh...lets go to semantics again. Do you consider your dead great-great-great-great-great-grandfather a relative, or is the proper term ancestor?

And people of color are still effected by slavery today. But thanks for focusing on semantics. I'm fairly sure you got what I meant on this one.

 

 

 

Now you choose to focus on the physical violence instead of looking at all the other things I said. The point was not physical violence, but why the higher levels of racial sensitivity exist. Until you understand why people feel certain ways you can't begin to empathize with them. I don't advocate violence and I don't support my friend James punching anyone out. But I do understand why he would do it. You choose to look at the result on a surface level (as many conservatives do- admittedly its much simpler that way - NOT a shot at conservatives) without looking at the causation. Point missed....again. You are so focused on the act (result) you missed the cause.

 

 

 

Shame. Let's just say it covers a bit of everything here. Are you a lawyer, BTW? It would explain quite a bit about why you are missing these points -not a negative, mind you - just that I have friends that are lawyers and they frequently argue semantics or focus on the legality of behavior, referencing statutes - all while missing the bigger picture.

 

EDIT> BTW is there a TP member directory? It would be useful to see if someone was a TP member when the news of this racist behavior hits. You keep referencing the official organization, and I was wondering how many of these racist folks were real TP members? How do you qualify membership? It may save people some trouble.

 

We could go on forever here...but I'll just say this. I focus on the resulting physical violence regarding the situation with your friend because I believe that making excuses for behavior, based on what happened years or even a century ago, is what is seriously hindering a large portion of the African-American community. Yes, one should not say racist things to ANYONE, but if your friend or anyone else responds with force, he will be prosecuted and convicted. At best, he may get a reduced sentence, but he will still be convicted of something. The resulting criminal conviction will be on his record for the rest of his life, and handicap him in many ways.

 

Yes, I am a lawyer, and, while not a trial lawyer, I see how a serious brush with the law can literally ruin a person's life. My wife works as a special education teacher (for severely handicapped children) in an urban school district, and she is often at her wit's end dealing with the PARENTS, not the children.

 

Excuses aren't won't do him or others any good. Slavery is over; and racism can't explain most of the severe dysfunction in a segment of the African-American community. (Truth be told, those same dysfunctional behaviors - lack of respect for education; acceptance of petty crime, particularly among teenagers; large number of births to unwed mothers; dependency on government benefits; low employment rate of adult males - are present in what we used to not-so-politely call the "White Trash" segment of the population. But, since they are white, and generally don't live in the cities with major television stations, most people simply ignore them. And, of course, one can't attribute the negative behaviors to racism.)

 

The big threat to African-Americans and their progress is not a loose collection of middle-aged and older, somewhat grumpy Americans upset over government spending, or even some goofy looking kid carrying a sign at one of their rallies. Listening to the media, one would think that this is the case. The big threat is from WITHIN their communities, and the people outside who enable the criminal element through excuses and deflection (who, conveniently, don't have to live in the same neighborhoods with the criminal element).

 

I'm sure that it's easy to fret about whether racism is the reason for an African-American kid mugging his neighbors when the worrier lives along Philadelphia's Main Line, or in Beverly Hills or Westchester County. His law-abiding neighbors, of course, just want him out of there.

Edited August 23, 2012 by grbeck

[partsisparts]

Error, sorry

Edited August 24, 2012 by partsisparts

[the_spaniard]

The big threat to African-Americans and their progress is not a loose collection of middle-aged and older, somewhat grumpy Americans upset over government spending, or even some goofy looking kid carrying a sign at one of their rallies. Listening to the media, one would think that this is the case. The big threat is from WITHIN their communities, and the people outside who enable the criminal element through excuses and deflection (who, conveniently, don't have to live in the same neighborhoods with the criminal element).

 

I'm sure that it's easy to fret about whether racism is the reason for an African-American kid mugging his neighbors when the worrier lives along Philadelphia's Main Line, or in Beverly Hills or Westchester County. His law-abiding neighbors, of course, just want him out of there.

 

Now oddly enough, I believe nearly everything you said in your reply (even what isnt quoted above). My reference to slavery and oppression is in reference to a system in place that further oppresses people of color, one that creates an even more hostile environment. It limits the ceiling of what they can accomplish. Its a lack of opportunity. This is the result of slavery, and as you said, not the slavery itself.

 

You hit it right on the head when you talk about the acceptance of petty crime, single parents, etc. As well as the dangers they face every day from within the community. I lived on the North Long Beach/Compton border in CA for a few years. Some of the people in these communities have generations raised on social programs. Some of those people are simply apathetic. Some of those people are good, hard-working people that can never get a good opportunity to better themselves, due to factors outside their control.

 

It is the same thing here in the Appalachian Mountains (my current area for a few) with white folks. If you want to see some of the poorest people you have laid eyes on, check out the mountains in Kentucky, where mining Corporations like Massey Energy have been oppressing whites for decades, and despite being known for unsafe work conditions, lawsuits and federal fines. If you ever get a chance to head to West Va, check out the Whipple Company Store in WV. It's represents the best non-slavery definition of slavery there is. I have a personal bone to pick with coal mining companies, as my great-grandfather was killed in the mines of West Virginia years ago, my grandfather worked in the mines at Cabin Creek. My uncle Jim worked low-coal and eventually died of complications due to black lung.

 

No, white racism is not the largest problem facing the black community. It's insult to injury. And it is the most preventable aspect of oppression there is. That's one reason why I'm a bit sensitive to it. And believe it or not, some of the most racist people I have met were in Washington D.C., and they were black...and boy they hate Hispanics. And yes I grew up with a ton of racist whites in Maryland.

 

Any group at the extreme of one side (Tea Party, Occupy WS) will have a few nuts that do not represent the whole of the group, but are a black eye to the organization. The media will latch on to these groups every chance it gets. My argument is that the racism is there...it exists and it is real and it is there. Thats why I disagreed with your "alleged" statement. It's there. Get it out in the open (like the links you posted it show) every time. What happens in the media when something is hidden? Blood in the water (Romneys taxes, Obamas Fast+Furious Docs, etc.)

 

Yes, I am a lawyer, and, while not a trial lawyer, I see how a serious brush with the law can literally ruin a person's life. My wife works as a special education teacher (for severely handicapped children) in an urban school district, and she is often at her wit's end dealing with the PARENTS, not the children.

 

Cool. And kudos to your wife for doing a difficult (and many times thankless) job for the special-needs children of that community. She is truly at ground-zero. And yes the parents are the worst. I worked at a treatment facility for drug/sexually abused adolescent females (Florence Crittenton Services) my first stint through college. The only thing more heartbreaking than physically restraining a violent adolescent teen female (because she was raped by her father for years, any physical contact for her from male staff gives her sexual gratification - so she acts out to get restrained by male staff), was supervising her visitations from her crack-addicted mother who keeps telling her daughter how great everything is going to be when she gets home while shaking from the DT's.

[Edstock]

We could go on forever here...but I'll just say this. I focus on the resulting physical violence regarding the situation with your friend because I believe that making excuses for behavior, based on what happened years or even a century ago, is what is seriously hindering a large portion of the African-American community. Yes, one should not say racist things to ANYONE, but if your friend or anyone else responds with force, he will be prosecuted and convicted. At best, he may get a reduced sentence, but he will still be convicted of something. The resulting criminal conviction will be on his record for the rest of his life, and handicap him in many ways.

 

Yes, I am a lawyer, and, while not a trial lawyer, I see how a serious brush with the law can literally ruin a person's life. My wife works as a special education teacher (for severely handicapped children) in an urban school district, and she is often at her wit's end dealing with the PARENTS, not the children.

 

Excuses aren't won't do him or others any good. Slavery is over; and racism can't explain most of the severe dysfunction in a segment of the African-American community. (Truth be told, those same dysfunctional behaviors - lack of respect for education; acceptance of petty crime, particularly among teenagers; large number of births to unwed mothers; dependency on government benefits; low employment rate of adult males - are present in what we used to not-so-politely call the "White Trash" segment of the population. But, since they are white, and generally don't live in the cities with major television stations, most people simply ignore them. And, of course, one can't attribute the negative behaviors to racism.)

 

The big threat to African-Americans and their progress is not a loose collection of middle-aged and older, somewhat grumpy Americans upset over government spending, or even some goofy looking kid carrying a sign at one of their rallies. Listening to the media, one would think that this is the case. The big threat is from WITHIN their communities, and the people outside who enable the criminal element through excuses and deflection (who, conveniently, don't have to live in the same neighborhoods with the criminal element).

 

I'm sure that it's easy to fret about whether racism is the reason for an African-American kid mugging his neighbors when the worrier lives along Philadelphia's Main Line, or in Beverly Hills or Westchester County. His law-abiding neighbors, of course, just want him out of there.

 

100%! Kudos to you and your wife. It's one sad social problem.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Edstock

[partsisparts]

Some good news....from Karl Rove:

 

 

http://samuel-warde.com/2012/08/karl-roves-polling-shows-obama-leading-by-almost-30-pts/